modification: the government intends on holding a … · web view1. question: the subject...

MCLOGSS Final Solicitations KTR Submitted Questions And the Government’s Responses

Pertaining to Solicitation M67004-11-R-0003 Unrestricted Competitive Suite (FOC)

1. Question: The subject solicitation requires offerors to complete Sections I and II of the Past Performance Questionnaires for each relevant contract and email it to the Government/commercial assessor within 7 calendar days after issuance of the solicitation, (Reference Section L-4.6 PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR REQUIREMENTS (VOL III), 62.)

Request an extension to 14 days in support of finalizing major teammates and concurrently analyzing their Past Performance information.

Response: The Past Performance Questionnaire requirement did not change from the issuance of the draft solicitations to release of the final solicitations. With a solicitation closing date of 14 January 2011, no past performance questionnaire extension is authorized. It is the Prime Contractor’s responsibility to ensure that past performance questionnaires are completed by the assessor for Prime and major Subcontractor’s correctly referenced to the Prime Contractor for Government evaluation purposes and submitted by the assessor directly to the Contracting Officer or the lead Contract Specialist by the proposal response due date. Past performance assessor responses may be returned by the rating official directly by FAX to 229-639-6722 or by email to [email protected] or [email protected].

2. Question: Why is it required that we have our questionnaires out within 7 calendar days after issuance of the solicitation?

Response: The 7 calendar day after issuance of the solicitation requirement is in the solicitation to allow for each contractor’s assessing official ample time to receive contractor requests; review performance records by the contractor; provide an objective, accurate and thorough response for submission in a timely manner or extensive administrative burden being placed upon the assessing official to return back to the Contracting Officer or the Lead Contract Specialist. Note: the Past Performance Questionnaire requirement did not change from the issuance of the draft solicitations to release of the final solicitations. It is the Prime Contractor’s responsibility to ensure that past performance questionnaires are completed by the assessor for Prime and major Subcontractor’s correctly referenced to the Prime Contractor for Government evaluation purposes.

3. Question: Can it be extended to within 30 days of solicitation release?

Response: No. Past performance assessor responses may be returned by the rating official directly by FAX to 229-639-6722 or by email to [email protected] or [email protected].

4. Statement/Question: Reference: RFP Section L-4.6, Past Performance Questionnaire, page 164. Question: The RFP instructs offerors to email the past

1 of 127

mailto:[email protected]





performance questionnaire to the government/commercial assessor within 7 calendar days after issuance of the solicitation. As currently written, offerors must send the questionnaire to customers by October 14, 2010, with a proposal due date of January 14, 2011. Sending the questionnaires to customers this far in advance of the proposal due date can be problematic as the offerors’ selection of past performance references to submit could change over the next 92 days as a result of amendments and the government’s answers to questions. We recommend the RFP be amended to remove the stipulation regarding when to email the questionnaires to assessors and simply state that the questionnaires must be completed and forwarded by the assessors directly to the Contracting Officer by the proposal due date.

Response: The Past Performance Questionnaire requirement did not change from the issuance of the draft solicitations to release of the final solicitations. With a solicitation closing date of 14 January 2011, no past performance questionnaire extension is authorized. It is the Prime Contractor’s responsibility to ensure that past performance questionnaires are completed by the assessor for Prime and major Subcontractor’s correctly referenced to the Prime Contractor for Government evaluation purposes and submitted by the assessor directly to the Contracting Officer or the lead Contract Specialist by the proposal response due date. Past performance assessor responses may be returned by the rating official directly by FAX to 229-639-6722 or by email to [email protected] or [email protected].

5. Question: Was it the Government’s intent to force offerors to make this decision so quickly?

Response: No. The 7 calendar day after issuance of the solicitation requirement is in the solicitation to allow for each contractor’s assessing official ample time to receive contractor requests; review performance records by the contractor; provide an objective, accurate and thorough response for submission in a timely manner or extensive administrative burden being placed upon the assessing official to return back to the Contracting Officer or the Lead Contract Specialist. Note: the Past Performance Questionnaire requirement did not change from the issuance of the draft solicitations to release of the final solicitations. It is the Prime Contractor’s responsibility to ensure that past performance questionnaires are completed by the assessor for Prime and major Subcontractor’s correctly referenced to the Prime Contractor for Government evaluation purposes.

6. Question: The table is Section L-4.2, page 159 shows that Volume II, Technical Approach (including PWS and QASP), is limited to 20 pages. Would the Government please clarify the page limit for Volume II, Technical Approach?

Response: As previously cited on page 28 of 60 of the Pre-Solicitation Conference Questions and Answers for the Unrestricted (FOC) draft solicitation question #109, and other similar questions that Section L-4.2.4 Tables and Glossary states that tables and figures will not count toward page limitations. Therefore, contractors should consider

2 of 127




using tables or figures as attachments that are properly annotated within the Technical Volume that will not count toward narrative page limitation of 20 pages.

7. Statement/Question: We understand that according to page 159, L-4.2 of the unrestricted solicitation, that the technical Approach is limited to 20 pages total for all task areas. Is it correct that attachments (General Information, Sample Task PWSs, etc) to this section do not count against the 20 page limit?

Response: Yes. Tables, Figures, General Information, Sample Task PWSs, etc. incorporated as attachments which are properly referenced within the Technical Volume will not count toward the 20 page, narrative page limitation.

8. Statement/Question: Reference: RFP Section L-4.2, Proposal Volume Requirements, page 159. Question: The table shows that Volume II, Technical Approach (including PWS and QASP), is limited to 20 pages. With nine sample task orders to respond to (which are described in the 239-page Attachment 4), offerors will be unable to adequately address all the requirements in 20 pages. Attachment 4 also stipulates a 5-page limit for each phase-in/phase-out plan required with the sample task order response, but Section L-4.2 does not account for these pages. Please clarify the page limit for Volume II, Technical Approach. We recommend the RFP be amended to allocate 10 pages for the technical approach overview and general information, 20 pages for each sample task order response, and 5 pages for each phase-in/phase out plan (not counted against the 20 pages allocated for the sample task order response). We also recommend that the list of labor categories, work breakdown structure, and basis of estimates be excluded from page count.

Response: As previously cited on page 28 of 60 of the Pre-Solicitation Conference Questions and Answers for the Unrestricted (FOC) draft solicitation question #109, and other similar questions that Section L-4.2.4 Tables and Glossary states that tables and figures will not count toward page limitations. Therefore, contractors should consider using tables or figures as attachments that are properly annotated within the Technical Volume that will not count toward narrative page limitation of 20 pages. The PWS narrative for each SOO shall not exceed 5 pages per SOO. Attachments to the PWS will not count toward the page count limitation.

9. Statement/Question: The Page limit provided for the Technical Volume is now 30 pages less than the 50 page limit allotted in the Draft Solicitation. Is this a typographical error or is it the Government’s intent that the Technical Volume (less tables and graphics) only be 20 pages? Also, please verify that the 20 page limit is to include response to the 9 sample task orders as well as QASP, and PWS for each.

Response: Confirmed. The acceptable Volume II, Technical Approach (including PWS and QASP) including all sample task order responses are limited to the 20 page narrative page limit. Contractors should consider using tables or figures as attachments that are properly annotated within the Technical Volume that will not count toward narrative page limitation of 20 pages. The PWS narrative for each SOO shall not exceed

3 of 127


5 pages per SOO. Attachments to the PWS will not count toward the page count limitation.

10. Question: Is it the Government’s intent to limit the responses for all 9 sample tasks to 20 written pages (including its respective PWS, Offeror’s approach and QASP) or does this limit apply to each sample task. If it applies to each sample task, what is the page limit for the overview section? [NOTE: A similar question was asked as a post-proposal solicitation meeting (Post Sol Conf Q and As ‐ 8‐27‐10) Q&A; the response unambiguously stated that to ALL Sample Tasks responses must be written to satisfy the Volume page count limit. With the sharp reduction in the Volume-II page count, we want to ensure compliance with the government's intent]

Response: Yes. The acceptable Volume II, Technical Approach (including PWS and QASP) including all sample task order responses are limited to the 20 page narrative page limit. Contractors should consider using tables or figures as attachments that are properly annotated within the Technical Volume that will not count toward narrative page limitation of 20 pages. For example, possible tables, could include: Overview; PWS; QASP; Phase-In; Phase-Out; etc., which can be incorporated in the narrative with minimal impact on the total page count as well as being referenced by specific attachment number to alleviate the technical review, evaluation process by the Government. The PWS narrative for each SOO shall not exceed 5 pages per SOO. Attachments to the PWS will not count toward the page count limitation.

11. Question: Can you change the NAICS Code to 561210 to reflect the all activities of the requirements?

Response: No. The USMC PCO is responsible for selecting the most suitable NAICS code. NAICS code 561210 “Establishments in this industry typically provide a combination of services, such as janitorial, maintenance, trash disposal, guard and security, mail routing, reception, laundry, and related services to support operations within facilities. These establishments provide operating staff to carry out these support activities; but are not involved with or responsible for the core business or activities of the client.” The intent of this program is not a facilities support services; rather, logistics support services identified within the individual MCLOGSS 10 task areas of Program Management Support; Quality Assurance Support; IT Daily Operations Support; IT Specialized Support; Training Support; Program Support; Transportation/Supply Support; Support to LOGCOM Centers and subordinate commands; Maintenance Support; and Technical Data Development Support services. MCLOGSS program market research conducted from June 2008 through March 2009 between the Government and the private industry confirmed the NAICS code selection by the PCO. The intent of this program is not facilities support services, rather, logistics support services.

12. Question: How many contract awards do you plan to make for M67004-11-R-0003 and how many for M67004-11-R-0004 and how many for M67004-11-R-0013?

4 of 127


Response: In accordance with FAR 52.216-27, the number of contracts to be awarded will be determined by the degree of competition received and the number and quality of proposals provided. The MCLOGSS team proposes to balance the number of contracts awarded to allow for adequate competition at the task order level and to prevent an unwieldy ordering process.

13. Statement: Am I correct to state that the NAICS code for a company subcontracting to a large business bidding the unrestricted solicitation is NAICS 541614-$7.0M.

Response: Yes. The assigned SB NAICS code of 541614 applies to all Prime and Subcontractors accurately reflecting the assigned NAICS code within each business concern's CCR profile under their industry classification and capabilities. The size standard of $7.0M applies to the Prime, SB entity's performing 51% or more of the effort under a teaming agreement.

Recommend that you familiarize yourself with the Archived documents. Especially those pertaining to the Archived Solicitations; Pre-Solicitation Conference documents addressing Q & A's plus the Post Pre-Solicitation Conference Q & A's that are posted and available to all prospective contractors as background information to head off as many duplicative questions as possible.

From the Pre-Solicitation Q & A posted response, Pg. 5: #4: Question: Can a firm bid as a Prime contractor for an unrestricted suite and at the same time be a subcontractor team member on another firm’s Prime team for an unrestricted suite? Response: Yes, as long as there are no Conflict of Interest is apparent. However, please keep in mind that the NAICS is the Small Business size standard that would apply for any teaming agreements entered into by Large or Small Businesses when submitting potential offers as the Prime Contractor or as a Sub-contractor to another business entity, Large or Small. All Businesses sizes may compete against or partnering with each other under the Unrestricted Suite. The Government will evaluate each team whether each team member, Prime or Sub, accurately reflect in their CCR profile the proposed, FBO cited NAICS code under their industry classification and capabilities.

14. Question: I noticed the proposal is due January 14, 2011 and the start date for the POP is August 2012. Is the latter date in error?

Response: The PoP in the Solicitation is the Government’s worst case timetable for MCLOGSS Multiple Contract Awards while taking in account DoD, DoN, and USMC Policy and implementation of Section 808 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, Public Law 110-181 that established the statutory requirement for independent management reviews of contracts for services; Pre-Award reviews including: phase 2 and phase 3 reviews required for competitive procurements prior to formal contract awards may be fully executed by the Contracting Officer.

5 of 127


15. Question: Additionally I also noticed the government provided the labor categories and the total LOE. Will the government provide the LOE for each labor category?

Response: As identified in Attachment #9, paragraph 1.1, “The following personnel descriptions, describe the overall workload anticipated and help contractors select internal labor categories that are likely to be used during contract performance. Offerors are free to use labor categories provided herein, or substitute and define their own categories in a similar fashion, as appropriate, using these examples to determine level of detail required.” The labor categories provided are not an all inclusive list requiring Contractors to complete the Labor Categories, Education and Experience requirements from their own internal labor categories as necessary. The Government will not provide the LOE for each labor category since it is the Contractors responsibility to submit formal proposals for the Government to evaluate fairly for a best value contract award determination.

16. Question: When is RFP expected to be released?

Response: The Final Solicitations were released on 7 October 2010 and are uploaded to the MCLOGSS Contract webpage (See subject line or a direct link provided below the signature)

17. Question: I see that most or all work is expected to be on-base. If a USMC office felt it best, could this contract be used to perform a task order off-base?

Response: Yes. Within the released Final Solicitations and associated attachments, locations are identified both on and off base at specified locations within and outside the Continental United States.

18. Question: If a task order was permitted to be performed off base, would the same Wage Determinations apply?

Response: Yes. Wage Determinations are based on specific State and County locations by the Department of Labor. Please see Attachment #7 for the latest effective WDOL wage determinations effective prior to release of the MCLOGSS Final Solicitations.

19 Question/Clarification: a) Please clarify whether you only want past performance information on "subcontracts" performed by proposed subcontractors or if you want past performance on any applicable "contracts or subcontracts" performed by proposed subcontractors.

Response: The Governments past performance order of precedence is specified within the Solicitation, Section L-4-6. It is the contractor’s choice on past performance submissions. The solicitation does not specify “only”, rather, “or” pertaining to past performance information. Section L-4.6, paragraph (a) clearly states: "Demonstrate your ability to successfully perform work in all task areas . . . through your own experience or

6 of 127


your partners or subcontractors. Provide past performance references to demonstrate this experience." Paragraph (b) addresses: “Contractor Performance Data Sheets on up to five of the offeror's most relevant contracts that have been performed within the last three years . . . contract performance as long as a minimum of one year of performance has been completed as of the closing date of this RFP." Paragraph (c) address relevant past performance information: "The offeror may also submit relevant past performance information for subcontracts performed by proposed subcontractors that will perform under this contract . . . If subcontractor contracts are submitted, the offeror must also clearly indicate the percentage of work that the subcontractor(s) performed under each task/category of effort throughout the course of the contract."

Please note the descending order of Your ability to successfully perform...”your own experience or your partners or subcontractors”. No where does the solicitation address that the Government "only want past performance information on 'subcontracts' performed by proposed subcontractors". The Government requests Contractor relevant past performance contracts/subcontracts performed

20. Question: As a result of the ambiguity raised by the question above (#19), request an additional 7 calendar days to submit the Past Performance Questionnaires.

Response: No. The Past Performance Questionnaire requirement did not change from the issuance of the draft solicitations to release of the final solicitations. With a solicitation closing date of 14 January 2011, no past performance questionnaire extension is authorized. It is the Prime Contractor's responsibility to ensure that past performance questionnaires are completed by the assessor for Prime and major Subcontractor's correctly referenced to the Prime Contractor for Government evaluation purposes and submitted by the assessor directly to the Contracting Officer or the lead Contract Specialist by the proposal response due date. Past performance assessor responses may be returned by the rating official directly by FAX to 229-639-6722 or by email to [email protected] or [email protected].

21. Question: What is suspense date for submission of questionnaires from our customers to the Marine Corps Logistics Command?

Response: The suspense date for submission of questionnaires from contractor customers is no later than 14 Jan 2011.

22. Statement: Per the RFP: The POCs will complete the questionnaires and forward them by FAX, directly to the Contracting Officer who will provide them to the Past Performance Evaluation Team (PPET). FAX copies to 229-639-6722 (Attn: Susan Wilson).

Response: Acknowledged. FAX completed and fully executed past performance questionnaires are preferred in order to not be unnecessarily burdensome on the Assessor or the Government's email capacity to manage the anticipated volume of responses with attachments that might exceed authorized mail account limitations. As previously cited

7 of 127




on page 10 of 60 of the Pre-Solicitation Conference Questions and Answers for the Unrestricted (FOC) draft solicitation question #22, Yes; Past performance questionnaires must be returned by the rating official directly back to the MCLOGSS PCO, [email protected] or the Contract Specialist, [email protected] in reply to allowing questionnaires to be returned by e-mail in that some customers, especially OCONUS, do not have ready access to FAX.

23. Statement: Per the Questionnaire: Message to the assessor: Your assistance is requested by the Marine Corps Logistics Command to assist with establishing the performance history for the Contractor named below. In efforts to expedite receipt of the requested information, the Contracting Office respectfully requests that you do not mail hard copies. Instead, please e-mail the completed questionnaire(s) to: [email protected] or fax to 229-639-6722.

Response: Acknowledged. As previously cited on page 10 of 60 of the Pre-Solicitation Conference Questions and Answers for the Unrestricted (FOC) draft solicitation question #22, Yes; Past performance questionnaires must be returned by the rating official directly back to the MCLOGSS PCO, [email protected] or the Contract Specialist, [email protected] in reply to allowing questionnaires to be returned by e-mail in that some customers, especially OCONUS, do not have ready access to FAX.

24. Statement/Recommendation: Pg 164 L-4.6 2nd paragraph: The solicitation states: "Offerors shall complete Section I & II of the questionnaire for each relevant contract and email it to the Government/commercial assessor (with a copy provided with their proposal) within 7 calendar days after issuance of the solicitation." Based on this language this would mean that we (offerors) are required to have determined and selected all of our past performance references/qualifications and complete the surveys by October 14, 2010. Given the time needed to execute a full review of the RFP and ensure each past performance questionnaire is completely relevant, as well as the time required to coordinate with the clients, we recommend the language be adjusted to require distribution no later than 30 days within receipt of the RFP. This would allow sufficient time for preparation and coordination on the part of the offeror, as well as adequate time for the government client to respond.

Response: No. The 7 calendar day after issuance of the solicitation requirement is in the solicitation to allow for each contractor's assessing official ample time to receive contractor requests; review performance records by the contractor; provide an objective, accurate and thorough response for submission in a timely manner or extensive administrative burden being placed upon the assessing official to return back to the Contracting Officer or the Lead Contract Specialist. Note: the Past Performance Questionnaire requirement did not change from the issuance of the draft solicitations to release of the final solicitations. It is the Prime Contractor's responsibility to ensure that past performance questionnaires are completed by the assessor for Prime and major Subcontractor's correctly referenced to the Prime Contractor for Government evaluation purposes.

8 of 127






For requests received to extend this date, the below response is provided for FYI purposes to save you're the time in requesting an extension.

Response: The Past Performance Questionnaire requirement did not change from the issuance of the draft solicitations to release of the final solicitations. With a solicitation closing date of 14 January 2011, no past performance questionnaire extension is authorized. It is the Prime Contractor's responsibility to ensure that past performance questionnaires are completed by the assessor for Prime and major Subcontractor's correctly referenced to the Prime Contractor for Government evaluation purposes and submitted by the assessor directly to the Contracting Officer or the lead Contract Specialist by the proposal response due date. Past performance assessor responses may be returned by the rating official directly by FAX to 229-639-6722 or by email to [email protected] or [email protected].

25. Question: Will a Prime be able to add team members during the course of the contract or is the Prime restricted to keeping only the team members proposed?

Response: All initial team members must be included in the Prime Contractors final proposal for evaluation purposes for awarding of MCLOGSS multiple award contracts (MACs). As necessary, for specialized task order efforts should any arise that are beyond the Primes existing team to provide required support, additions to the Primes team structure may be authorized, subject to the approval of the Government at the Contract Level or the Task Order level.

26. Question: I was wondering if you could tell me why there are only a few days between when questions are due and when solicitations are due will the due date for solicitations be extended after all questions have been received?

Response: The last date to contact the Procuring Contracting Officer identified in the solicitation is 12 January 2011 according to the 7 October 2010 released solicitation. Amendment 0001 is changing the date to reflect 15 December 2010. Should additional time to respond to any further questions be required, consideration will be given at that time whether or not to extend the closing date of the solicitation.

27. Statement/Question: It is unclear whether the sample task orders are awardable. Pg 162, L-4.5 2nd paragraph states: "The government will provide sample task order(s) in the form of a Statement of Objectives (SOO) that are representative of the task orders that may be executed under the resultant contracts." Additionally, at the April 2010 Industry Day, and in Q&A responses to the draft RFP (Question 138), the government indicated the sample task orders would not be awardable. However, pg 168, L-4.9.v 1st paragraph of the solicitation states: "Pricing for some of the sample task orders identified as actual task orders will also be used for evaluation and actual task order awards immediately following the IDIQ evaluation." We request that the government confirm that the STOs included in the RFP are strictly representative task orders that will not be awarded with the IDIQ contract awards.

9 of 127




Response: As previously cited on page 32 of 40, question number 138 of the Pre-Solicitation Conference Q&As and re-confirmed once again, no, the Sample Task Orders are not live; the Sample Task Order responses are for evaluation purposes only.

28. Statements/Question: RFP Pg 164, Under L-4.7 Management Plan Factor Requirements (Volume IV), and states: Volume IV shall have no pricing information included. RFP Pg 165, 4.7.2 Subfactor 2 – Total Compensation Plan, “The total compensation plan shall include the salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for each category of labor.” Question: Please clarify whether salary/wages should be shown in Volume IV since no pricing information is to be in Volume IV.

Response: Correct. Please read all of L-4.7.2 in its entirety that states: “The Compensation Plan shall address all proposed labor categories, including those personnel subject to the Service Contract Act, union agreements, and those exempt. The total compensation plan shall include the salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for each category of labor. The plan shall also include a discussion of the consistency of the plan among the categories of labor being proposed. Employees may be exempt from the Service Contract Act if they are employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity as those terms are defined in 29 C.F.R. Part 541 and FAR 22.1001. Differences between benefits offered professional and non-professional employees shall be highlighted. The requirements of this plan may be combined with that required by the clause FAR 52.222-46, ‘Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees’." Emphasis is placed on contractors discussion of all proposed labor categories rather than actual pricing data for individual salaries, hourly wage rates, etc. that are to be included in Volume VI. Exempt employees include salaried individuals that do not fall under DoL Wage Determinations, Attachment #7, to the solicitation.

29. Statement/Question: RFP page 92 of 175 requires resumes to be included in proposal. Is it ok to include them as an unpaged counted attachment to the Management volume?

Response: Yes, but they must be identified/referenced as an attachment in the narrative; be in table/figure format in order not to count against the Volume page count limitation.

30. Statement/Question/Confirmation: RFP page 159 paragraph L-4.2 PROPOSAL VOLUME REQUIREMENTS table III. Past Performance References: Up to 5 prime contracts, 10 including subcontracts; 20 pages. We interpret this direction to mean, that each offeror team may present in the Past Performance Volume as follows: Up to 5 of the contracts from the company on the MCLOGSS team designated as Prime contractor for the MCLOGSS effort -- Up to 10 contracts if the offeror’s team includes the subcontractors on the MCLOGSS team. Please confirm.

10 of 127


Response: Past performance Volume III table on page 159 limits a team to 5 prime and 5 subcontractors past performances references for a team total of 10 past performance references. As identified under the Pre-Solicitation Conference Questions and Answers, page 20 of 60, should the team prefer, a team may propose 10 prime contracts instead, as affirmed by the Governments response. Contractors are encouraged to include supportive past performance information in the form of Tables incorporated as attachments that are properly referenced within the Past Performance narrative Volume that will not count toward the 20 page, narrative page limitation.

31. Statement/Question: RFP L-4.6, page 163, Offerors are directed to provide Contractor Performance Data Sheets on up to five of the offeror’s most relevant contracts that have been performed within the last three years. Are the Contractor Performance Data Sheets (CPDS) to be included in the Past Performance Volume 20 page count limitations?

Response: Contractor Performance Data Sheets properly referenced within the Past Performance narrative but included as Tables, Figures, attachments to the Past Performance Volume will not count toward the 20 page count limitation.

32. Question: The Contractor Performance Data Sheets instructions state: “Data other than that requested on the Contractor Performance Data Sheet will not be considered.” Is the Government’s intent to limit “data other than that requested” to the data sheets themselves? Or does this restriction apply to the entire Past Performance Volume?

Response: No. It is the Government’s intent to limit the narrative portion of the Past Performance, Volume III, as with other Volumes I, II, III, and IV, to require offerors to reference acceptable attachments, Tables and Figures, within the Past Performance narrative, that do not count toward the Past Performance Volumes reduced 20 page, narrative limitation. For most concerns, additional performance information will be available in the Contractor Performance Assessment Review System (CPARS); Federal Awardee Performance

33. Question: “Additionally, offerors are urged to submit brief and concise responses, within the confines of the space allotted.” Would the Government please define “within the confines of the space allotted?” Does that limitation apply to the 1.5 pages allotted to each CPDS, each of the defined cells for narrative entry, or both?

Response: The “confines of the space allotted” is defined as the narrative page count limitation reflected in Volume Table, Section L–4.2 PROPOSAL VOLUME REQUIREMENTS that is not subject to page count limitations as specified in section L–4.2.1 Page Limitations. The cover letter, title page, table of contents, table of figures, list of tables and glossary of abbreviations & acronyms do not count against page count limitations. Also, as previously answered in the Pre-Solicitation Conference Questions and Answers on page 28/60, question/response #109, that: “As stated in section L-4.2.4, Tables and figures will not count toward page limitations.”

11 of 127


34. Question: The CPDS seems more appropriately completed by the Government POC for the contracts in the Past Performance Volume, rather than the offeror as the instructions indicate. Would the Government please clarify that offerors are to complete the CPDS.

Response: Acknowledged, however, as specified and required in Section L-4.6 PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR REQUIREMENTS (VOL III), in the first complete paragraph it states: “Demonstrate your ability to successfully perform work in all task areas within the proposed Suite, Scope of Work Statement (Section J, Attachment 1) through your own experience or your partners or subcontractors. Provide past performance references to demonstrate this experience.” Additionally, the second paragraph plainly states: “Offerors are directed to provide Contractor Performance Data Sheets on up to five of the offeror’s most relevant contracts that have been performed within the last three years.” For contractors to be compliant with the requirements of the Past Performance Volume, up to five Contractor Performance Data Sheets must be submitted with the offer. The Government has provided Contractor Performance Data Sheets in the form of Template written in a Table format for contractor use which will not count towards the volume page count limitation when attached and referenced accordingly in the narrative document.

35. Question: Please explain the disposition of the role identification table on page 2 of the CPDS. The instructions state: “identify your role in the contract award or administration and the period of your involvement.” The Roles listed are: Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO), Contract Specialist, Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), Technical Project Lead/Project Officer, Quality Assurance Specialist, Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) Auditor, Other. With the exception of the “Other” role, all of these roles are normally filled by Government or Commercial entities (not the offeror). This table seems to conflict with the Government’s instructions that offerors are to complete the CPDS. Please clarify.

Response: The roles listed are easily recognized Government positions of authority that contractors may download and make necessary additions/deletions to the Word formatted Table document to fit each entities Business Management Model for attachment purposes for the Past Performance Contractor Performance Data Sheet requirement. The person/position authorized to financially obligate funds on behalf of the firm, for example, Business Manager; Contract Manager; Chief Financial officer; etc., would be entered in the block labeled Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO). Similar industry positions may be entered in place of the current Government positions for completion purposes of the Contractor Performance Data Sheets.

36. Question: By stating “identify your role in the contract award or administration,” is it the Government’s intent that the Government POC completes the table?

Response: No. Personalize the document to fit your own individual business model. Contractor Performance Data Sheets were created in response to the Pre-Solicitation Conference question #55 located on page 17/60 under the archived documents.

12 of 127


37. Question: Alternatively, is it the Government’s intent for offerors to identify themselves as “Other” in the Role table?

Response: No. Personalize the document to fit your own individual business model.

38. Statement/Question: RFP L-4.6, page 163, Relevant past performance does not have a minimum dollar requirement, however, relevant past performance information for any of the proposed MCLOGSS efforts must include specific details of performance as follows:

- scope, magnitude and complexity of work; - actual performance versus required performance; - actual quality or reliability versus specified levels or standards; - management performance in meeting program schedules and

milestones; - management of personnel;- quality management and process improvement; - cost control;- organizational conflict of interest mitigation; - conformance to the terms and conditions of the contract;- responses to technical direction;- problems encountered and resolution of problems;- customer satisfaction; and, performance achievements;

The Government instructs offerors that “relevant past performance information for any of the proposed MCLOGSS efforts must include specific details of performance” for the listed items. Does the Government intend for Offerors to address each of these items in the Past Performance Volume within the 20 page count?

Response: Yes. However, as stated previously within this document elsewhere; in the formal solicitation itself; and in the Pre-Solicitation Conference Questions and Answers; “L-4.2.4, Tables and figures will not count toward page limitations”. Contractors should choose wisely the language to include as narrative while referencing accurately additional support information included as authorized attachments (Tables and Figures) that do not count toward the total page count limitation identified in the solicitation.

39. Statement/Question: RFP L-4.6, page 163, Provide Sample Matrix of Past Performance to Task Area: The offeror shall submit a table that cross-references the past performance references to the task areas set forth in the Scope of Work. One matrix shall be provided for the offeror and one matrix for each of the offeror’s subcontractors. A brief narrative should accompany this matrix to briefly explain how the work on each past performance reference (previous contract) is relevant to each of the applicable task areas. Regarding the Matrix of Past Performance to Task Area for offerors, individual matrixes for each of the subcontractors, and the accompanying narrative for each past

13 of 127


performance references—are all of these items included or excluded from the Past Performance Volume page count?

Response: The brief narrative is included in the Past Performance Volume page count while any attached tables do not count toward the page count limitation of the Past Performance Volume.

40. Statement/Question: FAR 52.219-28 POST-AWARD SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM REREPRESENTATION (APR 2009), page 122. The government has specified NAICS code 541614. Would the government consider adding code 561210?

Response: No. The logistics support services required by the MCLOGSS Contract program are outside the “combination of support services within a client’s facility” as described under the NAICS Code 561210.

41. Question: Does the specified NAICS code apply to all subsequent task orders or will additional NAICS codes be provided with new Task Orders?

Response: Yes. The MCLOGSS program NAICS of 541614; 541611 and 541511 apply for this specific effort and for ensuing Task Orders.

42. Question: It is unclear whether the sample task orders are awardable. Pg 162, L-4.5 2nd paragraph states: "The government will provide sample task order(s) in the form of a Statement of Objectives (SOO) that are representative of the task orders that may be executed under the resultant contracts." Additionally, at the April 2010 Industry Day, and in Q&A responses to the draft RFP (Question 138), the government indicated the sample task orders would not be awardable. However, pg 168, L-4.9.v 1st paragraph of the solicitation states: "Pricing for some of the sample task orders identified as actual task orders will also be used for evaluation and actual task order awards immediately following the IDIQ evaluation." We request that the government confirm that the STOs included in the RFP are strictly representative task orders that will not be awarded with the IDIQ contract awards.

Response: Re-confirmed. The Sample Task Orders are for evaluation purposes only.

43. Question: Is any of the work defined in the sample task orders currently being performed by incumbents? If so, in order to level the playing field we request that the government make information about this existing work available to all offerors (i.e. current incumbent, LOE, etc.).

Response: MCLOGSS is a consolidated effort of historical similar work performed, intended or planned ahead, envisioned support services. The Government is not able to provide this information as requested.

14 of 127


44. Question: There are a total of nine sample task orders included in the final RFP, including two STOs each in task areas 1 and 9. Should offerors respond to ALL nine STOs? Or, is it the government's intention for offerors to submit one response for each of the seven task areas?

Response: Offerors need to respond to all STOs. Please see note to Offerors in solicitations regarding bidding on Task Orders.

45. Statement/Question: There was no indication of a page limit for the STO responses. We would highly recommend that the Government amend the RFP and specify a specific page limit for each STO response. This page limitation will help ensure that offerors STO responses do not become overly burdensome on the Government evaluators.

Response: The PWS narrative for each SOO shall not exceed 5 pages per SOO. Attachments to the PWS will not count toward the page count limitation.

46. Question: It was unclear what the evaluation weighting is for each STO response. We assume that all of the STOs are equally weighted. Is this assumption correct? If not would you please provide the specific weighting by STO?

Response: All are equally weighted.

47. Statement/Questions: Reference: RFP M67004-11-R-0003 Section B, and Attachment 4, “Sample Task Orders”, Discussion: Schedule B contains CLINs, (0003, 0004, 0005, 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0012, 0013, 0015, 0016, 0017, 0019, 0020, 0021, 0022, 0024, 0026, 0027, and 0028), for which there does not appear to be a sample task order to price for those CLINs. Additionally, there are CLINs, (0002, 0006, 0014, 0018, and 0023), that have related task orders that do not carry through the entire contract term. This creates a situation where the bidder will have zero amounts for most of the Section B CLIN amounts. Can the Government clarify the intent of including CLINs that have no related task order to price, or provide clarification as to how the bidder is supposed to price these CLINs? Will it be acceptable to enter a value of zero (0) for these CLINs?

Response: In the Final RFP, the MCLOGSS total estimated minimum and maximum program hours are identified. Unlike the Draft RFP that included the Unit of Issue of “Hours”, the Final RFP was purposely left blank to allow contractors the freedom to submit pricing information without defined constraints of completing projected, fully burdened, blended hourly labor rates per CLIN covering a base year plus four one year options with the full knowledge that the MCLOGSS Multiple Award Contracts would be evaluated for award purposes under the best value continuum compliant with FAR 52.216-27 where the number of contracts to be awarded will be determined by the degree of competition received and the number and quality of proposals provided. Entering a value of $0.00 is not an acceptable NTE offer.

15 of 127


48. Statement/Question: Reference Solicitation M67004-11-R-0003 Section C paragraph C.6b page 83 and Section L paragraph 5b page 170; Discussion: The referenced paragraphs refer to paragraph C.12. Paragraph C.12 could not be found in the solicitation. Paragraph C.12 appears to have been omitted. Will the Government provide paragraph C.12 or provide a corrected reference?

Response: Solicitation references on pages 83 and 170 referencing Paragraph C.12 were omitted during the conversion process from draft to final solicitations. The correct citation should read C.11, CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT which will be corrected by the amendment process.

49. Statement/Question: Reference: L-4.5.1 d Solicitation page 162 states that “Provide a list of labor categories deemed necessary to perform the sample task orders. Your list of labor categories should include the suggested labor categories from Section J, (Attachment 5 to the RFP) to incorporate into your proposal.” Discussion: In Section J there is no attachment 5 nor a list of labor categories provided. In section I page 124 of the solicitation there is a listing of labor categories and there is an attachment 9 that has labor categories. Will the government please clarify the reference in paragraph L-4.5.1 d?

Response: Within the final solicitation, in Section J, it reflects:

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE Attachment 5 MCLOGSS Pricing

Matrix2 21 September 2010

In response to questions #6 on page 6/60 and #35 on page 12/60 of the Pre-Solicitation Conference Questions and Answers, the Contracting Officer provided with the Final RFP’s the industry requested Pricing Matrix knowing that the Draft Solicitation, Attachment #5, was duplicated in content and reflected as being included within the FAR full text clause, 52.222-42 STATEMENT OF EQUIVALENT RATES FOR FEDERAL HIRES (MAY 1989) on page 124 for a sample listing of Government positions and labor categories with the associated hourly labor rate. Attachment #9, was added to the Final Solicitation to provide additional industry documentation in a Table format to identify additional labor categories with the associated experience and education requirements for use and define their own or unique labor categories in a similar fashion.

50. Statement/Question: Reference: M67004-11-R-0003 paragraph L 4.5.1a, page 162, paragraph M 4.1.1, page 172; Attachment 4, pages 10, 26, 27, 59, 80, 103, 132, 166, 193, and 227. Comment: M67004-11-R-0003 Sections L and M require a Management Plan Volume that contains a Quality Control Plan as Subfactor 4. Sections L and M of the solicitation direct that a QASP be submitted with each sample task order. The individual sample task orders do not call for a QASP but rather that a Quality Control Plan (QCP) be submitted with either the “Task Order Management Plan” or with the PWS (page 27). Most sample tasks direct the QCP be submitted with the Task Order Management Plan but others are unclear if they are submitted with the proposal or 15 days after award. Is the “Management Plan Volume” referenced in Sections L and M the same requirement as

16 of 127


the “Task Order Management Plan” found in the sample tasks; or does each sample task require an individual “Task Order Management Plan”?

Response: The Sample Task Orders are for evaluation purposes only. There will be no “award” directly issued as a result of any Sample Task Orders. The Solicitation requirements identified in Sections L-4.4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (VOLUME I) including all subsections; L-4.5 TECHNICAL APPROACH FACTOR REQUIREMENTS (VOLUME II) including all subsections; L-4.5.1; L-4.6 PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR REQUIREMENTS (VOLUME III); L-4.7 MANAGEMENT PLAN FACTOR REQUIREMENTS (VOLUME IV) including all subsections/subfactors, SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN AND SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (VOLUME V), as applicable; L-4.9 COST/PRICE PROPOSALS (VOLUME VI) shall have precedence over any conflicting requirements addressed in the Sample Task Orders for evaluation purposes addressed in the solicitation, Section M-4.

51. Statement/Question: Reference: M67004-11-R-0003 Section I, page 130, paragraph 52.204.8 and MCLogss Pre-Solicitation Conference KTR Submitted Questions and the Government’s Responses; Comment: Section I page 130 is quoted –“52.204-8 ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (FEB 2009) (a)(2) The small business size standard is $7.0M. (a)(3) The small business size standard for a concern which submits an offer in its own name, other than on a construction or service contract, but which proposes to furnish a product which it did not itself manufacture, is 500 employees.” The first question on page 4 of the Pre-Solicitation Conference questions is quoted: “1. Question: When forming a team in anticipation of submitting a bid for MCLogss “unrestricted suite", is it necessary that any small business that joins the team, meet the size standard of $7M under NAICS Code 541611”. The response given addressed the portion of the Unrestricted Suite set aside for small business. There are many small businesses not meeting the size standard of $7M that can be very productive members of an unrestricted team contributing to the accomplishment of Task Orders not set aside for small business, (those Task Orders above the $150,000 threshold.). Will the use of small businesses above the $7M size threshold count toward meeting a prime’s small business plan and small business goals?

Response: No. If the contractor exceeds the size standard threshold then it's not a SB and would not count toward meeting the prime's SB plan and SB goals.

52. Statement/Question: Reference: Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices & Attachment 1, SOW; Comment: “The second solicitation, M67004-11-R-0004, will be a 100% set-aside for small business under task areas #2, Quality Assurance Support and task area #8, Support to LOGCOM Centers and subordinate commands. All other requirements (within Task Areas 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10) less than $150,000 and requirements expected to result in two acceptable small business offers will also be 100% set-aside for small businesses within this suite. Requirements greater than $150,000 will be reviewed by the Contracting Officer to determine if there is a reasonable expectation that two or more small businesses could perform the work in this suite. If two or more small

17 of 127


businesses are capable of performing the requirement, it will be set-aside and competed among contractors within this suite. This process will be coordinated with the Small Business Specialist. This suite is named the restricted suite. The last solicitation, M67004-11-R-0003, will include all other requirements (excluding Task Areas 2, 3, and 8) greater than $150,000 which cannot be performed by two or more small businesses within the restricted suite. The task orders within this suite will be competed amongst the multiple award contract holders, which were competed using full and open competition with no set-aside restrictions. Therefore, this suite is named the unrestricted suite; a small business may compete in the unrestricted competition. “The requirement for 8(a) and small business concerns to offer against all Task Areas is to foster opportunities for the small business community as well as to satisfy the mandated Federal Acquisition Regulation requiring procurements having an estimated value under $100,000.00 be set-aside for small business.” Question: There appears to be a difference in terms of the dollar threshold that defines whether or not a Task Order will be restricted to Small Business in the two solicitations that are partially unrestricted. Is the small business threshold $100,000 (as implied in the SOW) or $150,000 (as stated in Section B)?

Response: Acknowledged. The Government recognizes there are some Simplified Acquisition Threshold discrepancies resulting in the late release of the final solicitations and the Scope of Work, Attachment 1 which will result in the issuance of at least one Amendment to correct and to address incoming industry question with formal government responses. The current threshold is $150K.

53. Statement/Question: Reference: M67004-11-R-0003 Section L.4.2.2 “Format”, page 159 of 175. “An 11” x 17” is a two-sheet minimum 12-point font size or a maximum 10 characters per inch spacing. Graphic presentations, including tables, while not subject to the same font size and spacing requirements, shall have spacing and text that is easily readable.” Comment: Proposal font size is specified only in the statement above for 11” x 17” pages. Please clarify font size for proposal text on 8.5” x 11” pages. Is a 12-point font required or can an 11-point font be used if easily readable?

Response: As stated in the L.2.2., “Graphic presentations, including tables . . . shall have spacing and text that is easily readable.” Generally, font size of 8 or 10 are considered the smallest readable font size with 10 pitch font being the Government standard. Contractors may use for text/narrative documents, 8.5” x 11” pages using an easily readable font no lower than 8 point font size for readability purposes. The Government will not impose a preferred font size that may be used by contractors other than the total page number restrictions identified in Section L-4.2 Proposal Volume Requirements.

54. Statement/Questions: Reference: RFP M67004-11-R-0003 Section C, page 92; Comment: This page references potential additional key personnel requirements not found in the draft RFP, and without reference in section L, specifically L4.2.2: Format”. The requirement states "Attach and properly designate additional pages if necessary."Question: Do “attached” Key Personnel resumes referenced on page 92 count against Section L section page limitations?

18 of 127


Response: Key Personnel Resumes attached in a Table or figure format, according to L-4.2.4, will not count against the Section L-4.2 PROPOSAL VOLUME REQUIREMENTS page count limitations.

Question: Do attached documents count against authorized page count?

Response: Tables and figures attached according to L-4.2.4, will not count against the Section L-4.2 PROPOSAL VOLUME REQUIREMENTS page count limitations. Contractors considering attaching support documents other than those allowed by L-4.2.4, the page number limitation will still apply.

55. Statement/Question: Reference: RFP M67004-11-R-0003 Section L, page 163Comment: Paragraph requires submittal of consent letters authorizing the Government to contact subcontractors for past performance information if necessary. Question: Will the Government allow these subcontractor authorization letters, the past performance task area matrix, and the sections 1 and 2 of the past performance questionnaires to be placed in the back of Volume 3 as attachments not subject to page count?

Response: Yes, if the contractor properly references attachments within the narrative document with attachments complying with Section L-4.2.4, tables and figures (attached) will not count toward page count limitations.

56. Statement/Questions a/b/c: Reference: Attachment 5 Pricing Sheets; Comment: It is not clear what labor rates are to be provided for both the Contractor and Government sites. Since work may be performed in several different states the impact of differing workers compensation and state unemployment insurance costs would yield a different rate for each state that work is performed in. Recognizing the impact, contractors do and have formulated a “National Rate” that they propose, e.g. any contractor that has a GSA Schedule: any MAS with other Government entities.

Questions: a. Are the rates proposed on Attachment 5 to be considered not-to-exceed rates such

as in a schedule contract where local area wage determination rates are used for specific task order pricing and a discount is shown from the master (schedule) rate?

Response: Yes.

b. Can a contractor add labor categories over time?

Response: Yes.

c. How often will the Government allow the rates to be amended for changes in local area wage determinations affecting wages and/or benefits?

19 of 127


Response: The Department of Labor (DoL) updates/revises specific area wage determinations seemingly on a 3 – 6 – 9 – 12 month cycle with many LOGCOM specific wage determinations seldom being impacted or revisions being enacted within a twelve month period of time. For MCLOGSS task orders issued for performance periods 12 months or longer, the Government will allow rates to be amended, if the DOL wage Rates is greater than the proposed rate, and prior to exercising any available option periods on an annual basis.

57. Statement/Question: Reference: RFP L-4.8 through L-4.8.2; RFP M-4.1.1, Factor 4, Subfactors (1) through (3). Comment: L-4.8 through L-4.8.2 does not mention past performance, although it is a DFARS 215.304 small business source selection evaluation factor, specifically PGI 215.304(c) (i) (A) (5) “Past performance of the Offerors in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, and 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.” L-4.8 through L-4.8.2 requires responses to two elements: Small Business Participation and Small Business Subcontracting Goals and directs that the Small Business Participation “will be in accordance with the criteria found in DFARS 215.304.” This could be interpreted as requiring past performance to be addressed in Small Business Participation. M-4.1.1, Factor 4, subfactors (1) through (3) identify the Small Business Participation and Subcontracting Plan as consisting of three subfactors:

(1) Small Business Participation(2) Small Business Subcontracting Plan(3) Past Performance

Question: Where does the Government want small business past performance addressed: in Small Business Participation; in the Small Business Subcontracting Plan; or as a separate item?

Response: Offeror included Small Business past performance information should be included/submitted under the Small Business Participation requirement since all business concerns are required to submit a Small Business participation plan. As stated in the solicitation, small business concerns are not required to submit a small business subcontracting plan.

58. Statement/Questions a/b: Reference: RFP L-4.2; RFP L-4.2.1; RFP L-4.8 through L-4.8.2; RFP M-4.1.1, Factor 4, Subfactors (1) through (3); Questions and Answers 3, 168, and 169; Question 8 and answer, 8-27-10. Comment: L-4.2 establishes a 15-page limit for Volume V, Small Business Participation and Subcontracting Plan. L-4.2.1 excludes front matter, e.g. title page, table of contents, from the page limitation. L-4.8 through L-4.8.2, and M-4.1.1, Factor 4, subfactors (1) through (3) establish up to three Small Business Participation and Subcontracting Plan requirements. Question 8 and answer, 8-27-10, Post Solicitation Conference Questions and Answers: Question: Reference L-4.2, Proposal Volume Requirements: Is it appropriate to assume that if the Small Business Subcontracting Plan is included as an attachment to Volume V, it will not count toward the 15 page limit for the Small Business Participation and Subcontracting Plans Volume?

20 of 127


Response: Yes. Please note, MCLogss Pre-Solicitation Conference KTR Submitted Questions and the Governments Responses document, page 14, question #45 that there are two Small Business Plans may now be required depending on the offeror’s size. A Small Business Participation Plan is required from all businesses concerns while a Small Business Subcontracting Plan is required only from Large Business Concerns since this regulatory requirement does not apply to Small Businesses. Applicable Small Business Plans submitted as attachments to Volume V, Small Business Participation and Subcontracting Plan.

Question: Is there missing matter from the final sentence of the above response?

Response: No.

b. Will the portion of the response permitting the Small Business Plan be incorporated in the actual solicitation by amendment?

Response: Solicitation M67004-11-R-0003, Section L-4.8 on pages 166 and 167 are very clear in what is required for inclusion into the Small Business Participation and Subcontracting Plan Factor (Volume V); as later specified in sections L-4.8.1, Small Business Participation (All prime offerors shall submit a Small Business Participation Proposal . . .) and L-4.8.2 Small Business Subcontracting Goals (All large businesses are required to provide a discussion of how it plans to meet the Small Business Subcontracting requirements set forth herein).

59. Statement/Question: Reference: Section G; Was Section-G purposely omitted from the RFP or is it an oversight?

Response: Yes. There are no actual funds obligated against a “D” type contract award; consequently, Section G was purposely omitted, from this solicitation.

60. Statement/Question: Reference: Attachment 4, Page 47 states, the Government will award a Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contract with 1 Base Year and 2 Option Years. Comment: Attachment A, Page 69 provides Man Hours for the base year and 4 option years. Question: Is it the Government’s intention that the contractors price the base year and all four option years or just the base year and two option years?

Response: Only Base and two (2) option years.

61. Statement/Clarification: Reference Section B, all FFP and CPFF CLINs (e.g., 0001, 0002, 0005, 0006, etc.). The RFP provides a level of effort minimum and maximum in all FFP and CPFF CLINs in Section B, but there is no reference to LOE-type task orders, FAR 16.207, or FAR 16.306.d.2. Please clarify whether the task orders (both the sample task orders and future FFP or CPFF task orders) are supposed to include the LOE provisions referenced above, or whether these are completion-based orders.

21 of 127


Response: The MCLOGSS Contract is a hybrid of several possible contract types of FFP, CPFF, T&M, and LH as reflected in Section B. The MCLOGSS Program does not conform to the FFP – Level of Effort type of contract since the MCLOGSS Program does not support investigation or study in a specific research and development area according to FAR 16.207-2. No FFP LOE type CLINS apply. FAR 16.301-2 allows use of cost-reimbursement type of contracts when “uncertainties involved in contract performance do not permit costs to be estimated with sufficient accuracy to use any type of fixed-price contract.” The MCLOGSS Program is a Logistics Sustainment approach defined by the individual MCLOGSS 10 Task Areas that does have cost and performance uncertainties. FAR 16.306.d.1 applies based on the “deliverables” identified/required in the Sample Task Orders rather than LOE CPFF term form cited under FAR 16.306.d.2.

62. Statement/Confirmation Requested: Reference Section B and Attachment 5 “Pricing Matrix”. CLINs are by contract type and task area in Section B, while CLINs are by labor category in the Pricing Matrix. Please confirm that CLINs are specified as laid out in Section B of the RFP and remove the reference to CLIN #s in the Pricing Matrix.

Response: Attachment #5, Pricing Matrix was provided by the Government at Industry’s request. The Government mapped the pricing matrix to the CLIN structure of the RFP as a guide, reference purposes. Contractors may download and make necessary additions/deletions to include labor categories as necessary to complete the IDIQ CLIN or Sample Task order responses being in a MS Word formatted Table document to fit each entities formal proposal efforts for attachment purposes in response to individual Volume requirements.

63. Statement/Clarification: Reference Sections L-4.7.2 and L-4.9.iv. As the RFP currently requests Compensation Plans that are in accordance with (L-4.9.iv), or that may be combined with (L-4.7.2), the requirements in 52.222-46, please clarify. We recommend that the Government amend the RFP to delete the requirement in L-4.7.2 to avoid potential redundancies. By deleting the language in L-4.7.2 it will also ensure that offerors have adequate space in their proposal response to thoroughly detail compensation for both professional and non-professional employees for all internal labor positions used in the development of the STOs.

Response: The final statement in 4.7.2 provides flexibility, if the offeror desires, to combine this requirement with requirements of FAR 52.222-46.

64. Statement/Question: Reference Section L-4.9 and Attachment 5. The Government references the pricing matrices (Attachment 5 to the RFP), but there is no obvious place to include this table in Volume VI. We assume that this information go upfront in Tab 3, Is this assumption correct? If not please clarify where this information should be placed.

Response: Correct.

65. Statement/Confirmation Requested: Reference Section M-4. The RFP states that “The offeror will receive one overall rating value for the non-cost evaluation factors.”

22 of 127


Please confirm that offerors will only receive one total rating that combines all non-cost evaluation factors.

Response: Confirmed.

66. Statement/Question: Section C.11 "Organizational Conflict of Interest (Specification Preparation)" clause, page 89 states there is a restriction on supplying "as a prime contractor, subcontractor at any tier, or consultant to a supplier to the DOD, any product, item or major component of an item or product, which was the subject of the specifications and/or work statements furnished under this contract" for the life of the contract plus 30 days. Will this restriction apply to those Contractors that submit an “acceptable mitigation plan” as stated on page 84, Section C.10.6, OCI AT THE TASK ORDER LEVEL subsection 6(c)(2)?

Response: All identified OCIs and mitigation plans submitted to the Contracting Officer will be reviewed. Upon review by the Contracting Officer, the Contracting Officer will determine if the mitigation plan is satisfactory.

67. Statement/Question: Section C.11 "Organizational Conflict of Interest (Specification Preparation)" clause, page 89 states there is a restriction on supplying "as a prime contractor, subcontractor at any tier, or consultant to a supplier to the DOD, any product, item or major component of an item or product, which was the subject of the specifications and/or work statements furnished under this contract" for the life of the contract plus 30 days. Additionally, in subsection (b), the clause indicates “Any subcontractor that performs any work relative to this contract shall be subject to this clause.” We assume that since some subcontractors will not be involved in Specification Preparation activities (thus no OCI) that this clause will only apply to the subcontractors who participate in Specification Preparation activities? Is this assumption correct?

Response: All identified OCIs and mitigation plans submitted to the Contracting Officer will be reviewed. Upon review by the Contracting Officer, the Contracting Officer will determine if the mitigation plan is satisfactory.

68. Statement/Question: Referring to Question 24 of the pre-solicitation Questions and Answers: Should an offeror assume that OCIs should be addressed both in the response to the IDIQ solicitation and at the Task Order level?

Response: Yes.

69. Statement/Clarification: Section C 10.6 (b) states: “The policy of the government is to avoid contracting with contractors who have unacceptable organizational conflicts of interest as defined in C.12.” , however there is no Section C.12. Would the Government please modify the RFP to delete the reference or include a Section C.12? Also it is unclear as to what would constitute an “unacceptable” organizational conflict of interest? Would the Government please clarify.

23 of 127


Response: The Government is in the process of Amending the solicitation to correct the citation to read C.11; referencing clauses incorporated in full text for Organizational and Personal Conflicts of interest clauses in section C.11 of the solicitation. All identified OCIs and mitigation plans submitted to the Contracting Officer will be reviewed. Upon review by the Contracting Officer, the Contracting Officer will determine if the mitigation plan is satisfactory.

70. Statement/Question: Referring to Question 24 of the pre-solicitation Questions and Answers: We assume that the OCI Plan is considered an attachment to the Management Plan and will not count toward the 50 page Management Plan limitation? Is this assumption correct?

Response: Correct. However, the OCI Plan must be submitted in a Table/Figure format, properly referenced in the limited page count narrative as a Table/Figure attachment, which then will not against the total page count narrative limitation.

71. Statement/Clarification: Section L-5, Notification to Offerors, Existing Organizational Conflict of Interest, page 170 regarding Warranty:

· This language is so broad that it may not be possible to “warrant” on behalf of our affiliates and subcontractors. We assume that it is the Government’s intent to have the Prime offeror states the interests of which they are aware that may give rise to a conflict of interest for ourselves, our affiliates and our subcontractors at the time of proposal submission. Please confirm this assumption is correct.

· We interpret the definition of “Supplier” as written in (a)(2) to mean companies providing support under this Marine Corps Logistics Support Services contract. Is this the government’s intent, or did the government intend to define “Supplier” as a company supplying products and support under contracts other than this Marine Corps Logistics Support Services contract?

· As written it is not feasible to provide a warranty relative to a potentially large and undefined set of “hardware and software suppliers”, as required in paragraph (b). Please provide a defined list of the specific hardware or software suppliers that should be used for the purposes of this statement. In addition we would recommend that the Government remove this clause from the IDIQ contract and only include it on Task Orders where a specific “hardware and software suppliers” concern is applicable. The clause as currently written could actually be interpreted to mean that an offeror that has a contractual relationship (unrelated to this contract) with Microsoft to provide it software would still be subject to this clause.

Response: This is a service support program. All services are warranted by the successful offeror.

72. Statement/Question: Section M-4.1.1. Factor 3, Management Plan (Volume IV) page 174: states in part that “the offerors OCI approach will be evaluated to determine if

24 of 127


it complies with the OCI clause in Section C.” We assume that this means the OCI Plan will be evaluated as pass/fail. Is this assumption correct?

Response: Yes.

73. Statement/Question: On p. 168, L-4.9.i, 1st paragraph, the solicitation states, “The offeror shall include the summary and/or general information in this section, i.e., summary rate information to provide aid in understanding of rates in the cost/price proposal section, Tab 4 and 5.” Further discussion in L-4.9.i through L-4.9.v only references through Tab 4. What information should be included in Tab 5?

Response: There is not Tab 5 as referenced on page 168, L-4.9.i in the 1st paragraph. The reference to tab 5 is being removed in Amendment 0001. Reference Page 16/60 of the Pre-solicitation Conference Q & A, #51 already advised that there was no tab 5 in the draft solicitations.

74. Statement/Question: On pg. 92 of the RFP, it states that resumes are required for the three key personnel positions; however the RFP does not specify which Volume to submit the resumes. Since there is no mention of how (what criteria) the Government will use to evaluate the Key Personnel we assume that the resumes are just part of the overall compliance and can be included along with the Reps & Certs. Is this assumption correct? If not please provide a detailed response as to what Volume of the proposal the resumes should submitted. Additionally if they are to be included with one of the other volumes please indicate if they count against the page count and amend Section M of the RFP to specify what evaluation criteria and weighting the Government plans to assign to Key Personnel.

Response: No. Key Personnel resumes should be attached in a Table/Figure format to the Technical Approach Factor Requirements, Volume IV, as part of the IDIQ narrative response by offerors.

75. Statement/Question: We assume that offerors are not required to provide Nondisclosure Agreements (Attachment 3) for key personnel as part of the proposal response and that this requirement will be part of a post award submission. Is this assumption correct? If not please indicate in what Volume the NDA’s should be submitted under and confirm that they do not count against the page count.

Response: Correct. NDA’s should be submitted with inclusion of Task Order submissions after award of LOGCOM MACs.

76. Question: Attachment 9 Labor Categories presents 37 positions ranging from Administrator/Financial Specialist I through Graphics Designer V. Are there additional Labor Categories to address positions such as Logistics Specialist or Warehouseman that might have been omitted inadvertently?

25 of 127


Response: Contractor call on all offered Labor Categories. The Government only provided our best estimates.

77. Statement/Question: Reference: L-4.6, Page 164, Par. 2 - Past Performance Questionnaire. The Past Performance Questionnaires require a government-to-government response. The Marine Corps Systems Command limits subcontractor interface with ACSS CEOss staff. This policy, in the handbook for the CEOss OMNIBUS program (Reference Page 11, CEOss 2010 Handbook), prohibits subcontractors from dealing directly with government representatives or other infrastructure/ administrators for the CEOss program. Is there any mitigation the Marine Corps Logistics Command can provide to expedite the processes and ensure that the required information is completed by the appropriate Contracting Officer or COTR and return to MCLC Contracting Officer as required? If not, is it acceptable for a prime contractor to provide a past performance questionnaire for a subcontractor?

Response: No. the Marine Corps Logistics Command is a separate Command Organization with no overarching policy or control authorization over the Marine Corps Systems Command. Contractor is encouraged to utilize another source, Prime or Sub, for Past Performance Questionnaire assessment purposes.

78. Statement/Question: Page 164 of 175. The RFP calls for all questionnaires for past performance to be sent to the Government POCs within 7 days of contract release – 14 October. Will this contract requirement preclude using any additional past performance that we may decide to use as we work the proposal or join new partners after that timeframe?

Response: No.

79. Statement/Question: L-4.2, page 159 of 175, Table. Does the 20 page Technical Approach include the solutions represented by the Sample Task Orders (roughly 2 pages per task order) or is the 20 page designation for each individual Sample Task Order?

Response: No. The PWS narrative for each SOO shall not exceed 5 pages per SOO. Attachments to the PWS will not count toward the page count limitation.

80. Request for Verification: 52.216-18, Page 120 of 175. Please verify that estimated start date of contract period of performance of 12 August 2012 is the intended start date.

Response: All Dates reflected for PoP dates, Section F, and 52.216-18 ORDERING. (OCT 1995) are estimated Government worst case circumstances.

81. Statement/Questions: Section B pages 3-74 of 175. Section B has four types of pricing for each of the Sample Task areas. The Sample Tasks are to be priced using CPFF T&M and FFP. Should only those CLINS which represent the pricing for each Sample Task be filled in? That would leave several CLINs in Section B with no pricing, is that the intent?

26 of 127


Response: No. The Sample Tasks require pricing support information as specified in L-4.9 submitted by the offeror in Sample Task Order Cost/Price Proposals – Tab 3 Subcontract Sample Task Order Cost/Price Proposals – Tab 4. Section B pricing

82. Statement/Clarification: Section B pages 3-74 of 175 contrasted with L-4.7.1 page 164 of 175. Section B (Supplies or Services and Prices) CLINs all identify a maximum order quantity of 2,608,566 hours per year, yet Section L (Instructions to Offerors) paragraph 4.7 identifies (Full & Open Suite) the estimated level of effort to be 1,774,943 hours per year. Additionally, CPFF Task 1, Task 4, Task 6, Task 7, and T&M Task 9 have periods of performance of only 3 years. Please clarify the government’s estimated level of effort for each contract year.

Response: The maximum order quantity of 2,608,566 hours per year is the MCLOGSS program estimated maximum hours over a five year period. The additional hours reflected in Section B are escalated to accommodate potential surges in program actions after MACs are awarded. The hours in Section L reflect FY-2008 hours by Suite from individual contract action reports.

83. Question: How will the maximum ceiling value of each IDIQ contract be determined?

Response: The maximum value for each IDIQ contract is determined either by the total number of hours or total issued order values will determine each IDIQ maximum ceiling within the confines of the total program hours/value.

84. Statement/Question: L-4.2 page 159 of 175. Will you consider a page limit of 40 pages for Volume V, Small Business Participation and Small Business Subcontracting Plan?

Response: No

85. Statement/Question: Attachment 5 (Pricing Matrix) requires fully burdened prices for all of the labor categories for on and off site and by year. How should we account for pricing the various locations in the pricing matrix?

Response: Attachment 5 at the IDIQ Contract level should represent the contractor’s current best thinking; proposed not to exceed, fully burdened labor category composite rates considering both on and off site different LOGCOM site locations for Government best value MAC award evaluation purposes.

86. Statement/Question: Attachment 5 (Pricing Matrix), if the pricing in Attachment 5 is to be used to price all types of contracts after contract award, how do we account for different profit and fee amounts for the different types of Task Order awards. For example, normally a T&M, LH or FFP type would have a higher profit percentage proposed than a CPFF, or is this Attachment to be used only to price T&M or LH orders?

27 of 127


Response: Attachment 5 is a tool for industry use for offeror’s proposal response to the IDIQ Government Evaluation process of MCLOGSS MAC Suite awards. It is not the Governments intention to use it at the Task Order competition level under FASA, “fair opportunity” process where all contractors within a suite awarded multiple award contracts shall be provided a "fair opportunity" to be considered for each task order over $3,000.00.

87. Question: C.11, Key Personnel, page 92 of 175. Will you provide Labor Category descriptions and minimum qualifications for the three Key Personnel positions?

Response: No. The Government provided the key personnel as requested by industry. Industry needs to provide the appropriate labor category description and minimum qualifications for each Key Personnel identified by the Government.

88. Statement/Question: Attachment 4, Sample Task Orders. Quality Assurance Surveillance Plans (see for example the SOO for Task Area 4, Par. IX, page 55 of 239). The tasks themselves specify that the Government will provide a QASP for the COR to use and base it on the Performance Metric Standards that they provide. We are asked to submit our quality processes in the form of a Quality Control Plan (Par. 10 on page 59 of 239). Are we to have a QASP separate from what the Government provides - our own in-house QA Plan - or are we to write our guess at what the Government's QASP might be and then respond with our QCP? What is your expectation of what the QASP you are asking us for contains, and of what it would be used for in view of the Government providing their own QASP?

Response: The requirements as described in the RFP and the Sample SOOs are overarching – contractor supplies a QCP; contractor provides a PWS, QASP, & QCP. Contractors are encouraged to comply with the submission requirements stated in the RFP and Sample Task Orders for Government evaluation purposes.

89. Statement/Questions: L-4.5.1.a, page 162 of 175. Performance Work Statements. This instruction requires us to provide a Performance Works Statement and QASP for each sample task order. What are your expectations in terms of formatting? Are these two elements of our response to be written for the Government to issue or as included summaries of our planned response to your stated objectives?

Response: The requirements as described in the RFP and the Sample SOOs are overarching – contractor supplies a QCP; contractor provides a PWS, QASP, & QCP. Contractors are encouraged to comply with the submission requirements stated in the RFP and Sample Task Orders for Government evaluation purposes.

90. Statement/Question: L- 4.7.4, page 166 of 175: Is the draft Quality Control Plan included in the page count for the Management Plan Proposal?

28 of 127


Response: The contractor submitted draft Quality Control Plan submitted as an acceptable attachment (Table/Figure format) that is properly cited as an attachment in the narrative, not embedded within the narrative, will not count toward the page count limitation of the Management Plan Proposal requirement. As stated previously on page 12/60 of the Pre-Solicitation Conference Q & A document, question #33: “Contractors should consider using tables or figures as attachments that are properly annotated within the Quality Control Plan, L-7.4.”

91. Statement/Question: L- 4.7.2, page 165 of 175. Is the Total Compensation Plan the same as the plan called for in Section L, paragraph 4.9.c.iv, page 168 of 175 Tab 2 – Total Compensation Plan? In other words, do you want us to present the same plan for both proposal volumes, or did you really mean to ask for it to be presented in only the cost volume, considering that it includes cost information?

Response: No. Section L-4.7.2, “all proposed labor categories, including those personnel subject to the Service Contract Act, union agreements, and those exempt. The total compensation plan shall include the salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for each category of labor. The plan shall also include a discussion of the consistency of the plan among the categories of labor being proposed;” covering non pricing related Total Compensation Plan requirements.

The purpose of the Cost/Price Proposal volume is to include all pertinent contract and cost information. Section L-4.9.i.c.iv, Tab 2 requires “setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract, will be assessed in accordance with FAR 52.222-46” as part of Volume VI requirement for: “all pricing and support documentation. Volume VI should include as necessary, formal and/or informal cost/price data and hourly wage rate and positions descriptions to validate offers received by the government. The purpose of the Cost/Price Proposal volume is to include all pertinent contract and cost information.”

92. Statement/Clarification: Attachment 9, Labor Category Table. All five “Consultant” labor categories have the same experience levels and no education requirement listed. Please clarify experience levels and education requirement for each category.

Response: Experience and education requirements were purposely marked the same or omitted entirely for offerors to complete, identifying industry experience and education requirements for the Government to evaluate under the best value continuum for MCLOGSS MAC Suite IDIQ contract award purposes.

93. Statement/Request: Attachment 9, Labor Category Table. Several “Administrative” and “Analyst” labor categories are missing experience/education descriptions. Request descriptions for each category.

Response: Experience and education requirements were purposely marked the same or omitted entirely for offerors to complete, identifying industry experience and

29 of 127


education requirements for the Government to evaluate under the best value continuum for MCLOGSS MAC Suite IDIQ contract award purposes.

94. Statement/Clarification: Attachment 4, Sample Task Orders, Task 9, T&M, Section IV, Period and Place of Performance. The PoP is identified as a Base Year and 2 Option Years. However, Task 9 Attachment A, identifies hours for a Base Year and 4 Option Years. Request clarification.

Response: The PoP identified in Section IV of a Base Year and 2 Option Years is correct.

95. Question: Are the three key personnel labor categories identified on Page 92 of 175 expected to be priced into each sample task order? Those labor categories were not identified in the IGE’s provided for each sample task.

Response: No. Price the Sample Task Orders according to the data provided in the sample task order.

96. Statement/Clarification: Request clarification how the Travel/ODCs are expected to be priced and level of detail for each sample task order. Some sample tasks include an Attachment identifying “travel and ODCs will be bulk funded” and NTE dollar amounts per year are provided. Is the Contractor to use those “plug” NTE amounts in our proposal and no further detailed breakdown required? Some of the sample tasks did not provided NTE amounts. Will the Government provide those missing Travel/ODCs NTEs?

Response: Contractors should price their ODCs and travel per SOOs for evaluation purposes.

97. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section C.11, Key Personnel, Page 92. RFP Section C.11 states that resumes are required for key personnel. However, Section L does not provide any instructions for submitting resumes. Please clarify if resumes are required with proposal submission. If they are required, please amend the RFP to provide instructions regarding the volume in which to place the resumes. Please also state that resumes will not count against the page limitation.

Response: Key personnel resumes are required with proposal submission. Key personnel resumes must be identified/referenced as an attachment in the narrative; be in table/figure format in order not to count against the Volume page count limitation. Key personnel resumes should be included in the Management Volume, Volume IV.

98. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section F, Deliveries or Performance, Page 98. The delivery schedule shows the first CLIN under this contract begins on August 1, 2012. In RFP Section A (page 2), Note 1 instructs offerors to extend their offers to a minimum of 90 calendar days from the date of receipt, which is January 14, 2011. These two dates are not in concert. Please state how long offerors must extend their offers to match the Government’s evaluation schedule.

30 of 127


Response: As requested in Section A, page 2, Note: “Offerors are requested to extend their offers to a minimum of 90 calendar days from the date of receipt. Offerors not allowing at least 90 days following the closing date of this solicitation may be excluded from further consideration.” The minimum 90 calendar days is the estimated length of time to evaluate offers to narrow down to a competitive range prior to conducting negotiations.

99. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section L-4.2, Proposal Volume Requirements, Page 159. The RFP limits the Small Business Participation & Subcontracting Plan volume to 15 pages. We are a participant in the Department of Defense Comprehensive Subcontracting Plan Test Program. As such, we have a DCMA-approved Comprehensive Small Business Subcontracting Plan, which exceeds 15 pages. We recommend the Government amend the RFP to state that offerors who have a DCMA-approved Comprehensive Small Business Subcontracting Plan may submit the plan as an attachment, which will not be counted against the page limitation.

Response: Mention your firm’s participation in the DCMA approved Comprehensive Small Business Comprehensive Subcontracting Plan Test Program in the narrative by reference and provide as an attachment the corresponding Comprehensive Small Business Comprehensive Subcontracting Plan in a table/figure format.

100. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section L-4.2.4, Tables and Glossary, Page 160. The RFP states that tables and figures will not count toward page limitations. Please clarify if offerors should place all tables and figures as an attachment to each respective volume.

Response: Contractors choice. Contractors are responsible for properly identifying, referencing, attachments within each Volume for Government evaluation purposes without exceeding the narrative page count limitations imposed in some Volumes.

101. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section L-4.2.4, Tables and Glossary, Page 160. The RFP states that tables and figures will not count toward page limitations. Please clarify if this means that even tables that include contract data for past performance references should be separated from the narrative description of the contracts and placed in an attachment.

Response: Yes. Otherwise, tables included within the narrative will count towards the page count total page limitation. Contractors are responsible for properly identifying, referencing, attachments within each Volume for Government evaluation purposes without exceeding the narrative page count limitation.

102. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section L-4.5, Technical Approach Factor Requirements, Page 162. The first paragraph in L-4.5 states: "A narrative response to the IDIQ Scope of Work is not required." L-4.5.1.a requires offerors to provide a PWS and QASP identifying the approach to meeting the objectives listed in the

31 of 127


sample task SOO for the task level, BUT ALSO for the overall contract level. These two statements are conflicting requirements. If a narrative response to the IDIQ SOW is not required, submitting the PWS and QASP at the contract level should not be required. We recommend the Government amend the RFP to remove the requirement for a PWS and QASP for the overall contract level in the Technical Approach Volume.

Response: Recommendation noted. Requirement is not changed. The Government has provided an overarching IDIQ contract level QASP to assist offerors meet the requirements of L-4.5.1.a.

103. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section L-4.5.1, Technical Approach Factor Requirements, Page 162. Paragraph L-4.5.1.d refers to suggested labor categories in Section J, Attachment 5. However, labor categories are provided in Section J, Attachment 9. Please clarify if this paragraph is referring to Attachment 9 (i.e., not Attachment 5).

Response: The Final RFP replaced the draft RFP Attachment 5, Labor Categories with the Pricing Matrix with Sample Labor Categories being added as Attachment 9. The Draft Labor Categories was a place holder that duplicated the rates identified in FAR 52.222-42 to allow the Government to add the industry requested Pricing Matrix, Final RFP Attachment #5, and develop a more representative separate, Sample MCLOGSS Labor Categories, Attachment #9. The reference to Attachment #5 will be corrected by Amendment to reflect Attachment 9 on page 162.

104. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section L-4.6, Past Performance Factor Requirements, Page 163. Paragraph 3 directs offerors to provide Contractor Performance Data Sheets on the offeror’s most relevant contracts. On the same page (paragraph 5), a list is provided of specific performance details that must be included for relevant past performance. Though no Contractor Performance Data Sheet template is included or mentioned in the RFP package, one does exist on the MCLOGSS Contract Web page, under MCLOGSS Contract Templates. However, the Contractor Performance Data Sheet template on the MCLOGSS Contract Templates site appears to be a questionnaire for customers to complete and not a template for offerors to provide the specific details of performance required by Section L. Additionally, the Contractor Performance Data Sheet template states: “Data other than that requested on the Contractor Performance Data Sheet will not be considered.” This statement does not allow offerors to provide specific details of performance listed in Section L. Please clarify that offerors are not required to use the Contractor Performance Data Sheet template that exists on the MCLOGSS Contract Templates site. We recommend that offerors be allowed to create their own Contractor Performance Data Sheet template to provide past performance information that includes the specific details of performance listed in paragraph 5 of Section L-4.6.

Response: The Governments past performance order of precedence is specified within the Solicitation, Section L-4-6. It is the contractor’s choice on past performance submissions. The solicitation does not specify “only”, rather, “or” pertaining to past

32 of 127


performance information. Section L-4.6, paragraph (a) clearly states: "Demonstrate your ability to successfully perform work in all task areas . . . through your own experience or your partners or subcontractors. Provide past performance references to demonstrate this experience." Paragraph (b) addresses: “Contractor Performance Data Sheets on up to five of the offeror's most relevant contracts that have been performed within the last three years . . . contract performance as long as a minimum of one year of performance has been completed as of the closing date of this RFP." Paragraph (c) address relevant past performance information: "The offeror may also submit relevant past performance information for subcontracts performed by proposed subcontractors that will perform under this contract . . . If subcontractor contracts are submitted, the offeror must also clearly indicate the percentage of work that the subcontractor(s) performed under each task/category of effort throughout the course of the contract."

Please note the descending order of Your ability to successfully perform...”your own experience or your partners or subcontractors”. No where does the solicitation address that the Government "only want past performance information on 'subcontracts' performed by proposed subcontractors". The Government requests Contractor relevant past performance contracts/subcontracts performed

105. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section L-4.6, Past Performance Factor Requirements, Page 163. Regarding submittal of subcontractor past performance, paragraph 4 states: “Offeror must have subcontractor’s written permission authorizing the government to contact, as necessary.” Please clarify that subcontractor permission letters are to be included in Volume III and that they are exempt from page count. We recommend that these letters be included as an attachment to Volume III.

Response: Contractors choice subject to the narrative page count limitation. Note: subcontractor written permission letters authorizing the Government to contact, as necessary, attached in the approved Table/Figure format per L-4.2.4 will not count against the Past Performance Volume III page count limitation.

106. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section L-4.6, Past Performance Factor Requirements, Page 163. In the instructions for the Matrix of Past Performance to Task Areas, the RFP requires offerors to submit a table that cross references the past performance references to the task areas set forth in the Scope of Work. The sample matrix in Section L shows 10 task areas, even though 3 of these task areas are set aside for small businesses. We recommend the Government amend the RFP to instruct offerors in the unrestricted category to cross reference their past performance references to the seven unrestricted areas.

Response: Recommendation noted. However, the Matrix of Past Performance to Task Area: provided in the solicitation has relevance across all ten MCLOGSS Task Areas considering the Note To Offerors included in all three MCLOGSS Solicitations advising potential offerors that: a concern that elects to submit an offer of “No Bid” or elects not to submit an offer against solicitation M67004-11-R-0004, which is reserved for small business concerns covering Task Areas 2 (Quality Assurance) and Task Area 8

33 of 127


(Support to Logcom Centers) and elects to submit an offer of “No Bid” or elects not to submit an offer against solicitation M67004-11-R-0003, which is an unrestricted solicitation for all Task Areas except 2, 3, and 8, must be aware that the Multiple Award Contracts (MAC) award selections will be made on a “Best Value” continuum. Therefore, offerings of “No Bid” or the failure to submit an offer against all three solicitations may negatively impact potential award consideration for possible Marine Corps Logistics Command Albany, GA (MCLCA) MAC IDIQ contract awards. Recommendation is rejected by the Government.

107. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section L-4.7, Management Plan Factor Requirements (Volume IV), Page 164. The first paragraph in L-4.7 states: “Volume IV shall have no pricing information included.” However, L-4.7.2, Subfactor 2 – Total Compensation Plan, requires the Total Compensation Plan to include salaries/wages for each labor category. These two requirements are in conflict. We recommend the Government amend the RFP to state that pricing information may be included within the Total Compensation Plan section of the Management Plan to comply with L-4.7.2 and FAR 52.222-46.

Response: Correct. Please read all of L-4.7.2 in its entirety that states: “The Compensation Plan shall address all proposed labor categories, including those personnel subject to the Service Contract Act, union agreements, and those exempt. The total compensation plan shall include the salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for each category of labor. The plan shall also include a discussion of the consistency of the plan among the categories of labor being proposed. Employees may be exempt from the Service Contract Act if they are employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity as those terms are defined in 29 C.F.R. Part 541 and FAR 22.1001. Differences between benefits offered professional and non-professional employees shall be highlighted. The requirements of this plan may be combined with that required by the clause FAR 52.222-46, ‘Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees’." Emphasis is placed on contractors discussion of all proposed labor categories rather than actual pricing data for individual salaries, hourly wage rates, etc. that are to be included in Volume VI. Exempt employees include salaried individuals that do not fall under DoL Wage Determinations, Attachment #7, to the solicitation.

108. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section L-4.8, Small Business Participation Plan & Subcontracting Plan Factor, Page 166. Question: The first paragraph states that Volume V shall have no pricing information included. However, a subcontracting plan that is compliant with FAR 52.219-9 must include both percentages and dollar values. We recommend the RFP be amended to remove the stipulation regarding no pricing information in Volume V so that offerors can submit a compliant subcontracting plan.

Response: A salary, percentage or other monetary symbol is not considered as formal pricing or cost type data that is normally required to perform cost or price analysis covered under the Cost/Price Proposal Volume (Volume VI). The requirements of

34 of 127


Volume V may indicate dollar values and percentages reflective of FAR 52.219-9 subcontracting plan requirements for evaluation purposes.

109. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section M-4.1.1, Factor 1 – Technical Approach, Page 172. Question: Section M states that the PWS and QASP for each sample task order will be evaluated. However, there is no mention of evaluating the Transition Plans, which are required for some of the sample task orders, as part of the proposal submission, per RFP Section J, Attachment 4. We recommend the Government amend Section M to include the Transition Plans in the evaluation of Factor 1, Technical Approach.

Response: Recommendation acknowledged, however, it will not be incorporated.

110. Statement/Question Reference: RFP Attachment 8, Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan for the Marine Corps Logistics Support Services (MCLOGSS). Attachment 8 presents an excellent 8-page format for the Government’s QASP. However, Section L-4.2, Proposal Volume Requirements, limits the Technical Approach Volume to 20 pages. There are various formats for developing a QASP that require text and tables, which would exceed the 20-page limit for the Technical Approach Volume when applied to the 9 sample tasks. Can the offeror use the MCLOGSS QASP format, and will the QASP pages be excluded from the 20-page limit stipulated for the Technical Approach Volume?

Response: Yes. The MCLOGSS Contract IDIQ format is in a combined narrative and table format. The narrative may be included in a table made up of a single row/column. As needed, additional columns may be added to complete the QASP requirement.

111. Statement/Questions (a)/(b)/(c)/(d): Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders. Question: Several of the sample task SOOs (FFP Task Area 1, CPFF Supporting Task Area 4, CPFF Supporting Task Area 7, FFP Task Area 5, T&M Supporting Task Area 9, FFP Task Area 9, and FFP Task Area 10) include a “Transition” section stating that a Transition Plan is due as part of the proposal. All sample task SOOs include a Phase-in/Phase-out Plan, stating: “The winning offeror will be required to provide a phase-in/out plan for the Program,” thus implying that this document is not due at proposal submission, but after contract award by only the winning contractor.

a. Is there a difference between the “Transition Plan” (which is due as part of the proposal submission for some of the sample task orders) and the “Phase-In/Phase-Out Plan” (which is due from the winning offeror for all of the sample task orders)?

Response a: No.

b. Please clarify that the Phase-In/Phase-Out Plans, which are due from the winning offeror, are not required with proposal submission.

35 of 127


Response b: Confirmed. Phase-In/Phase-Out Plans are due with proposal submissions as part of the STO evaluation process.

c. If the Phase-In/Phase-Out Plans are required with proposal submission, should they be called “Transition Plan” or “Phase-In/Phase-Out Plan?”

Response c: Either is acceptable.

d. Should only those sample tasks that specify the requirement for a “Transition Plan” have that document delivered with the proposal or should no “Transition Plan” be submitted, to be consistent with the other sample task SOOs that do not specify a Transition Plan with proposal submission?

Response d: Each sample task order will stand alone by the Technical Evaluation Board for review and evaluation purposes. Sample task orders specifying the requirement for Transition Plans (Phase-In and Phase-Out) should be provided by the offeror as requested. Sample task orders that do not contain the Phase-In and Phase-Out Transition Plans requirement need to address the individual requirements identified therein without providing for Transition Plans (Phase-In and Phase-Out).

112. Statement/Clarification: Reference: RFP Section B, Supplies or Services and Prices, Pages 3-73. Section B of the RFP lists seven Task Areas by each contract type for the 5 years of the contract. Please clarify how offerors are supposed to complete Section B. Is it the intent of the Government to have offerors insert sample task values in Section B CLINS?

Response: In the Final RFP, Section B, the MCLOGSS total estimated minimum and maximum program hours are identified. Unlike the Draft RFP that included the Unit of Issue of “Hours”, the Final RFP was purposely left blank to allow contractors the freedom to submit pricing information without defined constraints of completing projected, fully burdened, blended hourly labor rates per CLIN covering a base year plus four one year options with the full knowledge that the MCLOGSS Multiple Award Contracts would be evaluated for award purposes under the best value continuum compliant with FAR 52.216-27 where the number of contracts to be awarded will be determined by the degree of competition received and the number and quality of proposals provided. Entering a value of $0.00 is not an acceptable NTE offer. No. Offerors should not insert sample task values in Section B CLINS.

113. Statement/Question: Reference: RFP Section I, 52.222-49 SERVICE CONTRACT ACT, Page 125. Multiple Wage Determinations are included with the solicitation. For purposes of constructing the IDIQ Labor Pricing Rate Matrix, shall the bidders use all of the locations covered by the Wage Determinations and propose location-specific Fully Burdened Hourly Rates by duplicating labor categories, as the Direct Labor rates will differ by location?

36 of 127


Response: Contractor’s determination/choice. The Government prefers a single composite, fully burdened hourly rate per labor category.

114. Statement/Question: Reference: RFP Section L-4.9, Cost/Price Proposal, Page 168. Question: Paragraph L-4.9.v(1) states: “Pricing for some of the sample task orders identified as actual task orders will also be used for evaluation and actual task order awards immediately following the IDIQ evaluation.” However, the RFP does not identify which sample task orders are actual task orders. Will the Government amend the RFP to identify which sample task orders are actual task orders that will be awarded, per L-4.9.v(1)?

Response: None. The Sample Task Orders are for evaluation purposes only.

115. Statement/Question: Reference: RFP Section L-4.9, Cost/Price Proposal, Page 168. Paragraph L-4.9.v(1) states: “Pricing for some of the sample task orders identified as actual task orders will also be used for evaluation and actual task order awards immediately following the IDIQ evaluation.” Will the Government request a Best and Final Offer for any sample task order that will be awarded as an actual task order shortly after the IDIQ award?

Response: No. The Sample Task Orders are for evaluation purposes only.

116. Statement/Question: Reference: RFP Section L-4.9.i, Cost/Price Proposal, Page 168. Section L-4.9.i states that “the offeror shall include the summary and/or general information in this section, i.e. summary rate information to provide aid in understanding of rates in the cost/price proposal section, Tab 4 and 5.” Is this reference to Tabs 3 and 4 (i.e., not Tabs 4 and 5)?

Response: Correct.

117. Statement/Question: Reference: RFP Section M-4.2.1, Cost Factor, Page 175. Section M-4.2.1 states that pricing will be evaluated by totaling the values of the sample task orders. Will individual Fully Burdened Hourly Labor Rates for the entire IDIQ also be evaluated, even if they are not utilized in any of the sample tasks, and if so, what will be the evaluation method and criteria?

Response: No. Individual fully burdened hourly labor rates for the entire MCLOGSS Suite of contracts will not be separately evaluated.

118. Statement/Question: RFP Section B and Section L-4.4.3, Contract Line Items (CLINs): Since offerors are not proposing to a maximum ceiling value by contract type, what is the purpose of the CLINs?

Response: CLINs are for post MCLOGSS MAC award Task Order Matching function resident within the Standard Procurement System for the issuance of funded task orders by specified CLIN type.

37 of 127


119. Statement/Question: RFP Section B, CLINs: Each CLIN states a minimum order quantity of 40 hours or more. Is it correct to assume that each task order will be awarded with a minimum quantity of 40 hours?

Response: Either the minimum MAC contract award amount of $10,000.00 or 40 hours are the minimum task order award amounts.

120. Statement/Question: RFP Section B, CLINs: If the assumption is that the CLIN values will equal task order values, is it the Government’s intention to modify the appropriate CLIN(s) in the IDIQ contract when a Task Order is awarded?

Response: No. Contractor assumption is incorrect. CLIN and task order values are not equal in value.

121. Statement/Question: RFP Section B.2, Task Order Pricing: This provision references C-6 for pricing of Task Orders. Should this reference be C-5?

Response: Yes.

122. Statement/Clarification: RFP Section C.5, Task Order Pricing: Paragraph (b) states there will be no fee or profit on travel. Please clarify if this is this applicable only to the Time and Material contract type.

Response: No. The solicitation identifies the specific Travel regulations and travel reimbursement restrictions governing MCLOGSS program travel reimbursements. Applicable G&A will be added to actual travel costs.

123. Statement/Question: RFP Section C.11, OCI: In order to ensure a comprehensive sweep for OCI across the corporation, will the Government provide the list of what it considers “Marine Corps Logistics Services contracts”?

Response: Any effort described/defined under one or more of the ten individual task areas identified in the scope of work.

124. Statement/Recommendation: RFP Section I, DFAR 252.215-7004, Excessive Pass-Through Charges: We recommend that this clause be deleted since it is no longer in the DFARs.

Response: The Government will remove by Amendment.

125. RFP Section I, DFAR 252.215-70043, Excessive Pass-Through Charges: We recommend that this clause be deleted since it is no longer in the DFARs.

Response: The Government will remove.

38 of 127


126. Statement/Question: RFP Section L-4.4.3, Section F: Section L requires the offeror to complete Section F. How is the offeror to complete this section if the information in this section is specific to a Task Order?

Response: L-4.4.3 is a sub section of L-4.4 Executive Summary (Volume I), signed SF-33, blocks 12 through 16 completed and signature and date for blocks 17 and 18 being fully executed with Representations and Certification updated in ORCA. The Government has completed Section “F” for contractors. Section “J” documents are posted on the MCLOGSS Web Page for offerors to access. Offerors are responsible for the remaining requirements identified in L-4.4; L-4.5; L-4.6; L-4.7; L-4.8 and L-4.9.

127. Statement/Clarification: RFP Section L-4.4.3, Section J: Section L requires the offeror to complete Section J for inclusion in the Executive Summary/Standard Form 33 and Representations and Certifications. It is not clear what the offeror is expected to complete in this section (except those documents that are in support of Section L and submitted in different a volume). Please advise.

Response: As specified in L-4.4.1, documentation illustrating their approach for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation. Signed and completed SF-33, blocks 12 through 16 with blocks 17 and 18 being fully executed. Representations and Certification updated in ORCA website accordingly.

128. Statement/Clarification: RFP Section L-4.7.1, Paragraph h, OCI: Please clarify what is meant by “first core support elements”.

Response: The first core support elements are the contractor identified key personnel identified within the offer.

129. Statement/Clarification: RFP Section L-4.7.1, Paragraph h, OCI: Pursuant to Q&A No. 168 and 169 from the Draft RFP, the Government suggested that the OCI Plan document be considered an attachment and be excluded from the page count. Please confirm that this is still a valid approach for the final RFP.


130. Statement/Question/Clarification: RFP Section L-4.8.1, Small Business Participation: The RFP asks that offerors propose the extent of the participation in terms of the value of the total acquisition. Is it recommended that the total acquisition value be the cumulative total of the sample task orders? Please advise what dollar value offerors should use as the value of the total acquisition.

Response: The cumulative total value of all the sample task orders.

131. Statement/Question: RFP Section L-4.8.2, DoD Subcontracting Goals: Is the 37.2% considered to be a roll-up of all small business classifications (including small

39 of 127


business, small disadvantaged business, historically black colleges and universities, woman-owned, HUBzone, veteran owned, and service disabled veteran owned)?

Response: Correct. The 37.2% Small business goal is inclusive of the HUBZone, SDB, WO and SDVOSB goals as identified in the draft solicitation.

132. Statement/Clarification: RFP Section L-4.9, Paragraph v, Sample Task Order Price/ Cost Proposals: Subparagraph (1) states “Pricing for some of the sample task orders identified as actual task orders will also be used for evaluation and actual task order awards immediately following the IDIQ evaluation.” Please advise which sample task orders will be released as actual orders upon contract award, and if an incumbent is currently performing the task.

Response: Sample Task Orders are for evaluation purposes only.

133. Statement/Clarification: RFP Section L-4.2, Section L-4.6, and Section M-4.1.1, Past Performance: Please clarify if the 20 page limit for Volume III is for the entire Past Performance Volume or for each Past Performance citation. If it is 20 pages for the entire volume, we are concerned that we cannot cover the requirements within these page limitations. Section L states that for Past Performance for each Contractor Performance (up to 10 in all), we must address:- scope, magnitude and complexity of work; - actual performance versus required performance; - actual quality or reliability versus specified levels or standards; - management performance in meeting program schedules and milestones; - management of personnel;- quality management and process improvement; - cost control;- organizational conflict of interest mitigation; - conformance to the terms and conditions of the contract;- responses to technical direction;- problems encountered and resolution of problems;- customer satisfaction; and, performance achievements;

In addition, Section M requires that we address business relations including small business goal achievement and compliance with limitation of subcontract needs. We are also required to provide contractual information and a brief description of the contract, as well as a Matrix of Past Performance to Sample Task Area for the prime and for subcontractors.

Given the number of requirements to be addressed for up to 10 contracts, we recommend that the Government increase the Past Performance page limit from 20 pages to 50 pages in its entirety so that all required factors may be addressed adequately.

40 of 127


Response: Recommendation acknowledged. However, the Past Performance narrative page restriction is not being changed. Acceptable attachments are Tables and figures which will not count towards the narrative page count limitation.

134. Statement/Question: RFP Section L and Attachment 004, Quality Control Plan, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1) and CBRND Testing, Warehouse Operations, and Program Support Services (CPFF Supporting Task Area 6): SOOs 2 and 5 indicate that the Quality Plan should be part of the PWS; however, Section L indicates that the Quality Plan will be submitted after contract award. Are we required to submit a quality plan in our response to the individual SOOs?

Response: Yes.

135. Statement/Question: RFP Attachment 004, QASP: Is the quality control plan the same as the QASP within the individual SOOs?

Response: No. Both are required.

136. Statement/Question: RFP Section L-4.2, Page Limitations for Volume II: Is the 20 page limit for Volume II for the entire Volume or is it per SOO response?

Response: The 20 page limitation pertains to the narrative page count limitation for Volume II. The individual SOO response, the PWS narrative for each SOO shall not exceed 5 pages per SOO. Attachments to the PWS will not count toward the page count limitation.

137. Statement/Question: RFP Sections L-4.2 and L-4.5, Page Limitations for Volume II General Information: Paragraph 3 indicates that offerors may create a separate tab entitled General Information for information applicable to all Sample Task Orders. Can this be included as an attachment to the volume and therefore not be subjected to the page count restriction?

Response: Offerors may at their own discretion elect to create the separate tab labeled General Information – Sample Task Orders as stated in L-4.5 or “Tailoring of this information may be accomplished, as required, with each sample task order response” may be included as an acceptable formatted attachment type, “Tables & Figures” which will not count towards the Volume II narrative page count limitation.

138. Statement/Question: RFP Section L-4.2.4, Tables and Figures: Section L-4.2.4 states that tables and figures will not count toward page limitations. If tables and figures are embedded within the text, how will the Government calculate the number of pages we have used in each volume?

Response: Tables and figures should not be embedded with the narrative text. Embedded tables and figures would then count toward the page limitations per Volume.

41 of 127


Tables and figures should be properly referenced in the narrative text and included as attachments which will not count toward the page count limitation of each volume.

139. Statement/Question: RFP Section L-4.2.2, Format: Section L–4.2.2 states that “an 11” x 17” is a two-sheet minimum 12-point font size or a maximum 10 characters per inch spacing.” It appears some words are missing, or two sentences were inadvertently merged together. Can the Government please verify if this sentence is correct or if there are words missing regarding fold-outs and font requirements?

Response: The sentence is correct as stated: ‘An 11” x 17” is a two-sheet minimum 12-point font size or a maximum 10 characters per inch spacing.’

140. Statement/Question: RFP, Attachment 004, SOOs, Transition Plan and Phase-in/Phase-out Plan: SOO 1, Section VI, calls for submission of a Transition Plan. Is this deliverable the same as the Phase-in/Phase-out Plan? Is this to be submitted as part of the PWS response or after contract award?

Response: As required by section L-4.5 the offeror shall assume that the Government will execute all sample Task Orders simultaneously. You may presume that no other Task Orders have been awarded to date. As required by SOO Section VI, the contractor will submit a Transition Plan with their Proposal and be prepared to begin Phase-In efforts immediately after contract award.

141. Statement/Question: RFP, L-4.2.1, Page Limitations: The responses to question 169 from the Pre-Solicitation Contractor Submitted Questions states that the OCI plan could be submitted as an attachment and therefore not count toward the page count within the Management Volume. Are all attachments excluded from the page count limits for each of the volumes?

Response: Only attachments of the type specified in Section L-4.2.4 are acceptable, Tables and Figures which will not count against the page limitation.

142. Statement/Question: RFP, Section L-4.7 and L-4.7.2, Total Compensation Plan: Section L-4.7 specifies that “Volume IV shall have no pricing information included.” Section L-4.7.2 requires submittal of a Total Compensation Plan that “shall include the salaries/wages…for each category of labor.” These requirements seem in conflict. Please advise.

Response: Please read all of L-4.7.2 in its entirety that states: “The Compensation Plan shall address all proposed labor categories, including those personnel subject to the Service Contract Act, union agreements, and those exempt. The total compensation plan shall include the salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for each category of labor. The plan shall also include a discussion of the consistency of the plan among the categories of labor being proposed. Employees may be exempt from the Service Contract Act if they are employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity as those terms are defined in 29 C.F.R. Part 541 and FAR 22.1001.

42 of 127


Differences between benefits offered professional and non-professional employees shall be highlighted. The requirements of this plan may be combined with that required by the clause FAR 52.222-46, ‘Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees’." Emphasis is placed on contractors discussion of all proposed labor categories rather than actual pricing data for individual salaries, hourly wage rates, etc. that are to be included in Volume VI. Exempt employees include salaried individuals that do not fall under DoL Wage Determinations, Attachment #7, to the solicitation. General salaries, wages and compensation plans are not considered formal cost or pricing data that is required under the Cost Volume, Volume VI, as specified in section L-4.9 of the solicitation.

143. RFP, MCLOGSS Pricing Matrix Attachment 5, Notes-Assumptions Tab: The Notes-Assumptions tab in the Pricing Matrix states that “The Contractor shall use this worksheet to clearly list all pricing notes and assumptions used in the derivation of it pricing proposal.” As a cost narrative (MSWord document) and BOE forms typically provide this information, is it the Government’s intent that offerors not submit the standard Cost Narrative Volumes, but instead use this template?

Response: The Government provided Attachment 5 was provided at industries request as a tool for proposal preparation. Should individual contractors already possess other software narrative and BOE forms possessing the required information included that lists all pricing notes and assumptions used in the derivation of the pricing proposal, reference the applicable document or forms in the Notes to fulfill requirements of Attachment 5, Pricing Matrix.

144. RFP, Section L-4.5.1(d), p. 162, Labor Categories: Labor Category references Section J, Attachment 5. Should the correct reference be to Attachment 9?

Response: Correct upon release of the Final Solicitations not all cross references were corrected. The Government will correct by the Amendment process upon responding to formal questions and answers.

145. RFP, Section L-4.5.1(d), p. 162, Labor Categories: The RFP states “your list of labor categories should include the suggested labor categories from Section J, Attachment 5.” However, Attachment 5 (Attachment 9, Section 2.0) indicates that “offerors are encouraged to replace these categories and descriptions with their own versions.” Can the Government please clarify if we are to use these categories, and if so may we add to these categories?

Response: In the conversion process from the Draft solicitations to the Final solicitations not all references in the drafts were cleaned up prior to release of the Final solicitations. Final clean-up in addition to questions and answers will be enacted by the amendment process.

146. RFP, Section L-4.9 (p. 167), Total Compensation Plan (Tab 2): Section L-4.9 requires the Total Compensation Plan (TCP) be included Volume VI. However, the TCP

43 of 127


is also required to be included in Volume IV. Is it the Government’s intention that the TCP be duplicated in its entirety in both volumes?

Response: Yes. See L-4.7.2 under the management approach volume and L-4.9 both apply to offerors. General salaries, wages and compensation plans are not considered formal cost or pricing data that is required under the Cost Volume, Volume VI, as specified in section L-4.9 of the solicitation.

147. RFP, Section L-4.9 (p. 167), Fully Burdened Rates: The first paragraph states that the fully burdened rates are to be incorporated into the contract; however, Section C.5, Task Order Pricing, does not refer to using these fully burdened rates to price task orders. Please clarify the Government’s intention by contract type with regard to the fully burdened rates incorporated into the contract.

Response: The cited Section C.5, Task Order Pricing is one of many guiding overarching Contract Level, post Multiple Award Contract clauses incorporated in full text expressing how labor shall be priced on at the Task Order Level competition process under the IDIQ Suite’s Fair Opportunity process. The requirements of L-4.9 apply for the instant Multiple Award Contract evaluation process prior to any MAC Fair Opportunity, task order competition as discussed in Section C.5.

148. RFP, L-4.9 (p. 167), Fully Burdened Rates: The first paragraph mentions that the fully burdened rates are to be incorporated into the contract. Are these rates used for pricing of task order proposals only?

Response: Yes. The fully burdened rates apply to the requirements of both tabs 3 and 4 for pricing support data of the “Sample Task Order Cost/Price Proposals” and “Subcontract Sample Task Order Cost/Price Proposals.”

149. RFP, Section C.5, Pricing of Task Orders, Fully Burdened Prevailing Department of Labor Wage Determinations: Para (a) states that “Labor shall be priced in accordance with the negotiated fully burdened labor rates pursuant to the prevailing Dept of Labor Wage Determinations. Should this statement have referred to all of the fully burdened labor rates? If so, is it the government’s intention to include a schedule of rates for all categories for all contract types for all years in the contract?

Response: No.

150. RFP, Attachment 005, Pricing Matrix: The pricing template contains one labor category per CLIN. However, several labor categories will be required for each CLIN, and it will become repetitive and voluminous to list each category for each CLIN (i.e., each contract type for each year). We recommend that the Government request bidders to provide labor rates by contract type/offsite/onsite for each contract year as opposed to by Category/by CLIN.

44 of 127


Response: Attachment #5, Pricing Matrix was provided by the Government at Industry’s request. The Government mapped the pricing matrix to the CLIN structure of the RFP as a guide, reference purposes. Contractors may download and make necessary additions/deletions to include labor categories as necessary to complete the IDIQ CLIN or Sample Task order responses being in a MS Word formatted Table document to fit each entities formal proposal efforts for attachment purposes in response to individual Volume requirements. It is not the intent of the Government to recommend or mandate how offerors should use tools provided by the Government to complete proposal requirements by individual contractors or teams.

151. RFP, Attachment 005, Pricing Matrix, Sample BOE Tab: The sample BOE Tab seems to provide the process for how the rates will build up using the provided templates as identified for Contractor Site and Government Site. The sample requires that offerors identify annual productive hours, but the templates do not accommodate this action. Can the offeror provide annual productive hours in the cost narrative response under Tabs 3&4 Sample Task Order Price/Cost Proposals, or will the Government modify the provided RFP templates to accommodate this request?

Response: Yes, within the confines of any narrative page limitations. Should individual contractors already possess other software narrative and BOE forms possessing the required information included that lists all pricing notes and assumptions used in the derivation of the pricing proposal, reference the applicable document or forms in the Notes to fulfill requirements of Attachment 5, Pricing Matrix. The Government will not modify the existing Attachment #5. Any modifications to Attachment #5 are the sole responsibility of the offeror to make in their proposal submission process. Attachment #5 was provided by the Government as a tool for individual contractors to use for each offerors proposal preparation purposes.

152. RFP, Attachment 005, Pricing Matrix: Will the contractor be limited to only using these categories in pricing future task orders after award of the initial contract?

Response: No.

153. RFP, Section B: If all CLINS are not utilized in the pricing of the sample task orders, what nomenclature should the offeror indicate in the Section B CLIN amount?


154. Statement/Clarification: Section B Para B1 & Task Areas within Attachment 1, Section B States “All other requirements (within Task Areas 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10) less than

45 of 127


$150,000 and requirements expected to result in two acceptable small business offers will also be 100% set-aside for small businesses within this suite. However, Task Areas listed within Attachment 2 states Unrestricted task orders are > $100K in estimated dollar value, while small business (Restricted) task orders are established for estimated dollar values < $100K. Please clarify if the dollar threshold for set-aside contracts is $100K or $150K.

Response: Effective 1 October 2010, the SAT threshold was increased by $50,000.00 from $100,000.00 to $150,000.00. An updated attachment 0001 is forthcoming with Amendment 0001 upon release by the PCO.

155. Statement/Question: 52.216-18 ORDERING. (OCT 1995) 52.216-18 ORDERING states the following: “Any supplies and services to be furnished under this contract shall be ordered by issuance of delivery orders or task orders by the individuals or activities designated in the Schedule. Such orders may be issued from 01 August 2012 or date of award whichever is later, through 31 July 2017. Para F1. CONTRACT PERIOD. The IDIQ Contract includes a base period and four (4) option ordering periods, for a total potential ordering period of 5 years. The ordering period for each MAC shall be as follows: A twelve month ordering period commencing upon the award date of MAC covering a twelve month base ordering period with four twelve month option periods for a total potential ordering period of 5 years. The ordering period for each MAC shall be as follows: BASE PERIOD CLINS: Dates will be added at the time of award.Question: From the above it is not clear if supplies and services will begin on 1 August 2012 or on a date TBD. Please provide a projected performance start date for the contract.

Response: All Dates reflected for PoP dates, Section F, and 52.216-18 ORDERING. (OCT 1995) are estimated Government worst case circumstances. It is too early upon release of the RFP to determine the “Actual performance dates” prior to entering into formal negotiations; requesting best and final offers; and release of the MCLOGSS Contracts Suite MACs when definitive PoP dates will be known.

156. Statement/Question: L-2.1, L-2.1 states “Unfavorable consideration is defined and includes: any rating falling below “acceptable” level in Technical and Management Experience and “good” in Past Performance.” The adjectival ratings for Technical and Management described in Section M-4.1.1 are listed as “Excellent, Very Good, Good, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory”. Question: Is the rating “acceptable” in L-2.1 meant to relate to the rating “Marginal” in M-4.1.1?

Response: Yes. The lowest “acceptable” Technical or Management rating according to Section M-4.11 is “Marginal”. Any rating below marginal is “Unacceptable”.

157. Statement/Question: L-4.2, Volume II, Technical Approach, is assigned a 20 page limit. The response provided to Question #3 in the 8-27-10 Pre-solicitation Conference Q and A during the Draft Solicitation Phase-Indicates it is acceptable to provide the Sample

46 of 127


Task Order responses as “tables” and list them as attachments, and these attachments will not count toward the limit of 20 pages. Question: Please confirm that this guidance is still valid, and that the Sample Task Order responses (or portions of the responses) may be provided as tables/attachments not inclusive to the 20 page limit.

Response: Confirmed. Previous guidance, Tables, Figures, General Information, Sample Task PWSs, etc. incorporated as attachments which are properly referenced within the Technical Volume, will not count toward the 20 page, narrative page limitation of the Technical Volume.

158. Statement/Question: L-4.2; L-4.2.2 The table in L-4.2 indicates the requirement to submit one CD per proposal volume. L-4.2.2 states “One of the Volume VI (Cost/Price), disks shall be…” indicating there may be multiple disks required for submission.Question: Please confirm the number of electronic copies (CDs) required for proposal submittal.

Response: 2 CDs are required for proposal submission. Please see the Pre-Solicitation Conference Questions and Answers, page 11/60, response #28, it states: Electronic submission must be on a separate media (CD ROM) from the Technical Approach’s electronic submission.” Table in section L-4.2 remains unchanged. Technical Approach is read only: Cost/Price electronic copy is read/write. Cost proposal (Volume VI), if contain links, the links must be intact and maintained through all revisions. Spreadsheets should be easily traceable. Whether contractors choose to link or unlink supplied spreadsheets is not in the best interest for the Government to mandate. However, the consequences of contractors submitting documents with broken links may result in an unfavorable evaluation or the Government being unable to evaluate offer effectively.”

In the Final solicitation, Section L-9 continues and requires “The Cost/Price volume should be submitted electronically in addition to the printed copies. Electronic submissions must be on a separate media (CD ROM) from the Technical Approach’s electronic submission.”

159. Statement/Question: L-4.2, L-4.6, Offerors are instructed to submit “up to 5 prime contracts, 10 including subcontracts”. In section L-4.6 the instructions go on to explain “the offeror shall submit no more than two past performance references per proposed subcontractor(s)” and “a subcontractor past performance reference may be included as one of the past performance references submitted by the prime”. We interpret this to mean that a team’s prime contractors may submit up to five past performance references (on contracts where they are a prime or subcontractor), and the team members for that team may submit an additional five past performance references (on contracts where they are a prime or subcontractor). A subcontractor team member may submit one of the Prime’s five past performance references, making the possible subcontractor team member total submissions six, but no single team member subcontractor may submit more than two references total. Question: Please verify our interpretation of the above is correct. If not correct, please clarify.

47 of 127


Response: Verified, as previously cited on page 20/60, response #76 of the Pre-Solicitation Conference Questions and Answers.

160. Statement/Question: L-4.2, L-4.6, Volume III, Past Performance References, is assigned a 20 page limit. Responses provided via Question #3 in the 8-27-10 Pre-solicitation Conference Q and A states it is acceptable to include the Contractor Performance Data Sheets as “tables”, and list them as attachments not inclusive to the limit of 20 pages. Question: Please confirm that this guidance is still valid, and that the Contractor Performance Data Sheets may be provided as tables/attachments not inclusive to the 20 page limit.

Response: Confirmed. Responses provided then also apply to the Final Solicitations where applicable understanding that there are now some additional narrative page Volume limitations that were not present with the draft solicitations.

161. Statement/Question: Ref: L-4.2.2, L-4.9; L-4.2.2 states, “CDs shall be “read-only” CDs formatted for Microsoft Windows XP with one exception. One of the Volume VI (Cost/Price), disks shall be in read-or-write format with spreadsheets unlinked to any other spreadsheets or other files.” L-4.9 references the pricing documents and states “none of the files submitted shall have any read/write/password protection”. Question: Please clarify if all but one of the Volume VI CDs is to be read/write protected, or if none of the Volume VI CDs is to be read/write protected.

Response: 2 CDs are required for proposal submission. The Technical Approach is read only. “The Cost/Price electronic copy is read/write. Cost proposal (Volume VI), if contain links, the links must be intact and maintained through all revisions. Spreadsheets should be easily traceable . . . If files are compressed, they must be self-extracting archives (no software required to decompress). If files contain links, the links must be intact and maintained through all revisions. Additionally, spreadsheets should be easily traceable. None of the files submitted shall have any read/write/password protection. Include all formulas in your spreadsheets and please include any notes deemed necessary to add clarity to the spreadsheets.”

162. Statement/Questions A/B: Ref: L-4.2.2; L-4.2.10; L-4.2.2 indicates, “Text and graphics portions of the electronic copies shall be in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2003. Data submitted in spreadsheet format shall be readable by MS Excel 2003.” L-4.2.10 indicates the documents must be readable in Adobe Reader 8.0. Question A: Please confirm proposal documents may be submitted as either MS Word or Adobe PDF files. Question B: Please also confirm pricing worksheets must be submitted in MS Excel format.

Response A/B: Confirmed, text, graphics and spreadsheets must be in Microsoft (MS) Word (2003). Confirmed, pricing worksheets must be in MS Excel (2003) format while a fully executed SF-33 (signed) proposal must comply with the requirements of Section L-4.2.10.

48 of 127


163. Statement/Question: Ref: L-4.2.9; L-4.2.9 clearly indicates that there is to be no cross referencing between proposal volumes. Question: Please verify that cross referencing is permitted for sections within the same volume.

Response: Confirmed. Referencing attached documents within the same volume is authorized and highly encouraged for offerors to submit their best proposals for Government evaluation purposes.

164. Statement/Question: Ref: L-4.5.1. Section L-4.5.1 requires offerors to “Provide Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) that identifies your approach of meeting our objectives listed in the sample task Statement of Objective (SOO) for the task level but also for the overall contract level.”The requirement indicates offerors are to describe their approach to meet requirements at the Sample Task Order level, as well as “for the overall contract level”. This seems to indicate that the Government will evaluate contract level processes based on the response to Sample Task Orders. Question: Since offerors are describing their approach to satisfying the requirements of the Sample Task Order, please confirm that the intent of this requirement is to simply illustrate how the processes at the Sample Task Order level tie into the processes at the contract level, and not serve as an evaluation of contract level processes?

Response: Confirmed. However, contractor responses to the Sample Task Orders are also an indicator of the overall contract level performance capability as being evaluated as well under past performance; management; small business and pricing volume requirements for a best value continuum MAC award process. Note: for the responses to the Sample Task Orders, both the contract level and task order level QASP and QCP are required with a separate QCP for overarching MAC is required.

165. Statement/Question: Ref: L-4.6; The instructions state that for the Past Performance Matrices, “one matrix shall be provided for the offeror, and one matrix for each of the offeror’s subcontractors.” Question: Please verify that offerors are only to provide matrices for subcontractor team members that are submitting Past Performance Data Sheets, and not matrices for all subcontractor team members.

Response: No. Both requirements apply to offerors as stated in the solicitation. The Past Performance Matrix and Contractor Performance Data Sheets are formatted as a Figure and Table respectively that may be attached to the Past Performance Volume without counting toward the page count limitation but must be properly referenced within the past performance narrative and must be “relevant past performance as defined within the solicitation.

Past Performance Matrices: “One matrix shall be provided for the offeror, and one matrix for each of the offeror’s subcontractors.”

Contractor Performance Data Sheets: “Offerors are directed to provide Contractor Performance Data Sheets on up to five of the offeror’s most relevant contracts that have

49 of 127


been performed within the last three years. Offerors may submit performance data regarding current contract performance as long as a minimum of one year of performance has been completed as of the closing date of this RFP.”

166. Statement/Questions A/B: Ref: L-4.7.4; ATTCH 4; ATTCH 8. Section 4.7.4 Subfactor 4 – Quality Control Plan, states “The offeror shall: a. Submit a draft Quality Control Plan that supports the PWS and QASP (you will provide) at the contract and task order levels.” The above reference indicates offerors are to provide a QASP at the contract level. RFP Attachment 8 provides the contract level QASP. Question A: Please confirm the offerors will not have to provide a QASP for the contract level and the QASP provided by the Government may be used for the purpose of responding to the solicitation. Responses received to questions during the Draft RFP Q&A indicated it was acceptable to list the draft Quality Control Plan as an attachment, and this attachment would not be included in the page allocation for the volume.

Response A: A Quality Control Plan is required from offerors as specified in the instructions of the solicitation. The Government has an established QASP for the overarching IDIQ contracts.

Question B: Please confirm that the draft Quality Control Plan and the QASP (at the contract and task order levels) may be included as attachments, and these attachments will not be included in the page count for the volumes.

Response B: Confirmed, Previous guidance, Tables, Figures, General Information, Sample Task PWSs, draft Quality Control Plan and QASP incorporated as attachments which are properly referenced will not count toward the narrative page count limitation.

167. Statement/Question: Ref: L-4.9.i; In the instructions for Tab 1 – General Information, offerors are instructed to “include the summary and/or general information in this section, i.e. summary rate information to provide aid in understanding of rates in the cost/price proposal section, Tab 4 and 5.” Question: Please verify this information is to support Tabs 3 and 4, and not Tabs 4 and 5.


168. Statement/Question: Ref: L-4.7.2; 4.7.2 Subfactor 2 – Total Compensation Plan states “The Compensation Plan shall address all proposed labor categories, including those personnel subject to the Service Contract Act, union agreements, and those exempt.” Question: The phrase “union agreements” implies there are organized workforces in place. Please specify if there are currently organized workforces in place on contracts expected to be re-competed under the MCLogss Program.

Response: Within the Government workforce there are labor categories and employees exempt as well as subject to union agreements. For example, the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) primarily made up of Wage Grade (WG) industrial support workforce members involved in the Multi-Commodity Maintenance

50 of 127


Centers located in Albany, GA and Barstow, CA with forward locations located in Jacksonville, NC and elsewhere. Some of these positions are identified in the DoL Wage Determinations while others may not but are still part of the Government workforce and other contracted out support services.

169. Statement/Question A/B: Ref: M-4.1.1 Factor 2 Past Performance; M-4.1.1 Factor 2 states “The following areas will be evaluated within the applicable suite:

Management PerformanceQuality of PerformanceSchedule PerformanceCost Control”

Question A: Please indicate how these four areas relate to the evaluation guidance described in the preceding paragraphs: “The Government will evaluate: quality of services; timeliness of performance; record of meeting schedules; management of key personnel; ability to provide quality personnel and adequate non-labor resources for the life of the contract; business relations including small business goal achievement and compliance with limitation of subcontracting (when applicable); cost control; effectiveness of internal and external communications; ability to understand and resolve deficiencies in a timely manner with no adverse impact on the mission, program or task; general responsiveness to contract requirements; and, customer satisfaction. A significant achievement, problem, and how the problem was resolved, are considerations that will impact the overall risk rating.”

Response A: The four areas of: Management Performance; Quality of Performance; Schedule Performance; and Cost Control are all important considerations in evaluating any acquisition which provides the Government significant performance indicators of an offerors evaluated “potential performance risk” and “degree of confidence for successful performance” in the overall best value continuum MCLOGSS Contract individual suite, Multiple Award Contract, award determination process.

Question B: Please indicate which evaluation criteria takes precedence.

Response B: M-4, page 172, fourth sentence states: “Evaluation factors are in descending order of importance.”

170. Statement/Questions: Ref: M-4.1.1 Factor 3 Management Plan; M-4.1.1 states aspects of the Management Plan “will be evaluated to determine if they support successful implementation of the PWS provided by the offeror in response to the sample task orders.” Question: Is it the Government’s intent to evaluate the Management Volume in conjunction with the Technical Volume (to include the Sample Task Order PWS documents)?

Response: No.

51 of 127


Or is the intent of this reference to highlight that the Government will evaluate offerors’ abilities to execute Task Orders using systems and processes implemented at the MCLogss contract level?

Response: Yes.

171. Statement/Question: Ref: L-4.7.2; 4.7.2 Subfactor 2 – Total Compensation Plan states “The total compensation plan shall include the salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for each category of labor.” Question #1 in the 7-27-2010 Questions and Answers states: “ 1. Question : Section L in the mgmt volume under Subfactor 2 Total Compensation Plan it says, “The total compensation plan shall include the salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for each category of labor” however on page 163 in para. L-4.5 it states “Volume II shall have no pricing information included.” Please confirm that pricing information should only be placed in the cost volume. Response : As previously answered but without being highlighted on 9 June 2010, contractors should concentrate more on “all proposed labor categories” including those personnel subject to the Service Contract Act, union agreements, and those exempt. The total compensation plan shall include the salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for “each category of labor “ and shall also include a “discussion of the consistency of the plan among the categories of labor being proposed” more so than on salaries or other related pricing information as previously stated in the Draft Solicitation section L-4.7 Management Plan Factor Requirements (Volume IV) that “Volume IV shall have no pricing information included”.

Question: Based on the guidance above, we understand that for the Total Compensation Plan we are required to discuss all proposed labor categories, provide a general discussion concerning the compensation/benefits/leave (without going into specific detail such as pricing related to wages), and a discussion on the consistency of compensation across the contract. Please confirm our understanding is correct, and if not correct, please clarify.

Response: Confirmed. The Government though by definition does not consider under Section L-4.7.2, a general narrative discussion of salaries, wages and compensation plans in the Management Plan Volume, Volume IV, as formal or informal cost or pricing data that is required under the Cost Volume, Volume VI, as specified in section L-4.9 of the solicitation.

172. Statement/Question: Ref: Attach 4; in the “Other than Key Personnel sections of the Sample Task Orders (such as Section X, 1.3 [page 8 of Attachment 4]), the requirement reads: 1.3 Other than Key Personnel. Vacant positions for other than key personnel shall be made within 20 calendar days from date of vacancy. The contractor shall notify the COR and customer when a vacancy has occurred within five work days.

Question: The phrase “shall be made” is confusing. Should this requirement read “Vacant positions for other than key personnel shall be filled within 20 calendar days”?

52 of 127


Response: Confirmed, “shall be made” is synonymous in word usage as “shall be filled”.

173. Question: Request that a site visit be held with the MCLogss Contracting Team so that all contractors can discuss questions and receive clarification on SOO requirements. Having this meeting will also allow prime bidders to meet with potential subcontractors from the area and visit sites that may require services on future Task Orders.

Response: The MCLOGSS Team conducted a site visit open to all contractors on April 9, 2010. No additional site visits are scheduled to “discuss questions and receive clarifications on SOO requirements”.

174. Question: There was a great amount of guidance issued during the Draft RFP phase of the solicitation through multiple questions and answers. Please confirm this guidance is still valid for the actual RFP.


175. Question: Could you confirm that the Government intends to wait until the third quarter of 2012 to award IDIQ contracts?

Response: The PoP in the Solicitation is the Government’s worst case timetable for MCLOGSS Multiple Contract Awards while taking in account DoD, DoN, and USMC Policy and implementation of Section 808 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, Public Law 110-181 that established the statutory requirement for independent management reviews of contracts for services; Pre-Award reviews including: phase 2 and phase 3 reviews required for competitive procurements prior to formal contract awards may be fully executed by the Contracting Officer. At this time, the Government is unable to project a “best case” PoP.

176. Statement/Question: Reference: RFP Section L-4.7, Management Plan Factor Requirements (Volume IV), Page 165. Question: In the Management Plan volume, is the Total Compensation Plan required only from the prime contractor? If offerors must submit the Total Compensation Plan from all subcontractors as well, please clarify that the Total Compensation Plans will not be counted against the page limitation for the Management Plan volume. We recommend the subcontractor Total Compensation Plans be required only in the Cost/Price volume versus being required in both the Cost/Price volume and the Management Plan volume.

Response: Total Compensation Plans if only addressed in the narrative portion will count towards the narrative page count limitation. However, if properly referenced in the narrative and attached in a Table or Figure format, the Total Compensation Plan will not be subject to the page count limitation of the narrative volume. Total Compensation Plan is required in both the Management Plan Factor Volume and the Cost/Price Volume as specified in the solicitation.

53 of 127


177. Statement/Question: Attachment 9 Labor Categories presents 37 positions ranging from Administrator/Financial Specialist I through Graphics Designer V. Are there additional Labor Categories to address positions such as Logistics Specialist or Warehouseman that might have been omitted inadvertently?

Response: Contractor call on all offered Labor Categories. The Government only provided our best estimates.

178. Statement/Questions A/B/C/D: Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) Document; Reference: Attachment 3; what is the purpose of this form? Does it apply to all primes and subcontractors? When is it to be signed? Is the government going to grant relief when the restrictions in the NDA cause performance issues?

Response A: The purpose of NDA form is to acknowledge, address , mitigate, avoid, and/or waive any potential contractor and contractor employees having any organizational conflicts of interest (OCI), activities or relationships with other persons, a person who is unable or potentially unable to render impartial assistance or advice to the Government, or a person’s objectivity in performing contracted work is or might be otherwise impaired, or a person has an unfair competitive advantage in the performance of services that were previously conducted by government employees as identified in FAR 9.5 considering ethics and contractors in the workplace.

Response B: Yes. All LOGCOM MCLOGSS Contract Multiple Award Contract awardees, prime and subcontractors.

Response C: NDA signatures apply at the individual Task Order competition phase for inclusion with Task Order submission requirements.

Response D: OCI’s not able to be avoided, neutralized, mitigated, or eliminated may only be waived by the concurrence of the HCA, Assistant Deputy Commandant, Contracts.

179. Statement/Question: Reference RFP Period of Performance/Date of Award: Section F and Section I 52.216-18 Page 120 and page 98; why is there a 19 month delay from submission of the proposal on Jan 14 2011 and contract start of 1 August 2012?

Response: All Dates reflected for PoP dates, Section F, and 52.216-18 ORDERING. (OCT 1995) are estimated Government worst case circumstances.

180. Statement/Question: Potential Contract Value; Reference: RFP Para. B.1 Page 74;What is the contract ceiling dollar value? The DRFP stated a ceiling of $854, 625,000 but this has been removed from the final RFP.

Response: Procurement sensitive and therefore excluded from the final solicitation.

54 of 127


181. Statement/Question: Number of Contract Awards; previous published information stated that 3-5 awards would be made in each suite. How many contracts will be awarded in the Unrestricted Suite?

Response: In accordance with FAR 52.216-27, the number of contracts to be awarded will be determined by the degree of competition received and the number and quality of proposals provided. The MCLOGSS team proposes to balance the number of contracts awarded to allow for adequate competition at the task order level and to prevent an unwieldy ordering process.

182. Statement/Question/Clarification: General Instructions- Contract Awards in Unrestricted suite; Reference: RFP Paragraph/Page: B1, page 74; if a small business bids on both the small business set-aside contract and on the unrestricted suite contract are they eligible for award in both suites? i.e. a Small business could have two contracts. Please clarify how the government will resolve this issue.

Response: Solicitation M67004-11-R-0004 is 100% set-aside for small business under task areas #2, Quality Assurance Support and task area #8, Support to LOGCOM Centers and subordinate commands. All other requirements (within Task Areas 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10) less than $150,000 and requirements expected to result in two acceptable small business offers will also be 100% set-aside for small businesses within the restricted suite. Requirements greater than $150,000 will be reviewed by the Contracting Officer to determine if there is a reasonable expectation that two or more small businesses could perform the work in the restricted suite. If two or more small businesses are capable of performing the requirement, it will be set-aside and competed among the small business Prime contractors within the restricted suite. Should a set-aside be established but fails to receive two or more small business offers, the set-aside will be dissolved and competed among the unrestricted suite awardees.

Solicitation M67004-11-R-0003 includes all other requirements (excluding Task Areas 2, 3, and 8) greater than $150,000 which cannot be performed by two or more small businesses within the restricted suite. The task orders within this suite will be competed amongst the multiple award contract holders, which were competed using full and open competition with no set-aside restrictions. Should a set-aside be established but fails to receive two or more small business offers, the set-aside will be dissolved and competed among the unrestricted suite awardees.

183. Statement/Question: Key Personnel; RFP Paragraph/Page: C.11- Page 92; this requires the submission of resumes for three key personnel. Which volume are the resumes to be included? Are the resumes included in the page limit for that volume?

Response: Potential MAC award key personnel and key personnel assigned to any Contractor Teaming agreements and Subcontracting Opportunities would be included in the Management Plan Factor Requirements, Volume IV.

55 of 127


184. Statement/Questions: Volume II requirements and Page Limits, Reference: L-4.2 page 159, the table on page 159 states that Volume II Technical Approach has a page limit of 20 pages. Are we to assume that this is 20 pages for each sample task response? If so please amend the RFP to state this change.

Response: No. Amendment 0001 is incorporating the sample task order page count limitation of: “The PWS narrative for each SOO shall not exceed 5 pages per SOO. Attachments to the PWS (submitted in a table/figure format) will not count toward the page count limitation.”

185. Statement/Question: Are there any items such as the PWS, QASP, list of labor categories that are not included in the page limit?

Response: Yes. The items included in the question that are attached as a Table or Figure that do not count toward the page count limitation.

186. Statement/Question: All nine sample tasks require submission of a phase-in plan and resumes of key personnel, and in some case QC plans, are these included in any page limits? If so please clarify the page limits.

Response: Yes if only addressed in the narrative portion. No if properly referenced in the narrative and attached in a Table or Figure format not subject to the page count limitation of the narrative volume.

187. Question: Is the General Information or Technical Approach Overview section of Volume II, as required in Para L-4.5 on page 162, included in the page limit or does it have it own page limit?

Response: Yes if only addressed in the narrative portion. No if properly referenced in the narrative and additional information is attached in a Table or Figure format not subject to the page count limitation of the narrative volume.

188. Question: Please be very specific and amend the RFP to clearly describe the page limits of Volume II and what is not included in any page limit.

Response: The solicitation is very specific in the page count narrative limitation and acceptable documents that may be included as attachments that do not count against the narrative page count limitation.

189. Statement/Question: Reference : RFP page 164, paragraph L-4.6 PAST PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS (VOL III), Discussion: The first paragraph on page 164 of the reference states, “One matrix shall be provided for the offeror and one matrix for each of the offeror’s subcontractors.” To comply with the instructions in Section L for matrix construction would place offeror’s with team complements of more than five subcontractors at risk of exceeding the Section L page limitation for Volume III. Question: Would the Government reconsider and adjust the requirement to require a past

56 of 127


performance Matrix for the 5 subcontractors for which we are allowed to submit Contractor Performance Data Sheets rather than each subcontractor on the Team?

Response: No. The past performance matrix and the Contractor Performance Data Sheets are both in an acceptable Table or Figure format that may be referenced in the past performance narrative accordingly and included as attachments to the past performance narrative that do not count toward the past performance volume’s 20 pages, page count limitation.

190. Statement/Question: Addition of Subcontractors/Company Divisions, Will the Government allow Prime contractors to add rates for subcontractors, divisions, subsidiaries, and affiliates that are not bid under the McLogss original proposal in order to meet future specific task order requirements? The need for this could arise for a variety of reasons such as 1) future company acquisitions which could create new company “segment/group” rates, 2) re-organizations within a company which creates different business segments, and/or 3) future McLogss task order requirements specify effort from different business segments within a company that were not original proposed under the original basic contract.

Response: Contractor’s choice. If possible, the Government would prefer a single, composite rate indicative of the overall Company Divisions percentage of the work by labor category rolled into a single rate for pricing purposes.

191. Question: What will be the process for adding rates for subcontractors, divisions, and subsidiaries after contract award?

Response: For the MCLOGSS IDIQ contracts and task orders, prior to exercising any available option periods, the Government will allow additions of subcontractor/ company divisions to be amended, modified at the IDIQ contract level, effecting ensuing task order fair opportunity competitions while not effecting performance completion of any outstanding previously issued task orders.

192. Statement/Question: Addition of Subcontractors/Company Divisions, if a prime offeror anticipates supporting the contract with multiple divisions/business groups that operate under separate indirect cost pools, should separate rates be proposed for each division/group? If yes, should only one set of rates be identified as the “prime” rates and the other sets be identified and treated individually, similar to a subcontractor?

Response: Contractor’s choice. If possible, the Government would prefer a single, composite rate indicative of the overall Company Divisions percentage of the work by labor category, indirect cost pools, rolled into a single rate/pool for pricing purposes.

193. Statement/Question: Total Compensation Plan, Paragraph/Page: Section L-4.9.iii.iv Tab2; Page 168, The referenced paragraph states the following “As part of the cost/price evaluation, the offeror’s total professional employee compensation plan,, setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who

57 of 127


will work under the contract, will be assessed in accordance with FAR 52.222-46”. As this sentence references “professional employees” does this only apply to exempt employees?

Response: No. professional and exempt employee’s total compensation plans for maintaining program continuity of uninterrupted high-quality work, and availability of required competent professional service and exempt employees reflecting sound management judgment.

194. Statement/Question: Sample Tasks, Section L-4.9.iii.v Tab 3 & 4; Page 168, The referenced paragraph states the following “Pricing for some of the sample task orders identified as actual task orders will also be used for evaluation and actual task order awards immediately following the IDIQ evaluation”. It is not apparent which task orders have been identified in the RFP as “actual task orders”, can the government please identify which task orders are considered actual task orders as stated.

Response: All sample task orders are for evaluation purposes only. The sample task orders are indicative of actual requirements in support of LOGCOM and its customers.

195. Statement/Questions: Volume III requirements and Page Limits, Para 1-4.2 page 159 and Para L-4.6 pages 163 through 164, This table states that offerors can submit up to 5 prime contracts and a total of 10 contracts if we add contracts from our subcontractors. The page limit is 20 pages. On page 163 it references contractor data sheets on up to 5 of the offerors contracts. Are the contractor data sheets included in the 20 page limit?

Response: As previously provided on the 8-27-10, question #3, Post Pre-solicitation Conference questions and answers that: “it is acceptable to include the Contractor Performance Data Sheets as “tables”, and list them as attachments not inclusive to the limit of 20 pages.” Confirmation provided again for responses to the released Final Solicitations that the previous guidance provided is still valid. Contractor Performance Data Sheets may be provided as tables/attachments not inclusive to the 20 page limit.

196. Question: Are we to use the contractor data sheets for the additional 5 contracts for our subcontractors?

Response: Contractors choice. The Contractor Performance Data Sheets on up to five of the offeror’s most relevant contracts that have been performed within the last three years. Offerors may submit performance data regarding current contract performance as long as a minimum of one year of performance has been completed as of the closing date of this RFP. The offeror may also submit relevant past performance information for subcontracts performed by proposed subcontractors that will perform under this contract.”

58 of 127


197. Question: Is the “Matrix of Past Performance” described on page 163 included in the 20 page limit?

Response: Matrices of Past Performance included within the narrative will count towards the Past Performance Volume page count limitation. However, Past Performance Matrices properly referenced within the Past Performance Volume narrative but attached being of an approved Table or Figure format per L-4.2.4 will not count against the Past Performance Volume III page count limitation.

198. Question: We assume that the matrix of past performance is to only include those contracts for which we are providing “contractor data sheets”? i.e. 10 contracts. Is this correct?

Response: Correct.

199. Question: Are the completed sections I and II of the Past Performance Questionnaire, required to be submitted with the proposal, included in the 20 page limit?

Response: Page 164, 2nd paragraph after the past performance matrix, “Past performance Questionnaires – Offerors shall complete Sections I and II . . . The POCs will complete and forward back”, the completed past performance questionnaire to the Government. The “assessor” is responsible for returning the completed Past Performance Questionnaire back to the Government. There is no requirement for offerors to submit “completed sections I and II of the Past Performance Questionnaire” with the formal proposal whatsoever.

200. Question: On page 163, the 4th paragraph lists 12 topics which we are to provide specific details of performance for each contract. Since the Contractor data Sheets does not discuss these topics, what format should be used to discuss these topics? Are the discussions of these topics included in the 20 page limit? Please provide instructions for providing the information required in this paragraph.

Response: The Government has provided Contractor Performance Data Sheets in the form of Template written in a Table format for contractor use which will not count towards the volume page count limitation when attached and referenced accordingly in the narrative document. Personalize the document to fit each entity’s Business Management Model for proposal completion/submission. The roles listed are easily recognized Government positions of authority that contractors may download and make necessary additions/deletions to the Word formatted Table document for attachment purposes. The primary purposes of the Contractor Performance Data Sheet document is to provide offerors a tool to expound in narrative and attachment format on relevant past performance is past performance performed by a contractor in one or more of the Ten MCLOGSS specific Task Areas within the last three years which are crucial Government evaluation concerns under the best value continuum for MCLOGSS Multiple Award IDIQ Contracts in the three suites per Section M-4, paragraph 3, page 172, “The Government will use the criteria set forth below in the evaluation and selection of offers

59 of 127


for award. Evaluation factors are in descending order of importance, with Factors 1 & 2 being equal: Technical Proposal; Past Performance . . .”

201. Question: Page 163 the 3rd paragraph states “that the offeror must have subcontractor’s written permission authorizing the government to contact”. Should we include letters of authorization from our subcontractors in Volume III? Are they included in the 20 page limit?

Response: Yes. Contractors choice subject to the narrative page count limitation. Note: subcontractor written permission letters authorizing the Government to contact, as necessary, attached in the approved Table/Figure format per L-4.2.4 will not count against the Past Performance Volume III page count limitation.

202. Question: Please amend the RFP to clearly describe what is included in the 20 page limit.

Response: The RFP provides clear and in plain English that there is a 20 page narrative page limitation, L-4.2, while section L-4.2.4, Tables and Glossary, it states: Each volume shall list any tables and figures used within that volume. Tables and figures will not count toward page limitations. Offerors should consider using approved attachment types properly referenced within the narrative to submit a thorough proposal within the confines of the allowable narrative page limitations per Volume using approved/acceptable attachments for precise, additional documentation for Government evaluation purposes.

203. Statement/Question: Volume IV requirements and Page Limits, Para L-4.2 page 159 and Para L-4.7 page 164 through 166, Volume IV has a 50 page limit. In answers to questions regarding the Draft RFP it was stated that the QC Plan, OCI Plan and Compensation plan were not included in the 50 page limit. Is this still correct? If so please amend the RFP to state that these plans are not included in the 50 page limit.

Response: Correct if the offeror includes the OCI Plan and Compensation plan as attachments (Tables and Figures) to the written narrative subject to page count limitation.

204. Statement/Question: Volume IV requirements and Page Limits, RFP Para L-4.2 page 159 and Para L-4.8.1, Submission of a subcontracting plan in compliance FAR 52.219-9 requires almost 15 pages to complete all required elements. This will not leave sufficient page count to respond adequately to the Small Business Participation Plan. Can the Subcontracting Plan be removed from the 15 page limit? If so please amend the RFP to remove the Subcontracting Plan from the 15 page limit.

Response: No. Reference within the narrative and attach Approved Comprehensive Subcontracting Plans as attachments to the Small Business Participation and Subcontracting Plan Volume.

60 of 127


205. Statement/Question: Subcontracting Plan, RFP Para L-4.8 page 166, This paragraph states that “Volume V shall have no pricing information included”. Inherent in the requirements of FAR 52.219-9 is the need to put total contract dollar value and corresponding dollar values in each socio economic category to demonstrate commitment to using Small Business. Please advise how contractors should respond the requirement for no pricing information and still meet the requirements of a FAR 52.219-9 subcontracting plan?

Response: A salary, percentage or other monetary symbol is not considered as formal pricing or cost type data that is normally required to perform cost or price analysis covered under the Cost/Price Proposal Volume (Volume VI). The requirements of Volume V may indicate dollar values and percentages reflective of FAR 52.219-9 subcontracting plan requirements for evaluation purposes.

206. Statement/Question: Total Compensation Plan, RFP- Volume IV Management Plan, Para L-4.7 page 164 and Para L. 4.7.2 page 165, The requirements, on Page 165 Para 4.7.2, for the Total Compensation Plan in Volume IV, state the “plan shall include salaries/wages for each labor category. Paragraph L-4.7 states “Volume IV shall have no pricing information included”. These two statements contradict each other. To respond to the requirements of the compensation plan requires us to include salaries/wages in the response, but salaries/wages is pricing information. Please clarify how we should respond to these requirements. Should we remove the salaries and wages from the Compensation Plan? If so please amend the RFP to correct this inconsistency.

Response: No. Offerors are required to discuss all proposed labor categories, provide a general discussion concerning the compensation/benefits/leave (without going into specific detail such as pricing related to wages), and a discussion on the consistency of compensation across the contract. General salaries, wages and compensation plans are not considered formal cost or pricing data that is required under the Cost Volume, Volume VI, as specified in section L-4.9 of the solicitation.

207. Statement/Question: Sample Tasks, RFP Attachment #4, Will any of these task orders be awarded based on the proposals submitted on Jan 14th 2010? When will they be awarded in relation to award of the IDIQ contracts? Will offerors have to prepare new responses to these task orders after award of the IDIQ contracts?

Response: No. The sample task orders are for evaluation purposes only.

208. Statement/Question: Marketing of Work under the MCLogss Contract, Will contractors be able to work with and market potential task orders to Marine Corps activities and have these task orders be released for competition? Or will all task orders be generated internally by the Marine Corps and offerors will not be able market their services?

Response: No. LOGCOM is the agent for service benefits within the USMC enterprise. LOGCOM is the primary activity for generation of task order competitions.

61 of 127


Procedures are in place whereby upon meeting LOGCOM’s delegation of authority, other USMC/DoD activities may be able to issue competitive task orders against the LOGCOM MAC award contracts.

209. Statement/Questions 1/2/3/4: Sample Task requirements, RFP Attachment 4, Each sample task states that key personnel are to be identified in the proposal.

Question 1: Are offerors required to identify, by name, key personnel in each sample task response that is included in our proposal?

Response 1: Contractor’s choice. For evaluation purposes, position designations and responsibilities; authority level, etc. in fulfilling the sample task orders is deemed sufficient by the Government.

Question 2: Are resumes required for all key personnel identified?

Response 2: Yes.

Question 3: Are resumes included in the page limit for sample tasks?

Response 3: It depends, resumes attached in a Table or figure format, according to L-4.2.4, will not count against the Section L-4.2 Proposal Volume Requirements page count limitations. Resumes included as part of the narrative will count towards the total page count limitation of the

Question 4: Please clarify and amend the RFP to reflect any changes to this requirement.

Response 4: The PWS narrative for each SOO shall not exceed 5 pages per SOO. Attachments to the PWS in the format of tables/figures will not count toward the page count limitation.

210. Statement/Questions 1/2/3: Sample Task requirements, RFP Attachment 4, Each sample task requires the submission of a phase-in plan (5 pages) with each sample task response.

Question 1: Are phase-in plans required for each sample task response that is included in our proposal?

Response 1: Phase-In/Phase-Out Plans are due with proposal submissions as part of the STO evaluation process.

Question 2: Are the 5 page phase-in plans included in the page limit for each sample task response?

62 of 127


Response 2: The PWS narrative for each SOO shall not exceed 5 pages per SOO. Attachments to the PWS will not count toward the page count limitation if presented in table/figure format.


Response 3: Clarified. Amendment will follow.

211. Statement/Questions 1/2/3: Sample Task requirements, RFP Attachment 4, Several of the Sample task require submission of a Quality control plan with the proposal.

Question 1: Is a Quality Control plan required to be submitted as part of the sample task response that is included in our proposal?

Response 1: Yes. A PWS; QCP and QASP are required in response to each sample task.

Question 2: Is the Quality control plan included in the page limit for each sample task response?

Response 2: It depends. Quality control plan included in the narrative will count against the page count limitation. Quality control plan attached to the Sample Task Order submission requirement will not count against the five page count limitation requirement.


Response 3: Clarified. Amendment will follow.

212. Statement/Questions 1/2: CLIN Pricing of Section B, RFP Section B, CLIN Structure pages 4 thru 73,

Question 1: Is the contractor supposed to fill out any pricing on these sheets?

Response 1: Yes.

Question 2: If so how is the contractor to price the total hours for each CLIN without knowing the labor category mix for each year and each contract type?

Response 2: In the Final RFP, the MCLOGSS total estimated minimum and maximum program hours are identified. Unlike the Draft RFP that included the Unit of Issue of “Hours”, the Final RFP was purposely left blank to allow contractors the freedom to submit pricing information without defined constraints of completing projected, fully burdened, blended hourly labor rates per CLIN covering a base year plus

63 of 127


four one year options with the full knowledge that the MCLOGSS Multiple Award Contracts would be evaluated for award purposes under the best value continuum compliant with FAR 52.216-27 where the number of contracts to be awarded will be determined by the degree of competition received and the number and quality of proposals provided. Entering a value of $0.00 is not an acceptable NTE offer.

213. Statement/Question: Pricing Matrix, MCLOGSS PRICING MATRIX 11-R-003 Attachment 5, Excel Model with four tabs, Is this Pricing matrix to be used in developing the pricing for each proposal sample task?


214. Statement/Questions 1/2: MCLOGSS Labor Categories. Attachment 9 provides personnel descriptions that describe the overall workload anticipated and is to help the contractors select internal labor categories that are likely to be used during contract performance. Reference: MCLOGSS Labor Categories Attachment 9, pages 1-6.

Question 1: Should the contractor add to the “Attachment 9 (list of labor categories) all labor categories anticipated to be used on all task orders to include the proposal sample task order labor categories and any SCA labor categories not currently listed?

Response 1: Yes.

Question 2: Which tab in the Cost Volume VI is the Pricing Matrix to be provided?

Response 2: The Pricing Matrix should be submitted with or as attachments to the pricing data in Tab 3 according to the solicitation.

215. Statement/Question: Reference: MCLOGSS PRICING MATRIX 11-R-003 Attachment 5, Paragraph/Page: Excel Model with four tabs. Is this Pricing matrix to be used in developing the pricing for each proposed labor category?

Response: Contractor’s choice – use sample provided or contractor’s existing method.

216. Statement/Question: MCLOGSS PRICING MATRIX 11-R-003 Attachment 5 and RFP, Excel Model and Section L, What “tab” in the Cost Volume VI should the Pricing Matrix be included?

Response: Tab 3.

64 of 127


217. Statement/Question: Reference: MCLOGSS PRICING MATRIX 11-R-003 Attachment 5; Attachment 9; Attachment 7; Excel Model with four tabs, Is the pricing matrix to include the contractor’s labor categories listed in Attachment 9, as well as every labor category that a contractor might proposal from every AWD provided in Attachment 7?

Response: Price should be reflective of Labor Categories proposed per Sample Task Orders.

218. Statement/Questions 1/2/3/4/5: Reference: MCLOGSS PRICING MATRIX 11-R-003 Attachment 5, IDIQ-Contractor Site and IDIQ-Government Site tabs.

Question 1: If the pricing matrix is to list every labor category to be proposed on this contract by the Prime and by each subcontractor, does the Government really want it by CLIN by Year?

Response 1: Yes.

Question 2: This could mean having a labor categories listed in several CLINs?

Response 2: Correct.

Question 3: This could also mean having a SCA labor category listed more than once due to different direct labor rates in the 9 different AWDs?


Question 4: Also this could mean listing the same labor category more than once due to contract type (i.e. differences in fee or profit due to contract type)?


Question 6: Is this really what the Government wants?

Response 6: Yes.

219. Statement/Question: MCLOGSS PRICING MATRIX 11-R-003 Attachment 5, IDIQ-Contractor Site and IDIQ-Government Site tabs, The column titled “SCA or Non-exempt” is confusing as all SCA employees are non-exempt. Should this state “or exempt”?

Response: No. The Pricing Matrix was provided by the Government at Industry’s request. The Government mapped the pricing matrix to the CLIN structure of the RFP as a guide, reference purposes. Contractors may download and make necessary additions/deletions to include labor categories as necessary to complete the IDIQ CLIN

65 of 127


or Sample Task order responses being in a MS Word formatted Table document to fit each entities formal proposal efforts for attachment purposes in response to individual Volume requirements.

220. Statement/Question: Reference: MCLOGSS PRICING MATRIX 11-R-003 Attachment 5, IDIQ-Contractor Site and IDIQ-Government Site tabs, The column titled “Offeror’s Occupational Code”” is confusing. Should this be SCA Occupational Code?

Response: No. The Pricing Matrix was provided by the Government at Industry’s request. The Government mapped the pricing matrix to the CLIN structure of the RFP as a guide, reference purposes. Contractors may download and make necessary additions/deletions to include labor categories as necessary to complete the IDIQ CLIN or Sample Task order responses being in a MS Word formatted Table document to fit each entities formal proposal efforts for attachment purposes in response to individual Volume requirements.

221. Statement/Questions 1/2: Pricing Matrix, Reference: RFP Section L-4.9 and Section M 4.2, RFP Section L-4.9 page 167 and page 175.

Question 1: What is the purpose of the Price Matrix?

Response 1: The Pricing Matrix was provided by the Government at Industry’s request. The Government mapped the pricing matrix to the CLIN structure of the RFP as a guide, reference purposes. Contractors may download and make necessary additions/deletions to include labor categories as necessary to complete the IDIQ CLIN or Sample Task order responses being in a MS Word formatted Table document to fit each entities formal proposal efforts for attachment purposes in response to individual Volume requirements.

Question 2: How will the pricing Matrix be used in the evaluation?

Response 2: As a tool to evaluate offerors understanding and selection of appropriate labor categories/rates, to completely satisfy the specific requirements identified in the sample task orders as part of the best value continuum MAC evaluation process.

222. Statement/Questions 1/2/3: Reference: Sample Tasks, Attachment 4 and RFP Section L-4.9 page 167:

Question 1: “Use of contractor formats is encouraged provided that all the required information is made available.” Is this statement in Section L-4.9 (page 167) referring to pricing of the Sample tasks?

Response 1: The referenced statement, “use of contractor formats is encouraged provided that all the required information is made available” was pulled out of the general context for contractor submission requirements for the Cost/Price Volume VI.

66 of 127


The statement pertains to all of the Cost/Price Volume requirements of the individual Tabs; 1, 1a, 1b, 2, 3 and 4 to support price reasonableness or cost realism of the sample tasks and the complete Cost/Price Volume.

Question 2: Does the Government want a separate excel spreadsheet file for each sample task?

Response 2: Yes. Separate spreadsheets are preferred for pricing evaluation purposes.

Question 3: Does the Government want a summary rollup of all of the proposed sample task prices?

Response 3: Yes. A summary rollup of all of the proposed sample task pricing is especially practical for pricing evaluation purposes under a best value continuum, MAC consideration and evaluation process.

223. Statement/Questions 1/2/3: Sample Tasks, Reference: RFP Section L-4.9, Page: page 167.

Question 1: Is Tab 3 for the prime contractor pricing of each sample task?

Response 1: Yes.

Question 2: Is Tab 4 for any subcontractor pricing of the sample tasks and goes in the prime’s Cost Volume VI?

Response 2: Yes.

Question 3: The Subcontractor proposals will not have a Tab 3 in their Cost Volume VI, correct?


224. Statement/Questions 1/2: Disclosure Statement, Reference: Section L-4.9.iii Tab 1a, RFP page 168, “The offeror shall include a copy of the last approved Disclosure Statement, if applicable. Disclosure statements can be very lengthy and are available from our cognizant DCAA/DCMA.

Question 1: ”Does the Government truly want a contractor’s Disclosure statement provided in this section?

Response 1: Yes.

Question 2: Or can the contractor reference their disclosure statement and the date submitted (revision date)?

67 of 127


Response 2: No.

225. Statement/Question: Approved Indirect Rates, Reference: RFP Section L-4.9, page 169, “If not approved by DCAA, the offeror shall explain the status of approval, and shall provide a listing of the two previously approved rates.” We currently have a Forward Pricing Rate Proposal (FPRP) submitted to DCAA. Generally our indirect rates are approved after year end, depending upon when DCAA can audit the year end submittal. Can a contractor reference the FPRP submittal date and the approved dates of our last year end rates, as opposed to providing a listing of the two previously approved rates and reference the listings are available or on file with our local DCAA?

Response: Yes.

226. Statement/Questions 1/2/3: Labor Categories, Reference: Attachment 9; Attachment 4 Sample Tasks; RFP Section I clause 52.222-42; AWD Attachment 7, Attachment 9 pages 2 -6; Sample task Area 1 pages 41-42; Sample Task Area 6 page 117; Sample Task Area 7 page 143; Sample Task Area 9 page 177; Sample Task Area 9 pages 204-208; RFP page 124; AWD Attachment 7.

Question 1: Attachment 9, states the personnel descriptions describe the overall workload anticipated and help the contract select internal labor categories that are likely to be used during contract performance. The Sample Tasks provide position titles for each “Independent Government Estimate and location. All area wage determinations have a listing of labor categories. The clause 52.222-42 identifies the classes of service employees expected to be employed under the contract. All three listings of employee labor categories are very different. How is the contractor to address all of these labor categories?

Response 1: Contractor needs to provide their proposed Labor Categories to satisfy the SOO.

Question 2: Should the contractor map the labor positions in the sample tasks to the AWDs and both the listing in clause 52.222-42 and attachment 9?

Response 2: Yes.

Question 3: What approach to developing a labor category listing does the government prefer?

Response 3: Contractor choice.

227. Statement/Question: Position Descriptions, Reference: RFP Section L-4.9; Attachment 9, RFP page 167; Attachment 9 pages 2-6, RFP states “Volume VI should include as necessary, formal and/or informal cost/price data and hourly wage rate and positions descriptions to validate offers received by the government.” Does the

68 of 127


Government want the contractors to provide a labor position description for each labor category proposed to include every AWD labor category used in the proposal?

Response: Yes.

228. Statement/Question: Total Compensation Plan, Reference: RFP Section L.4.7.1 and Section L-4.9 paragraph iv, RFP page 165 and 168, RFP page 165 states “The Compensation Plan shall address all proposed labor categories, including those personnel subject to the Service Contract Act, union agreements, and those exempt. The total compensation plan shall include the salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for each category of labor.” RFP page 168 states “As part of the cost/price evaluation, the offeror’s total professional employee compensation plan, setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract, will be assessed in accordance with FAR 52.222-46.” Page 165 addresses what is required in the Technical Volume under Subfactor 2 and Page 168 addresses what is required in the Cost Volume VI. Each are different in what is required. Please clarify is this what the Government wants? The listing can be very large and how does the contractor provide salaries/wages for various AWD labor categories which may be different depending upon the fact that a General Clerk I hourly wage is different for each of the 9 AWDs?

Response: 18 under SCA, the Labor Categories, pricing, should be consistent.

229. Statement/Questions 1/2: Reference: Post Solicitation Questions 3 and 4 and Answers 8-27-10 (Website Archived Documents) below: 3.Question: Reference L-4.2, Proposal Volume Requirements: Table L-4.2 indicates there is a 50 page limit for Volume II Technical Approach (including PWS and QASP). Is it correct to assume that it is the Government’s intent to allow 50 pages for each Sample Task Order (including its respective PWS, Offeror’s approach and QASP) Government Response: No. As previously advised on similar questions/responses, MCLogss Pre-Solicitation Conference KTR Submitted Questions and the Governments Responses document, page 12, question #3; page 38, questions 168 and 169; the narrative response stated: “Contractors should consider using tables or figures as attachments that are properly annotated”; “Contractors should consider using tables or figures as attachments that are properly annotated . . . which do not count toward the 50 page” “Technical” or “Management Plan limitation”; “Yes”, re: “allowing attachments with no specified page count”.

4.Question: Reference L-4.5, Sample Task Order(s) Response: L-4.5 states “The offeror may include information applicable to all Sample Task Orders in a separate tab entitled – General Information – Sample Task Orders or under the Technical Approach Overview section.” Is it correct to assume that this General Information/Overview section narrative has its own separate 50 page limit within the Technical Volume?Government Response: No.

69 of 127


Question 1: Is the page limit of 20 pages stipulated in RFP M67004-11-R-0003 , dated 07 October 2011, L-4.2 the current and valid instruction?

Response 1: Yes.

Question 2: Reference: RFP M67004-11-R-0003, Section L, Paragraph L-4.5.1, “L-4.5., Provide your approach to satisfying each Sample Task Order and all Sample Task Orders simultaneously. Your approach shall include the following: a. Provide Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) that identifies your approach of meeting our objectives listed in the sample task Statement of Objective (SOO) for the task level but also for the overall contract level.b. Provide any assumptions upon which your approach is based, and the rationale supporting the assumption (i.e., why do you believe the assumptions are valid).c. Express your best understanding of the ramifications inherent in the Sample Task Order, e.g. upward and downward surges, organizational realignment (e.g. Marine Corps Logistics Command, programmed replacement of equipment, etc.), implications (and proposed resolution) of executing all Sample Task Orders simultaneously; how offerors will manage multiple tasks simultaneously, and how offerors management structure will support this, etc.d. Provide a list of labor categories deemed necessary to perform the sample task orders. Your list of labor categories should include the suggested labor categories from Section J, (Attachment 5 to the RFP) to incorporate into your proposal.”

Question 2: The requirements for the approach are clear in paragraphs “b, c and d.” However, the requirements of paragraph a are confusing due to the established DOD requirements for a complete Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) cited below:

(1) A Performance Work Statement (PWS) Template provided by DoD is over 13 pages in length. A review of the Statement of Objectives (SOO) for each task clearly indicates that the relationship of “SOO = PWS” remains valid.(2) Similar Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) templates and examples are of the same page lengths (8-13 pages).(3) The 20 page allocation for Volume II does not afford sufficient pages to fulfill Government solicitation requirements.

(1) Is it the Government’s intent that a “full” PWS and QASP be provided for each Task of the solicitation?

Response: Yes to both, full PWS and QASP.

(2) If so, where are the PWS and QASP for each Task to be placed and what are the page limitations?

Response: Volume II, Technical Approach. As previously stated, Tables, Figures, General Information, Sample Task PWSs, etc. incorporated as attachments which are

70 of 127


properly referenced within the Technical Volume narrative will not count toward the 20 page, narrative page limitation of the Technical Volume.

(3) Is something less than a “full” PWS and QASP desired? If so, where are they to be placed and what are the page limitations? Please give specific directions so that Government requirements can be responded to completely.

Response: Full PWS and QASP are required.

230. Statement/Question: Sample Task Area 10 FFP, Document/Reference: Attachment 4, Page: 215-237, Is it Aug 1, 2012 based on the Base year period of performance?

Response: This is only an estimate.

231. Statement/Question/Recommendation: Contractor Performance Data Sheet (CPDS), Reference: MCLOGSS Contractor Performance Data Sheet, The table provided at the end of the data sheet is identical to the table in Att #6 PPQ, Section III. The table clearly addresses a contract’s government official and can only be completed by said official. When completing the CPDS, how is the offeror to respond to this table?

Response: The roles listed are easily recognized Government positions of authority that contractors may download and make necessary additions/deletions to the Word formatted Table document to fit each entities Business Management Model for attachment purposes for the Past Performance Contractor Performance Data Sheet requirement. The person/position authorized to financially obligate funds on behalf of the firm, for example, Business Manager; Contract Manager; Chief Financial officer; etc., would be entered in the block labeled Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO). Similar industry positions may be entered in place of the current Government positions for completion purposes of the Contractor Performance Data Sheets.

Recommend the government remove this table from the CPDS.

Response: No. The CPDS is provided as a tool for industry to adapt for its own business model for completion as needed by each individual offeror. The CPDS was originally requested by industry, reference the Questions and Answers provided in response to the Pre-Solicitation Conference.

232. Statement/Question: Resume Template. The resume template indicates offerors should provide salary data on the three key personnel, including information from previous positions. Offerors generally do not have access to an employee's previous salaries. Request that this requirement be eliminated based on the sensitive nature of this information. If salary data is required, request the Government limit the request to the employee's current salary and include that data in the Cost/Price volume.

Response: If information is attainable; contractor must supply.

71 of 127


233. Statement/Question: Section L - 4.6, To ensure clarification, the Prime offerors would like to submit a listing of the only five (5) sub-contractor past performances to be used in support of the Prime's proposal. Is this acceptable?

Response: The prime should be able to provide past performance information; if only subcontractor past performances are available; then appropriate best value evaluation will prevail.

234. Statement/Question: Section L - 4.6. The RFP provides a sample matrix to show the cross-reference of the past performance references to the task areas in the Scope of Work. This sample includes all ten (10) task areas, even though Task Areas 2, 3 and 8 are restricted. Is an offeror in the Full & Open suite required to show the cross-reference of his past performance to the restricted task areas in the matrix?

Response: No, but in a best value continuum, it would be beneficial.

235. Question: Can General Information common to all sample tasks be provided in a separate TAB that does not count against the volume II 20 page limit?

Response: Each sample task order stands alone for evaluation purposes. Contractor could attach in table/figure format.

236. Question: Do the tabbed PWS and QASP sections for each of the nine Sample Task orders count against the Volume II 20 page limit?


237. Question: Can the Volume II Sample Task Order key personnel resumes be included behind a separate TAB that does not count against the 20 page limit?

Response: Only if submitted in a table/figure format.

238. Can the Volume IV Management Plan key personnel resumes be provided behind a separate TAB that does not count against the 50 page limit?


239. Question: Can the OCI mitigation plan be an attachment to the Volume IV Management Plan that does not count against the 50 page limit?


240. Question: Can the draft Quality Control Plan be an attachment to the Volume IV Management Plan that does not count against the 50 page limit?

72 of 127



241. Statement/Question: C.10.5 Uncompensated Overtime; The Government States: “The following proposed compensated hours and uncompensated overtime hours will be delivered under this contract:” Is this a Level of Effort (LOE) Contract?

Response: Overarching MAC is LOE; each awarded task order will either be LOE or defined deliverable.

242. Question: Does this clause only apply at the task order level?

Response: Yes.

243. Question: If the answer to the question above is “No”, how are offerors to estimate the number of compensated and uncompensated hours to be delivered under this contract since it is a multiple award ID/IQ contract?

244. Statement/Question: Section I, Page 115, The RFP contains FAR 52.237-7 – Indemnification and Medical Liability Insurance which is included in contracts for non-personal health care services. Question: Is this clause included in error?

Response: No

245. Statement/Question: L-4.9 Cost/Price Proposal, Page 168 paragraph v. Tab 3 & 4. The Government states Tabs 3 & 4 are the Sample Task Order Price/Cost ProposalsQuestion: What information is to be provided in Tab 3 and what information in Tab 4?

Response: Tab 3: Prime contractor sample task order cost/price support information. Tab 4: Subcontract sample task order cost/price support information.

246. Statement/Question: M-4.2.1 Cost/Price Factor Evaluation Ratings, Page 175. The Government states: the evaluated price will be the sum of the prices for all of the sample task orders. The Government also states Other Direct Costs (including travel) will be evaluated based on whether proposed costs are considered reasonable and realistic.Question: Since the Government is providing the estimates for ODCs and Travel, shouldn’t these be reasonable and realistic by default?

Response: The Government provided what it intended to “Bulk Fund” for ODCs and travel. The contractor needs to provide costing estimates for evaluation purposes.

247. Question: Since the Government is providing the estimates for ODCs and Travel, shouldn’t these be removed from the Total Evaluated Price?

Response: The Government provided what it intended to “Bulk Fund” for ODCs and travel. The contractor needs to provide costing estimates for evaluation purposes.

73 of 127


248. Statement/Question: Are the rates proposed on Attachment 5 to be considered not-to-exceed rates such as in a schedule contract where local AWD rates are used for specific task order pricing and a discount is shown from the master (schedule) rate?

Will contractors be able to add labor categories over time?

Response: Yes.

249. Question: How often will the Government allow the rates to be amended for changes in local area wage determinations affecting wages and/or benefits?

Response: The Department of Labor (DoL) updates/revises specific area wage determinations seemingly on a 3 – 6 – 9 – 12 month cycle with many LOGCOM specific wage determinations seldom being impacted or revisions being enacted within a twelve month period of time. For MCLOGSS task orders issued for performance periods 12 months or longer, the Government will allow rates to be amended, if the DOL wage Rates is greater than the proposed rate, and prior to exercising any available option periods on an annual basis.

74 of 127


Technical/Sample Task Order Related Industry Questions and AnswersSol 11-R-0003 STOs

1. Question: Is any of the work defined in the sample task orders currently being performed by incumbents? If so, in order to level the playing field we request that the government make information about this existing work available to all offerors (i.e. current incumbent, LOE, etc.).

Response: MCLOGSS is a consolidated effort of historical similar work performed, intended or planned ahead, envisioned support services; therefore, we are unable to provide this information. As provided in Section L-4.5 instructions to offerors, contractors should presume that no other Task Orders have been awarded to date.

2. Question: There was no indication of a page limit for the STO responses. We would highly recommend that the Government amend the RFP and specify a specific page limit for each STO response. This page limitation will help ensure that offerors STO responses do not become overly burdensome on the Government evaluators.


3. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives for Supply and Management Support, Task Area 1, Section V, Program Outcomes and Objectives, Logistics Strategies and Operations, page 2, states "The decision support framework will consider the current program baseline, associated cost and technical considerations, risks and emerging requirements that support identification of a preferred alternative/optimum Courses Of Action (COA) selection." Question: Will the Government please specify what the current program baseline consists of?

Response: The offeror should be prepared to provide for a solution to consider any program baseline when presented for analysis and offer COAs.

4. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives for Supply and Management Support, Task Area 1, Section V, Program Outcomes and Objectives, Logistics Strategies and Operations, pages 2 and 3, states "Contractor personnel shall be knowledgeable of the various Service unique logistics systems and their interface with current DoD logistics systems within total life cycle management philosophy." Question: Where the Government specifies "the various Service unique logistics systems." can offerors interpret this to include the logistics systems unique to the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy?

Response: As stated this relates to “all” services logistics systems.

5. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives for Supply and Management Support, Task Area 1, page 3, Section V, Performance Objectives, Strategic Program Management Support, item number 4; Deliver an "Executive Level" framework

75 of 127


of the current platform from which business and resource management decisions are supported by common picture and enterprise wide real time data. Question: Will the Government provide a description of what it expects an Executive Level Framework to consist of and what the current platform from which business and resource management decisions consists of?

Response: Offeror's proposals shall present Best Value solutions to meet the requirements of the Sample SOOs.

6. Background/Question/Question2: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives for Supply and Management Support, Task Area 1, page 4, Section VI Transition does not specify whether the successful offeror will be assuming this work from the Government or an incumbent contractor. Additionally, this section of the Task Area does not specify the length of the Phase-In period. Question: Will the Government specify whether this task area represents new work or if it requires assuming the work from an incumbent contractor? Question: Will the Government indicate the length of time available for transition?

Response: As required by section L-4.5 the offeror shall assume that the Government will execute all sample Task Orders simultaneously. You may presume that no other Task Orders have been awarded to date. As required by SOO Section VI, the contractor will submit a Transition Plan with their Proposal and be prepared to begin Phase-In efforts immediately after contract award.

7. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives for Supply and Management Support, Task Area 1, page 11, paragraph 1.14, Quality Assurance states "The Evaluator (normally the COR) will follow the methods of surveillance and document surveillance observations as specified in the Performance Standards Metrics through a government developed Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)." This appears to conflict with the guidance contained in Section L-4.5.1.a, page 162 of the RFP which states "Provide Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) that identifies your approach of meeting our objectives listed in the sample task Statement of Objective (SOO) for the task level but also for the overall contract level." Question: Will the Government please clarify whether in fact it expects offerors to produce a QASP for meeting the objectives of this task order?

Response: The offeror should comply with the instructions as stated regarding the contractor’s QCP and QASP submitted with SOOs - PWS. The Government has an established QASP for the overarching IDIQs.

8. Background/Question/Question2: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program, Section VI Constraints, 1 Facilities, page 25 states "The JTOC Facility shall be equipped with a security system; hook ups for government provided Teleconferencing equipment, standard communications equipment and computers for data entry. Question: Will the Government provide the technical specifications for the Security Systems necessary for

76 of 127


the JTOC Facility? Question: Will the Government clarify whether computers for data entry will be provided as GFE for this Task area?

Response: 1. The offeror shall propose a best value solution that meets the SOO requirements. No unique specifications have been developed. 2. Attachment B of the SOO clearly states the type GFE that will be provided.

9. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear Defense (CBRND) Testing, Warehouse Operations and Program Support Services, Task Area 6, page 94, Section III Scope, paragraph 4 introduces the acronym JSAP as meaning Joint Set-A-Side Project. On page 96, JSAP Operations, the acronym JSSAP is introduced with no explanation. Question: Is it correct to assume that JSSAP is a typographical error and that JSAP is the correct acronym for this section?

Response: This was a Typographical error. No new introduction of an acronym.

10. Background/Question/Question2: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear Defense (CBRND) Testing, Warehouse Operations and Program Support Services, Task Area 6, section VII d. Price & Performance Data, page 100 states "Workload and resource metrics shall be reported according to the work breakdown structure (WBS) shown in Table 1 and the Contractor Program Office WBS shown in Table 2." Question a: Does Table 1 in this sentence correspond to the tables provided as Attachment C Independent Government Estimate, Labor by Location? Question b: Will the Government please indicate where Table 2 specifying the Contractor Program Office WBS is located?

Response: P&PM definition and sample Template will be updated through amended SOO.

11. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear Defense (CBRND) Testing, Warehouse Operations and Program Support Services, Task Area 6, section VIII paragraph 1.12 Quality Control Program, page 103 indicates that the winning offeror will submit a Quality Control Plan (QCP) to the Contracting Officer within 15 days of Contract Award. Question: Will the Government confirm whether the due date for the is in fact 15 days after Contract Award or 15 days after the contract performance start date?

Response: The requirement is as specified in the Sample SOO paragraph.

12. Background/Question/Question2: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear Defense (CBRND) Testing, Warehouse Operations and Program Support Services, Task Area 6, section VIII, page 108, paragraph 1.32 Locations indicates that "All positions performing the JSAP and Program Support shall be considered "government on-site" unless otherwise indicated." Paragraph 1.33 Transportation and Material Handling Equipment in this section states that "The

77 of 127


contractor shall be required to provide, operate and maintain transportation equipment and material handling equipment. This may consist of, but not be limited to; forklifts to 4000LB Capacity, pallet jacks, and hand truck." Question: The fact that the contractor will use Government furnished facilities to perform this work and yet be required to furnish and maintain transportation equipment and material handling equipment seems inconsistent. Will the Government please clarify whether offerors are to provide and price transportation equipment and material handling equipment in support of this Task Area?

Response: The requirement is as specified in the Sample SOO paragraph.

13. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Program Management and Engineering Support for Ground Equipment Staging Program (GESP) Distribution Management Center Task Area 7, Section IV paragraph 2, page 125, states "The principal location for the support provided for this effort is the Marine Corps Logistics Command, Albany, Ga. All positions shall be considered "government on-site" unless otherwise indicated." Question: Will the Government please confirm that contractor personnel will have Government furnished office space and furnishings e.g. desks, chairs, as well as any necessary office equipment, (computers, copiers, telephones, etc.)?

Response: Confirmed. Offerors should present best value solutions to the Sample SOO requirements. SOO Paragraph X 1.30 applies, “Government-Furnished Items (material, information, equipment). The contractor shall specifically identify in their proposal the type, amount, and time frames required for any government resources, excluding those listed below. The Government will provide the following for on-site personnel at designated government installations:

Office space, warehouses, tools, test/diagnostics equipment, repair parts, consumable materials, petroleum oils and lubricants, computers, software, telephones, fax, copiers, printers, LAN access, supplies, small material handling equipment and other items necessary to perform contract duties. The government will also provide all maintenance required to keep these facilities and equipment in proper working order. Standard Operational Procedures/work Instructions, regulations, manuals, texts, briefs and other materials associated with the project and the hardware/software.

The contractor is authorized to operate MHE/GFE on government installations with proper licensure.

14. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Program Management and Engineering Support for Ground Equipment Staging Program (GESP) Distribution Management Center Task Area 7, Section VII Constraints, paragraph 1, Data Management, page 127, states "The goal of the Government is to minimize the delivery of data in Government format and hardcopy and to maximize the use of a contractor-maintained electronic data library using Microsoft Applications with data required to support PWS activities in contractor format using Microsoft Applications unless

78 of 127


otherwise requested by the government." Question: Is it correct to assume that the Microsoft Applications called for in this reference are provided as Government Furnished Equipment?

Response: Yes. SOO Paragraph X 1.30 applies.

15. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Program Management and Engineering Support for Ground Equipment Staging Program (GESP) Distribution Management Center Task Area 7, Attachment C, page 145. Question: Will the Government make the Directives and References listed in Attachment C available to offerors through a bidder's library?

Response: All requests for information not publicly available prior to contract award shall be requested through the Contracting Officer.

16. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Technical, Quality, Logistics and Program Support Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear-Defense /Consolidated Storage Division/Joint Equipment Assessment Program, Task Area 9, Section X, paragraph 1.34 Transportation and Material Handling Equipment, page 171, states The contractor shall be required to operate and maintain transportation equipment and material handling equipment as part of this SOO. This may consist of, but not be limited to; forklifts, pallet jacks, hand trucks, trucks up to 5-ton load capacity, commercial equipment requiring a CDL Class A license, and generators. The contractor shall ensure employees designated to operate this equipment have and maintain appropriate licenses. Question: Will the Government require contractor personnel operating this equipment to be licensed by the Marine Corps installation they are supporting (SF 346) or must the contractor have their own vehicle and equipment licensing program?

Response: Operators must comply with Local, State and Government host station rules and regulations as required at each operating location.

17. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Storage/Maintenance, Forward In Stores (FIS), Ground Equipment Staging Program (GESP) Distribution Management Center Task Area 9, Attachment A, Independent Government Estimate, Labor by Location, page 204. Question: Are the hours reflected against each position reflect the Government's estimate for work to be performed at both MCLB Albany, GA and MCLB, Barstow CA equal for each location?

Response: See clarifying paragraph on page 203 for recommendations on labor and staffing submissions.

18. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Page 11 of 239 1.14 Quality Assurance. According to the Inspection of Services clause, "the Government will evaluate the contractor's performance. The Evaluator (normally the COR) will follow the methods of surveillance and document surveillance observations as specified in the Performance

79 of 127


Standards Metrics through a government developed Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)." *This statement is repeated throughout all of the sample task orders. Question: The assumption was that the contractor shall develop a QASP for each Task Order response. Is this still the case and do these statements apply to something else?

Response: The offeror should comply with the instructions as stated regarding the contractor’s QCP and QASP submitted with SOOs - PWS. The Government has an established QASP for the overarching IDIQs.

19. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Some of the Sample Task Orders such as the Statement of Objectives for Training Support, page 73, do not include any staffing or ODCs, nor is there any workload data. This will require contractors to make many assumptions such as class size, duration, location etc. This is going to make it difficult for the government to evaluate offerors since there will be such a wide variety of assumptions. Question: If the government doesn't want to include staffing can you include work load data sufficient to allow contractors to bid to the same expected workload?

Response: Please see clarifying paragraph on page 88 for recommendations on labor and staffing submissions.

20. Background/Question: Reference Attachments A and B of Attachment 4, Page 18, Supply Management Support for Director, Supply Management Center (SMC) FFP Task Area 1, Attachments A and B of Attachment 4, Page 89, Training Support for Marine Corps Logistics Command FFP Task Area 5; Attachments A and B of Attachment 4, Page 237, Program Integration and Management Support Program Support Center FFP Task Area 10; Discussion: Attachments A and B of the Sample Task Orders listed above contain no data for estimated workload, number of man hours required, or ODCs. However there is a statement: Where no labor hours or labor categories are indicated, the government encourages the offeror to propose a realistic mix of labor hours and categories that will meet the objectives of this SOO at the best value to the government. These sample tasks are Firm Fixed Price and without estimated workload data it is not feasible to estimate the total FTEs required to support the functions beyond providing a loaded labor rate or designated skill sets. Question: Will the Government provide estimated workload data or estimated manhours required as is provided in the other Sample tasks?

Response: Information provided in the Sample SOOs and Solicitation Attachments provide the governments submission of data.

21. Background/Question/Question2/Question3: Reference: Attachment 4, Supply Management Support for Director, Supply Management Center (SMC) FFP Task Area 1, Section VI. Constraints, Paragraph 1. “Facilities”, page 25 requires that the contractor provide a warehouse facility in London Ohio. Discussion: In the reference paragraph there is a statement, “The government currently operates the JTOC from a suitable

80 of 127


facility in London, Ohio which meets all government requirements.” Question 1: Is the “suitable facility” mentioned currently a Government-owned property? Question 2: If leased, will the Government provide the name of the property owner? Question 3: If leased, is the property owner amenable to leasing the property to a successful bidder?

Response: The Sample Task Order SOO “WAREHOUSE AND OPERATIONS SERVICES FOR JOINT CBRND TESTING PROGRAM CPFF – Task Area 1” – VI, Constraints, 1. Facilities, the last two sentences has this information. “The government currently operates the JTOC from a suitable facility in London, Ohio which meets all government requirements. The Joint Test Operations Center shall be located in London, OH.”

22. Background/Question: Reference: Attachment 4, Supply Management Support for Director, Supply Management Center (SMC) FFP Task Area 1, Paragraph X 1.4 page 204 states, “Attachment A contains positions by location for which the contractor will be required to provide support. The number of estimated annual hours and the year of the contract the hours will be required is indicated.” Discussion: Attachment A however provides a listing of skill sets by location but a single number of man hours per skill set. An example is listed below

BASE YEAR OY-1 OY-2 OY-3 OY-4POSITION LOCATION SOO Comm Device Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours

PARASupervisory MCLB V 1Distribution Albany, GA, thru 5Facilities MCLB 1.1 No 11520 11520 11520 11520 11520Specialist Barstow CA, thru 5.1GS-2030-12 OCO, I, II, III

MEF’s

Question: For each skill set above, are the man hours provided a consolidated number of man hours that are to be allocated to the two locations; or the number of man hours to be used at each site?

Response: The Sample SOO quoted does not contain the requirement described here.

23. Background/Question: Reference: Attachment 4, C4 Information Technology Analytical Support Marine Corps logistics Command CPFF Supporting Task Area 4, Attachment A page 69. Discussion: It appears that the man hours provided is using a productive man year of 1872 instead of 1920 as is used in the other sample task orders. In the questions and answers provided; the Government stated that they were using 1920 man hours for a productive man year. This is consistent with the AWDs in allowing 10 days’ vacation and 10 holiday days per year. Question: Is it the government’s intent of using a standardized productive man year or is this sample task unique?

81 of 127


Response: Please see clarifying paragraph on page 68 for recommendations for labor and staffing submissions.

24. Background/Question/Question2/Question3/Question4: Reference: M67004-11-R-0003 paragraph L 4.5.1a, page 162, paragraph M 4.1.1, page 172; Attachment 4, pages 10, 26, 27, 59, 80, 103, 132, 166, 193, and 227.Comment: M67004-11-R-0003 Sections L and M require a Management Plan Volume that contains a Quality Control Plan as Subfactor 4. Sections L and M of the solicitation direct that a QASP be submitted with each sample task order. The individual sample task orders do not call for a QASP but rather that a Quality Control Plan (QCP) be submitted with either the “Task Order Management Plan” or with the PWS (page 27). Most sample tasks direct the QCP be submitted with the Task Order Management Plan but others are unclear if they are submitted with the proposal or 15 days after award. Question1: Is the “Management Plan Volume” referenced in Sections L and M the same requirement as the “Task Order Management Plan” found in the sample tasks; or does each sample task require an individual “Task Order Management Plan”? Question2: Does each Sample Task require an individual QASP or a QCP, or both? Question 3: Do we submit a QCP for each sample task or just the QCP for the Management Plan Volume? Question 4: If we are required to submit a QCP for each sample task, when are they due?

Response: 1. Offerors proposals shall follow the instructions contained in section L and M. 2. The requirements as described in the RFP and the Sample SOOs are valid. 3. and 4. Submission requirements are as stated in the RFP.

25. Background/Question: Reference: Attachment 4, page 8, paragraph 1.4 states: “Independent Government Estimate (Labor)”. Attachment A provides the format for the Contractor to estimate the positions required to support the Task Order by location. Comment: Under a FFP pricing model it is essential that actual workload data or actual staffing be provided in order to construct a realistic pricing scenario. Question: Will the government provide an estimated workload?

Response: Clarifying paragraph on page 19 provides recommendations on Labor and staffing submissions.

26. Background/Question: Reference: Attachment 4, Page 27, Paragraph VII b “Price and Performance Data”. Comment: The paragraph refers to a WBS that is contained in Table 1 and Table 2. These tables do not appear to be in the sample task. This also applies to sample task #5. Question: Will the government provide the referenced tables?


27. Background/Question: Reference: Attachment 4, Page 100, Paragraph VII .d “Price and Performance Data”. Comment: The paragraph refers to a WBS that is

82 of 127


contained in Table 1 and Table 2. These tables do not appear to be in the sample task. Question: Will the government provide the referenced tables?


28. Background/Question/Question2: Reference: Attachment 4–Sample Task Orders; Comment: Additional deliverable requirements found in the sample task orders such as requirements for QCP, Transition Plans, etc. Questions: When stated requirements in a sample task order go beyond the requirements of Section L of the RFP, (i.e. Transition Plan, QCP, etc.), do these requirements supersede the instructions contained within Section L?Question2: When a sample task order requires the submittal of a quality control plan or a transition plan with the proposal is this direction for this proposal or for the live task orders to be awarded for the work?

Response: 1 and 2. The submission requirements are as stated in the RFP.

29. Background/Question: Reference: Attachment 4, Page 5, Paragraph VII.3Comment: There appears to be an incorrect reference in Sample Task Order, “The Supply Management Support for Director, Supply Management Center (SMC), FFP Task Area 1”; In the sample task order, page 5, paragraph 3 references a paragraph X 1.36 for a travel report submission. Section X 1.36 is titled Technical Instructions and does not have a reference to this report requirement.Question: Will the Government please clarify the reference on page 5 in the sample task order?

Response: Typographical error, wording should reflect Paragraph X 1.32.

30. Background/Question: Reference: Section L, page 156, paragraph 4.4 of Attachment 4; Comment: This paragraph does not appear to pertain to this sample task. The questionable language is quoted below:“Provide provisioning and technical support on Lightweight 155 Howitzer and the logistical support associated as required by the Joint Program Management Office (LW155)." Question: Please clarify the requirement for this logistics requirement within the sample task identified as Technical, Quality, Logistics and Program Support, Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear-Defense /Consolidated Storage Division, / Joint Equipment Assessment Program, T&M Supporting Task Area 9?

Response: The requirement is valid for the Sample SOO submitted.

31. Background/Question: Reference: Task Area 1, Warehouse & Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program, Atch. 4, Page 95 of 239, Under Testing: “The Contractor shall document in the PWS (or in an attachment to the PWS) its approach in accomplishing each of the following Testing objectives. (Sub paragraph b) “Develop comprehensive Test Plans for all items to be Tested”. Comment: To properly

83 of 127


answer this performance requirement appears to require access to a fair portion of the references, Attachment G, that are restricted to the general public and contain the specific requirements for functions such as type of testing, frequency, parameters, etc. and obvious day-to-day policies, instructions and work processes as defined in the JEAP JSAP/JTOC Work references. Since CBRND activities require such exacting standards and the task performance requirement is certainly appropriate, lack of this information appears to put a non-incumbent bidder at a distinct disadvantage to generate comprehensive Test Plans for each item. Question: Is it possible to allow access to sufficient data to allow the bidder to obtain the information necessary to properly and completely answer the requirement for each item listed in Attachment A, page 115?

Response: All requests for data or publications not available to the public prior to contract award shall be requested through the Contracting Officer.

32. Background/Question: Reference: Attachment 4, Sample Task Orders, page 156 paragraph 4.4. Questions: Paragraph 4.4 is a single sentence tasking provisioning and supporting of the Lightweight 155 Howitzer as part of the JEAP support effort. Is this an error?


33. RFP, Attachment 004, SOO for C4 Information Technology Analytical Support MCLC (CPFF Supporting Task Area 4): What kind of IT services are required (e.g., application support, infrastructure support, service desk, back office; level 1, level 2, or level 3)?

Response: The IT services and support are those described in the Sample SOO Outcomes and Objectives.

34. RFP, Attachment 004, SOO for C4 Information Technology Analytical Support MCLC (CPFF Supporting Task Area 4): For integration of the Command’s information systems with DoD, Navy, and Marine Corps, is the offeror to develop interfaces? What kinds of systems will be interfaced? Are any interfaces in place today, and are we to provide ongoing support?

Response: In accordance with Section L of the Solicitation, the Offeror should assume no previous Task Orders have been awarded. The required support is that which is stated in the Outcomes and Objectives.

35. RFP, Attachment 004, SOO for C4 Information Technology Analytical Support MCLC (CPFF Supporting Task Area 4): What kind of functional management support would be needed for functional areas like finance or logistics?

Response: The required support and contractor expectations are those which are stated in the SOO Outcomes, Objectives and Constraints.

84 of 127


36. RFP, Attachment 004, SOO for C4 Information Technology Analytical Support MCLC (CPFF Supporting Task Area 4): Is there a system development life cycle that must be followed, or will the offeror need to provide a system development life cycle?

Response: The required support and contractor expectations are those which are stated in the SOO Outcomes, Objectives and Constraints.

37. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Task Area 1 – Supply Management Support. Since this is FFP, can the Government issue some guidance as to what areas of support and staffing are anticipated?

Response: The required support is that which is stated in the SOO Outcomes and Objectives. The clarifying paragraph on page 19 of the SOO provides recommendations to offerors for Labor and staffing submissions.

38. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Task Area 5 – Training Support. The task requires our training achieve 90% comprehension level with students (per Performance Metrics) but it is unclear the level of understanding that is the baseline. 19 different “areas/curriculum” of instruction are described, but do not give the level of instruction that is required, current level of understanding of the students, how many training sessions are expected, what percentage of the training is to be presented as distance learning, or where the training is to be performed. For example, could it require training for Marines in Afghanistan?

Response: Offerors should follow the guidance in Section L of the Solicitation when crafting their response to SOO requirements. Paragraph IV of the SOO indicates locations where the offeror should be prepared to perform the requirements.

39. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Sample Task Orders, Task 4, CPFF, Section IV, Period and Place of Performance. The PoP is identified as a Base Year and 2 Option Years. However, Task 4 Attachment A, identifies hours for a Base Year and 4 Option Years. Request clarification.

Response: The guidance as stated In paragraph IV is that which is authorized for any Services Task Order.

40. Background/Question: Attachment 4, Sample Task Orders, Task 6, CPFF, Section IV, Period and Place of Performance. The PoP is identified as a Base Year and 2 Option Years. However, Task 6 Attachment C, identifies hours for a Base Year and 4 Option Years. Request clarification.

Response: The guidance as stated In paragraph IV is that which is authorized for any Services Task Order.

41. Background/Question: RFP, Attachment 004, SOO for C4 Information Technology Analytical Support MCLC (CPFF Supporting Task Area 4): What kind of IT

85 of 127


services are required (e.g., application support, infrastructure support, service desk, back office; level 1, level 2, or level 3)?

Response: In accordance with Section L of the Solicitation, the Offeror should assume no previous Task Orders have been awarded. The required support is that which is stated in the Outcomes and Objectives.

42. Background/Question: RFP, Attachment 004, SOO for C4 Information Technology Analytical Support MCLC (CPFF Supporting Task Area 4): For integration of the Command’s information systems with DoD, Navy, and Marine Corps, is the offeror to develop interfaces? What kinds of systems will be interfaced? Are any interfaces in place today, and are we to provide ongoing support?

Response: The required support is that which is stated in the Outcomes and Objectives.

43. Background/Question: RFP, Attachment 004, SOO for C4 Information Technology Analytical Support MCLC (CPFF Supporting Task Area 4): What kind of functional management support would be needed for functional areas like finance or logistics?

Response: The required support is that which is stated in the Outcomes and Objectives.

44. Background/Question: RFP, Attachment 004, SOO for C4 Information Technology Analytical Support MCLC (CPFF Supporting Task Area 4): Is there a system development life cycle that must be followed, or will the offeror need to provide a system development life cycle?

Response: The requirements for this Performance Based SOO are described in the Outcomes and Objectives.

45. Background/Question: Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders, FFP Task Area 5, Page 74. Question: Section IV, Period and Place of Performance, paragraph 2 states: “The primary location for these efforts is Marine Corps Logistics Base, Albany, GA. government on-site and additional sites both Conus and Oconus.” Please provide locations of CONUS and OCONUS sites to assist offerors in determining applicable labor laws, Defense Base Act applicability, physical security requirements, scope, and cost of services.

Response: As stated in the SOO, the government may require support at Marine Corps Logistics Base, Albany, GA. government on-site and additional sites both Conus and Oconus as required. The offeror should follow the guidance of Section L in preparing their proposals for this effort.

86 of 127


46. Background/Question: Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders, CPFF Supporting Task Area 6, Page 94. Under Paragraph III, Scope, the RFP states: “The Contractor shall provide all Personnel, Test Chambers, Test fixtures, equipment, materials and facilities for all Chemical Testing, except as specified as Government Furnished Equipment/Government Furnished Material/Government Furnished Information (GFE/GFM/GFI) or Government Furnished Facilities (See attachment B Listing of GFE/GFM/GFI/GFF) to meet the outcomes and objectives for this effort unless otherwise stated.” Attachment B on page 116 does not specify Test Chambers or Test Fixtures. Will the appropriate Test Chambers and Test Fixtures be provided as GFE?

Response: Attachment B lists the GFE to be provided.

47. Background/Question: Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders, CPFF Supporting Task Area 6, Page 95. Item 6 states: “Personnel should be experienced in shelf life management, warehousing, shelf life testing requirements and bar code inventory management processes, data entry skills and knowledge of the Information Management Systems.” It is assumed an existing Information Management System is in place. Please provide more information, as to the type of Information Management Systems currently in place and the winning offeror’s responsibilities in supporting these systems, so the offeror can assess the experience level required.

Response: The Outcomes and Objectives of the SOO define the requirements. The GFE/GFI/GFM is contained in Attachment B.

48. Background/Question: Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders. There are conflicting instructions in each of the sample task SOOs related to labor categories and hours. As an example, Section 1.4, Independent Government Estimate (Labor), on page 57 states: “Attachment A contains positions by location for which the government estimates the contractor will be required to provide support. The number of estimated annual hours and the year of the contract the hours will be required is indicated. SOLICITATION RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS on page 68 states: “The placement of estimated hours and/or labor category mix in this SOO simply indicate an historical workload for this type effort and does not indicate the government requires the offer to adhere to these numbers or categories in their proposal. The government encourages the offeror to propose innovative solutions to meet the requirements of this SOO that do not necessarily adhere to the government’s estimate of labor hours, labor categories.” Should the offeror follow the instructions in Section 1.4, Independent Government Estimate (Labor), and bid those categories and hours in the labor tables, or should the offeror bid other labor categories and hours?

Response: The clarifying paragraph gives guidance for the offeror in relation to Labor and Staffing submissions to prepare their proposal as they deem necessary and in accordance with Section L.

49. Background/Questions: Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders. Attachment 4 of the RFP references Independent Government Estimates for labor.

87 of 127


Several of the referenced tables are blank. 1. Does the Government intend to append these tables to provide bidders with the Independent Government Estimates for each sample task?

Response 1: The clarifying paragraphs on each of the Sample SOOs give recommendations for submission of staffing and Labor. The tables will not be appended.

2. If not, will the Government provide quantitative measures of the work to be performed (e.g., frequency, duration, size, etc.), especially for the FFP Task Area 1, FFP Task Area 5, and FFP Task Area 10? Without detailed information on the work to be performed, it is impossible to develop a FFP bid.

Response 2: The Outcomes and Objectives of the SOO define the expected requirements. Section L of the Solicitation gives guidance as to offerors submissions. These are Performance Based requirements.

50. Background/Question: Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders. Question: Attachment 4 of the RFP references Independent Government Estimates for travel and other direct costs. The RFP states that travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the Government as a not to exceed amount. However, several of the referenced tables are blank (FFP Task Area 1, FFP Task Area 5, CPFF Task Area 7, FFP Task Area 9, and FFP Task Area 10). Does the Government intend to append these tables to provide bidders with the Independent Government Estimates for travel and ODCs for each sample task?

Response: The clarifying paragraphs on each of the Sample SOOs give recommendations for submission of Labor and Staffing.

51. Background/Question: Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders. Some of the deliverables tables are blank (FFP Task Area 1 and FFP Task Area 5). Does the Government intend to append these tables to provide a listing of deliverables?

Response: If no deliverables are described, then the offeror should assume none are known at this time. However, for future Task Order competition, the tables may be amended to identify deliverables.

52. Background/Question: RFP Attachment 004, SOOs: Is the contractor required to fill in the deliverable and workload data tables on each of the SOOs?

Response: No. See question 51 response.

53 Background/Question: M67004-1-R-0003, Atch 4, page 97 of 239, Section VI. Constraints, 1.a. Does the government provide access to the testing laboratories at Albany as part of this task order. Since government owned Chemical Agent will be used, we are under the assumption that the testing facility is owned and operated by the Government.

88 of 127


If not, please outline the relationship between the contractor that operates the facility and the contractor that is responsible for the testing of the CBRND equipment and clothing.

Response: The Outcomes, Objectives and Constraints of this SOO clearly state the requirements the offeror should respond to.

54. Background/Question: M67004-1-R-0003, Atch 4, page 97 of 239, Section VI. Constraints, 1.a. Can you please provide a list of the other testing laboratories to accommodate emergency testing requirements for wartime needs? We will need to address and identify these locations as part of our PWS that will address this sample Task Order.

Response: Section L Paragraph 4.5.1 provides guidance to offerors on their submission requirements. In the SOO Constraints Paragraph VI, sub-paragraph 2 states this as a contractor responsibility.

55. Background/Question: M67004-1-R-0003, Atch 4, page 98 of 239, Section VI. Constraints, 4.a. It states that “The offerors proposal shall present the cost of the efforts described for this effort in three parts…”Only two parts are indentified by the government in that paragraph. What is the third part?

Response: The Third part is “Travel costs and Incidental Material costs (ODCs) incurred. ODCs shall be submitted, but are reimbursable and shall be estimated per year by the government as a not to exceed amount unless authorized by the Contracting Officer, to be billed as an Other Direct Cost.” Typographical error left out the 3.

56. Background/Question: M67004-1-R-0003, Atch 4, page 99 of 239, Section VII. Deliverables, b. It states that a Quality Control Plan (QCP) shall be included in the PWS of this Sample Task order. Based upon the page limitation placed on the Technical, it will not be possible to include a QCP in the proposal. Can you please clarify and better define what the Government requires as part of the Sample Task order write ups.

Response: The PWS narrative for each SOO shall not exceed 5 pages per SOO. Attachments to the PWS in the format of tables/figures will not count toward the page count limitation.

57. Background/Question: M67004-1-R-0003, Atch 4, page 119 of 239, Attachment E. What is the quantity or measure of unit used in this chart? All it states is annual lots to test by type. We need to know the quantity so that we can ensure that the task is properly staffed and manned to meet the workload.

Response: The description of a Lot can be found in the respective Military Specification (MIL-SPEC) for the particular item to be tested.

89 of 127


58. Background/Question: M67004-1-R-0003, Atch 4, page 126 of 239, Section VI., Transition. The second sentence states that the contractor shall submit a Transition Plan as part of the proposal. Does this transition plan count against the Technical Volume page count. Providing a Transition Plan is not part of section L-4.5.1 within the RFP.

Response: Section L, Paragraph 4.5 gives clear guidance for offerors submissions for the Technical Approach.

59. Background/Question: M67004-11-R-0003, Atch 4, page 144 of 239, Attachment B. No amounts are provided in the blocks for this attachment.

Response: Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs.



61. Background/Question: M67004-1-R-0003, Atch 4, page 237 of 239, Attachment A. No information is provided in the chart for this Attachment.

Response: See clarifying paragraph on page 236 of the SOO for recommendations on submission of labor and staffing.



63. Background/Question: M67004-1-R-0003, Atch 4, page 18 & 19 of 239, Attachment A&B. No information provided in Attachment A & B.

Response: Attachment A. See clarifying paragraph on page 19 of the SOO for recommendations on submission of labor and staffing. Attachment B. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs.

90 of 127


64. Background/Question: M67004-1-R-0003, Atch 4, page 89 & 90 of 239, Attachment A&B. No information provided in Attachment A & B.

Response: Attachment A. See clarifying paragraph on page 88 of the SOO for recommendations on submission of labor and staffing. Attachment B. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs.

65. Background/Clarification: Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Chemical, Biological, Radiological Nuclear Defense (CBRND) Testing, Warehouse Operations, and Program Support Services contains a testing requirement under III. SCOPE paragraph 4. The Contractor shall provide all Personnel, Test Chambers, Test fixtures, equipment, materials and facilities for all Chemical Testing, except as specified as Government Furnished Equipment/Government Furnished Material/Government Furnished Information (GFE/GFM/GFI) or Government Furnished Facilities (See attachment B Listing of GFE/GFM/GFI/GFF) to meet the outcomes and objectives for this effort unless otherwise stated. It also specifies that the locations of Joint Set-A-Side Project (JSAP) Facilities are contained in attachment F. which would lead one to believe that govt desires testing to be conducted at those JSAP sites.

Under "Performance Objectives", the following testing related tasks are listed:

1. The Contractor shall accomplish the Program Objectives set forth below, which have been grouped into: Testing, JSAP Operations and Program Support and provide all the facilities, instrumentation, qualified personnel and materials necessary to test and investigate Government assets which will be used to meet critical CBRND requirements.

Testing

The Contractor shall document in the PWS (or in an attachment to the PWS) its approach in accomplishing each of the following Testing objectives.

a. Conduct Chemical Agent, Physical Properties (PPT), Shelf Life Extension and Production Lot (PLT) verification testing on the items listed in Attachment A in accordance with appropriate Government or Commercial Standards.

b. Develop comprehensive Test Plans for all items to be Tested.

c. Employ inventory control processes that verify specimen receipt and chain of custody including timely signature and return of the DD1149.

d. Prepare and provide written reports in accordance with the deliverable schedule.

Under "Constraints" is a set of specific Testing related constraints.

91 of 127


Further, VIII. Additional Contractor Requirements, paragraph 1.4 delineates Attachment C as containing the positions by location for which the contractor will be required to provide support.

Attachment C delineates seven Full Time Equivalent (FTE) located at Albany, GA and 1/2 FTE personnel located at Barstow CA. Attachment F delineates the locations of the JSAP facilities as Albany GA and Barstow CA. The types of labor categories delineated in Attachment C do not seem conducive to being experts at conducting Testing as required by this SOO.

Please help us understand what the testing requirement is, where it is to be conducted, size of the building(s), type of test equipment, type and number of personnel (similar to what is contained at Attachment C) contractors would need to successfully conduct required testing.

Response: The SOO Outcomes, Objectives and Constraints clearly state the required support to be obtained. Offerors should follow the guidance in section L for preparing their response to this Performance Based requirement. See clarifying paragraph on page 114 of the SOO for recommendations on submission of labor and ODCs. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs.

66. Background/Question: RFP Attachment 004, Workload Data, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1): SOO 2 does not indicate the amount of material to be moved, or the workload. Will the Government provide this information so that we can estimate the number of forklifts, transportation equipment, etc., that will be required and how much space to allocate in the facility for functions such as warehousing and testing?

Response: Clarifying paragraph in each SOO gives recommendations for submission of labor, staffing mix and ODCs. Pages 19, 88 and 236.

67. Background/Question: RFP, Attachment 004, Workload Data, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1): SOO 2 indicates that the facility is to be contractor leased/owned, and Government operated. Please advise how many Government employees will be located within the facility so we can plan appropriately for office space and equipment requirements.

Response: Offerors should make provisions for the facility to accommodate one (1) full time government employee.

68. Background/Question: RFP Attachment 004, SOO for Technical, Quality, Logistics, and Program Support (T&M Supporting Task Area 9): In SOO 7, Section V,

92 of 127


Paragraph 4.0, Item 4.4 which requires us to “Provide provisioning and technical support on Lightweight 155 Howitzer and the logistical support associated as required by the Joint Program Management Office (LW155)” seems to be out of place under this Task Order. Does this requirement belong in this SOO?


69. Background/Question: References: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003, Attachment 4 Sample Tasks:

Statement of Objectives (SOO) Supply Management Support For Director, Supply Management Center (SMC) FFP Task Area 1, Attachment B, page 19;

Statement of Objectives (SOO) Training Support For Marine Corps Logistics Command FFP Task Area 5; Attachment B, page 90,

Statement of Objectives (SOO) Program Management and Engineering Support For Ground Equipment Staging Program (GESP) Distribution Management Center CPFF Task Area 7; Attachment B, page 144,

Statement of Objectives (SOO) Storage/ Maintenance, Forward in Stores ( FIS),Ground Equipment Staging Program (GESP) Distribution Management Center FFP Task Area 9 page 209,

Statement of Objectives (SOO) Program Integration and Management Support Program Support Center FFP Task Area 10; Attachment B, page 238.

Discussion: Each of the referenced Sample Tasks contains the statement, “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Direct Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount”. However, there are no cost values included in the tables. Question: Will the Government provide an estimate of funding or for these sample tasks the contractor is to assume that an estimate for Travel and ODCs is not required in the cost submission for the sample tasks?

Response: Attachment C to the SOO provides the known historical labor staffing used to support the type of Outcomes and Objectives stated in this SOO. Paragraph VI Constraints sub-paragraph 1give the physical requirements that have to be supported in the Warehouse. The clarifying paragraph on page 39 gives recommendations on the offerors submission of labor and Staffing. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs.

70. Background/Question: RFP, Attachment 004, Workload Data, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1): SOO 2 indicates that the facility is to be contractor leased/owned, and Government operated. Please advise how many Government employees will be located within the facility so we can plan appropriately for office space and equipment requirements.

93 of 127


Response: Offerors should make provisions for the facility to accommodate one (1) full time government employee.

71. Background/Question: RFP Attachment 004, SOO for Technical, Quality, Logistics, and Program Support (T&M Supporting Task Area 9): In SOO 7, Section V, Paragraph 4.0, Item 4.4 which requires us to “Provide provisioning and technical support on Lightweight 155 Howitzer and the logistical support associated as required by the Joint Program Management Office (LW155)” seems to be out of place under this Task Order. Does this requirement belong in this SOO?

Response: This requirement is valid for this SOO.

72. Background/Question: References: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003, Attachment 4 Sample Tasks:

Statement of Objectives (SOO) Supply Management Support For Director, Supply Management Center (SMC) FFP Task Area 1, Attachment B, page 19;

Statement of Objectives (SOO) Training Support For Marine Corps Logistics Command FFP Task Area 5; Attachment B, page 90,

Statement of Objectives (SOO) Program Management and Engineering Support For Ground Equipment Staging Program (GESP) Distribution Management Center CPFF Task Area 7; Attachment B, page 144,

Statement of Objectives (SOO) Storage/ Maintenance, Forward in Stores ( FIS),Ground Equipment Staging Program (GESP) Distribution Management Center FFP Task Area 9 page 209,

Statement of Objectives (SOO) Program Integration and Management Support Program Support Center FFP Task Area 10; Attachment B, page 238.

Discussion: Each of the referenced Sample Tasks contains the statement, “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Direct Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount”. However, there are no cost values included in the tables. Question: Will the Government provide an estimate of funding or for these sample tasks the contractor is to assume that an estimate for Travel and ODCs is not required in the cost submission for the sample tasks?

Response: Offerors are encouraged to submit proposals that in accordance with Section L of the Solicitation offer a solution that demonstrates an understanding of the issues involved and satisfies the requirements of the Sample SOOs. Solutions should be based on any assumptions you use to support your approach. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs.

73. Background/Question: Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders, CPFF Supporting Task Area 1, Page 24. Question: Under Paragraph V, Outcomes, the SOO states: “Provide a contractor leased/owned, government operated test preparation facility with warehouse storage capabilities for general storage and material control and

94 of 127


trained staff to provide properly prepared test specimens for laboratory testing to various locations.” Is it the Government’s intent for offerors to purchase/lease a 54,000 sq. ft. facility in London, Ohio, or is the intent for offerors to transition into the current JTOC facility?

Response: Offerors should submit proposals based on the requirements of the SOO as written in the Outcomes, Objectives and Constraints.

74. Background/Question: Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders, CPFF Supporting Task Area 1, Page 39. Question: Attachment A of the SOO lists “Items that will have samples prepared and maintained,” but does not provide quantities. What are the annual quantities of samples tested and maintained for each item listed in Attachment A?

Response: Attachment C to the SOO provides the known historical labor staffing used to support the type of Outcomes and Objectives stated in this SOO. Paragraph VI Constraints sub-paragraph 1give the physical requirements that have to be supported in the Warehouse. The clarifying paragraph on page 39 gives recommendations on the offerors submission of labor and Staffing.

75. Background/Question: Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders, CPFF Supporting Task Area 1, Page 39. Question: Attachment A of the SOO lists “Items that will have samples prepared and maintained.” Can the Government provide individual test procedures for each item listed in Attachment A?

Response: Attachment G to the SOO provides the list of Directives and References used to support these efforts. If not available to the public, offerors will request through the Contracting Officer any documents required prior to Contract Award.

76. Background/Question: Reference: RFP Attachment 4 - Sample Task Orders, CPFF Supporting Task Area 1, Page 44. Question: Will the Government be providing the following reference documents listed in Attachment G?a. JEAP JSAP Work Processesb. JEAP JTOC Work Instructionsc. JEAP Data Loading Policies

Response: All documents listed for a particular SOO will be available for any Task Order issued. If not publicly available now and required prior to contract award they must be requested through the Contracting Officer.

77. Background/Questions A/B/C: Due to the undefined nature of some of the sample statement of objectives and that requirements are to be further defined within technical instructions under execution, Question A: is the offeror to use the non-labor NTE amounts in the IGE within the Statement of Objectives as plug numbers in pricing the sample tasks?

95 of 127


Response A: As stated in the SOO, “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount.” Offerors are encouraged to submit proposals that in accordance with Section L of the Solicitation offer a solution that demonstrates an understanding of the issues involved and satisfies the requirements of the Sample SOOs. Solutions should be based on any assumptions you use to support your approach. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs.

Question B: Therefore an offeror would NOT price out the actual trips and non labor requirements due to the current undefined nature of the requirements?

Response B: See A above.

Question C: Could the Government please provide those NTE amounts that are missing from the SOOs?

a. SOO for Supply Management Support for Director, Supply Management Center (SMC) – FFP Task Area 1

b. SOO for Training Support for Marine Corps Logistics Command – FFP Task Area 5c. SOO for Program Integration and Management Support Program Support Center -

FFP Task Area 10 d. SOO for Program Management and Engineering Support for Ground Equipment

staging program (GESP) Distribution Management Center – CPFF supporting Task Area 7

e. SOO for Storage/Maintenance, Forward in Stores (FIS) Ground Equipment Staging Program (GESP) Distribution Management Center - FFP Task Area 9

Response C: See A above.

78. Background/Question: Page 153 Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Technical, Quality, Logistics and Program Support Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear-Defense /Consolidated Storage Division,/Joint Equipment Assessment Program T&M Supporting Task Area 9 , Section V. Outcome #1 states “The Contractor shall conduct assessments on CBRN Defense Equipment, Individual Combat Equipment (ICE), and other equipment utilizing government owned test equipment and instruments in order to determine equipment serviceability in accordance with equipment technical manuals and DoD regulation; i.e. equipment military specifications (MIL-SPEC) and performance specifications.”

Page 154 Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Technical, Quality, Logistics and Program Support Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear-Defense /Consolidated Storage Division, /Joint Equipment Assessment Program T&M Supporting Task Area 9, Section V Performance Objectives Assessment of CBRND and Individual Equipment paragraph 1.6

96 of 127


states “Perform Individual Combat Equipment assessments, to include visual assessments.”

Page 181 Attachment D Types of Equipment to be assessed, repaired and maintained does not list any equipment other than CBRND items for individual or collective use.

Question 1: Can the Government clarify several points regarding the requirement to perform assessments of Individual Combat Equipment (ICE)?

a. Is there in fact a requirement to perform assessments of Individual Combat Equipment?

b. If this indeed a requirement, will the Government provide a listing of the types of Individual Combat Equipment the Contractor is expected to assess?

c. If this indeed a requirement, will the Government indicate whether the ICE equipment is located in some storage location or if the equipment to be assessed has been issued to individual Marines or units?

d. If this indeed a requirement, will the Government specify the frequency with which the ICE item assessments are to be conducted and indicate what activity is to receive the results of the assessment.

Response 1: a. The requirements of the Sample SOO are valid. b. Individual Combat Equipment is all the equipment issued to a Marine for personal

use that they maintain at all times except for weapons or other items that while issued to them are maintained in other secure facilities. Other items stored and used at the unit level will also be assessed.

c. Items are stored and maintained as ready for issue at various locations. d. Assessments are conducted in accordance with the documents in Attachment C,

Question 2: Can the Government specify what other equipment the Contractor might be expected to perform assessments on?

Response 2: Requirements are those that are specified in the SOO Outcomes and Objectives. Individual Combat Equipment and that specified in Attachment D will be assessed.

79. Background/Question: Page 156 Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Technical, Quality, Logistics and Program Support Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear-Defense /Consolidated Storage Division, /Joint Equipment Assessment Program T&M Supporting Task Area 9, Section V Program Outcomes and Objectives 4. Logistics, paragraph 4.4 states “Provide provisioning and technical support on Lightweight 155 Howitzer and the logistical support associated as required by the Joint Program Management Office (LW155).”

Question: This requirement does not appear to belong with this Task Order. Can the Government clarify whether this is in fact a performance requirement for this Task

97 of 127


Order? If it is, can the Government provide more specific requirements information regarding the nature and extent of the provisioning and technical support work to be performed on the Howitzer?

Response: The requirement is valid for this SOO. The requirement is as stated in the SOO.

80. Background/Question: Page 184 Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Storage/Maintenance, FIS, and GESP Programs, Section III. Scope states "Current capabilities allow for management, administration and oversight for Storage/Maintenance, FIS, and GESP Programs."

Question: In view of the stated Scope for this Task Order, which defines current capabilities as “management, administration and oversight for Storage/Maintenance, FIS, and GESP Programs”, can the Government confirm that the contractor will not be required to perform storage, maintenance, LTIs, QA/QC, preservation actions on Principle End Items (PEIs) which have not been inducted or accepted into any Storage/Maintenance, FIS or GESP programs?

Response: The offeror will be responsible to offer solutions to meet the requirements as described in the Outcomes and Objectives of the SOO.

81. Background/Question: Page 54 – 55 Statement of Objectives for C4 Information Technology Analytical Support Marine Corps Logistics Command Task Area 4. Governments Deliverable Description does not provide any description other than the title.

Question: Can the government provide a description of the deliverables?

Response: Offerors proposals should present their best understanding of the SOO requirements as stated.

82. Background/Question: Page 25 Statement of Objectives for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program Task Area 1. Section VI Constraints paragraph 1. Facilities requires contractor to provide a 54,000 square foot warehouse in London Ohio. There are no warehouses in London Ohio this large.

Question: Does the government expect contractors to bid the price of the existing JTOC building? Since the government currently operates the JTOC from a suitable facility, can the government provide this cost so all contractors have access to the cost information?

Response: Offerors are expected to meet the requirements and Constraints of the SOO as written. The current resources expended for the existing JTOC will not be provided.

98 of 127


83. Background/Question 1/2/3/4: Question Number with Topic/Title: 41. Sample Task Area 1 FFP, Reference: Attachment 4, Paragraph/Page: pages 1-21,Question 1: What is the assumed Sample Task start date?

Response: Offerors should be prepared to start efforts at contract award as the Sample SOOs are representative of those that may be executed.

Question 2: This is a FFP contract type, is there any workload information available in which the Government can provide to indicate the number of positions required to perform the requirements?

Response: Clarifying paragraph on page 19 gives recommendations to offerors for submission of Labor and Staffing.

Question 3: This is an FFP contract type and without knowing the amount of travel and various locations, can the Government provide a “plug” value in dollars for travel? It is assumed the plug values will include all contractor indirect costs and fee.

Response: As stated in the attachment title, the government will fund Travel and ODCs as a bulk funded Not To Exceed amount. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs.

Question 4: This is an FFP contract type and without knowing what ODCs are required, can the Government provide a “plug” value in dollars for the ODCs? It is assumed the plug values will include all contractor indirect costs and fee.


84. Background/Question 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9/10/11/12/13/14/15: Sample Task Area 1 CPFF, Attachment 4, Paragraph/Page: pages 22-43, Question 1: What is the assumed Sample Task start date?


Question 2: Where is the current JTOC facility (street address) that the Government operates in London, OH?

Response: 120 Maple St, London, Ohio.

99 of 127


Question 3: Is the facility available for the contractor to lease? Who is the current owner?

Response: The government has not inquired as to the availability of the facility except as it relates to current operations. Local inquiry should be made to determine the facility owner.

Question 4: Is the facility available for the contractor to visit?

Response: Requests of this type should be submitted to the Contracting Officer for decision.

Question 5: How many government employees will be working at the facility?

Response: Offerors should assume One (1) full time.

Question 6: Does the contractor have to have a lease agreement in the proposal for the facility?

Response: Requirements for submission are as stated in Section L of Solicitation and the SOO.

Question 7: The task states “Travel costs and Incidental Material costs; Other Direct Costs (ODC). ODC costs incurred shall be submitted, but are reimbursable and shall be estimated per year by the government as a not to exceed amount unless authorized by the Contracting Officer.” Does this mean the Government will provide a “plug value in dollars for the ODCs?


Question 8: How much Hazardous waste disposal on a per year basis is required for the contractor to dispose of?

Response: Offerors are to assume that no previous Task Orders have been issued for this effort, so no pre-determined amount is available.

Question 9: Is the contractor site lead the same as the program manager?

Response: No.

Question 10: Section VII, paragraph b states, “. Workload and resource metrics shall be reported according to the IIF work breakdown structure (WBS) shown in Table 1 and the Contractor Program Office WBS shown in Table 2. Workload metrics for each WBS

100 of 127


element are also shown in Tables 1 and 2. Resource metrics consisting of man-hours by labor category, travel cost by subcategory and other direct cost (ODC) by subcategory shall be reported for each WBS element. Subcategories of travel and ODCs are shown in Tables 3 and 4 respectively.” Where are tables 1, 2, 3, and 4? Will the Government provide?

Response: The SOO will be amended to provide up to date description of the P&PM deliverable with sample template.

Question 11: In Attachment C, Independent Government Estimate, Labor the estimate shows approximate 6 full time equivalent (FTEs) based on an average of 1920 annual hours per FTE. This estimate does not show a Program Manager/Site lead or a Quality Control representative. Is the Government independent estimate not inclusive of all contractor personnel?

Response: The Clarifying paragraph on page 39 gives recommendations to offerors for submission of Labor and Staffing.

Question 12: In paragraph 1.31 Travel, the government states, “Locations and the duration of travel cannot be established at this time so an estimated travel budget of (See Attachment D) for the entire effort (inclusive of G&A, if applicable).” Does this statement mean the contractor is to use the government’s independent cost estimate for travel?


Question 13: Is the contractor to use the government’s independent cost estimate for ODCs?


Question 14: Does the government independent cost estimate for ODCs cover the contractor required supplies and/or materials to perform this contract?

Response: If any figures are populated in the ODC IGE, they simply reflect the government estimate of ODCs as defined by the FAR that may be required. The offeror should propose their requirements based on a best value solution to meet the SOO requirements.

101 of 127


Question 15: Does the ODC independent cost estimate include costs for items such as communication devices, transportation equipment, permits/licensing to operate and maintain the facility, employee badging, and material handling equipment?

Response: If any figures are populated in the ODC IGE, they simply reflect the government estimate of ODCs as defined by the FAR that may be required. The offeror should propose their anticipated ODCs based on a best value solution to meet the SOO requirements.

84. Background/Question: Sample Task Area 4 CPFF, Paragraph/Page: pages 44-68Questions 1/2/3/4:

1. What is the assumed Sample Task start date? Is it Aug 1, 2012 based on the Base year period of performance?

Response: Offerors should be prepared to start efforts at contract award as the Sample SOOs are representative of those that may be executed. It is only an estimate.

2. Is the contractor to use the government’s independent estimate for travel based on the statement in paragraph 30. Page 64, which states “Locations and the duration of travel cannot be established at this time so an estimated travel budget of (See Attachment B) for the entire effort (inclusive of G&A, if applicable) is established.”?

Response: As stated in the attachment title, the government will fund Travel and ODCs as a bulk funded Not To Exceed amount. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs. If any figures are populated in the ODC IGE, they simply reflect the government estimate of ODCs as defined by the FAR that may be required. The offeror should propose their requirements based on a best value solution to meet the SOO requirements.

3. Is the contractor to use the government’s independent estimate for ODCs, as no supplies, services and/or materials are identified in the sample task SOO other than communication devices?

Response: If any figures are populated in the ODC IGE, they simply reflect the government estimate of ODCs as defined by the FAR that may be required. The offeror should propose their anticipated ODCs based on a best value solution to meet the SOO requirements. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs. If any figures are populated in the ODC IGE, they simply reflect the government estimate of ODCs as defined by the FAR that may be required. The offeror

102 of 127


should propose their requirements based on a best value solution to meet the SOO requirements.

4. Paragraph 27., states “Office space, warehouses, computers, software, telephones, fax, copiers, printers, LAN access, supplies, small material handling equipment and other items necessary to perform contract duties. The government will also provide all maintenance required to keep these facilities and equipment in proper working order.” Will the government be providing all of the above for this task order?

Response: If any personnel are assigned Government On-site they will receive this support.

85. Background/Questions: Sample Task Area 5 FFP, Attachment 4, Paragraph/Page: pages 71-90, Question 1/2/3/4/5/6:

1. What is the assumed Sample Task start date?


2. Is the contractor to use the government’s independent estimate for travel based on the statement in paragraph 1.32., which states “Locations and the duration of travel cannot be established at this time so an estimated travel budget of (See Attachment B) for the entire effort (inclusive of G&A, if applicable) is established.”? There is no travel dollars provided in the Government’s independent estimate, does this mean no travel is planned?


3. Since this is a FFP contract type, can the Government provide any workload or current staffing data for the contractor to have develop a staffing estimate for this sample task?


4. In paragraph 1.31 it states “The Contractor shall provide any communication devices for contractor personnel at his own expense. This will not be chargeable

103 of 127


as an ODC expense against the Task Order.” In this sample task, if a communication device is required, why can’t the contractor charge the communication device as an ODC expense? Why is this sample task different from the others?

Response: As seen in Attachment A, no Communications devices are shown as required by the government for this Task.

5. In paragraph 1.33 for ODCs, what requirements to obtain supplies, services and/or materials in the performance of this task may be required? There is no mention of any requirements. How should the contractor price the ODCs?

Response: The offeror should propose their anticipated ODCs based on a best value solution to meet the SOO requirements.

6. Will the Government be providing the contractor personnel with office space, office furnishing, access to copiers, computers, supplies, LAN, telephones, printers, and other required items to perform this task at the MCLB in Albany, GA, as well as additional sites both CONUS and OCONUS?

Response: If any personnel are assigned Government On-site they will receive this support.

86. Background/Questions 1/2/3/4/5/6, Sample Task Area 6 CPFF, Attachment 4, Paragraph/Page: pages 92-121;

Question 1: What is the assumed Sample Task Order start date? Is it Aug 1, 2012 based on the Base year period of performance?


Background/Question: Paragraph III. Scope, states “4. The Contractor shall provide all Personnel, Test Chambers, Test fixtures, equipment, materials and facilities for all Chemical Testing, except as specified as Government Furnished Equipment/Government Furnished Material/Government Furnished Information (GFE/GFM/GFI) or Government Furnished Facilities (See attachment B Listing of GFE/GFM/GFI/GFF) to meet the outcomes and objectives for this effort unless otherwise stated. Locations of Joint Set-A-Side Project (JSAP) Facilities are contained in attachment F.” If the Government is providing the set aside facilities (per Attachment F) and Attachment B, what Test chambers, test fixtures, equipment, materials and facilities is the Government referring to in the above statement?

Response: The Outcomes and Objectives of the SOO describe the requirement for which the items described above are typically used. As specified in the Scope this is a contractor requirement.

104 of 127


87. Background/Question: Are the positions identified in Attachment C (Independent Government Estimate) the only positions required for this task that the contractor should provide?


88. Background/Question: Is the contractor to use the government’s independent estimate for travel based on the statement in paragraph 1.36., which states “Locations and the duration of travel cannot be established at this time so an estimated travel budget of (See Attachment B) for the entire effort (inclusive of G&A, if applicable) is established.”?


89. Background/Question: Should the contractor use the Government’s Independent estimate for ODCs as no ODCs other than communication devices and disposal of hazardous waste have been identified in the sample task?

Response: As stated in the attachment title, the government will fund Travel and ODCs as a bulk funded Not To Exceed amount. The offeror should propose their anticipated ODCs based on a best value solution to meet the SOO requirements. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs. If any figures are populated in the ODC IGE, they simply reflect the government estimate of ODCs as defined by the FAR that may be required. The offeror should propose their requirements based on a best value solution to meet the SOO requirements.

90. Background/Question: Paragraph 4. Cost proposal Submission states “ a. The offerors proposal shall present the cost for the efforts described for this effort in three parts, (1) Program Support by Labor Hours, (2) Test cost per lot by category, Travel costs and Incidental Material costs (ODCs) incurred. ODCs shall be submitted, but are reimbursable and shall be estimated per year by the government as a not to exceed amount unless authorized by the Contracting Officer, to be billed as an Other Direct Cost. What is (3) Travel costs and Incidental Material Cost (ODCs) incurred? The last sentence states “ODCs shall be submitted… and shall be estimated per year by the government.”

105 of 127


Does this mean for the contractor to use the Government’s Independent estimate for ODCs?

Response: Yes, typographical error left out the 3. As stated in the attachment title, the government will fund Travel and ODCs as a bulk funded Not To Exceed amount.

91. Background/Questions 1/2/3: Sample Task Area 7 CPFF, Attachment 4, pages 122-148,Question 1: What is the assumed Sample Task start date?


Question 2: Is the contractor to use the government’s independent estimate for travel based on the statement in paragraph 1.34., which states “Locations and the duration of travel cannot be established at this time so an estimated travel budget of (See Attachment B) for the entire effort (inclusive of G&A, if applicable) is established.”? There is no travel dollars provided in the Government’s independent estimate, does this mean no travel is planned?


Question 3: Paragraph VII 2. Cost Proposal Submission states “a. The offerors proposal shall present the cost for the efforts described for this effort in three parts, (1) Labor Cost by Labor Hours for each Position, (2) Other Direct Costs non-travel and (3) Travel costs. Travel and Other Direct Costs will be estimated per year by the government as a not to exceed amount unless authorized by the Contracting Officer.” Will the Government estimate the travel and ODCs per year?


106 of 127


92. Background/Questions 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9: Sample Task Area 9 T&M, Attachment 4, Paragraph/Page: pages 150-180;

Question 1: What is the assumed Sample Task start date? Is it Aug 1, 2012 based on the Base year period of performance?


Question 2: Is the contractor to use the government’s independent estimate for travel based on the statement in paragraph 1.37., which states “Locations and the duration of travel cannot be established at this time so an estimated travel budget of (See Attachment B) for the entire effort (inclusive of G&A, if applicable) is established.”?


Question 3: In paragraph IV 2. states “The initial locations requiring support for this effort is; MCLB, Albany, GA; MCLB, Barstow, CA; MCB Camp Lejeune, NC; MCB, Kaneohe Bay, HI; MCB, Camp Hansen, Okinawa Japan (which requires a contractor commitment for a minimum 24 month tour); MCB, Camp Pendleton, CA; Tyndal AFB, Panama City, FL. As all positions are considered deployable, if this requirement is exercised, the current known locations would be Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan. Other locations may require support as program requirements dictate. Also, places of performance may be added or changed by the Contracting Officer based on changing of mission requirements.” If the person is deployed from CONUS to OCONUS will the contractor be able to reprice the labor rates for this T&M contract as a person working CONUS would be paid differently from the same position in Iraq, Kuwait or Afghanistan due to additional pay for hazardous duty, work differential? Which labor positions would be deployed?

Response: Costs for deployed personnel in support of the government are as authorized in the FAR, JTR and other guiding documents. Specifics of this nature should be addressed directly to the Contracting Officer. Specific positions needed for deployment will be made as the government’s requirement arises.

Question 4: If the contractor employees are deployed overseas to Iraq, Kuwait or Afghanistan will the employees have a different work week other than 40 hours per week?

107 of 127


Response: Work periods will be those authorized by the governing Labor clauses and any overtime if authorized by the Contracting Officer.

Question 5: Deployment to Kuwait requires additional ODCs such as sponsorship. How will these costs be proposed? Are they considered as part of the Government’s Independent Estimate for ODCs?

Response: The offeror should prepare their proposal to meet all overarching contract and SOO requirements to include surge and deployment requirements if invoked by the government.

Question 6: Will all deployed personnel be housed by the Government? Will they be provided meals?

Response: Deployment specifics will be determined when the action to require deployment is invoked by the government.

Question 7: Will the position deployed to Okinawa, Japan be provided government housing and meals? Is it included in the Government’s Independent Estimate for ODCs?

Response: Yes. Contractor personnel on Okinawa are covered by the Status Of Forces agreement for the country of Japan. Contractors placing personnel there should prepare accordingly.

Question 8: Will DBA insurance be required for deployment to OCONUS? Is DBA costs included in the Government’s Independent Estimate for ODCs?

Response: DBA for deployed personnel is covered under the overarching contract requirements.

Question 9: Paragraph VII 2. states “. The offerors proposal shall present the cost for the efforts described in this SOO in three parts, (1) Labor Cost by Labor Hours for each Position, (2) Other Direct Costs non-travel and (3) Travel costs. Travel and Other Direct Costs will be estimated per year by the government as a not to exceed amount unless authorized by the Contracting Officer.” Does this mean the contractor does not provide a price for travel and ODC costs? Does the contractor use the Government Independent Estimate for Travel and ODCs?

Response: Offerors submission should follow the guidance in section L of the solicitation. As stated in the attachment title, the government will fund Travel and ODCs as a bulk funded Not To Exceed amount. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs. If any figures are populated in the ODC IGE, they simply reflect the government estimate of ODCs as defined by the FAR that may be

108 of 127


required. The offeror should propose their requirements based on a best value solution to meet the SOO requirements.

93. Background/Question: Sample Task Area 9 FFP, Attachment 4, Paragraph/Page: 181-214Questions 1/2/3/4:

Question 1: What is the assumed Sample Task start date?


Question 2: Paragraph VII 2. states “The offerors proposal shall present the cost for the efforts described in this SOO in three parts, (1) Labor Cost by Labor Hours for each Position, (2) Other Direct Costs non-travel and (3) Travel costs. Travel and Other Direct Costs will be estimated per year by the government as a not to exceed amount unless authorized by the Contracting Officer. ”Does this mean the contractor does not provide a price for travel and ODC costs? Does the contractor use the Government Independent Estimate for Travel and ODCs?


Question 3: Is the contractor to use the government’s independent estimate for travel based on the statement in paragraph 1.36., which states “Locations and the duration of travel cannot be established at this time so an estimated travel budget of (See Attachment B) for the entire effort (inclusive of G&A, if applicable) is established”? There is no travel dollars provided in the Government’s independent estimate, does this mean no travel is planned?

Response: As stated in the attachment title, the government will fund Travel and ODCs as a bulk funded Not To Exceed amount. Offerors proposal should present their assumption of whether any travel is needed or not. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs.

Question 4: In paragraph 1.37 it states “The contractor may be required to obtain supplies and/or materials for the performance of this contract. Those supplies and/or materials must be incidental to and associated with the overall functions being performed through this contract. The contractor shall abide by the requirements of the FAR in acquiring supplies and/or materials, and must maintain files in such a manner that the Contracting Officer could review them upon request to ensure compliance with federal procurement

109 of 127


regulations; however, price reasonableness should always be determined prior to selecting a teammate or partner.” Can a list of ODCs be provided that may be required for this task? There is not a Government’s Independent Estimate for ODCs?

Response: Section L of the Solicitation sates offerors should assume no previous task orders have been issued for this task. Therefore, offeror should prepare their proposal accordingly and make their own assumptions as to ODC requirements. Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount” but contractors should propose their costs.

94. Background/Question: RFP, Attachment 004, SOO for Storage/Maintenance, FIS, GESP Distribution Management Center (FFP Task Area 9): Section X, paragraph 1.36 states “Locations and the duration of travel cannot be established at this time so an estimated travel budget (see Attachment B) for the entire effort is established.” Attachment B does not provide any estimates. Will the Government provide the estimated travel budget?


95. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Supply Management Support for Director, SMC, Pg. 18, Attachment A, Independent Government Estimate, Labor by Position and Location, is blank. Will the Government provide the required or recommended personnel requirements by location?

Response: Clarifying paragraph on page 19 gives recommendations for submissions of labor and staffing.

96. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Supply Management Support for Director, SMC Atch 4 Sample Task Orders (STO), Pg. 19, Attachment B, Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs, is blank. Will the Government provide the referenced NTE dollar amounts?

Response: Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount.

97. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Supply Management Support for Director, SMC, Pg. 20, Attachment C, Directives and References, cites the Solution Planning Directive for Logistics Modernization DC CDI 3500 C06 dtd Jan 23 2006. Will the Government provide a copy of this reference?

110 of 127


Response: Yes. Upon request; will post to the MCLOGSS web page.

98. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Training Support for MCLC, Pg. 89, Attachment A, Independent Government Estimate, Labor by Position and Location, is blank. Will the Government provide the required or recommended personnel requirements by location?

Response: Clarifying paragraph on page 19 gives recommendations for submissions of labor and staffing.

99. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Training Support for MCLC, Pg. 90, Attachment B, Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs, is blank. Will the Government furnish the referenced NTE dollar amounts?

Response: Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount. Contractors should propose their costs.

100. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Training Support for MCLC, Pg. 91, Attachment C, Directives and References, cites the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between Commanding General (CG), MARCORLOGCOM, Albany, GA and CG, Marine Corps Installations East (MCIEAST), Camp Lejeune, NC dated April 2008. Will the Government provide a copy of this reference?

Response: Yes. Will post to the MCLOGSS Contract web page.

101. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Training Support for MCLC, Pg. 91, Attachment C, Directives and References, cites the MOA between CG, MARCORLOGCOM, Albany, GA and CG, Marine Corps Installations West (MCIWEST), Camp Pendleton, CA dated March 2009 Will the Government provide a copy of this reference?

Response: Yes. Will post to the MCLOGSS Contract web page

102. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Training Support for MCLC, Pg. 91, Attachment C, Directives and References, cites the CG, MARCORLOGCOM Letter FY10 Annual Training Needs dated 11Mar09 and the Comptroller Guidance Letter Number 10-02, Fiscal Guidance and Procedures for Marine Corps Logistics Command Tuition Assistance and Program Degree Reimbursement dated 3Dec09. Will the Government provide a copy of this reference?

Response: Offerors should search all sites available to the public for requested documents. Documents not available to the public should be requested through the Contracting Officer.

111 of 127


103. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Program Management and Engineering Support for GESP DMC, Pg. 144, Attachment B, Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs, is blank. Will the Government furnish the referenced NTE dollar amounts?


104. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Storage/Maintenance, FIS, GESP DMC, Pg. 209, Attachment B, Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs, is blank. Will the Government furnish the referenced NTE dollar amounts?


105. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Program Integration and Management Support PSC, Pg. 273, Attachment A, IGCE Labor by Position and Location is blank. Will the Government provide the required or recommended personnel requirements by location?

Response: Clarifying paragraph on page 236 of SOO gives recommendations for submissions of labor and staffing.

106. Background/Question: Atch 4 Sample Task Orders SOO for Program Integration and Management Support PSC, Pg. 238, Attachment B, Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs, is blank. Will the Government furnish the referenced NTE dollar amounts?


107. Background/Question: Attachment 4, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1), Section VIII.1.20 and Attachment A, Section VIII.1.20 states, "In no case, without prior approval of the COR, will any Government furnished equipment be removed from any Government facility or installation." Does this include items in Attachment A being sent to the laboratories for testing?

Response: Yes. The chain of custody needs to be employed.

112 of 127


108. Background/Question: Attachment 4, There are several of the sample task Statement of Objectives (SOO) that appear to have conflicting language. In three separate task order instructions, the following language is used:

"This SOO describes the requirements, level of effort, services ..." "Independent Government Estimate. Attachment _ contains positions by location

for which the government estimates the contractor will be required to provide support. The number of estimated annual hours and the year of the contract the hours will be required is indicated".

"The placement of estimated hours and/or labor category mix in this SOO simply indicates an historical workload for this type effort and does not indicate the government requires the offer to adhere to these numbers or categories in their proposal".

Could the Government please clarify the differences in the above language?

Response: The scope of each SOO gives broad description of efforts covered. As stated in the clarifying paragraphs for each SOO, Clarifying paragraph of SOO gives recommendations for submissions of labor and staffing. Offerors proposals should follow the guidance in section L of the solicitation and present best value solutions for meeting government’s requirements.

109. Background/Question: Attachment 4, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1), Section V, Performance Objectives, item 1.d, and Section IX, Objective no. 4, Section V indicates, "Stock and maintain sufficient quantities of consumables and repair parts for test preparation equipment to support daily operations and test preparation analysis of samples. Section IX, the fourth objectives indicates, "Stock and maintain sufficient quantities of consumables that are needed for test preparation and or machinery repair parts to support daily operations and test preparation analysis of samples. This includes material handling equipment and test preparation equipment." Can the Government provide historical data on the types and quantities of consumables and repair parts to be stocked and maintained?

Response: As stated in section L of the solicitation, the offeror should assume no previous task orders have been issued for this support. Any known historical information has been presented in the attachments.

110. Background/Question: Attachment 4, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1), Attachment D, Section III.1, Section V, Performance Objectives 1.c. & d., and Sections VI.4, VIII.1.28, VIII.1.29, VIII.1.32, and IX, Attachment D provides a Government estimate for ODCs. Section VIII.1.32 indicates that the ODCs are to be used to obtain supplies and/or materials that are "incidental to and associated with the overall functions being performed through the contract." Request clarification as to what can be purchased using

113 of 127


ODCs (e.g., things such as the required consumables, packaging materials, shipping and/or transportation charges, equipment maintenance, etc.).

Response: FAR regulations are quite clear on what can and cannot be procured in support of a contract using ODCs and incidental materials procurements.

111. Background/Question: Attachment 4, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1), Attachment B and Section VI.1, Request information on the VTC system being provided to ensure the appropriate space is available and the proper circuits are provided.

Response: GFE VTC expected to be issued is a Sony, model number FWD-50PX2.

112. Background/Question: Attachment 4, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1), Attachment B. The GFE listed in Attachment B ranges from washers and dryers to communications servers and a VTC system. Request clarification as to the role of the vendor's personnel associated with this sample task order; i.e., are they only responsible for the operation of the GFE, or are they responsible for both operation and maintenance of the GFE.

Response: The contractor shall be required to use any GFE/GFM/GFI provided to meet the Outcomes and Objectives of the SOO.

113. Background/Question: Attachment 4, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1), Attachment C and Section IX. Attachment C provides for two labor categories, Warehouse Man and Data Information Technician. Section IX provides a performance metric to, "Provide staff to conduct JTOC Operations."The standard associated with this metric indicates, "All personnel shall have the capability to perform all assigned functions. If all of the staff can perform all of the functions, what is the purpose of having more than one labor category?

Response: Clarifying paragraph on page 39 of SOO gives recommendations for submissions of labor and staffing. Offerors proposal should present their best value solution to meet the requirements of the SOO.

114. Background/Question: Attachment 4, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1), Sections VI.4 and VI.7. Section VI.7 indicates that, "The contractor shall obtain and maintain all necessary insurance (property, liability, etc.) with sufficient coverage for the facility, personnel, and Government owned and stored equipment." In order to obtain adequate insurance, the Government is requested to provide a complete list of all equipment and materials (including costs) to be housed in this facility.

Response: No predetermined list of materials other than as described in the SOO for what may be housed in the facility is available.

114 of 127


115. Background/Question: Attachment 4, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1), Sections IV.2, VI.1, VI.7, and VIII.1.27. Section IV.2 indicates the JTOC shall be in London, OH, and Section VI.1 further indicates that "the Government currently operates the JTOC from a suitable facility in London, OH which meets all of the Government requirements. The Joint Test Operations Center shall be located in London, OH." Questions:

Will the lease and/or operations of the current JTOC facility be transferred from the outgoing vendor to the winning vendor upon task order award, or are the vendors required to locate and prepare a new facility?

If the vendors are to locate and prepare a new facility, what is the maximum distance or driving time from London, OH that the new facility can be located?

Responses: Offerors are expected to submit a proposal that meets the Outcomes and Objectives of the SOO while assuming no previous Task Order has been issued for this effort. Location of the Facility in London Ohio as stated in the SOO is the requirement. Offerors proposals to meet the requirement should be a best value solution to the government.

116. Background/Question: Attachment 4, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1), Section IV and Attachments C and D. Section IV states this is a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract with 1 base year and 2 option years, yet Attachments C & D appear to indicate this is a 1 base year and 4 option years. Please clarify.

Response: Only Base and two (2) option years.

117. Background/Question: Attachment 4, SOO for Warehouse and Operations Services for Joint CBRND Testing Program (CPFF Supporting Task Area 1), Attachment A. Attachment A lists items that will have samples prepared and maintained. While most of the items appear to be clothing, a couple of items (M100 Skin Decontamination System Kit and M291 Decontamination Kit) may contain hazardous materials. Request the MSDS sheets for these two items.

Response: We are requesting and will post to our MCLOGSS Contract web page.

118. Background/Question: Sample Task Orders SOO, Pages 51, 76, 128, 158, 188, and 221. The Government States: Staffing for the position identified in support of this effort will be done through the issuance of technical direction at Task order award as the needs of the Government are determined. Question: Is it the Government’s intent to estimate the labor categories and hours necessary to meet the requirements of the sample task SOOs?

115 of 127


Response: Clarifying paragraphs in the SOOs gives recommendations for submissions of labor and staffing. Offerors proposal should present their best value solution to meet the requirements of the SOO. Contractors should propose their costs.

119. Background/Discussion/Question: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks:

Statement of Objectives (SOO) For Technical, Quality, Logistics and Program Support, Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear-Defense/Consolidated Storage Division,/Joint Equipment Assessment Program T&M Supporting Task Area 9, Paragraph IV.2 , page 153 and Attachment A, page 177.

Discussion: Paragraph IV.2 lists MCB Kaneohe Bay, HI as one of the initial locations requiring support for the sample task effort. Attachment A lists ‘0’ hours for the Base Year in the row for MCB Kaneohe Bay, HI. Question: Will the Government clarify the hours required for the Base Year at MCB Kaneohe Bay, HI?

Response: Clarifying paragraph on page 176 of the SOO gives recommendations for submissions of Labor and Staffing.

120. Background/Discussion/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks:

Statement of Objectives (SOO) For Technical, Quality, Logistics and Program Support, Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear-Defense/Consolidated Storage Division,/Joint Equipment Assessment Program T&M Supporting Task Area 9, Paragraph VI.1 Testing, page 97.

Discussion: Paragraph VI.1.a stipulates, “Only those laboratories Certified by the Government to handle government owned Chemical Agent shall be able to perform these efforts.” Question: Will the Government provide a list of laboratories currently certified to handle government owned Chemical Agent?

Response: This office does not maintain a list of laboratories that currently have and maintain the certification described.

121. Background/Reference/Question: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO) For C4 Information Technology Analytical Support Marine Corps Logistics Command CPFF Supporting Task Area 4, Attachment A, page 69.Discussion: The hours listed in the top four rows of the “Base Year” column are somewhat confusing as they are evenly divisible by the hours listed in row four of the column. It appears the Government has used 1872 hours as the productive man-year for this Sample Task. Question: Will the Government please clarify the use of the hour value 1872 rather than the value 1920 for the productive man-year?

Response: Clarifying paragraph on page 68 of the SOO gives recommendations for submissions of Labor and Staffing.

116 of 127


122. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO) For Technical, Quality, Logistics and Program Support, Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear-Defense/Consolidated Storage Division, /Joint Equipment Assessment Program T&M Supporting Task Area 9, Paragraph IV.1, page 152 and Attachment A, page 177. Discussion: Paragraph IV.1 states, “The Government will award a Labor Hour (T&M) Contract with 1 Base Year and 2 Option Years.”Attachment A, page 177 contains labor hour data for Option Years 3 and 4. Question: Will the Government clarify the period of performance for this Sample Task?

Response: The period of performance as stated in paragraph IV is the number of years, base and options authorized for services contracts.

123. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 2.3, para. V.2, Ref: Paragraph V. Program Outcomes and Objectives - Outcomes- sub para 2 “The contractor shall furnish all course materials, equipment …” Question: Paragraph 1.1 lists a series of topics I. E. – “supply and value chain management, etc ” are these current courses that are USMC developed and require only contractor delivery services?

Response: Since no Titled SOO or correct page number is given for this inquiry, will presume you have a question about the Training Support SOO based on your question. The contractor should propose to meet the requirements of the SOO as written and submit their proposal at the best value to the government.

124. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 2.3. Para. V.2, Paragraph V. Program Outcomes and Objectives- sub para 2, Performance Objectives 1.1 ;indicates “Contractor’s instructors shall… deliver instructions in the following areas/curriculum:” Question: There are several items in the list that in themselves appear to be methods/requirements of development and delivery of training and not subjects of training- Specifically ” [1] web –based training modules ,[2] curriculum development, [3] training monitoring system development” Does the requirement ask that training courses be developed/delivered in these three areas or are these stated as requirements in the development/delivery of the other topics in the list?

Response: Since no Titled SOO or correct page number is given for this inquiry, will presume you have a question about the Training Support SOO based on your question. The Outcomes and Objectives are presented as requirements the government anticipates needing for future support. No delineation is made unless it is presented in the Outcomes, objectives or Performance metrics.

125. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 1 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 12, para. 5.6.2, Documentation/Data. Logistics Parts Support - Sets, Kits and Outfits (NOTE: Has to be related to and necessary to the service. In no case can the supplies exceed the services.)

117 of 127


This task area provides materials/ supplies other than those materials/supplies directly tied to one of the other task area. For example, material and parts associated with the Maintenance or LOGCOM support shall be provided under those task areas. Question: The discussion of Logistics Parts Support – Sets, Kits and Outfits does not seem to be relevant to the Documentation/Data discussion. Should this discussion on Parts Support be located in section 3.10 or another 3.X paragraph vice 5.6.2?

Response: The information regarding the Logistics Parts Support is not associated with paragraph 5.6.2, but is provided as supporting detail for Task Area 8 paragraph 3.8.

126. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 15, para. X, 1.34, The contractor may be required to obtain supplies, services and/or materials for the performance of this contract. Those supplies, services and/or materials must be incidental to and associated with the overall functions being performed through this contract. Question: Can the government provide an estimate of the supplies, services, and/or materials to be purchased? If not, can the government provide a ‘set’ ODC budget to allow fair comparison of these costs among the various contractors?

Response: Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount.

127. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 24, para. V, 1, Provide a contractor leased/owned, government operated test preparation facility with warehouse storage capabilities for general storage and material control and trained staff to provide properly prepared test specimens for laboratory testing to various locations. Question: Can the government identify the “various locations” where test specimens are to be provided?

Response: Not at this time. Test Laboratory support will be obtained through a separate Task Order.

128. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 24, para. V, 2, Provide warehouse staff for test sample preparation, conducting warehouse operations, inventory control, material handling equipment operation and test preparation equipment such as cutting press, laundering equipment and laboratory scales. Question: Laboratory scales are not provided as GFE in attachment B. Can the government identify the size and accuracy of laboratory scales they expect will be required? Or, will the Laboratory scales be provided as GFE?

Response: The scales needed to support these requirements are a simple Bench Top scale with 10 pound measuring capability. The GFE list is accurate as written.

118 of 127


129. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 24, para. V, 3, Provide Program support staff for the receipt, collation, analysis, archiving, report generation and distribution of the Test Reports and data received as a result of Testing. Question: Can the government clarify the nature of “…Test Reports and data…” analysis to be provided by the program support staff?

Response: As stated, this requirement is to be performed on data received as a result of testing the articles as prepared and submitted per paragraph V, 1.

130. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 24, para. V, 1a, Provide a facility (minimum 54,000 square foot) inclusive of warehouse, office space, restrooms, break area and all supporting infrastructure. Question: In addition to the office space required for the Task Order Team member, how many offices will be required for government employees?

Response: Offerors should make provision for one (1) government employee.

131. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 24, para. V, 1c, Perform receipt, accounting, chain of custody, inventory, preparation for shipment, transportation and distribution of CBRN-D items used in the Shelf Life Extension Testing program. Question: “Perform transportation and distribution….” Can the government clarify if these locations are internal or external to the JTOC? If external please identify locations.

Response: Locations for distribution of these items cannot be determined at this time. Laboratory Testing support will be obtained through a separate Task Order.

132. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 25, para. VI,1., The JTOC Facility shall be equipped with a security system; hook ups for government provided Teleconferencing equipment, standard communications equipment and computers for data entry… Question: Can the government specify the classification level required for the JTOC facility and equipment?

Response: No security classification has been assigned the JTOC facility, however offerors are reminded of the requirements of Paragraphs VIII 1.15 through 1.21 of the SOO and any requirements of the overarching contract pertaining to security of government owned material or information.

133. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 25, para. V, 1d, Stock and maintain sufficient quantities of consumables and repair parts for test preparation

119 of 127


equipment to support daily operations and test preparation analysis of samples. Question: Can the government clarify the meaning of “test preparation analysis” of samples?

Response: An analysis is performed on all Test Samples prepared to ensure they meet the requirements of the Test Laboratory.

134. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 25, para. V, 1d, Stock and maintain sufficient quantities of consumables and repair parts for test preparation equipment to support daily operations and test preparation analysis of samples. Question: Can the government supply a typical list of consumables required to support daily operations and test preparation analysis of samples?

Response: Offerors should assume no previous Task Orders have been issued for this effort when developing their proposal. Any known historical data available is presented in the SOO.

135. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 26, para. VI, 6.a., The Contractor shall comply with all Federal, State, and local environmental laws and regulations for the safe handling and accumulation of Hazardous materials and waste. The Contractor is responsible for Hazardous waste disposal unless provided by the Government. Question: Will the Government be providing hazardous waste disposal for this task? If the government is not providing hazardous waste disposal, what types (list/characteristic/mixed) of hazardous waste will be generated for disposal?

Response: The offeror should review the referenced items to have samples prepared and maintained in Attachment A and documents referenced in attachment G to make this determination. The government has no intent at this time to perform hazardous waste disposal for this effort.

136. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 40, Attachment B, Government Furnished Equipment, Material and Information. Question: What is the value of GFE and GFM specified in Attachment B?

Response: No cost estimate has been performed for these items at this time.

137. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 42, Attachment D, Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount. Question: Are the Travel and ODC numbers provided by the Government considered plug numbers for offerors to use? Or are offerors expected to provide their own travel and ODC estimates with supporting detail?

120 of 127


Response: Offerors should propose best value solutions to meeting SOO requirements using the guidance in Section L of the solicitation.

138. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 50, para. VI.2. During the phase-in period, the contractor shall be responsible for finalizing all employee clearance requirements. Question: By the statement “the contractor shall be responsible for finalization all employee clearance requirements,” is it intended that only the identification of the clearance requirements by position will be determined during the phase-in period, or is it intended that all the necessary clearances be actually attained during the phase-in period?

Response: As stated the contractor will finalize all requirements. Final clearances can often take longer than the Phase-In time.

139. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 51, para. VII. Staffing for the positions identified in support of this effort will be done through the issuance of technical direction at Task Order award as the needs of the government are determined. Question: If the staffing will be done at Task Order award as the needs of the government are determined, is it intended that the technical direction will be provided upon review / approval of the project schedule and project charter submitted for upper level management described in para V.1 and V.2 (page 48)?

Response: The government will be prepared to provide this at Task Order Start Of Work when issued.

140. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 51, para. VII.4.a, Application software shall be written in many languages, but not limited to such as VS COBOL II, Natural and IBM Assembler, JAVA, C, C++, .Net, Oracle Developer Suite tools, TSO. Question: Will the specific programming languages needed be determined upon approval of the project charter submitted for upper level management review described in para V.2 (page 48)?

Response: The charter will outline the scope of the project, including programming language.

141. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 59, para. XI.9, The contractor shall meet performance standards listed in this SOO and shall not be relieved of any performance requirements because of waiting for GFE/GFM or GFI. The only deviation to required work efforts allowed will be for GFE/GFM or GFI not available to permit contractor employees to conduct the efforts established by the standards in this SOO. In those cases where a deviation is required the COR will be notified. Question: Will there be a requisite time standard by which the government can be reasonably

121 of 127


expected to provide necessary GFE/GFM or GFI in order for the contractor to meet performance standards, e.g. within the 30 day transition period?

Response: If offeror proposes and the government agrees or if the government predetermines GFE will be issued to the contractor, the expectation should be that it will be available at Start of Work.

142. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 60-61, para. XI.14, Certain individuals performing specific duties may require Security clearances or favorable background checks before being assigned these duties. The government will identify these positions to the contractor at contract award. Question: Will there be an estimated time standard for achieving a required background clearance that can be used for response estimating purposes?

Response: The time standard for achieving a clearance is influenced by factors outside the control of this agency, therefore no specific number of days can be established. The contractor is responsible for ensuring proposed candidates meet all the requirements and that no issues arise that would cause undue delay.

143. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 65, para. XI.32.(13).(a), The successful offeror will assume responsibility for performance of all tasks required by the PWS within 30 days of contract award. Question: If the government identifies specific duties requiring Security clearances or favorable background checks at contract award, will a reasonable accommodation of this fact be considered when enforcing the requirement for assuming duties within 30 days of contract award?

Response: Assumption of duties are met regarding security clearance requirements when the contractor has finalized all requirements for obtaining the clearance. This shall be accomplished during the Phase-In time.

144. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 153, para. IV.2, MCB, Camp Hansen, Okinawa Japan (which requires a contractor commitment for a minimum 24 month tour); Question: Base year POP is one year, but this place of performance requires 24 month tour commitment. Should the offeror price return trip costs in the event of non-exercise of option year 1?

Response: Offerors proposal should represent the requirement to return an employee to CONUS from an OCONUS location should an option not be exercised that prevents minimum required Period Of Performance by the contractor.

145. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 153, para. V.3; VII.1, Logistics will be conducted utilizing government provided systems, applications,

122 of 127


automated information technologies (AIT) and databases, 1. Data Management: a. The goal of the Government is to minimize the delivery of data in Government format and hardcopy and to maximize the use of a contractor-maintained electronic data library with data provided in Microsoft Applications required to support this effort in contractor format unless otherwise directed by the government. Question: Request clarification on what processes/data transactions the government wants completed on government provided systems and what process/data transactions the government wants completed on contractor managed format.

Response: Any software or program provided by the government for contractor use meets the requirement of paragraph VII 1. for use in Microsoft Applications. The Deliverables table describes which are to be presented in what format. Unless the government specifies at the time of request through Technical Direction contractor format can be presumed.

146. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 153, para. IV.2, As all positions are considered deployable, if this requirement is exercised, the current known locations would be Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan. Question: What would be the estimated duration of possible deployments to these areas? Should travel costs, per diem, and hazard pays in support of these deployments be provided in the pricing volume?

Response: No predeterminations of deployment time are available at this time. Costing for offerors proposal should be as authorized by the FAR for this type support and in accordance with the Solicitation.

147. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 154, para. V.1, Perform authorized, required repairs. Question: Will repair parts be ordered and funded via normal supply channels or will the offeror be responsible for procuring repair parts with funding provided for that purpose?

Response: Repair parts for this effort will be procured using various government approved requisition methods.

148. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 154, para. V.1.9, Perform necessary travel in order to conduct scheduled assessments, both CONUS AND OCONUS, Question: In order to facilitate accurate pricing, could offerors be provided with a list of locations for scheduled assessments and associated scope of assessments?

Response: This information has not been predetermined. The Places Of Performance as described in Paragraph IV are considered valid at this time. Regarding Travel, as stated in the attachment title, the government will fund Travel and ODCs as a bulk funded Not To Exceed amount.

123 of 127


149. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 156, para. V.4.1, Provide inventory planning for various types of CBRN equipment, DCTE, and support equipment, to include requirements determination, through normal supply channels, ordering, order management, inspection and receipt, inventory control, in-stores care including shelf-life management and issue. Question: Can the government provide applicable historical CBRN equipment repair data, repair part consumption rates, and the quantity of repairs conducted on CBRN equipment over recent periods (3 Fiscal years)?

Response: Guidance in section L advises offerors to prepare submission assuming no previous Task Orders have been issued for this type support. Any supporting data available has been attached to the SOO.

150. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 156, para. V.4.4, Provide provisioning and technical support on Lightweight 155 Howitzer and the logistical support associated as required by the Joint Program Management Office (LW155). Question: Can the government specify the type of CBRND related support it requires for the LW155?

Response: As stated the type support required is provisioning and technical support for the Lightweight 155 Program.

151. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 157, para. VII.3.a, The Contractor is responsible for Hazardous waste disposal through government provided processes Question: Is the offeror responsible for the costs associated with Hazardous Waste Disposal and if so should those costs be provided in the pricing file as an ODC?

Response: No, just performing disposal functions per government direction and policy.

152. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 157, para. VI.1, In the plan, the Contractor shall include adequate time to hire appropriate personnel, conduct inventories, assume equipment control, Questions: Will inventory levels by equipment type be provided by location in order to facilitate the efficient conduct of 100% inventories during transition? Will equipment maintenance history files be provided to assist in conducting an initial assessment of on hand inventory?

Response: All required data to perform the requirements stated will be provide at Task Order Start Of Work when issued.

153. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 171, para. X.1.34, Statement: 34 Transportation and Material Handling Equipment: The contractor shall be

124 of 127


required to operate and maintain transportation equipment and material handling equipment as part of this SOO. This may consist of, but not be limited to; forklifts, pallet jacks, hand trucks, trucks up to 5-ton load capacity, commercial equipment requiring a CDL Class A license, and generators. The contractor shall ensure employees designated to operate this equipment have and maintain appropriate licenses. Question: Are the costs associated with training/testing/physicals and other requirements that must fulfilled to obtain CDL-A, HAZMAT endorsements, and other certification listed in the referenced section to be considered as ODCs and priced accordingly. Are the costs for PMCS, OEM or authorized repair center to be paid by offeror or Government?

Response: Offeror is directed to paragraph X 1.7, 1.34 and 1.35 of the SOO for information regarding this issue. Repair parts for this effort will be procured using various government approved requisition methods.

154. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 184 & 204, para. IV.2 & Attachment A, The current locations where the DMC anticipates needing support for these efforts are Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany, GA and Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow, CA, government on-site. The DMC also conducts operations in direct support of the War-Fighter at Camp Pendleton, CA (I MEF), Camp Lejeune, NC (IIMEF), Kaneohe Bay, HI and Okinawa Japan (III MEF) and In-Theater deployed support of OCONUS Contingency Operations (OCO). Question: A. Is contractor support required at all sites over and above Albany and Barstow? Attachment A, government labor estimate appears to indicate personnel are required at all sites including OCO, which seems to conflict with section IV.2 for current support required only at Albany and Barstow?

Response A: Offerors should prepare proposals based on the requirements as described and in accordance with the guidance in Section L of the Solicitation where assumptions and expectations are provided. Clarifying paragraph on page 203 of the SOO gives recommendations on submissions of labor and staffing.

B. If additional site support is required, can the Government clarify the expected magnitude and specifics of OCO support?

Response B: No specifics are available at this time.

C. Is travel required for this task associated only with OCO? Are there other requirements for support across sites that necessitate travel?

Response C: Offeror is directed to paragraph X 1.36 of the SOO.

155. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 217, para. II, Our dedicated team is directly aligned to support Program Executive Offers (PEO), and

125 of 127


Program Managers (PM), and teams Headquartered at Marine Corps Systems Command. Question: Can the government provide how many programs require dedicated team support and how many programs share resources?

Response: The center for which support will be acquired using this SOO supports all USMC PMs.

156. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 218, para. V, Program Support, Business Management and Analysis, Prepare Business Case Analysis. Question: To determine LOE, what are the expected number, frequency and complexity of Business Case Analysis?

Response: No predetermined amount of BCAs has been made at this time and offerors should assume no previous Task Orders have been issued for this effort.

157. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 218, para. V, Program Support, Business Management and Analysis, Draft Performance Based Agreements. Question: To determine LOE, what are the expected number, frequency and complexity of drafting Performance Based Agreements?

Response: No predetermined amount of agreements has been made at this time and offerors should assume no previous Task Orders have been issued for this effort.

158. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 218, para. V, Program Support, Program Management and Analysis, Draft Agreements with Organic or Commercial Support Providers. Question: What is the frequency and complexity of drafting agreements with Organic and commercial Support providers?

Response: No historical data available for this at present. Offeror should assume no previous Task Orders have been issued for this effort.

159. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 219, para. V, Logistics Support, The contractor will provide support for program integration logistic support management in support of ground weapon systems and future opportunities. Question: To determine the proper PSM/PST make-up supporting Total Life Cycle Management support, how many programs/Program Managers are supported that are listed in the “Logistics Support Services” area? Example is it one combat system (M1) or is it all Marine Corps combat systems? Same for C4I, etc.?

Response: All Marine Corps PMs are supported.

126 of 127


160. Background/Reference/Question: Reference: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Statement of Objectives (SOO), page 219, para. V, Integration and Technical Data Support, Systems Engineering. Question: Are the engineering efforts listed under “systems engineering” referring to development of a logistics enterprise or are they engineering efforts in support of specific programs?

Response: The support could be to either one.

161. Background/Reference/Question: (RFP) M67004-11-R-0003 Section B and Attachment 4 Sample Tasks: Discussion: Several of the Sample Tasks provide an amount for travel and ODC’s in their respective Attachment B. However, none of these amounts are reflected in Section B of the RFP. Questions:

1. Will the Government provide clarification regarding the cost amounts contained in the Sample task Attachment Bs?

Response 1: Clarifying statement in the title of the attachment “Independent Government Estimate, Travel and Other Directs Costs. Travel and ODCs will be bulk funded by the government as a Not To Exceed amount.

2. How should bidders show these ODC amounts in their proposal pricing?

Response 2: Offerors should propose a best value solution to the government for meeting the requirements.

3. Will the Government incorporate provision to add these amounts to Section B?

Response 3: No.

127 of 127