Loren Data's SAM Daily™

FBO DAILY - FEDBIZOPPS ISSUE OF MARCH 29, 2015 FBO #4873
DOCUMENT

R -- Antiterrorism Force Protection Support Services - Attachment

Notice Date

3/27/2015
 

Notice Type

Attachment
 

NAICS

541611 — Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services
 

Contracting Office

N00189 NAVSUP Fleet Logistics Center Norfolk 1968 Gilbert Street,Suite 600 NORFOLK, VA
 

Solicitation Number

N0018915R0016
 

Response Due

4/13/2015
 

Archive Date

12/31/2015
 

Point of Contact

Ricky Jennings 757-443-1456
 

E-Mail Address

ricky.jennings@navy.mil
(ricky.jennings@navy.mil)
 

Small Business Set-Aside

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business
 

Description

ANTI-TERRORISM FORCE PROTECTION CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS � N00189-15-R-0016 QUESTION: Personnel Qualifications. The Technical response requires a staffing plan � there are NO qualifications or experience standards provided, what will be the basis for being technically acceptable for staffing? The Evaluation Criteria (pp. 20-21) states that we will be evaluated on �the vendor �s capability to identify the personnel who will be staffed for all functions to be assigned to fulfill the PWS to accomplish the effort. � Can the government provide the expected qualifications and experience standards required to be technically acceptable? ANSWER: See Attachment I. QUESTION: Pricing/Personnel. For an LPTA solicitation, typically there are clearly defined levels of effort so that all offeror �s responses can be compared based on the same criteria and level of effort. There are no position descriptions or levels of effort (hours etc �) identified for pricing the tasks to make a realistic comparison of responses. As LPTA solicitations are based on clearly defined levels of effort for non-complex commercial services, can the government clarify the positions requested, the qualifications, and the expected level of effort? Does the procurement of complex Antiterrorism Exercises and program analysis truly fall under �non-complex � services? ANSWER: The procurement of complex Antiterrorism Exercises and program analysis truly falls under �non-complex � services. See Attachments I and II. QUESTION: Pricing. ORDERING for Task Orders states in f. (page 63) that � �All labor categories and rates used to price task orders shall be in accordance with Attachment II of the contract. � Attachment II is a QASP. Can the government provide the labor categories for adequate pricing comparison? ANSWER: See Attachment I and II to this amendment. QUESTION: Place of Performance. The source sought identified that three (3) persons would work onsite at USFF. Can you provide clarification of the Place of Performance and on site vs off site requirements? ANSWER: Three personnel will be working on site. One person each, for the Nuclear Weapons Support, Non-Lethal Weapons, and Defense Critical Infrastructure Program tasks. The remaining personnel will work off site at a place supplied by the contractor. A terminal will be provided on-site for any work requiring �Secret � level access to the computer network. QUESTION: Evaluation Criteria. If having or providing no past performance is considered �acceptable � in the LPTA evaluation, what utility does past performance provide (page 22)? ANSWER: Past performance evaluation is required per FAR 15.304. Having no past performance is not considered �acceptable �. Per FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv), offerors without a record of past performance or past performance information is unavailable may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. QUESTION: QASP. The QASP (Attachment II) states that acceptable performance for documents is: �Documentation reviewed and presented to meet acceptance. 95% require no more than two review cycles to finalize. � In the development of briefs, IPRS and new documents, the typical review cycle at USFF for planner, O-6/GS-15 and Flag-level review routinely will exceed �two cycles � � can you clarify this QASP metric? ANSWER: Two review cycles are interpreted as two submissions of a product for review. To meet the 95%, a product must be in a finalized state within two submissions. Products must meet a high standard to be acceptable for O-6/GS-15 and Flag-level review. QUESTION: Task Orders. As the contract will be task order driven, are each of the provided task areas considered complete task orders? Many have been in work for several years, can the government provide a summary of the status of ongoing task orders so that non-incumbent contractors can accurately gage the level of effort to continue support without duplication of effort? As an example, the Hostile Intent and Small Arms Task Orders have been ongoing for 2-3 years � (REF from 2012 RFP TOs): ANSWER: The Small Arms and Hostile Intent Determination tasks are currently executing a Limited Objective Experiment (LOE) to determine proficiency levels of sailors in a simulator environment as it relates to small arms and hostile intent determination training. Based upon the findings of the current LOE the contractor will be asked to update the associated instructions/programs and complete the tasks detailed in the PWS. Reference paragraphs 4.1.1, 4.1.6.3, 4.1.6.5, and 4.1.6.11. QUESTION: Can you tell me if there is an incumbent contractor currently performing work for this requirement? If so, could you please provide their company name and contract number? ANSWER: There is an incumbent contractor. Contract Number: N00189-12-D-0040 QUESTION: Pricing. The EVALUATION CRITERIA states that this will be awarded based on LPTA (page 19), however in several places the solicitation states �The government reserves the right to award a contract to other than the lowest priced vendor � � (page 63) Additionally, in the PRICE section, states the price will be �evaluated on the basis of price reasonableness. �(page A � Can you confirm the acquisition strategy? Is the intent to make the selection based on LPTA for a four star staff support? ANSWER: The source selection process will be LPTA. QUESTION: The solicitation states that PDF files are not acceptable for the price quote. Are PDF files acceptable for the Technical and Past Performance Volumes? ANSWER: Yes. QUESTION: Does a cover page and table of contents count against the 30-page limit for Technical Volume and 6-page limit for Past Performance Volume? ANSWER: No. QUESTION: On page 66 of the RFP, in note (5) to Volume III Price Proposal within the Instructions to the Vendor, it is stated that the �basis of the award will be the total overall price for the Base Period and all two option periods. � Is the word �two � actually meant to be �four? � ANSWER: The word �two � was meant to be �four �. The solicitation has been revised. QUESTION: On page 66 of the RFP the Vendor is directed to include a completed RFP Section �Schedule of Supplies/Services. � Does this refer to the section of the RFP that begins on page 1 under the phrase �Contract Line Items as follows: � and ends on page 18? ANSWER: Yes. QUESTION: The Past Performance Information Form (Attachment V) does not completely align with what the government is requesting, i.e. missing a block for �contract type, � and missing separate blocks for Contracting Officer and COR contact information. Can the vendor adjust the form to meet these requirements listed in the Solicitation ADDENDUM INSTRUCTIONS TO THE VENDOR? ANSWER: Yes.
 

Web Link

FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/NAVSUP/N00189/N0018915R0016/listing.html)
 

Document(s)

Attachment
 

File Name: N0018915R0016_Personnel_Qualifications-Attachment_I.docx (https://www.neco.navy.mil/synopsis_file/N0018915R0016_Personnel_Qualifications-Attachment_I.docx)

Link: https://www.neco.navy.mil/synopsis_file/N0018915R0016_Personnel_Qualifications-Attachment_I.docx

 

File Name: N0018915R0016_LABOR_HOURS_CHART-Attachment_II.docx (https://www.neco.navy.mil/synopsis_file/N0018915R0016_LABOR_HOURS_CHART-Attachment_II.docx)

Link: https://www.neco.navy.mil/synopsis_file/N0018915R0016_LABOR_HOURS_CHART-Attachment_II.docx

 

File Name: N0018915R0016_USFF_Consolidated_AQASPrev-Attachment_III.docx (https://www.neco.navy.mil/synopsis_file/N0018915R0016_USFF_Consolidated_AQASPrev-Attachment_III.docx)

Link: https://www.neco.navy.mil/synopsis_file/N0018915R0016_USFF_Consolidated_AQASPrev-Attachment_III.docx

 

Note: If links are broken, refer to Point of Contact above or contact the FBO Help Desk at 877-472-3779.
 

Place of Performance

Address: U. S. FLEET FORCES COMMAND

Zip Code: 1562 Mitscher Ave, Norfolk, VA
 

Record

SN03681517-W 20150329/150327234841-06c2e1dd19668bd5bc979d2d81cffb7b (fbodaily.com)
 

Source

FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

---

| FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |