QA V2.1.pdf

Vendor Name: Cask NX LLC

Section Ref Page

Number Vendor Question Government's Response

AMS Licensing Clarification (PWS Section

3.0 – Contractor Requirements)

In Section 3.0, the government requires contractors to obtain an AMS license to access and transmit EWR data.

However, the PWS does not specify which specific AMS license(s) apply to contractors providing this system. Can the government clarify which specific Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) license(s) offerors must obtain to be eligible for this effort? The Performance Work Statement references AMS licensing requirements and the need for a working system capable of transmitting Electronic Warehouse Receipt (EWR) data. While the provided link includes a list of AMS licenses and provider agreements, it does not specify which license(s) are required for offerors delivering this system. Could the government confirm the exact licensing requirements applicable to this solicitation?

Visit: https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/uswa then click "Licensing and Provider Agreements"

Licensing Agreement for Grain and Rice Warehouse Operators https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/ WA402.pdf

EWR System Integration (PWS Section 3.0

– Contractor Requirements, Task 4:

Deployment of Software and Data Service)

In Section 3.0, the government states that the contractor will be granted access to transmit data to FSA’s EWR system through firewall access and security certificates. Can the government provide more details on additional technical or security standards that the system must meet for seamless integration with existing FSA systems?

There are multiple options to consider, and we will determine the best manner possible based on technologies available.

Data Transmission Volume (PWS Section

3.0 – Contractor Requirements, Task 1:

Subscription Access)

In Section 3.0, the PWS notes that EWR transactions may vary based on crop conditions. Can the government provide historical data or estimated transaction volumes per month or year to help offerors size infrastructure requirements appropriately?

Estimated volume is under 3,000 transactions a crop year. Current volume is 1,500, however we are fully functioning, we expect to gain higher levels of activity.

Reporting Requirements (PWS Section 3.0

– Contractor Requirements, Task 1:

Subscription Access & Invoicing)

6-7

In Section 3.0, the PWS states that contractors must provide activity reports on demand and submit monthly invoices based on transactions. Can the government specify the required level of detail for EWR data transmission reports and if there are any predefined formats or templates that must be used?

Do predetermined format but the invoice should include the following information per receipt:

•Receipt number •Commodity and class/variety as applicable •Crop year •assigned warehouse •current holder •quantity/weight •transaction/status.

Help Desk & Support Expectations (PWS Section 3.0 – Contractor Requirements, Scope & Help Desk Support)

5-6

In Section 3.0, the PWS states that help desk assistance must be available from 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM ET. Does the government require live support during these hours, or would an automated/ticket-based system be acceptable?

Additionally, can the government be more descriptive of the levels of support it expects offerors to provide as part of this service, and the services provided by the National Office?

Live support within a reasonable timeframe.

National Office will facilitate requests through field offices. Due to volume, ticket based system may not be needed.

Technology Preferences & Constraints (PWS Section 3.0 – Contractor Requirements, Task 4: Deployment of Software and Data Service)

Given the short turnaround time and the broad scope outlined in the PWS, does the government have a preferred technology, platform, or existing system in mind for this service? Additionally, is the government open to leveraging existing platforms already available to USDA, such as those provided by the FPAC Business Center, to support cost-effective solutions for this requirement? For example, would the government consider using AWS, SalesForce, ServiceNow, etc... or other enterprise tools within USDA to streamline implementation and reduce costs? No preference

Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Considerations (PWS Section 3.0 – Contractor Requirements, Task 4:

Deployment of Software and Data Service)

To maximize cost efficiency while maintaining technical acceptability, is the government open to offerors proposing the use of existing USDA contracts that support the operations and maintenance (O&M) of USDA-approved platforms? If so, can the government provide guidance on what they require from offerors in their proposals in support of this type of proposal.

There are no other contacts supporting this effort currently.

USDA FPAC Electronic Warehouse Receipts \\ 12FPC225Q0014 Vendor Questions Matrix

Request for Proposal Period Extension n/a

Given the importance of ensuring a technically compliant and cost-effective solution, we respectfully request that the government consider extending the proposal submission deadline. This extension would allow offerors adequate time to incorporate responses to government-provided answers to industry questions, ensuring a more comprehensive and compliant proposal. Can the government confirm whether an extension will be granted and, if so, the revised submission deadline?

The Government is extending the due date for quotes. Please see SAM for the new due date.

User Access & Licensing Clarification (PWS Section 3.0 – Contractor Requirements, Task 2: Develop Implementation Plan & User Access Definition)

Given the LPTA evaluation criteria, would the government be able to refine the list of user personas and clarify whether the user base is limited to the following roles referenced in the PWS: National Office personnel, field staff, help desk personnel, and state users? Specifically, in Section 3.0, the PWS outlines:

• Phase 1 Implementation/Release activities, including training for National Office, development of guidance for field staff, granting access for field staff, and issue resolution/help desk availability.

• System User Access designations, which include National Office Master Access, National Office User, and State User roles.

Can the government confirm whether these categories represent the full expected user base, or if additional user roles should be considered? Additionally, to support accurate pricing and compliance with the LPTA approach, can the government provide an estimated number of users for each persona to aid in offerors’ license estimations?

I don't have a count, but I can estimate:

8 National Office Staff 100 State/County Office Users May expand as warehouses adopt EWR use

In the S01 document on page 6 (1) (ii) what is the verification process for establishing our status under this. Would we just submit the service members DD214?

Your status is what you declared when signing up with SBA and would be verified by the contracting officer via SAM.gov. You should be registered and active on SAM.gov to be in compliance with this requirement.

The RFQ states that this is “Firm-Fixed Price contract”. How are you expecting the pricing to be presented? My interpretation is that the contractor will create a system (consisting of website and backend services to handle the processing of EWRs into or out of loan). With that in mind, it appears that there is a “fixed” price for the creation\maintenance of the system and potential ongoing price for the commodity going under loan (See page 6 “Projection of Transactions, column “Charge to FSA”. Since the “Charge to FSA” is based on a quantity, are you looking for “fixed price per quantity” or is this a single fixed total price quote that covers everything, regardless of quantity processed?

We are expecting an industry norm fixed price per transaction for each of the five 12-month periods of performance.

2 What determines if an option year is accepted or rejected/denied?

Each year, prior to the specified number of days for notice, the Government will determine if the need still exists for these services, if there is funding available, and if this contract is the best way to obtain the services. If the answers are all yes, then the Government will issue a notice of intent and proceed to unilaterally exercise the next option period prior to the new option years period of performance.

13 2 How long after submission before acceptance is given? (Base year starts April 18th 2025) We are not sure what this question is asking.

4-5

In order to create an implementation plan (Item 4) for phase 2, is the assumption that each commodity will be brought online in stages (item 5), then deployed (Item 6), with the first one being rice? Then repeated for each MAL that are approved for Price Support benefit?

Yes online in stages, and deployed based on the priority of need.

18 11.0 does that apply to a contractor that is not developing within the FPAC environment?

Section 11 states the contractor "The contractor must practice and adhere to Agile development practices within the FPAC environment.".

The contractor must deliver the software code paragraph My understanding is that we are creating a website and ongoing service for FSA to pull data from the provider database and there is no software deliverable in that case. The contractor will be hosting the service and it will be its responsibility to maintain the service. Is that correct? Yes

17 19 Same with Section 12.0 Software Line Item data We will not be providing a software license to USDA to use the service, so I assume this does not apply?

Please provide your quote in response to the PWS and it will be evaluated.

21 Attachments referenced are missing url or were not included in original transmission:

Attachment 1: Onboarding process for contractors Attachment 2: USDA Cyber supply chain risk management Attachment 3: EWR transactions and receipt examples Attachment 4: Data layouts

Provided as attachments