SCANTS_Q+A_Matrix_(15_FEB_2018).pdf

Solicitation # 70Z02318RP0400100 3rd Amendment Questions and Answers (Q+A) Matrix

# Question Answer 1 Is the SCANTS solicitation posted on FEDBIZOPS and responses required for 14 Feb for the actual solicitation or the draft solicitation?

The type‐title of the posted docs in FEBBIZOPS indicates 'Draft RFP/RFI's'. We just wanted to verify this is the actual solicitation.

Yes, this is the actual solicitation. The SCANTS solicitation number is 70Z02318RP0400100 and it is on www.fbo.gov here:

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=8afc6391b84725b68db4f6 dffd9662f6&_cview=0

2 Could the submission deadline for proposals be extended until Friday, February 16th?

Amendment A00002 was posted to www.fbo.gov and extended the proposal due date to Tuesday, February 20th, 2018, at 1400 Eastern Time.

3 The RFP submission requirements state “Each Offeror’s technical proposal is limited in length to a total of forty (40) pages. An introductory cover sheet and the table of contents page(s) do not count toward the page limit. Pages in excess of the fortieth (40th) page will be removed and excluded from evaluation”. The Technical Proposal – Volume II contains four Technical Sub‐factors. Since the Form, Fit and Function Design Integration sub‐factor is included, we are assuming that the required 80% design documents are NOT included in the 40 page limit. These include the overarching architectural document, layouts, elevation, detail drawings, network schematic for each bridge and all support spaces, complete equipment listings for each space including simulation specific equipment and all required ancillary and support systems to meet the requirements in Section 5 of the PWS. If this assumption is incorrect, please clarify how the USCG was envisaging these being presented within the 40 8.5”x11” size pages.

Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended solicitation itself, Section # 12, "SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS".

4 Reference RFP Attachment B ‐ Pricing Spreadsheet. Since CLIN 1 ‐ Bridge 1 includes the cost of a LED Monitor Visual Display: Is the USCG expecting CLIN 4 to show a delta price associated to CLIN 1 to provide a Projected Visual Scene? Clearly CLINS 5 and 6 are delta costs.

Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) 4 is the delta between the base requirements for a horizontal 240 degree field of view on a projected visual scene. CLINs 5 and 6 are asking for the delta costs for the expanded horizontal visual scene (270 degrees) for both an LED and projected scene (respectively).

5 For past performance programs, the RFP states that “Relevancy” is defined as work similar in scope, size, and complexity, of the present requirement. Does relevancy also require that the referenced programs/systems also be in use at a USCG NMC Approved facility certified to provide International Convention of Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW) training?

Yes. PWS Section # 1.17, "PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY", indicates that the offeror shall provide a COTS product, and that "The system must also be in use at facilities certified to provide International Convention of Standards of Training, Certification an Watchkeeping (STCW) training". Absent this experience, offerors are to provide a detailed plan on how they will seek compliance, so as to mitigate risk.

6 Reference PWS 5.12.5 ‐5.12.7. Both Initial Year Support Services and

Additional Year Support Services require life cycle maintenance including necessary updates to all software/hardware in order to maintain the most current versions. Can you therefore explain what the USCG envisages for the Technical Refresh in Option Year 4 since the hardware and software has been updated in each of the previous option years? Put another way, if a Technical Refresh CLIN is exercised does this imply that the Initial and Additional Year Support Service options were not exercised?

CLINs 4030 to 4034 are intended to provide pricing information for a technical refresh should the government not purchase one of the tiered maintenance plans that include hardware/software updates.

If the Government exercises the option of one of the Tiered maintenance plans, then CLINs 4030 to 4034 should not be necessary in the fourth option year, depending on what is offered in the three tiered maintenance plans.

7 Is it the Coast Guard’s hope and intent to award this contract such that installation will take place during the recess period Summer 2018?

Yes. The timeline for installation will be from 23 July 2018 until 01 September 2018.

8 In the RFP section 1 12. Submission Requirements, it is specified that the technical proposal is limited to 40 pages and includes Past Performance information. In section 1 13. Proposal Content, it defines the technical proposal as Volume II, and Past Performance as Volume III of the submission. Is it the Coast Guard’s intent that Volume II be limited to 40 pages and thereby exclude past performance as part of the page restriction?

For the page limits of the technical volume, please see the answer to Question # 3.

For past performance, there is no page limit.

9 With the page limitation for Volume II, is it acceptable for the bidder to submit supporting technical data in an Appendix that is an addition to the required submission documents?

For the page limits of the technical volume, please see the answer to Question # 3.

10 Since this is a Total Small Business Set‐Aside procurement, will the Coast Guard allow for progress payments under FAR provision 52.232‐ 14?

Yes. Please see the third amendment of the solicitation, the amended solicitation itself, RFP Section # 13, "Proposal Contents."

11 In the interest of Coast Guard Information Systems and Data security, are there restrictions with delivering operational software that was developed in foreign countries of concern, such as Russia, as part of the SCANTS simulator package?

No.

12 In the PWS section 5.2.2 General Requirements, it states that as part of the bridge equipment there be a AIS component. Does this mean there is to be a separate simulated AIS Receiver on the bridge, or is the AIS as supported on the radar and ECDIS adequate?

PWS Section # 5.2.2, "General Requirements", requires an AIS receiver and that receiver shall have the ability to integrate with the radar and ECDIS equipment.

13 My main question is to ask if there is an incumbent contractor fulfilling these services currently. If there is one, could you provide the contractor name and contract number?

The company who originally installed the current simulator is no longer in business.

14 The requirements contained in Section 12. SUBMISSION

REQUIREMENTS are not clear. It states:

“Each Offeror’s technical proposal is limited in length to a total of forty

(40) pages. An introductory cover sheet and the table of contents page(s) do not count toward the page limit. Pages in excess of the fortieth (40th) page will be removed and excluded from evaluation. “

The following table in that section seems to include a Staffing Plan, Resumes, and Past Performance in addition to the Technical Proposal within the page limitations.

Volume Page Limitations Cover Sheet, Certification and Representations, and Documentation of Any Proposal Exceptions I Excluded Technical Proposal, Staffing Plan, and Resumes II Included Past Performance and Fixed Pricing III Included (Fixed Pricing Sheets are excluded)

Please clarify if all of Volumes II & III are included within the page limitations.

Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended solicitation itself, Section # 12, "SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS".

15 Requirements for the Staffing Plan other than identifying the Program Manager and requirements for Resumes does not seem to be specified in either the PWS or the RFP. Please clarify the content expectations.

Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended solicitation itself, RFP Section # 12, "SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS". The staffing plan will vary by Offeror, but shall document how the Offeror's personnel will meet the PWS requirements. While resumes are not required for any positions, Offerors shall still supply only personnel that can meet the PWS requirements in line with PWS Section # 1.3.2, "Qualified Personnel."

16 Based on the challenges of fully developing a responsive and competitive proposal, request that a 2 week extension to the proposal submission date to Wednesday, February 28th, 2018.

Please see the answer to Question # 2.

How many students are anticipated/desired for each training location?

18.0 PWS 5.2.2 states that two Alidades are required, and virtual reality binoculars are also required. How many and what student positions are anticipated desired for the Full Mission Bridges (FMBs) (Rooms 1 and 2), and the smaller bridges (Rooms 3, 4, and 5)?

i. Conning Officer

ii. Helm

iii. Navigator & VMS/ECDIS Operator

iv. Radar Operator

v. Other ?

b. What is the desired student to instructor ratio for exercises being conducted in the Full Mission Bridge rooms (1 & 2)? Are all simulation exercises in these rooms intended to be evaluated by one instructor, located at the Instructor Control Station? Or would it preferable to have an instructor located in the same room as the students to provide more timely and responsive feedback? Or are instructors anticipated to be located at both locations for most exercises?

c. What is the desired student to instructor ratio for exercises being conducted in rooms 3 thru 5? Are all simulation exercises in these rooms intended to be evaluated by one instructor, located at the Instructor Control Station for Bridge 3, 4, and 5? Or would it preferable to have an instructor located in the same room(s) as the student(s) to provide more timely and responsive feedback? Or are instructors anticipated to be located at both locations for most exercises?

17 a. The ideal number of students is eight (8) per bridge. This applies to bridges one (1) to five (5).

However, this number is not exact ‐ the positions are dependent on the number of students involved on any given day as training requirements vary. For example, there may be times when only two students would be on the bridge and therefore the USCG does not want to be so specific that the bridge requires 8 students to operate the equipment.

b. and c. One (1) instructor is desired for each bridge. The instructor is typically in the control room but at times may be required to be present on the bridge; however, USCG does not want to limit where the instructor will be during the exercise. The instructor is expected to participate in the exercise.

18 PWS paragraph 3.0 lists GFP, GFM, GFE and/or GFI. However, other portions of the PWS identify other items that seem to constitute GFE.

Some examples are PWS paragraph 5.2, “Integrate VEGA ECDIS computers provided as GFE,” etc. Is the offeror expected to receive and/or integrate GFE for any of the following?

a. Items identified in PWS 5.2.2

b. PWS paragraphs 5.2.3 (Bridge GPS), 5.2.5 (Bridge Alidade), 5.2.6 (Bridge Binocular), 5.2.7 (Bridge Ship Control), and/or 5.2.8 (Bridge Communication – both internal and external)

c. FMB Rooms 1 & 2: bridge console, projector mounting infrastructure

d. Bridge Rooms 3, 4, and 5: bridge consoles, displays, display stands

All Government‐Furnished Equipment (GFE) are listed in the PWS Section 3.0, "GOVERNMENT‐ FURNISHED PROPERTY, MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, or INFORMATION (GFP, GFM, GFE, or GFI)." VEGA ECDIS computers are provided as GFE as noted in PWS Section 3.2, "Government Furnished Property (GFP)."

All items not specifically noted in PWS Section 3.0 shall be provided as Contractor‐Furnished Equipment (CFE).

19 Regarding the Debriefing Stations discussed in PWS 5.10:

a. Are these stations to be located in Classrooms 1 & 2, as depicted on page 18? Do these locations change if any of the options in 5.10.1 thru

5.10.4 are exercised?

b. Are any modifications to the existing A/V or other equipment expected from the offeror if none of the options in 5.10.1 thru 5.10.4 are exercised?

c. PWS 5.10.1states that the offeror should, “Utilize existing A/V equipment to provide a single video channel.” Can the Government provide a list of what items currently exist (including switches and other network components) that the offeror will have to integrate into the simulation network?

a. Yes. Classrooms 1 and 2 shall be the location of the de‐briefing rooms. This location will be the same if PWS Sections 5.10.1, "Debriefing Room 1 (Optional)", or 5.10.4, "Debriefing Room 2 Upgrade (Optional)" are exercised by the Government.

b. Yes. Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended PWS, Sections # 5.10.1, "Debriefing Room 1 (Optional)", and 5.10.3, "Debriefing Room 2 (Optional)", for more information on those areas.In that same amendment, please see the A/V requirements for PWS Sections # 5.9.1, "ICS Specific Requirements", and # 5.10, "Monitoring and Debriefing".

c. Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended PWS, Section 5.10.1, "Debriefing Room 1 (Optional)."

20 Is GFI available for electrical capacity, outlet & receptacle locations?

This information will be helpful in creating 80% design solutions for tasks related to red/white dimmable lighting schemes (e.g. PWS 5.3 thru 5.7), and providing projected visual scenes on a curved wall (e.g.

PWS 5.3.1, 5.3.3, etc.)? Specifically, the location of electrical outlets, which outlets are on which circuits, and the amperage rating for each respective circuit would be most helpful.

Technical drawings of the power distribution is not currently available for the concerned areas.

The offerer who is awarded a contract for this acquisition will be allowed access to the space prior to the installation timeframe. The facility has the standard power distribution network necessary for maritime simulation.

21 Given that this opportunity is a small business set aside, would the inclusion of past performance citations for the past 5 years be acceptable? Many (most) small businesses do not operate at the scale that generate a high number of past performance citations that are both very recent and relevant. Extending the allowable citation period from 3 years to 5 five years would allow for small businesses to present a more accurate portrayal of their experience and capabilities. Doing so would foster competition, and would likely result in more and better choices for the government.

Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended solicitation itself, Section # 13, "PROPOSAL CONTENTS".

22 Paragraph 8 of the RFP states that, “This IDIQ provides for FFP task order, with no approved contractor travel. The IDIQ ceiling amount is [To Be Decided]. Task Orders awarded to the contractor shall not exceed the IDIQ ceiling amount.” Is contractor travel being excluded from the IDIQ RFP responses for evaluation purposes; and will the successful offeror be authorized to include contractor travel as authorized costs in their Task Order responses?

All necessary travel as proposed by the offeror must be included in the offerer’s firm fixed price.

Per the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended PWS, Section 1.9, "TRAVEL", no travel is required under the IDIQ other than to and from the Coast Guard Academy itself.

23 AN/SPS‐50 Radar x 6

a. Where are they located in the design layout (i.e. is there a desired position on the bridge console – far right, far left, etc.)?

b. What are the dimensions of the GFE?

c. Are pictures and or data sheets available to facilitate creation of 80% drawings?

a. Please reference the image on PWS page 18. The radars are indicated by the octagon enclosed in a square on the bridges.

b. The GFE dimensions will be provided to the successful offeror upon request. The GFE can be incorporated in different ways and its locations will depend on how the offeror would integrate this equipment.

c. No. The 80% drawings are expected to be created from the images on PWS pages 18 to 20.

24 AN/SPS‐78 Radar x 4

a. Where are they located in the design layout (i.e. is there a desired position on the bridge console – far right, far left, etc.)?

b. What are the dimensions of the GFE?

c. Are pictures and or data sheets available to facilitate creation of 80% drawings?

Please see the answer to Question # 23.

25 USCG VEGA ECDIS Navigation Program and Computer x 5

a. Where are they located in the design layout (i.e. is there a desired position on the bridge console – far right, far left, etc.)?

b. What are the dimensions of the GFE?

c. Are pictures and or data sheets available to facilitate creation of 80% drawings?

a. Please reference the image on PWS page 18. The ECDIS are indicated by the large single rectangle enclosed in a rectangle on the bridges. Please note that the placement of GFE equipment in the drawings is for informational use only and it is not a requirement to place GFE only in those specific locations in Offerors' proposals.

b. Please see the answer in Question # 23.

c. Please see the answer in Question # 23.

26 Full size chart tables

a. Where are they located in the design layout (i.e. is there a desired position on the bridge console – far right, far left, etc.)?

b. What are the dimensions of the GFE?

c. Are pictures and or data sheets available to facilitate creation of 80% drawings?

a. Please reference the image on PWS page 18. The chart tables are indicated by the large rectangles with two small and shaded rectangles enclosed. Please note that the placement of GFE equipment in the drawings is for informational use only and it is not a requirement to place GFE only in those specific locations in Offerors' proposals.

b. The chart tables are 48” long by 38” wide, and are 37” tall Please see the answer in Question # 23 regarding GFE placement.

c. Please see the answer in Question # 23.

27 ICS 27” desk

a. What is the size of the local storage capacity (dimensions)?

b. Where is the location of desk in Instructor Control Station 2?

a. The storage capacity will be dependent on the Offeror's selection of the storage unit.

B. The location of the desk will be dependent on the Offeror's design.

28 ICS 33” bench ‐ What is the size of the local storage capacity (dimensions)?

Please see the answer to Question # 27.

29 Is any furniture required other than:

a. GFP (chart tables, etc.)

b. tables for ICS in Rooms 2, 3, 4, 5

c. bench for ICS 1?

If so, what furniture is desired, and where should it be located?

Please see the answer to Question # 18.

30 Do all of the ICS’s need to be able to control each bridge? E.g. ICS 1 can control bridges 1‐5. Or are only one of the bridge 3‐5 ICS’ able to control bridges 3‐5? E.g. ICS 3 can control bridges 3‐5.

At a minimum, ICS one (1) must be capable of controlling Bridge One (1). ICS two (2) must be capable of controlling Bridge two (2). The third (3rd) ICS must be capable of controlling bridges three (3), four (4), and five (5). Inter‐operability of ICSs will be dependent upon Offerer’s proposals.

31 For the GFE radars (SPS‐50 and SPS‐78), what versions of the radars are to be used; and are there any specific signals, or message sets that are desired?

The SPS‐50 is Furuno Marine Radar ARPA FAR 2827. The SPS‐78 would only require X‐band stimulation/simulation.

32 Regarding the 10% drawing, please see the diagram below:

a. What is the height of each of the rooms?

b. What is the height of the raised floor?

c. What are the dimensions (wall lengths) of this area (left of pillars/supports)?

d. What is the thickness of these walls?

e. What are the dimensions of the walls that protrude into the hallway above Room 1?

Approximate measurements for general design are:

a. The height of Bridge 1 is 9’8”, with an 8” raised floor in the footprint of the bridge. Bridge 2’s controlling height is 6’11”. Bridges 3,4 and 5’s heights are 7’1”.

b. The raised floor is 8” in Bridge 1.

c. 21’5” long at the longest point, 9’4” wide. The pillars are 41” long by 18” wide.

d. Estimated 18” thick.

ICS 1 is 17’4” long by 17” wide, which does not include the area where the current VEGA computers reside (see annotation 13 on pg. 20 of the PWS).

The classroom is 22’6’ long by 20’ wide.

e. This room contains HVAC equipment and cannot be used for equipment.

33 Reference PWS 1.16: Is the acronym GOTS, Government Off the Self? Yes.

34 The USCG owns and operates a Bridge Simulator at its facility at Yorktown. Is any software on the Yorktown Simulator classified as

GOTS?

USCG does not intend to duplicate the Yorktown simulator at the Coast Guard Academy. The Yorktown simulator is not comparable to the Coast Guard Academy simulators in either scope or requirements.

35 What software generates the out the window scene on the Yorktown Simulator?

Please see the answer to Question # 34.

36 Is any software on the Yorktown Simulator owned by the USCG and/or U.S. Government? If not who owns or grants the license to the USCG for the software operating the Yorktown Simulator?

Please see the answer to Question # 34.

37 Are any of the entities and synthetic environments (databases) specified on the table of PWS ¶ 2.4 running on or part of the inventory of the Yorktown Simulator?

Please see the answer to Question # 34.

38 Please provide a listing of all software for the Yorktown Simulator and the availability of any of this software for the SCANTS use.

Please see the answer to Question # 34.

39 The RFP Part 12, p 49 limits the Tech Proposal to 40 pages. May COTS documentation be added and not counted toward the 40‐page limit?

Please see the answer to Question # 3.

40 RFP Part 12, p 49 states that there is a page limit for Volume III, Past Performance and Fixed Pricing (the chart says “Included”). There is no page limit stated, as there is for the Technical Volume I. Is there any page limt for Volume III?

Please see the answer to Question # 14.

41 The same Table, at RFP Part 12, p 49, refers to the “Technical Proposal, Staffing Plans and Resumes” as having a page limit “Included”. Yet both the first paragraph of Part 12 and the detailed instructions for Volume II on pages 50‐51 only refer to the Technical Proposal. There is no specific requirement for “Staffing Plans and Resumes”. Is there such a requirement? If so please set forth the information requested? If so, is the additional requirement for staffing plans and/or resumes included in the 40‐page limitation?

Please see the answer to Question # 15.

42 May the Offeror propose milestone payments for CLIN’s 0001, 0002 and 0004 through 0010?

Yes. Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended solicitation itself, Section # 13, "Proposal Contents."

43 Is there a spare parts requirement? Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended PWS, Section # 5.12.6, "Additional Year Support Services (Optional)"

44 RFP Part 14, Factor 1, page 52, indicates that Offerors will receive a single combined technical rating. We can find no listing of the possible ratings (i.e. Outstanding, Marginal, etc.). Please comment or explain.

Please see the the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended solicitation itself, Section #

14, "EVALUATION PROCEDURES…".

45 RFP Part 14, Factor 3, Price, page 53, states that each Offeror’s “Total

Evaluated Price” (“TEP”) will combine all Base Period CLINs with all Option period CLINs. Many of the Options in the base year are exclusive of one another. That is if the Coast Guard purchases one of the options it precludes purchase of one or more other options. For example, if CLIN 0004, Projected Visual Scene is purchased, that would preclude purchase of CLIN’s 0005 and 0006. Similarly, if CLIN 0019 is purchased it would preclude purchase of 0020; and the same for CLINs 0021 and 0022.

Further, the base year and all Option Year CLINs include “Developed” Ownship Models, Targets, Objects and Areas. It is obvious that the Coast Guard will never purchase the total quantities of each, each and every year.

Suggest that the TEP be based solely upon the Base Year CLINs that are not options, or alternatively only those base year CLINs known by the Coast Guard to be likely for purchase. Any other methodology for determining TEP would be wholly unrealistic to the requirement.

To ensure Coast Guard evaluates all possible options and as noted in the RFP Section # 14, "EVALUATION PROCEDURES…", the USCG will evaluate the total proposed price by combining all base period CLIN prices with all optional CLIN prices. This total price will be considered the offeror’s Total Evaluated Price (or TEP).

46 Please define “Existing” and “New” as used in PWS 5.8.5. Does “New” equate to “Developed” in CLINs 0015 through 0018 and corresponding CLINs in the Option Years? If not please define “Developed”.

Please see page 17 of the PWS. "Existing" models refers to the models referenced on that page.

"New" models would equate to “Developed” models.

47 The RFP does not include any provision for a site visit for Offerors to look at the installation site. Can this be arranged?

No.

48 As the PWS 2.2 requires that the submitted 80% design “be dimensionally accurate and solve all interferences” when is the industry day for contractors to examine the facility?

Please see the the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended PWS, Section # 2.2, "Eighty Percent (80%) Design".

49 The provided floorplan (PWS Attch. A) is inadequate, as it does not identify ANY elevation data, making the PWS‐requirement to “solve all interferences” nearly impossible. Will the USCG provide a detailed room‐by‐room elevation plan of the installation facility identifying all elevation information? Also, is there any newly‐installed equipment not illustrated on the provided floorplan?

Please see the answer to Question # 48.

50 The PWS requirement is that “Documents submitted with an 80% design should include an overarching architectural document, layouts, elevation, detail drawings and network schematic for each bridge and all support spaces.” In the previous verbal debrief for this program, the evaluator stated that the Proposer’s provided drawings were not in the correct format (yet was unable to identify what the correct format was). In an effort to avoid confusion on this proposal effort, please identify (by DID or other specific format) the correct format for this and other required data submission.

There is no specific format aside from what is required by the PWS.

51 The PWS 2.4 is the list of “Ready to Train Scenarios List of Required Ports, Objects and Ships”. Please clarify what Scenarios List means? Are Scenarios exercises beginning with Initial Conditions and scheduled events to be inserted during the planned Lesson conforming to USCG Lesson Plans? Similarly, please define “US Coast Guard Training Scenarios” in PWS 5.12.1.

Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended PWS, Sections # 2.4, "Ready to Train", and # 5.12.1, "Reserved".

52 The extensive list of “Ready to Train Scenarios List of Required Ports, Objects and Ships” elaborated in PWS ¶2.4 shows 3 ports and 4 ownship models as “optional”. In section 2.4 it is enumerated that this list is required to be fulfilled. It cannot be both “optional” and required; please explain.

Please see the answer to Question # 51.

53 PWS Section 2.4 identifies the requirement of “All … scenarios and models are provided to the satisfaction of the Government.” “All scenarios are fully executable.” These scenarios are not identified anywhere in the PWS and do not appear to be a defined deliverable.

Please elaborate.

Please see the answer to Question # 51.

54 Page 18 of the PWS appears to illustrate the 10% design, yet also says it is an “As Built Drawing”. For clarity, it cannot be both, as 10% designs have not been built yet Please clarify/ amend.

Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended PWS, page 18.

55 Page 19 of the PWS appears to illustrate the facility as it currently exists, and remains unchanged from the previous iteration of this program proposal effort. However, we are aware that a contract was awarded to effect some of the planned facility upgrades in the interim.

As this drawing says “Changes to existing” either add some illustration of these “changes to existing” or remove this label, as this would indeed be merely the “As built” drawing.

Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended PWS, page 19.

56 Page 20 of the PWS has similar issues. This is not an “As built” drawing unless everything illustrated has been built. It appears to illustrate both the as built facility and the desired changes both on one page. Please clarify.

Please see the third amendment to the solicitation, the amended PWS, page 20.

57 What contractor’s solution or design data was used to generate the detailed illustrations on pages 18 – 20?

The illustrations were developed by the Government, not by a Contractor.

58 PWS 3.1 defines that Ownship Hydrodynamic Data is GFI. Is this the case for all 12 Ownship models identified in PWS 2.4? Even the “optional” models?

Please see the answer to Question # 51.

59 Does the USCG consider the software currently running on the Yorktown Simulator as COTS?

Please see the answer to Question # 34.

60 What is the USCG definition of the term “turn‐key” as referenced in PWS ¶ 1.17 and 5.1?

A "turn‐key" product is defined as a completed product that is bought by the Government and is ready to operate.

61 What Operating System is utilized in the Yorktown Simulator? Please see the answer to Question # 34.

62 Does the USCG currently own or use under license any “Ownship” models matching USCG hydrodynamic data for that ship, at either the Academy or on the Yorktown Simulator or at other locations?

For the Yorktown simulator, please see the answer to Question # 34. Per PWS Section # 3.1, "Government Furnished Information (GFI)", the Government owns hydrodynamic data and will furnish it during contract performance.

63 Does the USCG have any GOTS software being utilized on any USCG Bridge Simulator currently in USCG inventory?

This question is not applicable to the present requirement. The Government does not have any GOTS software available for re‐use nor do we intend to re‐use existing software.

64 All of the entities identified in PWS ¶ 2.4 can be defined by software modules, plug‐ins or other software descriptors. Does the USCG have a list of these software entities currently in USCG inventory? Are these entities classified as GOTS, COTS or otherwise?

Please see the answer to Question # 51.

65 PWS ¶ 1.15 PROTECTION OF INFORMATION states that all “databases, scenarios and models” created are for the sole use of the Gov’t. Is this to be GOTS? The use of the term scenarios implies defined “repeatable events”. Please provide a list?

Any information that is created under this procurement will be reserved for the sole use of the USCG Academy and will not be disseminated without prior USCG approval.

66 Please identify Debriefing Rooms 1 and 2 on the drawings of the PWS pgs. 18, 19 and 20.

Debriefing Room 1 is indicated by “Classroom 1” on page 18 of the PWS. Debriefing Room 2 is indicated by “Classroom 2” on page 18 of the PWS. For pages 19 and 20 of the PWS, the debriefing rooms are in the same locations as listed on page 18 of the PWS.

67 Please provide the ownership and licensing status of software on the current Academy simulator; on the Yorktown Simulator and any other Bridge Simulators owned or operated at a Coast Guard facility?

For the Yorktown simulator, please see the answer to Question # 34. For the Academy simulator, please see the answer to Question # 13. For software simulation as a whole, please see the answer to Question # 63.

68 Please provide the ownership and licensing status of software on the current Yorktown Simulator?

Please see the answer to Question # 34.

69 What is the USCG’s understanding of the term COTS as it relates to Hardware?

Per FAR 2.101, "Definitions", "Commercially available off‐the‐shelf (COTS) item‐‐”

(1) Means any item or supply (including construction material) that is—

(i) A commercial item;

(ii) Sold in substantial quantities in the commercial marketplace; and

(iii) Offered to the Government, under a contract or subcontract at any tier, without modification, in the same form in which it is sold in the commercial marketplace; and

(2) Does not include bulk cargo, as defined in 46 U.S.C. 40102(4), such as agricultural products and petroleum products.

70 What is the USCG’s understanding of the term COTS as it relates to Software?

Please see the answer to Question # 69.

71 Please clarify PWS ¶ 5.12.10 the requirement “…all systems must be capable of functioning under the Windows 10 operating system”?

Per the list found in PWS Section # 6.0, "REFERENCES" (speciifcally, Department of Homeland Security MD 4300.1) any computer hardware included in the offerer’s proposal must be capable of operating on a Windows 10 operating system.

72 Where is Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices, in the current

RFP?

The pricing template can be found via the link contained in the answer to Question # 1. It is an Excel spreadsheet entitled, "Attachment B ‐ Pricing Spreadsheet".

73 The PWS requires documentation in 5.12.4, and additional licenses/permissions in PWS 5.11 for system tasks beyond simple operation. Will the successful contractor be expected to provide all SCANTS related technical data and computer software, including but not limited to the delivered configuration of hardware and software documentation, to the Government with Unlimited or Government Purpose Rights?

PWS Section # 5.12.4, "Documentation", requires various documentation related to usability (such as user manuals and schematics). PWS Section # 5.11, "Local Design Capability (Optional)", requires the Contractor‐provided software to be editable by USCG personnel for local training purposes.

Please see the amended provisions and clauses and the inclusion of FAR clause 52.227‐19, "Commercial Computer Software License (Dec 2007)".

74 Please provide the location of the Optional Debriefing Rooms. Please see the answer to Question # 19.

75 Room Modifications: How is HVAC zoned within the proposed spaces housing the simulation complex? It is understood that the USCGA intends to replace the existing HVAC within the complex, will the USCGA be responsible for AC changes to meet contractor requirements as per the 100% design drawings as agreed with USCGA, or will such changes be the responsibility of the contractor?

The Contractor will not be required to make any changes to the existing Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) equipment.

76 Please provide: Facility Primary Power available, Power distribution and availability in all spaces to be upgraded?

Please see the answer to Question # 20.

77 We respectfully request a two (2) week extension to the proposal submission date of 14 February 2018 to 28 February 2018 in order to afford us adequate time to prepare and submit our proposal in response to the Solicitation 70Z02318RP0400100 for Ship Control and Navigation System (SCANTS).

Please see the answer to Question # 2.