Attachment 13 - Response to Draft RFP Questions.pdf

RFP Page RFP Section/ Paragraph

CLIN/

Clause/Appendix/ Attachment/Other

Questions/Comments/Recommendations Government Response

2 Draft RFP for Posting Are there plans to release the program as a small business set-aside? Soliciatation is not a small business set-aside.

2 Draft RFP for Posting Will the contract be awarded as Multiple Award or Single award?

Solicitation is for a Single award IDIQ. See Paragraph 1 of page 2.

2 Section B.2 LABOR RATE TABLES Draft RFP for Posting

Section B.2 states that the contract includes cost reimbursable CLINs for Housing Overseas Living Allowance (HOLA) / Cost of Living Allowance (COLA). Could the Government confirm that this item includes Education Allowance, as described on the Department of State Standardized Regulations (DSSR) for personnel under SOFA/TESA in Germany (or other locations as required by the TO).

Education Allowance has been added to the HOLA/COLA CLIN and description. RFP has been updated.

3 & 19

B.5 Program Management Support Costs And Other Indirect Costs & PWS 6.1, Task 1: "Project Management"

Draft RFP for Posting

A Program Support Team is required to successfully execute a program of this scale. Based on our experience with managing programs of this magnitude, we recommend that program management and program support hours be included in the CLIN structure and defined by CDRLs in order to be consistent with the list of program-level functions identified at the beginning of Section 6 (Performance Requirements) of the IDIQ PWS.

At this time the Government is not considering a change. As described in B.5 contract level program management and other program management support cost should be allocated as indirect costs.

3 B.7 OCONUS Labor Draft RFP for Posting Given that 90% of the work on this contract is performed OCONUS, we recommend adding the following language to this section: "The majority of the direct labor will be performed

OCONUS."

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

14 4. Objectives Draft RFP for Posting In addition to the Technical Expert Status Accreditation (TESA) personnel requirement, we suggest adding Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) and Technical Representative (TR) to support SOFA in other countries outside of Germany in support of this contract.

The Government does not anticipate SOFA or TR being required for countries other than Germany at this time. If there is a future requirement at the contract or TO level, it will be added via modification.

20 6.1.5 Monthly Status Report RFP There are several references to "Key Personnel" throughout the RFP, but no list of Key Positions. Is the Government going to identify which positions are Key? Key positions will be identified at the Task Order Level.

33 6.10.1 Training Course Draft RFP for Posting The current phrasing of this section calls out AV, specifically. We recommend the language to be broad and require training on any of the delivered turnkey solutions identified in PWS 5.1. RFP has been updated.

38 Section 9 Place of Performance

Draft RFP for Posting In Objectives, Section 4 of the draft RFP, Southwest Asia (SWA) is mentioned. Does the government intend to include SWA within the geographical scope of this contract? If so, can the government specify potential locations that may be supported via a Task Order?

RFP has been updated.

40 11.2.1 Personnel Clearance Draft RFP for Posting Since the majority of engineering and installation personnel associated with this contract need to possess a Top Secret SCI clearance, we recommend modifying the language in this section to reflect that personnel are required to have a TS-SCI.

RFP has been updated.

47 13.6 Off-base Contractor Facility Draft RFP for Posting

The PWS states that the contractor shall be prepared to establish a local facility. However, based on the PWS requirements and our successful experience performing on similar DoD OCONUS contracts, we recommend that the PWS language is modified to clarify this statement to ensure that the offeror must establish a local facility. We also recommend that the existing contractor off-base facility be made a gate criteria for evaluation of the offeror as an off-base facility will be essential for successful support of the government's requirements.

This will ensure there is no significant impact to government operations under this follow-on

IDIQ.

RFP has been updated.

47 13.6 Off-base Contractor Facility Draft RFP for Posting

The PWS states "Of the total, it is anticipated that an estimated 600 square meters, will be required to be secure laboratory, secure staging area, and secure storage." We recommend clarifying this statement to ensure that the offeror will establish a Secure Storage Area (SSA) in accordance with ICD 705 and obtain approval for use by the cognizant SSO for use as a SSA in support of this IDIQ.

RFP has been updated.

Section C - Performance Work Statement, 13.6 Off-base Contractor Facility

Draft RFP for Posting

Within PWS 13.6 Off-base Contractor Facility, the RFP states that: "...it is anticipated that an estimated 600 square meters, will be required to be secure laboratory, secure staging area, and secure storage."

Is the government referring to a Secure Storage Area (SSA) in accordance with (IAW) ICD- 705 technical standards?

If so, will the SSA IAW ICD-705 technical standards within the Off-base Contractor Facility be required within 180-days after contract award?

If the SSA IAW ICD-705 technical standards within the Off-base Contractor Facility is required within 180-days after contract award, will there be an approval process communicated to the contractor from the local command and will the contractor have access to the USEUCOM Special Security Office (SSO) for coordination and discussion?

RFP has been updated.

48 SCRM Draft RFP for Posting Will the SCRM plan referenced in para 13.15 be added to volume VI? If not, please specify which volume the SCRM should be included with.

The SCRM plan shall be submitted as part of the technical proposal as described in 13.15 of the PWS. The SCRM plan will not count towards the page limitation of the technical proposal. Table 1 Proposal Organization has been updated.

52 - 56

Section C - Performance Work Statement, Labor Category Descriptions

Draft RFP for Posting For the labor categories that require a Bachelor's Degree (LCAT #1- 26) will the government accept years of experience in lieu of a Bachelor's Degree and if so, how many years of experience are required to substitute for a Bachelor's Degree within these Labor Categories?

RFP has been updated.

52-63 LABOR CATEGORY

DESCRIPTIONS: LCAT Table Draft RFP for Posting We recommend defining "Relevant Technical Field" and "Acceptable Education Substitution" listed in LCAT numbers: 12 -18; 20-22; 27-31; 63-66. RFP has been updated.

78 H3 Key Personnel (OCT 2021) Draft RFP for Posting Section H3 KEY PERSONNEL states that Key Personnel will be identified at the task order level; however, Task Order 0001 does not identify specific Key Personnel. Will the government consider revising the draft PWS for TO 0001 to include Key Personnel?

Key personnel will be identified at the Task Order (TO) level. TO 0001 does not require key personnel.

78 - 79 Section H - Special Contract Requirements, H3 Key Personnel

Draft RFP for Posting

Within Section H3, Key Personnel, the government does not name any labor categories as Key Personnel and includes a note that the Key Personnel table is "to be completed at TO level."

Does the government intend to name any Labor Categories as Key Personnel at the IDIQ level in the final RFP?

If so, what labor categories will be designated as Key Personnel and will the government require resumes of Key Personnel within the proposal?

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

83 Security Clearances Draft RFP for Posting

Please confirm that the statement "...if the successful offeror is comprised of a contractor teaming arrangement, each member of the teaming arrangement is required to maintain a Top Secret Facility Site Clearance throughout the life of the contract." is referencing a Joint Venture arrangement.

RFP has been updated.

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1 (iv) Page limitations & Table 1 Proposal Organization

Draft RFP for Posting

We noted a few inconsistencies with the instructions detailed in Section L as they relate to the page limits and required documents outlined in Table 1 Proposal Organization.

- Please confirm that Volume 1 - Executive Summary does not have a page limit

- Please clarify if the past performances will not be considered when calculating page limits.

Table 1 Proposal Organization lists the page limit as 3 pages per reference.

- Volume VI - Contract Documentation; paragraph 1: Can you please confirm that the form to be signed and submitted referenced in Paragraph 1 is actually an SF33 and not an SF1449?

Volume I Executive Summary does not have a page limit. Table 1 is updated.

Past Performance will be evaluated in Volume IV and does have a page limit of 5 pages per reference and a total of 3 references. The RFP has been updated.

Colume V - Contract Documentation has been updated.

Section L, ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1, (b) Submission of offers:, (12) Other Instructions, (iv)

Table 1 Proposal Organization

Draft RFP for Posting

(iv) states: "The following items will not be considered when calculating page limits: cover page, table of contents, glossary, executive summary, generic resumes, past performances, OCCI mitigation plans, SCRM plans, GFP Attachment, Fixed Price Payment Plans, FAR/DFARS Provisions/Clauses attachment, and Section 508 compliance."

Table 1 Proposal Organization lists a one-page limit for the Executive Summary, Volume I.

Will the Government clarify if page limits apply to the Executive Summary volume?

Table 1 has been updated. There is no limit to the executive summary.

Section L, ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1, (b) Submission of offers:, (12) Other Instructions, (iv) Page limitations

Table 1 Proposal Organization

Draft RFP for Posting

(iv) states: "The following items will not be considered when calculating page limits: cover page, table of contents, glossary, executive summary, generic resumes, past performances, OCCI mitigation plans, SCRM plans, GFP Attachment, Fixed Price Payment Plans, FAR/DFARS Provisions/Clauses attachment, and Section 508 compliance."

Table 1 Proposal Organization lists a 3 pages per reference page limit for Past Performance, Volume IV.

Will the Government clarify if page limits apply to the Past Performance volume?

RFP has been updated. Volume IV, Past Performance has page limits.

149, 151-152

Table 1 Proposal Organization

Section L, ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1, (b) Submission of offers:, (12) Other Instructions,

(vii) Proposal Organization, (E) Volume V – Past Performance, (F) Volume VI - Contract Documentation

Draft RFP for Posting

Table 1 Proposal Organization lists Past Performance as Volume IV and Contract Documentation as Volume V.

(vii) Proposal Organization on pages 151-152 list Past Performance as Volume V and Contract Documentation as Volume VI.

Will the Government clarify the volume number for Past Performance and Contract Documentation volumes?

RFP has been updated.

149, 155

Table 1 Proposal Organization

Section M, ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2, b. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors, (1) Factor 1:

Technical/Management

Draft RFP for Posting

Table 1 Proposal Organization specifies a 35 page limit for the Technical/Management volume.

Are there page limits per Subfactor for the three Subfactors (listed in Section M) within the Technical/Management volume?

(a) Subfactor 1: Technical Expertise, Task Order 0001 PWS Task 6.3.1 and 6.3.2

(b) Subfactor 2: Technical Installation Basic PWS Task 6.8.1

(c) Subfactor 3: Management Task Order 0001 PWS Task 6.1 and Basic PWS Task 6.1

Overall page limit for technical/management volume remains 35 pages.

150 (B) Volume II – Technical/Management Draft RFP for Posting Please confirm that font size of 8-point Arial, Times New Roman, or Courier New is acceptable for included tables, figures, and graphics, across all Factors. RFP has been updated

Section L, ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1, (b) Submission of offers:, (12) Other Instructions,

(vii) Proposal Organization, (B) Volume II – Technical/Management.

Draft RFP for Posting (vii) Proposal Organization, (B) Volume II – Technical/Management states: "The file size of each document shall not exceed 20MB."

Does the 20MB file size limit apply to all files for all volumes?

The 20MB file size limit applies to all files for all volumes and is a limitation of electronic submission. The RFP has been updated.

Section L, ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1, (b) Submission of offers:, (12) Other Instructions,

(vii) Proposal Organization, (B) Volume II – Technical/Management.

Draft RFP for Posting

"The technical portion of the proposal is to be submitted as a Microsoft (MS) Word 2016 or newer file."

Are Offerors permitted to submit the Technical/Management volume (and all volumes) in Adobe PDF?

The technical/Management volume shall be submitted as a Microsoft word document.

150 Section L(b) (12)(vii)

Draft RFP for Posting

For Item (B), Volume II – Technical/Management, it indicates that the font size cannot be smaller than an 11-point Arial, Times New Roman, or Courier New font for all text to include any text contained in a table.

Confirm that font size for graphics can use a font size no smaller than 10 point Arial, Times New Roman, or Courier New font. Confirm that font size for graphics cannot be no smaller than 10 point Arial, Times New Roman, or Courier New font. applied to Volume I Executive Summary and Volume III – Price. RFP has been updated.

151 (vii) Proposal Organization: (E) Volumes V – VI Draft RFP for Posting We wanted to raise awareness that the volume numbers are misnumbered. Past Performance should be Volume IV, and Contract Documentation should be Volume V. RFP has been updated.

(vii) Proposal Organization:(B)

(C) Volume III – Price - Fixed Price Payment Plan Task Order

Draft RFP for Posting Fixed Price Payment Plan Task Order 0001 is not included in the Volume Organization breakdown. Please confirm that this is to be a separate document submitted as part of the overall volume.

RFP has been updated.

151 (vii) Proposal Organization: (E) Volume V – Past Performance. Draft RFP for Posting

Will the offeror be allowed to reformat Attachment 11-1 to reduce the amount of space taken by the required information? If not, given the required information included, please consider increasing the page limit to 5 pages for each reference? Also, is attachment 11 included in the page limit for Past Performance identified in Table 1 Proposal Organization.

RFP has been updated.

Section L, ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1, (b) Submission of offers:, (12) Other Instructions,

(vii) Proposal Organization, (E) Volume V – Past Performance., 1

Table 1 Proposal Organization

Draft RFP for Posting

(vii) Proposal Organization, (E) Volume V – Past Performance states: "Total page count for this Past Performance volume is annotated above in Table L1 - Proposal Organization."

Table L1 specifies page count per Past Performance reference but does not specify total page count for the Past Performance volume. Will the Government specify total page count for the Past Performance volume?

Only the Past performance information sheets have a page limit. The volume as a whole does not have a page limit.

152 Section L(b) (12)(vii)(E).2 Draft RFP for Posting Confirm that the offeror can provide the Attachment 11, Past and Present Peformance

Information to either the Program Manager or Contracting Officer for each contract reference.

Offerors shall provide current information for both the Program Manager or COR AND the Contracting Officer.

Section L, ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1, (b) Submission of offers:, (12) Other Instructions,

(vii) Proposal Organization, (E) Volume V – Past Performance., 2

Draft RFP for Posting

"2. The offeror shall provide the Attachment 11, Past Performance Questionnaire, to each of the Government customer Points of Contact (POCs) identified for each of the past performance efforts submitted."

Will the Government consider Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluations in lieu of a PPQ?

A PPQ for each Past Performance Information Sheet submitted is required.

(vii) Proposal Organization:

Volume VI - Contract Documentation; paragraph 5

Draft RFP for Posting Can you please clarify what is the Past Performance References sheet referenced in this paragraph? RFP has been updated.

154 - 155

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award, Factor 1:

Technical/Management, paragraph a Subfactor 1: Technical Expertise, Task Order 0001 PWS Tasks 6.3.1 and 6.3.2, bullet #1

Draft RFP for Posting

The Evaluation factors for Award under Factor 1: Technical/Management instruct that the contractor: "shall utilize the results of the surveys and the analysis of the requirements to develop an Installation Design Plan (IDP) that will meet the requirements of the system migration and cutover of data and services for USEUCOM sites D, E, K, and RAS from site A to site C" however, no site survey results are provided.

Will the government include sample or draft site survey reports within the final RFP?

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

155 ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2 b.

Evaluation Factors and Subfactors Draft RFP for Posting

We recommend adding gate criteria to include: Cage Code, Facility Clearance Level & Safeguarding Capability of Top Secret, Export Controls Compliance, Experience w/ ICD 705 OCONUS, and local warehousing and logistics capability or experience with OCONUS. The criteria will ensure that the offeror can meet the government's requirements at contract award.

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award: ADDENDUM TO 52.212- 2 b. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors 1-3

Draft RFP for Posting

The evaluation criteria for Subfactors 1-3 as it is written does not allow for the government to adequately evaluate the other requirements included within the tasks outlined in PWS 6.0. We recommend that the government evaluate the full set of technical requirements in order to fully evaluate and determine the offerors comprehensive best approach to provide a total technical solution to the government needs for the Basic PWS, as well as Task Order 0001.

Refer to Section L addendum to 52.212-1 (b)(12)(ii). The proposal should sufficiently address the requirements as stated in the Basic and Task Order PWS’s. Section M Addendum to 52.212-2 . To be eligible for award, the offeror’s proposal must sufficiently address all aspects of the basic and Task Order 0001 PWS. With regard to the best value analysis for the award decision, evaluation factors and subfactors will be used in the best value tradeoff analysis.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award: ADDENDUM TO 52.212- 2 b. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors - Subfactor 1

Draft RFP for Posting

The evaluation criteria listed for Volume I: Factor 1 - Technical/Management Approach does not currently evaluate the offeror's approach to provide turnkey solutions for the Solutions listed in Basic PWS 5.1. Was it the governments intent not to evaluate the contractors capability to turnkey the solutions listed in PWS 5.1?

Refer to Section L addendum to 52.212-1 (b)(12)(ii). The proposal should sufficiently address the requirements as stated in the Basic and Task Order PWS’s. Section M Addendum to 52.212-2 . To be eligible for award, the offeror’s proposal must sufficiently address all aspects of the basic and Task Order 0001 PWS. With regard to the best value analysis for the award decision, evaluation factors and subfactors will be used in the best value tradeoff analysis.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award: ADDENDUM TO 52.212- 2 b. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors - Factor 2 Past Performance

Draft RFP for Posting

As the majority of the work under this IDIQ will be OCONUS, we recommend that the Past Performance be limited to only include work performed for the DoD OCONUS to allow the government to evaluate the offerors experience performing the work under the Basic PWS under the difficulties working specifically with the DoD OCONUS.

Past Performance will be evaluated for recency, relevancy, and quality.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award: ADDENDUM TO 52.212- 2 b. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors - Subfactor 1

Draft RFP for Posting

Is it the government's intent for the offeror to provide both an approach and a sample IDP and Systems Migration and Cutover Plan for Subfactor 1? If so, can the government please confirm that the sample artifacts do not count against the page limit set for Volume 1 - Factor 1?

The government is not mandating the provision of sample IDP and/or Systems Migration and Cutover Plan. If the offeror provides those artifacts, the government will include them in the evalution of the subfactor. The artifacts do not count against the page limit set for Volume - Factor 1. RFP has been updated.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award: ADDENDUM TO 52.212- 2 b. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors - Subfactor 1

Draft RFP for Posting In order for offerors to adequately demonstrate their capability to perform the requirements outlined in the Basic PWS and the Task Order 0001 PWS, we recommend increasing the page limit for this Volume.

Page limit remains 35 pages for technical/management approach

155-156

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award: ADDENDUM TO 52.212- 2 b. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors - Factor 2 Past Performance

Draft RFP for Posting & Attachment 11

These instructions require the Contractor to address the Past and Present work's relevance to the subfactors in Section M, but does not require coverage of all solution types identified in Section of 5.1 of the IDIQ PWS. Recommend that instructions be updated to also include the relevance of the work to each solution type.

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

Attachment Attachment 9

In the CLIN Summary tab, the Labor totals in cells E15:H15 for Option Period 1 through Option Period 4 are referencing incorrect cells in the OP1 through OP4 tabs. Will the Government correct these cells for the final RFP, or provide instructions to bidders to make the corrections?

RFP has been updated.

15 C5.1.h

Recommendation: Evaluate placement of private cloud appliance/devices from one or more of the four JWCC providers. JWCC Cloud Service Providers have solutions that provide a private cloud, physically located in your datacenter, with the ability to connect smaller edge devices that can be used outside the data center in DDIL environments, re-syncing when connectivity exists. Employing private cloud would also provide the architecture and workforce knowledge to better exploit future DoD accredited commercial regions from JWCC CSPs located in the EUCOM AOR.

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

4 6.3.1 PWS-DRAFT

Recommend deployment of Private Cloud consolidation platform - these appliances eliminate the need for physical moves and provides modernized CPU, memory, storage and network.

Typically a 100 GbE network backbone, high performance storage and current generation CPUs. These devices provide for much greater density to minimize data center footprint. The appliances typically have a fault tolerant architecture to provide increased availability to Mission Partners.

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

5 6.3.2 PWS-DRAFT

Recommend a Private Cloud consolidation platform, source workloads can be transferred to the target platform electronically - regardless of source or target virtualization. Tools such as Rackware CloudMotion can move existing workloads in an automated manner with very low downtime. This approach dramatically simplifies migration and cutover and reduces error via automation.

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

5 6.3.3 PWS-DRAFT

Recommend a Private Cloud consolidation platform, List Of Materials (LOM) can typically be provided self services via the management console. These platforms, typically can scale (e.g., increase compute, storage) so that they can be sized to fit. LOM is typically automaticly updated after physical changes to the appliance.

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

5 6.4 PWS-DRAFT

Recommend a Private Cloud consolidation platform, software configuration is typically available as self service webpage/report from the management console

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

6 6.5 PWS-DRAFT

Recommend a Private Cloud consolidation platform. Traffic is isolated largely isolated to the appliance and the multi-tenant architectures provide isolation between Mission Partners. This approach minimizes the network attack surface and also results in simplifed inbound/outbound networking and port reduction (2 * OOB, 2 Production, with ability to scale as required)

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

7 6.7 PWS-DRAFT

Most Private Cloud consolidation platforms provide Pre-Installation Test and Check-out (PITCO) built into the management framework.

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

N/A N/A PWS-DRAFT

Recommend consider additional of services for the initial setup and ongoing maintenance of security posture (STIG, CVE's etc.).

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

however, no change will be made to the solicitation related to this matter at this time.

N/A N/A PWS-DRAFT

Recommend for consideration, if ACI fabric is being used, the network setup/security posture is driven by the supporting Network Operations Center (NOC). If local network management is required, then consideration should be given to NSX, which interoperates with ACI but provides local control. Note: Most Private Cloud consolidation platforms run NSX within the appliance.

The Government acknowledges the recommendation from industry;

Q&A