CAF DMO 3.0 Questions and Answers_Amend 8.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 38 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- CAF_DMO_IT_SEC_Industry_Day_Nov_2022
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to a federal solicitation for Combat Air Force Distributed Mission Operations Services. The solicitation seeks proposals to provide network and security services to support 119 sites across multiple domains. Key details include a requirement for cross-domain solutions, technical refresh of one-third of all equipment annually, support for distributed training centers, and adherence to standards for interoperability. Pricing is fixed-firm-price according to calendar year. The initial transition period of up to 24 months is covered by a bridge contract, with offerors expected to fully transition the network by the end of that time period. The Department of the Air Force is the contracting agency, with responses and questions due by specified dates.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 72 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Reference Document | Question | Government Response | Column1 |
| Bidders' Library | Bidders Library the "Test Schedule" folder is empty. Did the Government intend to put files in this folder? | This was erroneously left empty, this has since been sent out via DoD Safe. | |
| Bidders' Library | Will the awardee receive the contents of the Classified/Unclassified data in the Bidder's libraries upon award? | Offerors should have already received all contents of the Unclassified Bidders' Library via DoD Safe. If you are missing something, please let us know. The Classified Bidders' library documents will be provided to the awardee, once there is an appropriate facility for storage (SAPF). | |
| Bidders' Library | What level of clearance is required for access to the Classified Bidders' library? | The clearance level required as SECRET as well as being read into the program. | |
| Bidders' Library | My CAC is expired how do I get on base to view the Classified Bidders' library? | If you’re traveling with someone who already has a CAC, you will only need to show an ID to get on base. If you are not, you will need to work with security, through the Contracting POCs for a base visit request. | |
| Bidders' Library/Section+J+Attachment+7+-+CAF+DMO+3.0+Section+L_Amend+2 | Section L, para 4.2.4.D, states “An approach for CDS/ MLS services that provide pedigree information on the proposed solution using NSA Cross Domain Solutions Management Office (NCDSMO) Cross Domain Baseline Submission Guide (in bidder's library)”. We do not see this guide in the Bidder’s Library. Please clarify if the guide has been made available. | This is being sent out via Bidders' Library. | |
| DD254 | Offerors are required to provide the draft DD254 with Volume V. The DD254 provided with the solicitation states in Block 13, ref block 10k, “The contractor is authorized to have SIPRNET computers and connections at 2300 Discovery Drive, Orlando, Florida 32826.” Please remove the address listed and provide a revised DD254 before the solicitation due date. | Address has been removed. | |
| DD254 | Offerors are required to provide the draft DD254 with Volume V. In the draft DD254 provided with the solicitation, the Government refers to a SCIF throughout the DD254. In addition, the PWS states that this is a SAP and not a SCIF. However, item 10f (“Special Access Program (SAP) Information”) is not checked. Please provide a revised DD254 before the solicitation due date. | 10f is now checked. The classified DD254 was correctly marked. | |
| Miscellaneous | Are there Government Purpose rights for the CERT Tool utilized on the current CAF DMO contract that will transfer to 3.0? | No, we do not own the rights to the CERT Tool. | |
| Miscellaneous | Will offerors have the opportunity to ask additional questions pending Q&A responses? | Yes. | |
| Miscellaneous |
Is AFLCMC considering DISA Accredited cloud technologies for the new contract?
| Each offeror is responsible for proposing their solution to meet the needs of the requirement. | ||||
| Miscellaneous | The draft PWS originally identified 105 sites, of which 4 sites have been removed. The final PWS released by the Government identified 119 sites, of which an additional 17 sites have been added. This requires our network provider to visit all 17 sites to evaluate the as-is conditions (e.g., fiber and last mile installation) in order to provide accurate pricing. Based on this change, will the Government extend the proposal due date to 5 Jan 23 for all volumes other than past performance? | We will allow an extension with proposals being due no later than 3 January 2024 by 3:00 EST. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | PWS para 4.7.3 is titled “DTC Network. “ | |||
| PWS sub-para 4.7.3.4 states "the contractor shall tech refresh 1/3 of all equipment in the CAF DTC each year so a full tech refresh occurs every 3 years.” In the Q&A dated 28 Nov. ‘23, the government confirmed its request to do a 1/3 tech refresh on the entire (not just the DTC) CAF DMO network each year. If this is correct, the entire DMO network would be modernized 3 1/3 times over the 10 period of performance of CAF DMO 3.0. Is that the government’s intent? Or did you mean to request a 1/3 refresh of the DMO network every 3 years, so that the entire DMO network is refreshed 1 time over a 9-year period of performance? Additionally, because this requirement is under the heading “DTC Network” the intended scope of the requirement is still unclear. Please clarify. | Yes, that is our intent to do 3 1/3 times over the period of performance. Added statement to PWS 4.4.4.2 to clarify. | |||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | NAWCTSD has confirmed that ENG is only available for purchase by Government buyers and not available to contractor buyers. If only one contractor is able to provide ENG, it creates an unfair advantage because it is Government-owned. In order to ensure a level playing field, will the Government confirm that bidders cannot include ENG as a component of a contractor-procured CDS solution? | The contractor should provide a solution, the Navy's ENG is not a requirment. If any documents refer to ENG, offerors should assume that is not a GOTS provided solution. The PWS does not reference the Navy's ENG. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | PWS 4.7.2 states "The contractor shall have the personnel be able to support 2 simultaneous DTC events starting July 2024 when SAPF is a fully armed and operational battle station." This requirement is not consistent with Government's stated 24 month transition period. This transition period includes a fully operational SAPF, network accreditation, DTC transitioned and ending with the ability to support events. Request the Government remove the July 2024 suspense date. | Correct. July 2024 is not correct, and it will be removed. No suspense is needed because it is associated with required performance of the contract. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | PWS 4.7.3.4 states "the contractor shall tech refresh 1/3 of all equipment in the CAF DTC each year so a full tech refresh occurs every 3 years." Please confirm the Government's intent is to have the contractor refresh all CAF DMO equipment, not just DTC equipment, so a full tech refresh occurs every 3 years? If so, please update PWS 4.4 to reflect this change. | This is correct, and recommend adding the following as the second sentence in section 4.4.4.2: "The contractor shall tech refresh 1/3 of all equipment each year for the entire program so a full tech refresh occurs every 3 years." | Statement was added to PWS 4.4.4.2, was previously included in 4.7.3.4. | |
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | In PWS 4.7.3.3, the second paragraph requires the contractor to develop a DCO plan. Is this plan associated with a CDRL? When is the DCO plan to be delivered to the Government? | We added CDRL A037 to address the DCO plan delivery. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | In PWS 4.7.3.3, the third paragraph requires the contractor to develop a plan to instantiate the JIAB no later than FY25. Please confirm that the plan is due by FY25 and that the JIAB will be GFE. | Yes, GFE will be provided under an alternate contract. But yes, the JIAB will need installed at the DTC by FY25. CDRL A038 was added to address the JIAB delivery. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | In previous communications we were informed that the Government-developed Enterprise Network Guard (ENG) is part of the cross domain solution installed on the CAF DMO network. Will the Government confirm whether or not ENG is GFP, provided at no cost to all bidders? If it is GFP, can the Government confirm that the bidders should include no costs to pay for any future support costs for future year raise the bar incremental changes? | |||
| The ENG that is part of the CDS is being provided by the contractor and therefore will not be provided as GFP. Therefore, please provide your solution for this service. | ||||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | Will the Government confirm that all costs associated with Aquisition and sustainment of the CDS solution must be priced in each bidders price proposal and that no GFE or GFP can be incorporated into a bidders solution? | Correct, the only GFP provided under other contracts for the CAF DMO service are provided in the Bidders' Library GFP attachment. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | PWS 4.4.5 Will the Gov't be providing the list of closed and ongoing platform and program SPRs? | Both closed and currently open platform and program SPRs that were opened in CY22 were provided in the bidders library. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | PWS 4.7.2 DTC Support—There is no mention of Bomber, Attack or Electronic Warfare expertise required, is this intentional? | Added the following language to PWS: "Bomber USAF aircraft operational experience, including B52, B1, B2, B21, that is Mission Commander qualified. USAF Weapons graduate is preferred but not mandatory." The SEAD and C2ISR (RJ, EC130, EC37B) cover the EW experience required. Every SME for the DTC needs to have aviation experience, an EWO will not suffice. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | PWS 4.7.3.3 Requirements (4th to last para)—Will E-7 Wedgetail, Tactical Operational Center—Light/Medium/Fixed (TOC-L/M/F) and Compass Call be added to this list for ruleset solutions? | Yes, any weapon system that cannot join the network at CORAL or PIANO will need a ruleset to bring them in at RED (SECRET collateral) to start. If E7, TOC, or Compass Call can get their PERSEC, Sim facility and ATO up to CORAL or PIANO, no ruleset would be required. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | PWS 4.10.2 Standards Collaboration—Shouldn’t AUS be included in this TAA list? | Yes. Added to the list in the PWS. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | Recommend the removal of DoDAF from the PWS since this is being accomplished with MBSE. | Concur. Systems Modeling Language (SysML) diagrams in MBSE map directly to DoDAF. PWS 4.12.5 & 4.13.3 already includes MBSE requirements and so stating both is likely redundant. Removed from PWS. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | Recommend adding SubCLIN 0004AN for additional 4 hour blocks of I&T effort. | Added SubCLIN0004AN to 4 hours of I&T effort excluding travel. CLIN 0004 updated in solicitation to reflect this description. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | PWS Section 3.2.2 describes translating between GRID and the other formats. This is not possible for all GRID message types. Please confirm the requirement. | We believe you mean 4.4.2. If so, the following was added to provide additional clarification: In particular translation between GRID and DISv8 will be required to train distributed JSE via the DMON. Additional translations from GRID will be required once the training version of JSE has been baselined. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | Is there a single Authorizing Official (AO) across all security domains, or separate/multiple AOs? Please clarify. | There is a single AO for the domains covered by this contract. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | Will the CDS system be allowed to fall under the definition of JSIG or NIST complex information system? | It must fall under the definition of both JSIG and NIST. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | Section 4.3.1 of the PWS states "The transition period" will be issued as the first task order on CAF DMO 3.0" while Section 4.2 states "The first 12 months of the transition period will be issued as the first task order on CAF DMO 3.0." Please clarify the apparent inconsistency. | The first 12 months of the transition period will be issued as the first task order. Task orders cannot exceed 12 months with the anticipated funding. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | Section 4.2 states "Transition shall be considered complete once all federated sites and the entire Distributed Training Center (DTC) at Langley have been transitioned. The transition criteria shall also include an approved and functioning Cross Domain or Multi level Security (MLS) solution as specified in PWS section 4.8." The next sentence references ATO and ATC but doesn't reference an end state, such as approved. This implies that an approved Authority to Connect (ATC) and an approved Authorization to Operate (ATO) are required for the transition to be considered complete. If this is correct, would the Government consider revising the criteria to transition will be considered complete when O.fferor submits the ATO packages (as the Offeror has no control over how long it takes for the Government to process/approve)? Please clarify the completion criteria | The entire network must be fully functional at the end of the transition period, as the bridge contract will no longer be in place to sustain the network. Therefore, the ATO and ATC must be approved. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | What patching/scanning frequency is required? | You are required to be in compliance with the JSIG to maintain the ATOs. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS | The document mentions the contractor must get COMSEC. What is the required NSA key #? | The minimal COMSEC requirements will require the use of TACLANES to send SECRET collateral and S/SAP information over the CAF DMO Network. TACLANES KGD-175F or KGD-175X and their associated CIK would be the minimum COMSEC required to make the CAF DMO Network work. | ||
| Section J Attachment 1 - CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS_Amend 5 | PWS paragraph 4.4.3 notes that the latency requirement only applies “within a theater (i.e., USAFE, PACAF, CONUS).” However, it should be noted that the sites in Alaska and Hawaii, while both in the PACAF theater, present limitations with regard to available commercial and Government networking infrastructure (e.g., cable type, data routing, etc.) which preclude any contractor from meeting the threshold latency requirement. No similar issue exists with regard to other PACAF sites or any other sites in the other theaters. Is it the Government’s intent to apply the 65ms threshold latency requirement to the Alaska and Hawaii PACAF sites despite the lack of compatible networking infrastructure? Please clarify. | Yes, the requirement is for 65ms at all sites. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | In Section L.2.2, the table instructs Offerors to name Volume V “Contracts,” while in Section L.2.4, Volume V is named “Contracts Documentation.” Please clarify if Volume V should be called Contracts or Contract Documentation. | Updated Section L.2.2 to "Contract Documentation". | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Please confirm that only the following attachments are required with submission of Volume V: |
• Attachment 1 – Updated PWS
• Attachment 2 – DD254
• Attachment 4 – Small Business Subcontracting Plan
| • Attachment 6 – Proposal Adequacy Checklist | These documents will be attachments to the Contract Document and should be submitted by Offerors. As a reminder, in addition to this list you provided, the Organizational Conflict of Interest Requirements must be addressed and submitted in Volume V. | |||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L.4.2.4.D was edited in response to our question regarding the removed requirement for a separately attached CDS Pedigree document. However, the edited version no longer includes the words "An approach for ..." which implies a requirement to include the complete pedigree information withi the document page count, which was previously requested as a separate attachment. Will the Government confirm that the requirement is to "Provide an approach for CDS/MLS services that provide pedigree information on the proposed solution for CDS/MLS services using NSA Cross Domain Solutions Management Office (NCDSMO) Cross Domain Baseline Submission Guide (in bidder’s library)?" | Offerors do not need to submit a seperate attachment. Reworded Section L 4.2.4 D back to previous verbiage. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L.4.2.4.D was edited in response to our question regarding the removed requirement for a separately attached CDS Pedigree document. The current version also includes a fragmented sentence: "Configuration Management of the network and CDS/MLS accreditation sustainment." The scope of Section 3.2.4.D is specifically regarding CDS/MLS services.It is unclear whether the requirement to address configuration management of the network is limited to the CDS/MLS portion of the network, or is regarding the entire network. Will the Government confirm that the requirement is to address configuration management of the entire network? If so, will the Government confirm that this requirement should be addressed in Section 3.2.5.I, which already includes PWS 4.12.7 for network configuration management? | The scope of the network configuration management plan is at the discretion of the offerer. The offerer could choose to develop one plan that covers all three ATO enclaves, or generate a network configuration plan specific for each enclave. Grammatical error was corrected in L 4.2.4 D. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L: Section 4.2.4.D was edited in response to our question regarding the removed requirement for a separately attached CDS Pedigree document. However, the edited version no longer includes the requirement for "An approach for...". There is also a subsequent sentence fragment: "Configuration Management of the network and CDS/MLS accreditation sustainment." Will the Government confirm that the requirement is to "Provide an approach for CDS/MLS accreditation sustainment?" | See previous 2 answers. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | In Section L.4.2.3, the government requires the offeror to submit an updated PWS for the first task order incorporating the first 12-months of the transition plan. Reference Attachment 7, Section L.2.2 Table. Under Technical Acceptability Volume Attachments, did the Government intend to ask for the Task Order IMS and not the Task Order IMP? | Correct, the government only requires a seperate PWS and IMP. The master IMS is required, but not a seperate IMS for the inital TO. | To provide further clarification, we do require a separate, more detailed IMS as part of the proposal. It will not be an attachment to the TO. | |
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | In Section L.4.2.3, the government requires the offeror to submit an updated PWS for the first task order incorporating the first 12-months of the transition plan. Reference Attachment 7, Section L.4.2.2, In the Volume Organization list, did the Government intend #10 to include the TO IMS and not the TO IMP? It is our understanding that this attachment should be the TO IMS to reflect the first 12-months of transition. | Correct, the government only requires a seperate PWS and IMP. The master IMS is required, but not a seperate IMS for the inital TO. | See above. | |
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | PWS 4.12.5 Systems Engineering support does not appear to be relevant to section L.4.2.5.D under Subfactor 3: Training Operations. Since the requirement is to give an approach for the completion of verification and test activities shouldn't this section be mapped to PWS 4.5.1 Integration and Testing and 4.5.2 Additional Federate Testing Support? | PWS 4.4.5, 4.5.1, and 4.5.2 are the updated references | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Please confirm that the List of Table and Drawings, required in section L.4.2.2 Volume Organization in Volume II Technical Acceptability, is excluded from page count. | It is excluded. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Section L 4.2.3.A references PWS section 3.11. There is no PWS section labeled 3.11. Please advise what PWS should be referenced in this section. | PWS 1.1.2, 4.2, 4.3, 4.3.1 | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | The table in Section L.2.2 mentions SSP and CDS Pedigree docs as attachments for Volume II. These requirements, previously found in the draft RFP, have been removed from the final RFP. Please remove the SSP and CDS Pedigree documents reference from the table since they are no longer required. | The SSP and CDS Pedigree documents are not required as attachments. Clarifying language provided in section L. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Section L.4.2.2. references (8) Past Performance Tool Submission under Volume Organization. Please confirm that this requirement is not to be provided in Volume II Technical Acceptability. | Correct, this should not be in Volume II, but in Volume III. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | In section L.4.2.3 the government requires the offeror to submit an updated PWS for the first task order incorporating the first 12-months of the transition plan. Is the PWS the government referring to the file titled CAF+DMO+3.0_Task+Order+1_Transition.docx? Additionally please confirm that this file to be submitted as an attachment to Volume II and therefore excluded from page count. | Correct, the PWS that should be tailored for the Task Order is the "CAF+DMO+3.0+Task+Order+1_Transition.docx" to incorporate the first 12-months of the transition plan. The file should be an attachment and excluded from the Volume II page count. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Section L.4.2.3.B Staffing approach under Subfactor 1: Transition refers to PWS 4.10.1 Standards General. This PWS reference does not appear relevant. Is there a more appropriate PWS reference that should be cited here? | PWS 4.10.1 states "The contractor shall provide adequate staffing to develop and update standards, and complete the following requirements...", which has relevance to a CAF DMO staffing approach. Additionally, the transition sections are relevant. They are added as follows: (PWS 1.1.2, 4.2, 4.3, 4.3.1, 4.10.1) | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Section L.6.1.2 of the RFP states the TEP consists of offeror proposed quantities, pre-populated quantities and optional quantity discounts; however, Section L Attachment 6 - Price Matrix does not include columns for quantities or discounts, and formulas are pre-populated to calculate prices based on single unit quantities. Can the Government please confirm that offerors should complete the Attachment 6 template as provided without any edits to include estimated quantities or discounts? | The offerors should complete the Attachment 6 template as provided, not to include estimated quantities or discounts. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Section L.6.1.6 states that all loaded labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny; however, labor rates are not being proposed in Section L Attachment 6 - Price Matrix. Can the Government please confirm that fully burdened labor rates are not required to be submitted as part of the price proposal? | Correct, labor rates should not be included. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Section L.6.2.1 states that the Price Matrix will include a summary tab. Can the Government please confirm that the tab titled "Price Matrix" that is included in the Section L Attachment 6 Price Matrix template satisfies this requirement and offerors do not need to add an additional summary tab? | Correct, the "Pricing Matrix" tab satisfies this requirement and offerors do not need to add an additional summary tab. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | The first paragraph of section L.5.3.2 Subcontractor Consent states that a consent letter is to be executed by each subcontractor/teaming partner yet the second paragraph states we are to provide a letter from all significant subcontractors. Please confirm that letters of consent are only required for significant subcontractors. | Letters of consent are only required for significant subcontractors. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Please confirm that L.4.2.5.I under Subfactor 3: Training operations should reference PWS 4.12.7 Configuration Management. | PWS 4.12.7 is an appropriate reference for L.4.2.5.I | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Section L 2.3 states, "Pages shall be single-spaced as defined in paragraph settings/spacing in Microsoft Word, with a double space between paragraphs." Please confirm the solicitation requires a single 12 point space between paragraphs? | Concur | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Should the offeror provide the TO PWS to include the IMP as an attachment to Volume V - Contract Documentation or within the volume? | As an attachment. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Section L 2.2 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits , Volume V labels the Small Business Subcontracting Plan as Attachment 1. In Section 7.1.10 Section J-List of Attachments, the Small Business Subcontracting is labeled as Attachment 4. Will the Government confirm that the Small Business Subcontracting Plan should be labeled as Attachment 4? | It should be labeled Attachment 4. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Is it required to include this at the top and bottom of each page within the PPI tool submission or only in the DVD copy? If required in the PPI Tool, does that count towards page count? “CUI//Source Selection Information – See FAR 3.104 AND 2.101” | The legend is only required on the top and bottom of the DVD copy. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Does the Organizational Structure Change History count towards the 20 page limit | Yes, it counts towards the 20-page limit. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Please clarify the Section L.4.2.5.F requirement, as there is no mention of Staffing Requirements for DTOC or UAWC in the PWS. | They need to provide technical support of the DTOC and UAWC. Clarifying language added to Section L. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | Will the Government please exclude the Business Relationship page from the Past Performance Volume's 20-page limit? Giving back this 3/4-page space in the introductory information section would enable a more comprehensive overview of what our company offers the Government. | No, per Section L, paragraph 2.2 this is included in the 20-page limit. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | IAW Section L, we will need a 1 hour read-in, followed by tp to 4 hours to access the material and we can request 1 additional visit for up to 2 hours. To clarify, do we have to visit together? And is the hors access per person? | The time limitations are per company, we encourage both representatives to attend at the same time. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L | A Master Table of Contents is required to be delivered with Vol. I per Section L para 3.2. Please confirm it will be excluded from page limitations and whether or not it may be provided as a separate attachment. | It may be provided as a separate attachment and it will be excluded from page limitations. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L Amend 7 | Section L, Paragraph 7.1.1, Section A Solicitation/Contract Form states, Signature by the Offeror on the SF33 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept. The original copy should be clearly marked under separate cover and should be provided without any punched holes. Paragraph 2.4 Electronic Offers states, Offerors shall submit their proposal via CD-R/DVD-R or via DoD Safe. Submit proposal Volumes I, II, IV, and V on a single CD-R/DVD-R. Are we still required to submit an “original” SF33 under separate cover? Please confirm. | Language updates as follows: "Completion of blocks 13 through 16, signature for block 17, and date for block 18 of the Standard Form 33 is required. Signature by the offeror on the SF33 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept." Addtionally, digit signature is acceptable. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L Amend 7 | Section L, Paragraph 7.1.10, Section J List of Attachments lists the requirement to provide Attachment 5, IMP and removes the requirement for Attachment 6, Proposal Adequacy Checklist; however, Paragraph 7.4.5 Attachments to Volume V Submission removes Attachment 5 IMP but lists Attachment 6, Proposal Adequacy Checklist. Please clarify, which should be provided? | Requirement for proposal adequacy checklist has been removed and section L has been updated. The IMP is an attachment in the techincal volume. Paragraph 7.4.5 outlines the attachments for Volume V. | ||
| Section J Attachment 7 - CAF DMO 3.0 Section L Amend 7 | IAW Section L paragraph 6.1.5, certified cost or pricing data or data other than certified cost or pricing data is not required at this time. Proposal Adequacy Checklist is typically not required unless certified cost or pricing data or data other than certified cost or pricing data is required. Contractor does not find FAR 15.408 or DFARS 252.215-7009 listed which dictate format and requirement for proposal adequacy checklist only when certified cost or pricing data or data other than certified cost or pricing data are required. May Proposal Adequacy Checklist be required only when, and if, submission of certified cost or pricing data or data other than certified cost or pricing data is also required? | Requirement for proposal adequacy checklist has been removed and section L has been updated. | ||
| Section J Exhibit A - Contract Data Requirements List | During BOE development, we discovered the following issue with CDRL A008 - (DI-MGMT-81466A/T) Contract Performance Report (CPR); PWS 4.12.12. The DID (applicable to Cost Reporting in Program support element) requires reporting actual costs. Cost Reporting is incompatible with an FFP contract. Will the Government remove this CDRL requirement? | This CDRL is required, as some of the CLINs are cost CLINs and will require Cost Reporting. It does not apply to the FFP CLINs. | ||
| Section J Exhibit A - Contract Data Requirements List | CDRL A009 requires that the initial Transition Plan be submitted at initial task order issuance. Would the Government please confirm that the initial task order issuance date is the same date as the Task Order award date? Will the first Task Order be awarded on the same day as Contract Award? | The initial task order issuance date is the same as the Task Order award date. The first Task Order will be awarded the same day as Contract Award, or within a few business days. | ||
| Section J Exhibit A - Contract Data Requirements List | Please clarify whether A025 (Physical Inventories List) is required quarterly or annually. | Clarifying language added, will be needed annually. | ||
| Section J Exhibit A - Contract Data Requirements List | There appears to be an inconsistency with the Data Item Description (DID) references identified in the CDRLs and what is located in ASSIST. Please clarify what is the correct reference. | DID References updated in CDRL Package and PWS. | ||
| Section J Exhibit A - Contract Data Requirements List | Request removal of "Government nonresponse beyond forty-five (45) calendar days does not constitute approval." as the acceptance period should not be unlimited and open ended. | CDRLs updated. | ||
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | For site surveys that occur during the transition period, should those costs be priced in Initial Transition CLIN 0001 or the Site Survey CLIN 0002AA? For Network Connectivity that occurs during the transition period, should those costs be priced in Initial Transition CLIN 0001 or Network Connectivity CLIN 0002AB? For Gateway Install that occurs during the transition period, should those costs be priced in Initial Transition CLIN 0001 or Install Gateway CLIN 0004AA? | All activities that need to take place during the transition period should be captured in the "Initial Transition" CLIN (to include, but not limited to Site Surveys, Gateway Installs, Network Connectivity, etc). | ||
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | The CLIN x017 tab of the Price Matrix references PWS paragraph 4.7.8. PWS Paragraph 4.7.8 state “The Prime shall travel as necessary to perform the services described in this PWS that are not currently covered in the pricing matrix.” Based on the PWS references contained in the Price Matrix, all sections of the PWS other than 4.7.8 are referenced in tabs CLIN X001 thru X016 and X018 thru X019. Will the government clarify which services are described in this PWS that are not currently covered in the pricing matrix? | CLIN x017 is blacked out, as nothing is to be provided at this time. It is a CLIN to capture any travel that we may need to unexpectedly account for future requirements that are not yet known. | ||
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | On tab "Pricing Matrix" of Attachment 6, CLIN 0002AB unit type is listed as "$/Month" but in tab CLIN X002 it is listed as "$/Site/Month". Can the Government please confirm this SubCLIN should be priced as $/Site/Month? | $/site/month | ||
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | The Section_L_Attachment_6_-_CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix contains 99 uniquely priced, FFP CLINs/SLINs that when spread across the multiple option years total more than 1050 FFP items that must be completed for a response. The amount of effort required for estimating, coordination with vendors and subcontractors, compiling data, and reviewing pricing for adequacy is substantial. The government did not provide any information in the draft RFP that indicated this level of complexity would be required for submission. The period between the release of the solicitation and due date for responses spans 2 Federal holidays, the traditional Thanksgiving week/weekend, and extends into the common Christmas leave window. We are requesting the government give a two week extension to allow adequate opportunity for bidders to complete the extensive pricing matrix and provide the government with pricing in line with the government’s stated goal of a best value evaluation. | We appreciate the burden with the number of CLINs, but proposals are due by 22 December 2023. | ||
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | Request clarification on the pricing UNITs. | Should be $/Month. | ||
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | Please change CLIN X011[G27:Q27]. | Corrected | ||
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | Duplicated CLIN description found across CLIN 0011 AB and CLIN 0011AC. Update to Install low-side O&I VTC at site (including secondary portal kit)? | Added "secondary portal kit" to CLIN 0011AC. | ||
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | There is a "6-month extension of services" entry listed in each CLIN in the Price Matrix. Is it your intention for bidders to provide an associated price for these entries and if it will be included in the TEP? | Per the Price Matrix "General Instructions": "The government will evaluate FAR 52.217-8 with CY34 for pricing evaluation purposes." Therefore, the government will utilize pricing provided in CY34 for each line item. Per Section M, Paragraph 2.4.4 Total Evaluated Price, "The Government will not disclose these predetermined cells to the offerors in the solicitation." | ||
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | The Pricing Matrix contains the following 3 SubCLINS with the associated descriptions that all map to the same 3 PWS paragraphs (PWS Paragraph 4.5, 4.5.1, 4.5.2), but with differing units of measure: | |||
| • | $/Month CLIN 0004AE - Federation Test - Reference PWS Paragraph 4.5, 4.5.1, 4.5.2 | |||
| • | $/Unit/Person CLIN 0004AF - Federate Test by the Block (5 days) - Reference PWS Paragraph 4.5, 4.5.1, 4.5.2 | |||
| • | $/Block/Person CLIN 0004AG - Integration/Testing by the Block (4 hours) - Reference PWS Paragraph 4.5, 4.5.1, 4.5.2 |
PWS 4.5.2 “Additional Federate Testing Support” states “The contractor shall support additional federate testing as requested by the Government. Future efforts will be negotiated through a separate task order.”
Will the government confirm that PWS 4.5.2 relates only to SubClin 0004AF?
Further, the title of PWS 4.5.1 “Integration and Testing” seems to relate only to SubCLIN 0004AG. Will the government confirm that PWS 4.5.1 relates only to SubCLIN 0004AG?
| Finally, if the government confirms both of the two questions above, will the government clarify what scope of work is to be included in SubCLIN 0004AE given that there would be no remaining scope on in the PWS 4.5 that is not uniquely related to either 0004AF or 0004AFG? | Removed PWS paragraph 4.5.2 from CLIN X004, it was erroneously included. It was added to CLIN X015. PWS 4.5.1 applies to 0004AF and 0004AG. PWS paragraphs can apply to more than one SubCLIN. | ||
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | The Pricing Matrix identifies “CLIN 0005AD - Cyber Security Testing - Reference PWS Paragraph 4.5.2”. The PWS 4.5.2 states “The contractor shall support additional federate testing as requested by the Government. Future efforts will be negotiated through a separate task order.” Will the government either correct the PWS paragraph reference for 0005AD or change 0005AD to “Negotiated”? If the government provides a corrected PWS reference, will the government clarify that the UNITS cell for CLIN 0005AD should be “$/Month”? | CLIN 0005AD has been updated to remove PWS 4.5.2, it now includes PWS 4.8.4. The units should be $/Month, this is correct. | |
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | How will the price for CLIN 0018 be evaluated since Section M is silent? | Per Section M, Paragraph 2.4.4 Total Evaluated Price, "The Government will not disclose these predetermined cells to the offerors in the solicitation." | |
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | Would the government provide the number of sites expected in each contract year to allow out year pricing for the network infrastructure in CLIN 0018? | The government is unsure what the future requirements will be in the out years. There will likely be an additional 10-15 sites in the next 3-5 years. | |
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | What warranties are expected to be included in the price of CLIN 0018 (or is the purchase "as is")? | "As is" with any active warranties transferred to the government. | |
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | The pricing matrix is unclear in how it accounts for Contractor equipment pricing that appears in CLIN 001 and CLIN 0018. It seems the HW acquisition could be accounted for twice in the TEP calculation. Please clarify. | This is a services contract. The Government does not intend to pay for HW acquisition, unless it decides to switch to a Government Owned Government Operated (GOCO) model, and CLIN 0018 it utilized. | |
| Section L Attachment 6 - CAF_DMO_Price_Matrix | CLIN 0002AB references PWS paragraph 3.10. This PWS paragraph does not exist. Please clarify. | Reference to paragraph 3.10 should be removed, it was included erroneously. | |
| Section L Attachment 7 - PPI Tool Instructions | Section L Attachment 7, Past Performance Information (PPI) for Offerors, says "Explain how your performance on this contract is relevant for Subfactors 1 through 4 as instructed under Past Performance in Section L of the RFP." Please confirm that we are to only address relevance to Subfactor 1: Transition, Subfactor 2: Security, and Subfactor 3: Training Operations. | It should read Subfactors 1 through 3. | |
| Section_J_Attachment_1_-_CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS_Amend_1.docx | PWS para 4.7.3 is titled “DTC Network. “ | ||
| PWS sub-para 4.7.3.4 states "the contractor shall tech refresh 1/3 of all equipment in the CAF DTC each year so a full tech refresh occurs every 3 years.” In the Q&A dated 28 Nov. ‘23, the government confirmed its request to do a 1/3 tech refresh on the entire (not just the DTC) CAF DMO network each year. If this is correct, the entire DMO network would be modernized 3 1/3 times over the 10 period of performance of CAF DMO 3.0. Is that the government’s intent? | Correct. | ||
| Section_J_Attachment_1_-_CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS_Amend_1.docx | The PWS conflicts what was stated in the Q&As. The PWS states "the contractor shall produce and maintain a transition plan….". However Q&As conflict that. Is only the plan to be provided during the first 24 months with one site installed? | Per Task Order 1 PWS Paragraph 2.0 "Transition shall be considered complete once all federated sites and the entire DTC at langley have been trransitioned. The transition criteria shall also include an approved and fucntioning Cross Domain or Multi Level Security (MLS) solution....". The goverment's intent is for the contractor to plan and implement the plan during the transition period. | |
| Section_J_Attachment_1_-_CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS_Amend_1.docx | PWS for Task Order One references CDRL A039 – (DI-MISC-80508B/T) Technical Report Study/Services Sub-Title Interoperability and Standards. In the Program PWS this is CDRL A033 for Interoperability and Standards. | ||
| Since the CDRL list only goes up to A038, is it possible that this is a typo and should be referencing A033? Please clarify. | Correct, it should reference A033. | ||
| Section_J_Attachment_1_-_CAF_DMO_3.0_IDIQ_PWS_Amend_1.docx Task Order PWS | Can the government provide specific clarity about the installation and equipment to be provided during the Task Order 1 Transition Phase. Is it the governments intent to develop a prototype during the first 12 months; or provide equipment and establish the affiliate connections for the 119 sites. | Offerors should propose their solution to implement and fully transition the network during the transition period. The entire network shall be fully operational by the 3.0 contractor at the end of the transition period, IAW the Task Order 1 PWS. The bridge contract is in place to cover the transition period (up to 24 month). It is up to each Offeror how they would like to propose/implement this transition. | |
| Section_J_Attachment_7_-_CAF_DMO_3.0_Section_L_Amend_4.docx | Section L, para 2.2.2 states, "All pricing information shall be addressed ONLY in the Price Volume." Section L para 7.1.2 states, "Section B - Supplies or Services and Costs/Prices, For use in task orders as applicable." Is the offeror to complete Section B for the Initial Task Order? If so, it is acceptable to provide pricing information in the Contract Documentation volume? Please clarify. | Because the Initial Task Order is FFP, CLIN 0001 in the Pricing Matrix is required to be completed. Therefore, there is nothing additional needed in Section B for the Initial Task Order. | |
| Solicitation - FA862124RB006 | Please define CLIN 000. | This should be CLIN 0002AB (Network Connectivity) and CLIN 0003AA (Network Management), solicitation updated. | |
| Solicitation - FA862124RB006 | Request removal of DFARS clause 252.227-7022 Government Rights (Unlimited) (MAR 1979). This clause is applicable to architect-engineer or construction contracts and would not be appliable to CAF DMO 3.0 because CAF DMO 3.0 is not an architect-engineer or construction contract, in accordance with DFARS 227.7107-1 Architectural designs and data clauses for architect-engineer or construction contracts (noted below). | Removed. | |
| Solicitation - FA862124RB006 | Request removal of DFARS clause252.227-7023 Drawings and Other Data to Become Property of Government. (MAR 1979). This clause is applicable to architect-engineer or construction contracts and would not be appliable to CAF DMO 3.0 because CAF CMO 3.0 is not an architect-engineer or construction contract in accordance with DFARS 227.7107-1 Architectural designs and data clauses for architect-engineer or construction contracts (noted below). | Removed. | |
| Solicitation - FA862124RB006 | Solicitation FA862124RB006, Section I contains clause 52.211-11, Liquidated Damages-Supplies, Services, or Research and Development (Sep 2000), while Section H of the Contract lists clause H100 Service Availability (Aug 2023). This would appear to duplicate the same penalty on the Contractor by potentially reducing Contract value for the same event on this Services contract. Can FAR 52.211-11, Liquidated Damages-Supplies, Services, or Research and Development be removed from the solicitation? If not, will the Contracting Officer complete the “fill-in” amount and better describe how this will be implemented prior to Contract Award, to allow the Contractor the chance to better access the potential impact? Please advise. | This clause has been removed. | |
| Solicitation - FA862124RB006 | Can the government confirm that all menu pricing CLINs will be applied according to the calendar year and month of performance? As clarification, that the government will award the annual task order using the CLIN values associated with the calendar year month of performance and not the time of award? | Price Matrix "General Instructions" updated to read: The calendar year of the first month of the PoP, will be the calendar year pricing for the entirety of the PoP. For example, if the beginning of an order's PoP is in May 2025, CY 25 pricing will be utilized for the entire order (NTE 12 months, unless FAR 52.217-8 is utilized. In which case, NTE that extension). | |
| Solicitation - FA862124RB006 | Since this is a services contract, request removal of the Inspection of Supplies and Responsibility for Supplies clauses noted below: * 52.246-2 Inspection of Supplies-Fixed-Price. Aug 1996 * 52.246-2 Inspection of Supplies-Fixed-Price - Alternate I Jul 1985 * 52.246-16 Responsibility for Supplies. Apr 1984 | These clauses are included in the event the government chooses to excercise the option CLIN for the COCO Purchase. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .