CSS3 Draft RFP Questions and Responses_Final.xlsx

Draft RFP Questions

Misc

Tables have been corrected 2 3 1 PWS Related - Regarding the section on handling tickets, would it be possible to provide historicals for the ticket counts, priority and severity? An estimation of the "average" utilization, as compared with the maximum ticket count is incuded in the PWS.

The ticket averages that were supplied in the PWS were based off detailed historical data for the the ARC, ITF, and Tech Pubs. Breakdown in priority and severity will not be provided.

6 11 1 Reference CSS3_Draft_PWS 2.1.docx - Section 1 of PWS states there are three separate test facilities at Hansom, however there are only two mentioned in the description. Please provide the function and details of the third facility. Updated Section 5 to include a reference to there being 2 ITFs in B1607

12 1 Reference CSS3_Draft_PWS 2.1.docx - Section 4.3 states the AFIN response center will function IAW the EITSM Users Guide. Will the Government provide a copy of the EITSM Users Guide? Yes. The EITSM User guide will be found In the GFI section of the PWS when the Solicitation is released.

13 1 Reference CSS3_Draft_PWS 2.1.docx - Will the Government confirm whether the service desk function will be performed on Govt site? The ARC function will be formally located at Hanscom AFB but will be manned in accordance with local remote work requirements.

14 1 Reference CSS3_Draft_PWS 2.1.docx - Draft PWS interfacing with a tier 1 vendor. Please consider identifying vendor, and how that interface will take place. Tier 1 government contact information will be provided at contract award. No direct interface with the Tier 1 vendor is required, interface will be through Tier 1 government POC.

15 2 Would AFLCMC consider using the NAIC 517111? This was the NAIC code used when it was originally awarded underneath NETCENTS II SB. After review of the requirements for this acquisition, the PCO along with the Small Business Specialists reviewed the NAICS codes and determined that NAICS code 541513(Computer Facilities Management) most appropriate for this acquisition. The requirements have changed since the original CSS2 contract was awarded and 517111(Wired Telecommunication Carriers) only covers a small portion of the scope of the follow on contract.

3 16 3 Section L of the Draft RFP indicates that Offerors are required to submit two (2) complete hardcopies by mail in addition to the electronic proposal submission. This is a departure from recent practices that have predominantly shifted towards electronic submissions, particularly in light of the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, and there are logistical complexities involved with mailing the submission. Please consider removing this requirement. Please also clarify the date that the submission must be postmarked to be considered on-time if hardcopies are required. Section L will be edited to include electronic submissions only.

17 4 Reference PWS 3.1.3: Will there be work locations on base for the PM, Deputy PM, Support Strategy, ARC, and Technical Publications? Work locations have been updated appropriately and will be in the final RFP

1 18 4 Reference PWS 3.1.3 Table 1: The requirement number in the columns within the table does not match the requirements in Section 9 Requirement 5 of the PWS, will the Government please clarify? Table has been updated

19 4 Reference PWS 3.1.6: What does the “+” sign represent in the FTE Reqt column for percentages and number of FTEs? Will remove the "+", since a number less than 100% is implied as a minimum

20 4 The previous CSS and CSS 2 contracts were 100% Small Business utilizing NAICS Code 517111, with a size standard of 1500 employees. The current DRFP for CSS3 does not appear to be set-aside for Small Business and Utilizes NAICS Code 541513, with a size standard of $37M.

a. Will this requirement be 100% Small Business Set-Aside?

b. Will the Government consider continuing to utilize NAICS 517111 for this requirement? A. Yes, B. No(See Question 15)

6 22 6 Performance Work Statement (PWS) Para 1 mentions 3 separate ITFs, but lists only 1607 and 1435. Where/what is the 3rd ITF? Updated Section 5 to include a reference to there being 2 ITFs in B1607

23 6 Performance Work Statement (PWS) Para 5.1: Does monitoring equipment changes include facilities equipment (i.e. HVAC, Power, etc) or does it pertain to only IT systems within lab environments? Added a bullet to include contractor responsibility to monitor environmentals

24 6 Performance Work Statement (PWS) Para 5.3: States that contractor shall maintain baseline of IT systems contained within the ITFs - Is this ITF infrastructure and supporting equipment or tenant systems as well (i.e. ACAS, ESS, ADX, etc)? ITF team is responsible for baseline for ITF infrastructure.

25 6 Performance Work Statement (PWS) Para 5.4: States that contractor shall maintain current baseline of the systems and provide software changes and problem fixes to these baselines as required for the ITF. Will contractor be responsible for only ITF infrastructure or tenant systems as well? ITF team is responsible for baseline for ITF infrastructure.

26 6 Performance Work Statement (PWS) para 3.1: "Contractor shall restore certification requirements within 20 (45) days." Which is accurate? Fixed to reflect 45 days

3 27 6 Draft RFP Section L.1.2 (Page 7-9): Request the Government change submission requirements to an email transmission in lieu of hard copies. This is a eco-friendly approach and removes reliance on the "snail" mail system to provide a compliant proposal on time. In addition, most computers no longer have the ability to burn CD/DVDs. Submission requirement will be changed to electronic submissions only.

28 6 Draft RFP Section L.2.1.1 (Page 9) and 4.2 (Page 14): For clarity, please correct the numbering for the Technical Volume and Past Performance Volume. Comment is unclear. Will be assessed before the final RFP.

4 29 7 1) re: CSS3 Draft PWS 2.1 --> PWS Section 1.1 Scope, as well as PWS Section 4 and 5, appear to indicate an overlap of scope covered in the recent Department of the Air Force (DAF) EITaaS Base Infrastructure Modernization (BIM) IDIQ PWS. Can the Government provide additional clarity on how these two efforts are envisioned to work together in the future? BIM, along with CSS3's sustainment efforts, will work in parallel to provide support to the AFNet.

30 7 2) When does the Government expect the Hanscom AFB wired and wireless infrastructure modernization scope to be awarded as a Task Order under the DAF EITaaS BIM IDIQ? Not applicable to CSS3

31 7 3) re: CSS3 Draft PWS 2.1 --> PWS Section 4.2 and 4.2.2 reference the acronym "TSC" but it is not defined. Please clarify if this was meant to be "PSC" of some other construct. Fixed to reflect PSC

32 7 4) re: CSS3 J-7 Section L, section 1.2.b --> In the forthcoming Bidders Library, we recommend the Government provide architecture diagrams with associated equipment (HW/SW) lists for the systems and infrastructure that the Contractors will be responsible for. This will assist in developing optimal staffing and proposing effective approaches and solutions. No architecture diagrams will be provided, but a summarized higher level listing of equipment will be provided.

Action - need to complete this summarized list of equipment/systems Team working on CSS3 System summary

5 35 7 7) re: CSS3 J-7 Section L, section 4. Vol IV - Past Performance --> To increase competition and support companies that go to market with more than one company or subsidiary, we ask that language is added to the solicitation to clearly permit the Government to credit an offeror with the past performance of its affiliates whose resources will be meaningfully contributing to contract performance (e.g., workforce, management, facilities, or other resources). The Government procurement rules specifically endorse this approach, and upheld in GAO decisions.

The following is language from a recent Government RFP specifically addressing affiliate past performance for consideration to be included in section 4. Vol IV:

- "If applicable, Offerors may provide the experience or past performance of a parent or affiliated or predecessor company to and Offeror... where the firm's proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliate or predecessor will affect the performance of the Offeror. The Offeror shall demonstrate that the resources of the parent or affiliate or predecessor company (its workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) shall be provided or relied upon for contract performance such that the parent or affiliate or predecessor will have meaningful involvement in contract performance." (See question 10)

3 36 7 8) re: CSS3 J-7 Section L 1.2(e) states that It is requested that you submit one (1) complete electronic proposal and two (2) complete hardcopies delivered to the address listed in paragraph “p” by the deadline stated in the RFP Letter. Can the Government confirm that only electronic copies shall be submitted? Answered above. Electronic Submissions only.

37 7 9) re: CSS3 J-7 Section L 1.1(g) states "THE OCI ASSESSMENT MAY BE PROVIDED IN ADVANCE OF PROPOSAL." Can the Government confirm that Offerors can submit a draft OCI Mitigation Plan now, if needed, and receive feedback before the final RFP is released? Yes.

38 7 10) re: CSS3 J-8 Section M.2.10 and M. 2.11 --> We suggest the Government require offerors to provide LCATs with labor rate ranges as part of either Technical or Management volumes/factors, e.g., per a Staffing section, to demonstrate a realistic understanding of the labor required and salary ranges for the offeror’s team. Then, perform a price realism evaluation. Based on recent Federal proposals with this consideration, we suggest the Government add evaluation language, e.g., into Section M of the RFP, similar to this example from a Government RFP:

- “The results of the realism evaluation will result in a performance risk assessment, as it relates to the technical approach proposed by each offeror and will be utilized in the selection of the offer which provides the best value to the Government. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(d)(3), no adjustments will be made to the FFP labor and T&M CLIN process as a result of the realism analysis.”

Rationale: If the Government does not structure the evaluation criteria to mitigate low-cost offers, then there may be no means for the Government to degrade evaluation scores based on such staffing risk in order to prevent being compelled to award to an unrealistic low-price offeror without a likely award protest from such an offeror. In the event such a low-cost offeror is awarded the contract, this will present immediate and long-term performance risk to this critical mission. The Government’s intent is to award based on a fair and reasonable price that does not create significant performance risk; thus, such an approach enables that. A price realism analysis would not be appropriate for this effort. This will not be a fixed price contract and there aren't any exceptional circumstances that warrant a price realism analysis. A cost realism analysis of cost type CLINs is required per FAR 15.404-1(d); however, a price realism analysis of fixed priced CLINs is not required.

39 7 11) re: CSS3 CLINS.docx and CSS3 Draft PWS 2.1 --> Per the CLIN titled "Tech Support HNI", which is FFP, can the Government clarify this PWS(s) are associated specifically with this CLIN so we can ensure clarity on the work scope associated with this CLIN. CLIN titled "Tech Support HNI" is associated with PWS Section 2 "Technical Support".

40 7 12) re: CSS3 CLINS.docx --> Per the CLIN titled "Tech Support HNI", which is FFP, can the Government provide historical workload data in order to effectively price this CLIN. Provided current workload ranges using historical data. See previous similar question/answer.

7 41 8 1. What is the status of the Bidder's Library referenced in the draft RFP? Earliest access will allow us to develop a more detailed technical solution. Bidders library to be sent out with RFP

3 42 8 2. Section L paragraph 1.2e references submission via 1 electronic copy on CD or DVD, and two hardcopies. Table one calls for 3 paper copies. Recommend eliminating the use of paper copies and other electronic media, and allow upload via Safe or other appropriate file transfer application. Answered above. Electronic Submissions only.

2 43 8 3. Can you provide the current level of effort, LCATs and locations? No, historical manning will not be provided

44 8 4. Requirement 5c shows locations and FTE count at supported locations. Can the government provide similar estimates and breakouts for all locations/systems coverd under requirement 5? Locations are listed in PWS and FTE counts beyond what is in the PWS will not be provided

45 8 5. While clearly separate tasks, does the government anticipate that Requirement 4 and requirement 5 will be supported by different employees, or do SME's on location all provide the FER support? The FERs and the SMEs are different people and the SMEs will not be expected to provide FER support. FER staffing levels have been added to Table 6, currently at 21 FERs

46 8 6. Paragraph 4.2.1 indicates references shall have been performed by the "Offeror." Does the term "Offeror" encompass Prime and subcontract teammates? Yes.

All "Offerors" were corrected to "Contractor"

47 8 7. Can you provide a rough estimate or breakdown of labor vs ODC costs? It looks like there are significant travel and material purchases, so we're wondering what percentage of the total contract value we can expect to cover labor? ODC CLIN ceilings will be provided in the RFP. Labor costs will be evaluated as part of the proposal process

48 9 What are the primary objectives of the CSS3 contract in terms of sustaining and improving the Air Force Information Network (AFIN)? See PWS Section 1

4 49 9 How does the scope of CSS3 integrate with the Enterprise IT as a Service (EITaaS) initiative? Interfacing between CSS3 and EITaaS is currently undefined, anticipate minimal direct interaction between the contracts. EITaaS along with CSS3 sustainment efforts will work in parallel to provide support to the AFNet

50 9 Can you clarify the specific requirements and expectations for the 24/7/365 Service Desk, including the types of incidents it will handle and performance metrics? The technical requirements for the ARC, as part of the PSC, are contained within Requirement 2 of the PWS. Quality assessment metrics are contrained within the QASP

51 9 What are the detailed tasks and responsibilities of Field Engineering Representatives at various CONUS and OCONUS locations? The tasks for all FERs are contained within Requirement 4. While specific locations will have differing numbers of meetings, numbers of units, operational responsabilities, level of command, etc. the task requirements for the FERs will remain uniform. Offerors are encouraged to apply their knowledge of the command and operational units and their functions within those locations to build a FER team with appropriate experience and skills.

52 9 What are the security clearance requirements for FERs and how will these be managed? Security clearance requirements are specified within the "manpower reporting" section of the PWS.

53 9 What are the specific procedures and timelines for troubleshooting, incident resolution, and equipment replacement? The requirements are contained within Requirement 2, under the section titled "AFIN Response Center" Table 4 – Incident Timelines

54 9 How will the contractor be expected to manage and report on the patching, firmware upgrades, and technical orders (TOs)? The requirement for TCTO Compliance reporting is contained in the "Time Compliance Technical Order Compliance Reporting" section. Contractor is not reponsible for driving compliance reporting, they are simply responsible for compiling and reporting on what has been submitted.

55 9 What are the exact expectations for inventory control and management services, particularly regarding the CSS3 warehouse operations? Expectations for this position are defined in the Warehouse Inventory Management section

56 9 How will the contractor track and report the status of all assets, including those in the Integrated Test Facilities (ITFs)? For the ITF, a summary stoplight report will be provided to show the current health of the ITF.

The contractor will not be responsible for tracking and reporting on the status of fielded assets or the assets in the ITF that are not part of the ITF backbone.

57 9 Can you provide more details on the Out of Cycle Obsolescence (OCO) process, including criteria for rapid replacement and funding mechanisms? PWS updated to reflect that the LOM for equipment purchases will be provided by the PMO

58 9 What specific metrics and reports are required to be produced by the contractor, and what are the expectations for their content and frequency? Government expectation is that reports will be generated with the ability to be refreshed by the non-contractor viewer on demand. New Reports will be created as needed to define different metrics in terms of the status of the Afin and the status of the performance of the CSS3 contract

59 9 How will the government utilize these metrics to assess contractor performance? The government will use these reports as check-points for verifying the performance of the contractor, as well as providing visibility for both the Contractor and Government as to the performance of the contract.

60 9 What are the expectations for the various types of meetings (e.g., kickoff, PMRs, IRPs) the contractor must organize and participate in? See PWS Section 3.5

61 9 How will action items and follow-up tasks from these meetings be tracked and reported? Action items and follow-ups will be in a format provided by the Contractor and approved by the Government.

62 9 What are the procurement pre-approval requirements and processes for both break/fix incidents and out-of-cycle obsolescence actions? See PWS Section 3.10

63 9 How will the contractor handle the procurement and management of refurbished equipment, and what are the audit requirements for these processes? See PWS Section 3.14

64 9 What are the specific requirements and expectations for the Transition-In and Transition-Out plans, particularly regarding staffing, risk mitigation, and continuity of operations? See PWS section 3.22 and RFP sections L & M

65 9 What are the expectations for the Contractor Quality Assurance Plan (QAP), and how will the contractor ensure compliance with all quality standards and risk management protocols? See PWS Section 3.4

66 9 How will the contractor be expected to align its internal processes with those of HNI and the PWS requirements, particularly regarding documentation and process improvement initiatives? See PWS Section 3.3