TETRAS II RFP Questions-Answers 30 Aug 22.pdf

Item # RFP SECTION SUBJECT QUESTIONS ANSWERS

1 Atch 4 L-1.2 f, Page 2

Participation By Foreign Firms TETRAS II Addendum to Section L 3 Jun 22, Page 2 of 18, Section L-1.2 f, Participation by Foreign Firms states, “In accordance with the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM), foreign firms or U.S. companies determined to be under Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) will not be permitted to participate.”

NISPOM states, “Foreign investment can play an important role in maintaining the vitality of the U.S. industrial base. Therefore, it is the intent of the USG to allow foreign investment consistent with the national security interests of the United States. 32 CFR Part 117.11 defines FOCI procedures for cleared U.S. entities to mitigate the risks associated with FOCI by ensuring that foreign firms cannot undermine U.S. security to gain unauthorized access to classified information.”

Please confirm that a US Cleared Defense Contractor (CDC) who has mitigated risk through Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) FOCI considerations through a Special Security Agreement (SSA) may participate.

After discussion with both Industrial Security and National Disclosure personnel, we have determined the FOCI procedures focus on specific and known security implementations and are not designed to support an effort like TETRAS where the disclosure and security context is unknown until a requirement is defined. At this time a foreign contractor with an approved FOCI will not be able to perform as a TETRAS II Prime contractor.

2 Atch 4 Paragraphs. L-1.10 a & c

Encrypted e-mail and DoD SAFE Addendum to Section L, Para L-1.10 a. & c: "Exchanges with industry may be written and transmitted via encrypted e-mail, DOD Safe website referenced above, or orally with telephonic or face-to-face meetings." In para c. the guidance states, "Email may be used to transmit information to offerors only if the email can be sent and received encrypted and includes “CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION (CUI): SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – See FAR

2.101 & 3.104” in the subject line.

"These two statements seem to provide countering guidance, therefore, would you please clarify if offerors want to submit emails for all information exchanges with the Contracting Officers, must the email be encrypted and include the CUI statement or may the email exchange be unencrypted?

Also, is a government CAC required for encryption?

Both statements correctly reference different methods (encrypted e-mail, DoD Safe website, or orally with telephonic or face-to-face meetings) of transmitting exchanges between the Contracting Officer and industry. The second statement further clarifies information sent via e-mail. Both are correct.

Source Selection information can be sent via e-mail only if the e-mail can be encrypted and includes

"CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION (CUI): SOURCE SELECTION

INFORMATION - See FAR 2.101 & 3.104" in the subject line. A CAC is required for encryption.

If offerors do not have a CAC, DoD SAFE shall be used.

3 Atch 7 M-3.1, pages 3-9

FA248722RA002 vs Industry Day Slides FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL - SOW CAPABILITIES, pages 3-9 of 12, of the referenced document.

We recognize that the Criteria Subset Element tables for the SOW Capabilities Areas (Project/Program Management, Design/Redesign, Hardware, Software, and Testing) contain requirements updated from the 2017 solicitation, and not from the more current Industry Day slides. There are significant differences between these versions. Just as an example, Area 4, Testing, in the updated 2017 solicitation version, presents a different set of three critical requirements (industry Day designated five critical requirements), and bins non-critical requirements into three subsets from which three requirements from each subset must be addressed-the Industry Day slides divide requirements into two subsets but do not require that a minimum number of requirements come from each subset.

To ensure that offerors select the correct source of requirements and the correct requirements, will the Government please confirm that the SOW Capabilities requirements lists and organization be based on "Attachment 7 TETRAS II Addendum to Section M, 7 Apr 22," and not on the Industry Day slides?

For TETRAS II, offerors must comply with the requirements outlined in solicitation FA2487-22- RA002, to include subsequent issued Amendments. Attachment 7 TETRAS II RFP section M is the correct document attached to solicitation FA248722RA002.

4 RFP

Section J- Attachments

Number of documents posted with RFP Can the Govt confirm the number of documents related to TETRAS II RFP FA248722RA002?

When logging into SAM.GOV, we can see the 9 documents listed on SAM.GOV (see the snippet below) which agrees with “Section J/Attachments” of the RFP. However, at another website (GOVWIN) there is a reference to downloading CUI documents for this RFP. And when we click on the “Request Access” button in SAM.GOV, nothing happens.

Please confirm that 1) the TETRAS II RFP FA248722RA002 only has these 9 documents, and 2) there are no additional CUI documents for this opportunity.

If there are additional documents marked CUI, how do we obtain access?

The Government confirms there were originally 9 documents, as referenced in Section J of TETRAS II RFP FA218722RA002. The documents are: 01-FA248722RA002 Request For Proposal; 02- Exhibit A CDRLs 9 Nov 21; 03-Atch 1 TETRAS II Statement of Work 1 Feb 22; 04-Atch 2 TETRAS II DD254 26 Mar 21; 05-Atch 3 TETRAS II Cost Price Sheet 16 Mar 22; 06-Atch 4 TETRAS II Addendum to Section L 3 Jun 22; 07-Atch 5 OCI Mitigation Plan Template 2 Feb 22;

08-Atch 6 TETRAS II DO 01 SOW 7 Apr 22; and 09-Atch 7 TETRAS II Addendum to Section M 7 Apr 22.

On 15 Jul 22, two documents were posted to SAM.gov: Solicitation Amendment FA248722RA00020001 and 06-Atch 4 TETRAS II Addendum to Section L Amendment 0001 13 Jul 22.

On 11 Aug 22, two documents were posted were posted to SAM.gov: Solicitation Amendment FA248722RA0020002 and 06-Atch 4 TETRAS II Addendum to Section L, Amend 0002 8 Aug 22.

There are no other documents, to include those marked CUI, other than those posted to SAM.gov.

5 Atch 4 L-1.4 (b)

Oral Presentation Material Is there a requirement for PowerPoint aspect ratio? Is 16:9 presentation material acceptable? There is no requirement for PowerPoint aspect ratio. The current default 16:9 or previous default 4:3 is acceptable.

6 Atch 4 L-1.1 (b) page 1

DoD Safe Will both the COs provide separate DOD Safe Links? No. One of the COs or the CS will provide a DoD SAFE drop off request. Multiple DoD SAFE Drop off links will not be sent unless requested.

7 Atch 4 L-1.5 (e) page 5

Oral Presentations How early can offerors request their oral presentation time slot? Do offerors have to wait for notification after proposal submission to request?

Offerors may inform the Government they intend to submit a proposal and can request their oral presentation time slot as soon as the RFP is issued and no later than 22 July 22. However, Amendment 0001 was changed to state oral presentations will be scheduled in order of receipt of proposals.

8 Atch 4 L-1.5 (b) page 5

Oral Presentations How many presenters will a company be allowed to have at the oral presentation? Will the Prime be allowed to have any non-presenters in the room/online?

Offerors may bring up to 10 people to the oral presentation. This may be briefers and non-briefers as you choose. Dial in will not be offered during oral presentations. Exceptions will need to be coordinated with the CO with regard to special circumstances.

9 Atch 4 L-1.4 (b) page 4

Oral Presentation Material No reference is made to graphics that may be used in the oral presentation material. Will graphics be held to the same requirements as the text (Times New Roman, 14 pt. font, Line spacing at 1.0 or greater) on the presentation material?

The Government will not mandate a font size for graphics, but all graphics should be readable on a printed 8.5 inch by 11 inch page. Amendment 0003 incorporates this language.

10 Atch 4 L-1.4 (b & c) page 4

Oral Presentations and Written Proposal Material Section L says that we are to include RFP number, part and/or subdirectory title and page number in the header for both the oral presentation and written proposal materials. Please clarify and provide an example of what is meant by part and/or subdirectory title.

The RFP number, part/and/or subdirectory title, and page number go in the upper right corner of all slides/pages. Titling should follow Section L Table L-1.3. Example: the header for the OCI Plan should read "FA248722RA002/Volume I/Section IV/OCI Mitigation Plan/page#"

11 Atch 4 L-1.4 (b & c) page 4

Oral Presentations and Written Proposal Material Section L says that we are to include RFP number, part and/or subdirectory title and page number in the header for both the oral presentation and written proposal materials. Will text in the header be subject to the Times New Roman, 14 pt. font requirement?

Headers and footers should be readable when printed on an 8.5 inch by 11 inch paper.

12 Atch 4 L-1.10 ( c) page 6

Encrypted e-mail Do offerors have to set up secure email exchanges in preparation for the possibility of an encrypted email or will the government give notification if encrypted email will be used?

If offerors already have access to encrypted email using their CAC, they may use it. Otherwise, offerors shall use DOD Safe and request an encrypted drop notice off from the CO if they do not have a CAC.

13 Atch 4 L-2.4.2, page 8

Obtaining DD 2345 certification L-2.4.2 provides instructions for obtaining certification via DD 2345. If a company has a current DD 2345, do we just provide a copy of the signed certification or do we have to submit the certification request package again?

The current DD2345 is sufficient.

14 Atch 4 L-2.4.3, page 8

Small Business Subcontracting Plan L-2.4.3 states other than small businesses must submit a subcontracting plan. If the offeror is a small business for NAICS 336419, is it a correct assumption that the small business does not have prepare and submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan?

Yes. If a company is a small business under NAICS 336419, then they do not have to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan

15 Atch 7 M-3.1.2, Area 1b Section

2, page 5

Labeling Should labeling of sub bullets start with A and not F? No. Reference in accordance with labeling as stated in Section M.

16 Atch 7 M-3.1.2, Area 1b Section

3, page 5

Labeling Should labeling of sub bullets start with A and not D No. Reference in accordance with labeling as stated in Section M.

17 Atch 7 M-3.1.3, Area 2 Section

1, page 6

Numbering/lettering is off Numbering/lettering is off. There are 2 bullets labeled “a” and “b.”

1. Demonstrate the following disciplines:

A. Prototyping or engineering unit fabrication/manufacturing B. System compatibility and interoperability;

. Analysis and test of structures, materials and mechanical systems associated with excessive heat, mechanical loads, resonant frequencies, and/or environmental impacts . Integration of all interfaces (electrical/electronic and mechanical hardware, firmware, and software) between the system and its operating environment;

A. Manufacture planning and tracking;

B. Production and quality controls and assessments;

RFP Atch 7, page 6 clearly defines these as 1 A-G.

18 Atch 7 M-3.1.3, Area 2 Section

3, page 6

Numbering/lettering is off Numbering/lettering is off. There are 2 bullets called “c.”

3. Demonstrate hardware test capabilities in the following requirements:

A. Electromagnetic (EM) spectrum applications (in Radio Frequency (RF), Microwave and Millimeter Wave (MMW), Microwave, Electro-Optical (EO), laser, Ultraviolet (UV)) C. RF, EO, and multispectral simulators, projectors and measurement/calibration systems B. Flight termination, weapons safety footprint C. Guidance and control systems

RFP Attachment 9 clearly defines these as 3 A-N.

19 Atch 7 M-3.1.4, Area 3 Section

3, page 7

Numbering/lettering is off Numbering/lettering is off. There is an extra bullet labeled “I” after “B.”

3. Adequately demonstrate the following requirements:

A. Command and Control concept of operations and system functionality B. Communications and data transmission systems I. Computer communications/ networking, including distributed networks (Local area network (LAN)/wide area network (WAN)

RFP Attachment 9 clearly defines these as 3 A-S.

20 Atch 7 M-3.1.5, Area 4b Section

1, page 9

Labeling Should labeling of sub bullets start with A and not D? No. Reference in accordance with labeling as stated in Section M.

21 Atch 4 L-4.3.2

COST/PRICE Spreadsheet - OMB SOC rates Direct Labor. Proposed rates that significantly deviate from the OMB SOC percentile wage estimates shall be supported with applicable data in the narrative. At the time of this RFP release, the OMB SOC publication is dated May 2020. The current national estimates can be reviewed at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm. Offerors shall escalated all proposed rates to reflect an anticipated start in CY 2022.

The current OMB SOC publication found at the link above is date May 2021. Please confirm that the offer is to use the 2021 rates.

Yes, please use the current national estimate OMB SOC publication of May 2021. Offerors shall escalate all proposed rates to reflect an anticipated start in CY2023. Amendment 0001 was issued on 15 July 2022 to correct this information.

22 Atch 3 Cost Price Sheet

COST/PRICE Spreadsheet - Cells that are password protected

TETRAS II Cost Price Sheet 16 Mar 22.xlsx contains cells that are password protected. Per the RFP offerors are to provide calculations “consistent with the Offeror’s cost accounting system” or “consistent with their disclosed accounting practices.” Please provide an updated file with unlocked cell in order to allow the offeror to adjust formulas.

Attachment 3 is a required deliverable with locked formulas to expedite the Government’s evaluation of proposed rates. All offerors are required to comply with the attachment as provided. If an offeror determines that the Attachment 3 does not fully satisfy explanation of its estimating and accounting practices, the offeror may choose to provide a separate explanatory spreadsheet or narrative explaining how the offeror entered values into Attachment 3.

23 Atch 4 L-4.2.1

Contractor Business Systems Approval Letters The government has requested that if offerors have government approvals of their business systems that they shall "provide evidence of such approval". Some of the Business System approval letters/reports are marked as "CUI"; such as the Accounting System and Purchasing System approval letters. DoD SAFE can encrypt these business system approval letters. Is it acceptable to the Air Force that these documents are encrypted and submitted through DoD safe in support of the proposal?

Yes. Use DOD Safe and ensure you send the password to the encrypted files separately via e-mail to the COs/POC.

24 Atch 4 L-4.3.2

Direct Labor, Office of Management and Budgets' (OMB) Standard Occupational Classification (SOC)

SECTION L-4.3.2 states "At the time of this RFP release, the OMB SOC publication is dated May 2020. The current national estimates can be reviewed at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm." When using that link you are prompted to the May 2021 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates United States.

Should offerors use the May 2021 National Employment and Wage Estimates United States vice May 2020 for this proposal? If offerors use the May 2021 National Employment and Wage Estimates United States, there is currently no wage information for the following OMB SOCs: "15- 2098 Data Scientists and Mathematical Science Occupations", "15-1256 Software Developers & Software Quality Assurance Analysts & Testers", and "17-3098 Calibration Technologists/Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other".

Which SOCs should the offerors use for these three missing SOCs in the May 2021 data?

Yes, please use the current national estimate OMB SOC publication of May 2021. Replace OMB SOCs as follows:

1) 15-2098 Data Scientists and Mathematical Science Occupations with 15-2051 Data Scientists;

2) 15-1256 Software Developers & Software Quality Assurance Analysts & Testers with 15-1252 Software Developers

3) 17-3098 Calibration Technologists/Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other with 17-3029 Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other.

Amendment 0003 incorporates a revised Cost/Price Spreadsheet with updated labor categories along with an updated Section L.

25 Atch 4 L-1.2 (f)

Participation by Foreign Firms

Page 2 of 18, Section L-1.2 f, Participation by Foreign Firms states, "In accordance with the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM), foreign firms or U.S. companies determined to be under Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) will not be permitted to participate."

NISPOM states, "Foreign investment can play an important role in maintaining the vitality of the U.S. industrial base.

Therefore, it is the intent of the USG to allow foreign investment consistent with the national security interests of the United States. 32 CFR Part

117.11 defines FOCI procedures for cleared U.S. entities to mitigate the risks associated with FOCI by ensuring that foreign firms cannot undermine U.S. Security to gain unauthorized access to classified information."

The RFP is ambiguous on this issue and does not address those instances when a foreign-owned company has the appropriate DCSA-approved mitigations that allow participation. As a foreign-owned company, Company X has DCSA-approved mitigations in place that allow Company X to hold and perform under contracts at the SECRET and above level. Company X also has cleared facilities and the ability to store classified material. DCSA approved and renewed Company X's Special Security Agreement (SSA). The SSA is one of four authorized mechanisms used by the U.S. Government to mitigate FOCI to an acceptable level as determined by the CSA. Company X has operated under an SSA since 1998.

Previously, Company X has seen solicitations with similar language preventing foreign-owned companies from participation. Once Company X demonstrated that it has an approved SSA, Company X was allowed to participate. In fact, in one DoD contracting officer amended the solicitation with the language in yellow highlights:

[The Navy's Controlled Information] will not be distributed to unauthorized third parties, including foreign governments, or companies under Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) unless such FOCI has been appropriately mitigated through measures approved by the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency.

That amendment allowed Company X to participate. Please confirm that a US Cleared Defense Contractor (CDC) who has mitigated risk through Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) FOCI considerations through a Special Security Agreement (SSA) may participate.

After discussion with both Industrial Security and National Disclosure personnel, we have determined the FOCI procedures focus on specific and known security implementations and are not designed to support an effort like TETRAS where the disclosure and security context is unknown until a requirement is defined. At this time a foreign contractor with an approved FOCI will not be able to perform as a TETRAS II Prime contractor.

26 Atch 2

DD 254

DD254 Top Secret Facility Clearance The DD-254 included in the RFP specifies a Top Secret facility clearance.

While we have personnel who's current SSBI supports eligibility to upgrade to TS, our facilities are currently approved for SECRET and S//SAR so we will need to be sponsored to upgrade if awarded a prime contract under TETRAS II. Please confirm that our proposal will not be deemed non-compliant on the basis of our current facility clearance.

Confirmed. The TETRAS Program Management Team will work with your company and the Industrial Security Team to support approvals. Your ability to compete at the delivery order level will be restricted to your approved DD254 document at the time of FOPR release.

27 Other List of TETRAS I Primes Is it possible to get a list of the primes awarded for TETRAS I? The 14 TETRAS I Prime Contractors are as follows: Signalink, Inc; Corvid Technologies, LLC;

Maden Technologies; Intuitive Research and Technology Corporation; WaveLink, Inc; Cummings Aerospace, Inc; Radiance Technologies, Inc; Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc; Ierus Technologies, Inc;

Dynetics,Inc; Trident Research, LLC; Georgia Tech Applied Research Corporation; Raytheon Company; Kratos Technology & Training Solutions, Inc.

28 Other Teaming We are wanting to team with primes that have expressed interest in TETRAS II. Do you have any method to point us to potential primes that will bid TETRAS II?

The Pre-proposal Conference minutes will include a list of companies that have expressed they are open to teaming on TETRAS II

29 Atch 4 L-4.3.2

Labor categories Section L-4.3.2 provides a table for TETRAS labor categories and SOC codes. We have been unable to find a couple of the TETRAS II specified SOC codes in the OMB database. We believe that they may have changed in the most recent 2021 update released in May 2022, as shown in the following table.

1) TETRAS II: RFP 15-1256 Software Developers and Software Quality Assurance Analysts and Testers 2021 Alternate SOC: 15-1252, Software Developers AND 15-1253, Software Quality Assurance Analysts and Testers

2) TETRAS II: RFP 15-2098 Data Scientists and Mathematical Science Occupations 2021 Alternate SOC: 15-2051, Data Scientists AND 15-2099, Mathematical Science Occupations, All Other

3) TETRAS II RFP: 17-3098 Calibration, Technologist/Technicians, Engineering Technologists/Technicians, Except Drafters, All other 2021 Alternate SOC: 17-3028, Calibration Technologists/Technicians AND 17-3029, Engineering Technologists/Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other

We considered averaging the two rates for the new SOC codes to establish a wage basis, but Section L-4.3.4 states that "Labor categories shall not be combined into composite labor rates or categories be accepted" so we are concerned this approach would be non-compliant.

Would the alternative 2021 SOC codes be acceptable substitutes for the outdated TETRAS II labor categories?

Does the Attachment 3 Cost Price Sheet template need to be revised since the SOC code field is locked?

Please use the current national estimate OMB SOC publication of May 2021. Replace OMB SOCs as follows:

1) 15-2098 Data Scientists and Mathematical Science Occupations with 15-2051 Data Scientists;

2) 15-1256 Software Developers & Software Quality Assurance Analysts & Testers with 15-1252 Software Developers;

3) 17-3098 Calibration Technologists/Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other with 17-3029 Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other

Amendment 0003 includes a revised Attachment 3 cost/price sheet with updated labor categories along with an updated Section L.

Attachment 3 is a required deliverable with locked formulas to expedite the Government’s evaluation of proposed rates. All offerors are required to comply with the attachment as provided. If an offeror determines that the Attachment 3 does not fully satisfy explanation of its estimating and accounting practices, the offeror may choose to provide a separate explanatory spreadsheet or narrative explaining how the offeror entered values into Attachment 3.

30 Atch L-1.3, page 3

Inclusion of Volume III. Factor II - Cost/Price as a separate submission.

Proposal Organization / Page Limitations Table L-1.3 – Proposal Organization indicates that “Volume III, Factor II – Cost/Price” is to be included in the submission of files with a quantity of 1 and no limit on page count. Please confirm this is in error and that Volume III, Factor II – Cost/Price should not be included as a separate file with the submission of proposals.

Volume III is to be included as a separate file with the submission of proposals. A coversheet for each volume shall be used to clearly mark the volume number, title, solicitation number, and the offeror’s name. Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume.

31 Atch 4 L-1.4 (a), page 4

Cross-reference matrix The RFP states, “The cover page, table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, and cross- reference matrix are excluded from the page count limitations.” Is the cross-reference matrix a requirement? Please confirm whether the cross-reference matrix is a requirement.

Yes, the cross-reference matrix is a requirement, if cross referencing. Cross-reference in accordance with L-1.3 (c)

32 Atch 4 L-1.4 (a), page 4

Cross-reference matrix The RFP states, “The cover page, table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, and cross- reference matrix are excluded from the page count limitations.” Inclusion of cross-reference matrix in Volume I only or in all Volumes? Please clarify in which volume the cross-reference matrix should be submitted.

Submit the cross-reference matrix with the Overall Proposal Table of Contents or with the Volume the cross-reference matrix pertains to.

33 Atch 4 L-1.4 (b) page 4

Oral Presentation Material - Slide Format: Font type and size for headers and footers.

For the briefing slides, the RFP states, “Text size shall be 14- point or larger.”

Please confirm that the Times New Roman and 14-point font requirement does not apply to headers and top and bottom margin content.

Headers and footers should be readable when printed on an 8.5 inch by 11 inch paper. Amendment 0003 adds this information.

34 Atch 4 L-1.4 ( c) page 4

Written Proposal Material - Font type and size for headers and footers.

For Volumes I and III, the RFP states, “Text size shall be 12-point or larger.” Please confirm that the 12-point font requirement does not apply to top and bottom margin content.

Headers and footers should be readable when printed on an 8.5 inch by 11 inch paper. Amendment 0003 adds this information.

35 Atch 4 L-1.4, page 4

Written Proposal and Oral Presentation slide Format

- Graphics format requirements

Would the Government allow a smaller font size of no smaller than 10-point for tables, drawings, and graphics, as a 14-point font may distort the presentation and flow of information within the graphic and make it difficult to understand?

The Government will not mandate a font size for graphics, but all graphics should be readable on a printed 8.5 inch by 11 inch page. Amendment 0003 incorporates this language.

36 Atch 4 L-2.2, L-2.4.5, pages 7, Volume I – Executive Proposal - Representations and Certifications is requested twice.

The solicitation lists a requirement for a signed copy of the SF 33 with sections A through K, which includes Representations and Certifications. The solicitation also lists a requirement for Representations and Certifications in L-2.4.5. Please confirm that only one copy of Representations and Certifications is required, and if so, where it should be included in Offeror’s response.

Only one copy of Representations and Certifications is required. Provide Representations and Certifications in Volume I Section IV as indicated in Section L Table L-1.3.

37 Atch 4 L-1.3, page 3

Proposal Organization/Page Limitations - DD2345 Joint Certification Program (JCP)/ DD2345 has no quantity requirement. The solicitation does not give a quantity for the Joint Certification Program (JCP)/ DD2345. Please confirm that only one (1) copy of the Joint Certification Program (JCP)/DD2345 is required.

Only one copy of the JCP DD2345 is required.

38 Atch 4 L-1.3, page 3

Proposal Organization/Page Limitations - Submission of Documents for each volume.

Please confirm whether each section in the Proposal Organization table shall be submitted as a separate document, or as a section within a single document.

Provide information in each section as separate documents as indicated in Section L Table L-1.3.

39 Atch 4 L-4.2.4, page 13

Accounting System / Requirements for DCAA Audit documentation.

Please confirm if the DCAA Audit letter is sufficient for supporting data behind having a DCAA approved accounting system.

Yes, a DCAA Audit Letter is sufficient for supporting data behind having a DCAA approved accounting system. The letter shall be on official letterhead, specifically address the offeror's accounting system, and include a definitive statement regarding the adequacy of the accounting system. Amendment 0002 incorporated this information.

40 Atch 4 L-4.2.5, page 14

Disclosure Statements / CAS Disclosure Statement written determination adequacy.

RFP Section L-4.2.5, Page 14 states “The Offeror shall provide a copy of the most recent approved CAS Disclosure Statement, if applicable.”

Given the proprietary nature of the CAS Disclosure Statement, please confirm that submitting a copy of the cognizant Federal agency official’s written determination regarding adequacy meets the requirement for supporting data in L-4.2.5 in lieu of providing the entire CAS Disclosure Statement.

The Offeror may submit a copy of the cognizant Federal agency official's written determination regarding adequacy in lieu of their actual CAS Disclosure Statement. Amendment 0001 added this language to the RFP.

41 Atch 7 M-4.4

Period of Performance Start Date The only reference to a start date for this effort is CY '22. Could the Government please provide a specific date for estimating purposes given it has an impact on the labor escalation that will be applied to the labor rates.

Year 1 should anticipate a start date in March 2023. Amendment 0002 incorporated this language. .

42 Atch 1

SOW 1.3.6.4.5

Field Team Manager This appears to be an additional skill level beyond what is communicated in Attachment 4, pg. 14, L-4.3.2 Direct Labor. Please clarify as to what level this is (Level 1, 2, 3 or 4)

The field team manager is a subject matter expert (lvl 4 or higher) in test design, test set up and execution and may be useful when proposing on test intensive delivery orders. It is not included in the pricing volume criteria for basic award, but is provided to support DO level pricing criteria for future orders.

43 Atch 4 L-1.5 (b) page 5

All information contained in the slides must be presented. Any information contained in the slides not orally presented will not be considered as part of the offeror’s oral presentation evaluation.

The request to present all information contained in the slides refers to presenting every slide and not reading all content word by word on every slide, correct?

Correct. It is expected key slide content is briefed but not every word.

44 Atch 4 L-1.4 (b) page 4

Font. Text size shall be 14-point or larger. Considering the large amount of information and detail required for the slides, please allow a minimum font size of TNR 10 for slide text.

No. Text size shall be 14-point or larger or oral presentation slides.

45 Atch 4 L-1.4 (b) ( c)

Font. Text size shall be 14-point or larger. c. Text size shall be 12-point or larger.

Considering the numerous graphics/tables needed to portray information, please allow for a minimum font size of 8 for graphics/tables/header/footer for both the Orals Slides, Volume II and the Written items, Volumes I and III.

The Government will not mandate a font size for graphics, but all graphics, headers and footers should be readable on a printed 8.5 inch by 11 inch page. Amendment 0003 incorporates header/footer language.

46 Atch 4 L-4.2.1 page 13

Index/Table of Contents The Offeror shall provide an Index/table of contents to include, as a minimum, summary descriptions of estimating, purchasing, and accounting systems; any deviations to estimating, accounting practices, or Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Disclosure Statement.. Volume I will include a Table of Contents w all items listed based on the requirements, is there an additional TOC needed?

Yes. Per L-1.3, each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate subparagraphs within that volume.

47 Atch 7 M-3.1 (a)

SOW Capabilities- Project/Program Management The Government will evaluate the offeror's technical approach to determine the offeror's capability to directly perform Project/Program Management. ALL offerors MUST propose to and demonstrate technical proficiency in Project/Program Management.. Is there a technical approach required for Project/Program Management or just an overall management approach presenting our best practices?

The Offeror's technical approach shall present a sound approach for meeting the criteria for the specified critical items and non-critical items in accordance with paragraphs M-3.1 and M-3.1.1 of the RFP.

48 Atch 4 L-3.0 page 11

SOW Capabilities - Design/Redesign, Hardware, Software, Testing

Design/Redesign, Hardware, Software, Testing require response to SOW paragraphs 1.3.6.1 through 1.3.6.3. Do we need to address all SOW items 1.3.6.1 through 1.3.6.3 for every technical task response or can we provide experience write-ups in response to 1.3.6.1, and 1.3.6.3, and for

1.3.6.2 select only subtasks that are relevant to the technical areas we are responding to?

Offerors shall present a sound approach for meeting the criteria for the specified critical items and non-critical items in accordance with paragraphs M-3.1 and M-3.1.2/M-3.1.3/M-3.1.4/M-3.1.5 (as selected) of the RFP. Offerors may choose one or more pertinent company or personnel experiences to reflect as many capabilities in the SOW as possible but addressing every SOW paragraph is not required. RFP Section M criteria is required.

49 Atch 4 L-3.0 page 11

SOW Capabilities - Project/Program Management Project/Program Management: Offeror shall demonstrate processes for accomplishing project/program management IAW SOW paragraphs 1.3.5 through 1.3.5.5 and 1.3.6.1. Do we need to address technical experience SOW 1.3.6.1 for management or just provide our Project/Program Management processes for SOW items 1.3.5 through 1.3.5.5?

Offerors shall present a sound approach for meeting the criteria for the specified critical items and non-critical items in accordance with paragraphs M-3.1 and M-3.1.1 of the RFP. Offerors may choose one or more pertinent company or personnel experiences to reflect as many capabilities in the SOW as possible but addressing every SOW paragraph is not required. RFP Section M criteria is required.

50 Atch 4 L-1.4 page 4

Page count limitations. The cover page, table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, and cross- reference matrix are excluded from the page count limitations. For the Orals presentation the cover page is exempt from page count, can divider slides be exempt also?

No. Divider slides are not required.

51 Atch 4 L-1.4 ((b) ( c)

Oral Presentation Material/Written Proposal Material

Company name and proprietary information notices shall be placed in both top and bottom margins. Will it suffice to include company name and proprietary information notices only once per page? For example Company name in the top or bottom margin and proprietary information notices in the bottom margins.

No. Please follow the guidance provided.

52 Atch 1

SOW 1.2

Contractor Acquired Property (CAP) and GFE This contract shall acquire test support and equipment to include, but not limited to, laboratory test equipment with design and measurement capacities and ancillary equipment such as power supplies, antennas, and equipment mounting hardware. The Contractor shall also acquire specialized system equipment designed for C5ISR, munitions or electronic combat systems verifications or specialized test sets necessary to perform system operational checkout or automated built-in-tests, and support test and training requirements to include all matters of test and logistics support.

Will the Government consider providing existing test support systems as GFE or this will be priced at the Task order level?

GFE and CAP expectations will be identified at the Delivery Order (DO) level.

53 Atch 1

SOW 1.2

Contractor Acquired Property (CAP) and GFE This contract shall acquire test support and equipment to include, but not limited to, laboratory test equipment with design and measurement capacities and ancillary equipment such as power supplies, antennas, and equipment mounting hardware. The Contractor shall also acquire specialized system equipment designed for C5ISR, munitions or electronic combat systems verifications or specialized test sets necessary to perform system operational checkout or automated built-in-tests, and support test and training requirements to include all matters of test and logistics support.

Will the Government consider providing specialized items as GFEs or this will be priced at the Task order level?

GFE and CAP expectations will be identified at the Delivery Order (DO) level.

54 Atch 3 Cost Price Sheet

Government and Contractor Site Rates "BLR YEAR 1, BLR YEAR 2 and BLR YEAR 3" tabs ask for rates to be built by using a direct labor rate plus all applied indirect rate percentage amounts (excluding profit or fee).

Is it correct for offerors to assume the BLR rates included within Attachment 3 are inclusive of both government and contractor site rates?

These rates are being used to establish a ceiling. Therefore, use the higher of the rates between the Government or contractor site rates.

55 Atch 3 Cost Price Sheet

OCONUS Work "BLR YEAR 1, BLR YEAR 2 and BLR YEAR 3" tabs ask for rates to be built by using a direct labor rate plus all applied indirect rate percentage amounts (excluding profit or fee).

Is it correct to assume OCONUS work will not be permanent on TETRAS?

OCONUS work will be identified and proposed at the DO level. No permanent overseas work has been established on the current TETRAS contract.

56 Atch 3 Cost Price Sheet

OCONUS Labor Rates "BLR YEAR 1, BLR YEAR 2 and BLR YEAR 3" tabs ask for rates to be built by using a direct labor rate plus all applied indirect rate percentage amounts (excluding profit or fee).

Is it correct to assume government allowances associated with OCONUS work on TETRAS will be handled outside of the BLR rates provided within Attachment 3?"

There has been no permanent full time contractor support required at OCONUS positions to date on TETRAS I and the likelihood is low for TETRAS II. With that said, the BLR rates are utilized when a delivery order proposal request receives a single offer. Under competition rates are validated by competition and each prime may propose rates as they see fit. If a single bid situation arises and the offeror has valid reasons for establishing a higher rate the Government will consider provided justification before making a determination.

57 Atch 4 L-4.3.5

Fixed Fee and Profit Rates Section L-4.3.5 Fixed Fee and Profit states "Offeror’s Fee & Profit rates shall be expressed as a percentage."

Please confirm that offerors can propose a fee associated with FFP labor and a fee associated with CPFF labor within Attachment 3 TETRAS II Cost Price sheet; can the fee be different between FFP and CPFF?

Offerors can propose a profit percentage rate for FFP that is different than the fee percentage rate for CPFF. Provide an explanation for the difference in the cost narrative.

58 Atch 4 L-2.4.1

Security clearance of workforce/staff Section L-2.4.1 speaks to an “minimum facility clearance” for the opportunity.

Is there a minimum clearance related to the workforce/staff?

The draft DD254 for this RFP outlines all security expectations.

59 Atch 4 L-4.3.2

Direct labor categories Section L-4.3.2 DIRECT LABOR provides a table of the TETRAS labor categories mapped to OMD SOC numbers. The rates appear not to map back correctly.

Can the government verify that the OMB SOC number for the Data Scientists, Software Developers and Calibration Techs are correct?

Please use the current national estimate OMB SOC publication of May 2021. Replace OMB SOCs as follows:

1) 15-2098 Data Scientists and Mathematical Science Occupations with 15-2051 Data Scientists;

2) 15-1256 Software Developers & Software Quality Assurance Analysts & Testers with 15-1252 Software Developers;

3) 17-3098 Calibration Technologists/Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other with 17-3029 Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other

Amendment 0003 incorporates a revised Cost/Price Spreadsheet with updated labor categories along with an updated Section L.

60 Atch 4 L-4.3.2

Direct labor skill levels (Level 4 vs Senior) Direct Labor Levels; Sections 1.3.6.4/ 1.3.6.5/ 1.3.6.6 all reference a “Level 4” in terms of education and experience.

Please provide additional guidance as to the distinction between "Level 4" in the SOW and "Senior" in Attachment 4. Level 4 in the SOW seems to be indicative of a Subject Matter Expert (SME) whereas the term "Senior" used in the table in Attachment 4 would indicate a Senior level person and not a SME; i.e., is “Level 4” equal to a “Senior” as referenced in Atch 4 Section L

(4.3.2 DIRECT LABOR)?

SOW level 4 is indicative of a subject matter expert while the OMB related terms in Atch 4 indicate a senior level person that may not be a SME. The pricing workbook, based on the OMB SOCs, allows each offeror to define their worst case pricing needs. Level 4 pricing above the OMB standards should be explained.

61 Atch 4 L-1.5

L 1.5 Oral Presentations (FAR15.102) a through g. Are there any provisions for Virtual Presentation of Oral Presentations in the event of an uptick of Covid- 19 activity?

If so what is the Government's preferred medium to use. (IE: MS Teams, Cisco Webex etc.)

The Government may hold virtual oral presentations in the event an uptick COVID activity preludes in-person oral presentations. The Government's preferred medium to use is MS Teams.

62 Atch 4 L-2.4.1

DD 254 All contractors are required to hold at a minimum a facility clearance level of TOP SECRET with safeguarding at SECRET. Offerors shall complete the DD254 (block 6, 7, and 8), Attachment 2 to this solicitation. To be eligible for award, an offeror must have the required clearance at the time of award or be eligible to obtain clearance requirements. Unfunded sponsorship may be granted.

Blocks 7 & 8 are already filled in and due to the actual work to be performed identified at the future Task Order level the listing of 7. Subcontractors and where 8. Actual Performance of were work will be performed for the Offeror is notional.

Was it the Government's intention to have the Offeror's only fill out Block 6 for Proposal purposes?

Offerors are to complete Blocks 6,7,8. Offerors are to complete Block 7 if it is teaming or subcontracting with other companies. Offerors are to complete Block 8 if it intends to perform at any other of the locations listed. We recommend each offeror include as many subcontractor sites in section 7 and company work locations in section 8 as possible. DD254s are managed at the contract level and the more info provided up front the less DD254 amendments will be needed for execution.

63 RFP, page 3 CLIN Schedule Does the Government anticipate the use of SubCLINs for Material/ODCs for X001 or should a separate X004 CLIN be established?

Typical TETRAS delivery order contracts contain: 1) a combined CLIN for labor, materials and ODCs; 2) a Data CLIN; and 3) a separate Travel CLIN with duplicated formats for options. CLIN structures for each delivery order will be published in the individual Fair Opportunity Proposal Request (FOPR).

64 Atch 4 L-1.1 (b)

DoD SAFE Proposal submission The paragraph states "Offerors shall submit proposals electronically via DoD SAFE (Secure Access File Exchange) to both COs no later than 22 July 2022, 2:00 PM, Central Standard Time (CST). Mail in, hard copy proposals will NOT be accepted." DoD SAFE states that "Per Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) guidance, DoD SAFE should NOT be used for transmission of contract proposals or other contract award documentation. Instead, OSD directs that the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) be used for time-sensitive contract submissions and related documentation." Will DoD SAFE still be the accepted method of proposal transmission?

Offerors are to use DoD SAFE to submit proposals. Offerors without a DoD Common Access Cards (CAC) shall submit a drop-off request to the COs and the CS.

65 Atch 2

DD254

DD254: Block 13 - Security Guidance Will references to DoD 5220.22-M NISPOM be updated to 32 Code of Federal Regulation Part 117?

The DoD 5220.22-M NISPOM was codified into regulation effective February 24, 2021 and is now known as 32 CFR Part 11. The DD254 will not be updated as there is no need to go back and update references; however all future documents that reference the NISPOM will be updated to reflect 32 CFR Part 117 (aka NISPOM rule).

66 Atch 2

DD254

DD254: Items 10.a, 11.h, and 11.i - COMSEC/TEMPEST requirements

What COMSEC and TEMPEST requirements are required ACA or are these task order specific? COMSEC and TEMPEST requirements are delivery order specific. None exist for the base TETRAS II IDIQ contract.

67 Atch 2

DD254

DD254: Item 10.e (2) - National Intelligence Information

What storage requirements for the contractor site are part of the IDIQ and does that include hard copies?

Storage requirements will be Delivery Order specific. None exist for the base TETRAS II IDIQ contract.

68 Atch 2

DD254

DD254: Item 11.m - Other There is not specification of the type required, if any, for the AIS at the contractor’s facility. Is an AIS required at the contractor’s facility?

AIS requirements will be Delivery Order specific. None exist for the base TETRAS II IDIQ contract.

69 Atch 7 M-3.1.1

SOW Capabilities Subfactor A lists items multiple items with the same numbering.

Should these be unique?

1.A.i Planning 1.A.i Cost Estimating and budgeting

This was a typographical error but will not affect proposals. Reference in accordance with labeling as stated in Section M. You must address 1Ai Resource allocation and loading as a critical element.

You may select 1Ai Cost estimating and budgeting as a non-critical element.

70 Atch 4 L-4.2.4

Accounting System Is the requirement for an approved accounting system required prior to contract award or would the Government consider approval prior to delivery order award?

Amendment 0001 removed the requirement for an approved accounting system prior to contract award in Section L-4.2.4. The TETRAS Contracting Officers will work with your company and DCAA/DCMA to support approvals. However, after contract award, contractors will not be able to propose on CPFF or any cost type DOs until their accounting systems are Government approved and provide evidence of such approval.

71 Atch 4 L-2.4.1

Security Clearance This section states “To be eligible for award, an offeror must have the required clearance at the time of award or be eligible to obtain clearance requirements.” If a contractor is in the process of obtaining their clearance would they still be considered for contract award?

Yes. The TETRAS Program Management Team will work with your company and the Industrial Security Team to support approvals. Your ability to compete at the delivery order level will be restricted to your approved DD254 document at the time of FOPR release.

72 Atch 4 L-2.4.1, page 8

Security Clearance This section states, “All contractors are required to hold at a minimum a facility clearance level of TOP SECRET with safeguarding at SECRET. Offerors shall complete the DD254 (block 6, 7, and 8), Attachment 2 to this solicitation. To be eligible for award, an offeror must have the required clearance at the time of award or be eligible to obtain clearance requirements. Unfunded sponsorship may be granted.” Are offerors able to obtain this capability through teaming and subcontractors or is the prime required to have Secret Safeguarding capabilities on Day 1 of contract award?

The prime contractor is required to have secret safeguarding capabilities before being able to flow down to subcontractors.

73 Atch 4 L-1.3

Oral Presentations This section states, “Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume”, “d. Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used”, and “a. The cover page, table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, and cross- reference matrix are excluded from the page count limitations”.

Is the Volume II oral presentation PowerPoint required to have slides with this information?

Yes.

74 Atch 7 M-3.1

SOW Capabilities - Non-critical requirements In the areas selected as non-critical requirements, are offerors able to submit more than the minimum number of non-critical areas required as long as we remain within the slide count?

Yes.

75 Atch 4 L-1.3

Volume I This section shows 1 electronic copy required for all of the sections within Volume I. Can the government confirm that the sections within Volume I should be separate documents?

Sections in Volume I should be submitted as separate documents.

76 Atch 4 L-1.4 (b), page 4

Oral Presentation Material Section L states Microsoft PowerPoint slide font size shall be a minimum of 14-point.

Does this font size requirement apply to information in the header/footer or top and bottom margins? If so, recommend reduction of font size to minimum of 10 point requirement for top and bottom margin marking information.

Headers and footers should be readable when printed on an 8.5 inch by 11 inch paper. Amendment 0003 adds this information.

77 Atch 4 L-1.1 (b)(c), Page 1

DoD SAFE Instructions online for DoD SAFE state “DoD SAFE is NOT to be used for contract solicitation or proposal submission.”

The site directs users to PIEE for proposal Submission. Request clarification on use of DoD SAFE for TETRAS II proposal submission.

Offerors are to use DoD SAFE to submit proposals. Offerors without a DoD Common Access Cards (CAC) shall submit a drop-off request to the COs and the CS.

78 Atch 4 L-2.4.2, Page 9

DD2345 L-2.4.2 instructions are for the process of obtaining certification under the DLA JCP.

For contractors with current certification under the DLA JCP please define the documents to be included in the Volume I Section IV proposal response.

The current DD2345 is…