MSCC_QAs_dtd_21Apr17_saw.pdf

MSCC - Industry Day and One-on-One Q&As 3 Apr 17 to 7 Apr 17

Item Question Government Response

Is it to be understood that no GFP will be provided? Is there an expectation that the contractor will need to provide its own JWICs?

No Government Furnished Property will be attached to the contract at award, however that could change after award depending on operational needs. The Government will provide up to eight JWICS terminals on the Government site.

JWICS at the contractor facility will be required within 6 months of contract award.

2 What is the percentage of split of funding between 3400 and 3600 funding?

The Government anticipates using approx. 30% O&M (3400) funding, 70% R&D (3600) funding on MSCC.

On the reach back offsite, will it be located in Colorado Springs? For purposes of "reach back", the contractor may utilize whatever resources are necessary to optimize performance of in-scope contract requirements. The contractor SCIF must be located not farther than 25 miles from Peterson AFB, CO.

What is the expected number of Task Orders to be awarded per year?

The number of task orders will be driven by General Officer interest and will require anywhere from one month to one year of performance depending on the complexity and leadership dictation; an Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) can last up to two years. In a typical year, the Government expects to award six to nine task orders and to bundle the short task orders to the extent we are able to.

Does this contract relate to analysis efforts outside AFSPC? Is there a relationship? On cyberspace, how are you working with the 24th and 25th Air Force?

Currently, MSSC efforts are slightly connected to cyber analysis efforts through the Cyber Unified Platform AoA. 24th AF may be working some cyber operations, however the Government requires the flexibility to move funding and contract work to the appropriate analysis organizations.

Is the funding for space and cyberspace work? Funding is predominantly for space, but we expect there will also be funding specifically for cyberspace requirements.

INDUSTRY DAY Q&As

ONE- ON-ONE Q&As

The following questions and answers are documented notes from Industry Day, held 3 April 2017, and from all One-on-Ones held with interested

The contract ceiling is substantially greater than the past 5 year requirements, where is it growing?

There are three components to this new requirement: 1) Increased interest in space capability-warfighter analysis, 2) increase in funding to cover all space capabilities and warfighter missions, and 3) increased contract scope to cover extent of funding and flexibility to grow.

Government resources and analysis capabilities are lean and must be supplemented by contractor support.

What is the value of space to the warfighter? How do space capabilities meet the need of the warfighter? How will MSCC bring it all together?

The cumulative value of Space benefits the warfighter through engineering, engagement, mission, and campaign analysis across all space capabilities, supported by the AVAC and SARP infrastructure.

Integrating the analysis across all levels is a major challenge.

Is the Government looking for better management or better analytics capabilities?

Both - better management and improved analytics capabilities are anticipated by combining contract requirements from multiple contracts, and with the award of the contract to a single contractor to provide integration support across multiple task orders. There will be a significant increase in analysis requirements and integration.

Does the Government see this requirement using current tools and maintaining or increasing tools?

MSCC requires the right tools, right data, and right analysis. The Government will employ only approved models -- however, enhancements and innovations will be evaluated and approved on a case-by-case basis.

Regarding the stochastic model, is the Government looking to support existing models?

For operational assessments of current and soon to be fielded models the Government requires precision analysis, however, to support long-range planning and requirements development, the Government requires Military Utility Analysis (MUA) to provide insights and frame a discussion on warfighter impacts.

The space capability works; there is no explanation of does it meet the need. Is this what you are looking for?

The space community is good at determining "what" need to be built and "how" to build the capability, but not "why" the capability is required.

The "why" is a key focus of the contract.

How are data rights applied to MSCC? Data rights clauses in the Basic IDIQ contract will apply to each task order. If proprietary data is used the Government will ask for certain rights if needed.

Is the Government interested in using what data it currently has?

Does the contractor maintain rights on internal components?

In general, the Government prefers not to use proprietary tools. Great care should be taken in mixing contractor/Government R&D funding.

The Government is not opposed to the use of proprietary tools, but care must be taken to ensure everyone's data rights are protected and enforced. It's important to discriminate between proprietary data delivered and the use of a proprietary analysis tool to generate the data -the Government may not need access to the analysis tool after the data is generated, so data rights concerning the tool itself are of less concern.

A chronic problem for the Government is the placement of restrictive markings on all data delivered, proprietary or not, which limits our ability to use the data until the markings can be validated and/or removed.

Can you speak to the details with respect to ordering, H clauses, etc.?

The expected process will follow the procedure normally used for a modification to a contract. There will be a technical exchange meeting prior to implementing a task order for development, whereby an "Alpha" contracting process will be employed - the MSCC contractor will partner with the Government in the development of the task order requirement prior to issuance of the RFP, and the Government will work with the contractor to build the proposal. This results in a process that is very transparent to all contracting parties and typically dramatically accelerates the issuance of task orders. The Government has not yet determined what special contract requirements might go into Section H of the proposed MSCC contract.

Regarding "quick-turn" taskings (when there is no time to conduct "alpha" contracting or implement a task order - what is the ability to award unilateral hours under a certain number of hours?

The Government does not control many of the external factors that drive the schedule, however there is no plan to enable the Government to make unilateral taskings beyond those which already exist (e.g. letter contracts, Undefinitized Contractual Actions, change orders, etc.). This may be an area where the contractor has an opportunity to present innovative processes for work requiring a quick turn-around.

If there is a scope change to a task order requirement, would that change be made to an existing task order or would the Government issue a new task order?

Scope change on existing task orders will be addressed in the form of a modification to the existing task order.

Does the Government envision partnering with prime to arrive at a project cost for an effort?

Yes - the Government intends to partner with the prime contractor on every MSCC task order through an "Alpha" contracting process, whereby the Government and the MSCC prime contractor work together to identify requirements and propose affordable and effective solutions.

13 How many ongoing studies does the Government foresee? The Government anticipates 6-9 simultaneous analysis efforts at any given point in the MSCC ordering period.

How old is the hardware in AVAC? The AVAC hardware is a little outdated; the challenge is keeping AVAC hardware/software up to date due to Air Force cybersecurity protections and to meet customers' analytical processing needs.

15 Regarding classified systems, does the Government have documentation of the structure?

The Government will provide documentation on classification structure in the final/formal MSCC solicitation.

Is the hardware/software catalog up to date? The Government's hardware/software catalogue is not current at this time, however we plan to make an update before MSCC contract phase-in.

Does it feel like MSSC requirements are underfunded, or the required work is not where it needs to be?

MSSC requirements are underfunded due to budget cuts, but in FY18 funding will increase significantly to support the increased warfighter analysis requirements.

Does the Government have an AVAC cooling infrastructure in place to meet the expected growth?

Yes, there's AVAC cooling in place for the current AVAC location in Bldg 1470. The plan is to move AVAC into Bldg 1 (AFSPC HQ) where cooling is provided and there is space for growth.

19 Will AVAC requirements be part of the current contract or new? AVAC support will become part of the current contract, and is included in the proposed MSCC IDIQ contract.

How does the Government intend to expand AVAC infrastructure based on projected growth.

The Government will install additional racks as needed. Top Secret clearance will increase for JSWF work. Most analyses are constructive & should not require extensive infrastructural expansion.

Will AVAC work be done at an off-base facility? AVAC work will be performed on Government site -- however, the MSCC contractor may want to develop an internal network similar to AVAC to perform analysis at the contractor's facility.

What are the surge requirements for "reach back"? Depending on the requirement, "Reach back" capability may be proposed as needed to support analysis, however a SCIF must be located within 25 miles of Peterson AFB.

For the CPFF CLINS, are you planning on ceiling rates? Pricing tables containing composite labor rates will be requested in the solicitation and ultimately attached to the Basic MSCC IDIQ contract to facilitate task order pricing for both FFP and CPFF task orders.

Will the Government provide labor categories? Negative - contractors should propose all the labor categories (referenced in proposed pricing tables) they believe will be required under MSCC in accordance with the scope of MSCC PWS requirements.

25 Is the Government considering evaluation criteria applicable to the MSCC transition plan?

Negative.

26 Does the Government intend to expand the JWICS terminals? Affirmative - the Government is working on expanding JWICS connectivity at this time.

27 Will JWICS maintenance of this be on a TO? Negative.

28 Is AVAC accredited? AVAC is in the process of getting re-accredited for all three networks.

Will there be a task order for planned requirements that are not implemented? What about a deliverable under the PM task order?

Task orders intended for award with the Basic IDIQ contract will be included in the formal RFP, however subsequent task orders to be issued after award will be processed on a case-by-case basis.

Regarding new capability analysis, does the Government have existing or specialized tools?

The Government must use approved analysis tools. The PWS appendix provides a list of potential Government tools. The type of analysis will allow for flexibility in the tool that is used to complete the analysis.

When would the contractor add capability where it currently does not exist?

The contractor may add capability where it currently does not exist when something "new" happens and the Government does not have the appropriate tool(s). It should be noted that all MSCC analysis tools must be verified and validated before than can be used for analysis.

32 When will the bidder's library become available? The MSCC Bidder's Library will become available on the same day as the MSCC RFP release, anticipated on or about 7 June 2017.

When will we see sections L & M? MSCC solicitation sections L&M (in draft) will be published with the release of the second draft MSCC solicitation on the FedBizOpps website;

anticipated on or about 24 April 2017.

34 Does the contractor have to state, "will perform" every "shall"? Negative, however potential offeror's are cautioned not to simply regurgitate the PWS.

35 On the team composition matrix, do we need to identify the lead for each area identified?

Affirmative - we want to see what expertise your team brings and why you think they are capable of performing the required effort.

Are there any restrictions to adding subcontractors to the team? No, directed subcontracting is not anticipated - it should be noted however, that program management by the prime MSCC contractor is critical and the Government must have insight into proposed subcontractor capabilities, including mitigation of potential Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) issues.

Will offerors' technical volume address their proposed management approach, or should we address management in the program management task order?

Both - the technical volume (in part) should address management of the overall contract, and the task order portion (in part) should describe management of the effort at the task order level.

38 How will the successful offeror integrate into AFSPC's control analysis requirement?

The successful MSCC offeror will be expected to work closely with AFSPC/A3Z, the SSDP, SMC/SY, and the intel community.

What are the Government's set aside intentions? Based upon our market research there appears to be a very robust set of MSCC-related capabilities within the small business community, therefore a competitive Small Business set-aside is contemplated.

Are there general gaps in small business capability? No one small business seemed to have the ability to cover all aspects of Space and cyber analysis support, MS&A across all domains, not just Space and Cyberspace. Based on market research, substantial teaming arrangements are indicated.

Is the MS&A requirement 2/3 space and 1/3 cyber? Although it depends on senior leadership concerns, majority of requirement is space based -- most likely 3/4 space and 1/4 cyber.

On the milestone slides presented at Industry Day, which is correct? The slide or the verbal notification?

The verbal correction made by the Contracting Officer during the MSCC Industry Day briefing reflects our most accurate schedule estimate. The corrected schedule slide will be posted to the FedBizOpps website with the rest of the briefing slides.

What does success look like to the Government? A successful MSCC effort will demonstrate a comprehensive ability to address short-term analysis challenges while advancing and evolving an enduring MSCC capability.

Is the Government looking for people to answer questions or someone to do MS&A?

Both - depending on the requirement, the Government requires a robust analysis capability using approved analysis processes and M&S tools.

How about using tools that have the User Interface (UI) or the framework, and make it useful for space and cyberspace?

The Government's requirement does not include simulators with any kind of MS&A modeling interface.

Has the Government thought about integrating with other domains?

Yes - the Government requires analysis to evaluate the impact of multi-domain capabilities on warfighting, with the added benefits related to cyber security applications.

Does the Government plan to replace legacy MS&A? Not necessarily, but we are interested in innovative approaches to improving MS&A - e.g. VV&A, proven suites of tools: Improve on the tools and make them better!

48 Is there any indication of what the role of the SEAS tool will be? The SEAS tool is expected to remain as part of the Government's modeling tool inventory.

49 Does the Government anticipate an integration of SEAS and

AFSIM?

Possible integration of SEAS and AFSIM in the future.

Does the Government plan on doing any SOSI modeling? SOSI may be used to support AFSPC/A3Z. At A9XY we are not the resident AFSPC Space experts, but possibly the A3Z and SMC may be interested.

51 Within the warfighter integration, how does the Government see this contract support JSWF?

We expect to support the evolution of Air Force Space to a future Space Mission Force (SMF); growing exponentially into training.

52 Does the Government see development of tools for analysis or integration of existing tools?

Both - development of tools for analysis and integration of existing tools.

53 In use cases, does the Government plan to integrate various capabilities and tools?

Yes - the Government plans to integrate engineering, engagement, mission, campaign, & space control analysis.

To clarify, the Government is looking up and down the analysis pyramid for inputs/outputs.

Yes - the Government is focusing on it in an analysis. If there is a lot of analysis involved and the tool is capable, the Government will determine where the tool fits in the analysis pyramid.

If the focus is on analysis and delivery to the warfighter, do you see a need for V&V?

Yes - the MSCC contractor must ensure due diligence is applied to ensure M&S tools effectively capture Government requirements. We must be able to defend our analysis.

Can the Government talk about past performance of the current incumbent in a sense of what has been done well and what needs improvement?

Negative - we must decline to disclose this information.

What "keeps the Government up at night"? The scope and schedule of the MSCC source selection is a matter of considerable concern, as is our ability to avoid any break in service due to the late award of the proposed MSCC IDIQ contract. A source selection of this magnitude, however small in comparison to other, higher-dollar acquisitions, is always an extremely fluid process with many moving parts and a procurement schedule that is prone to adjustments that make a timely award highly problematic.

Please talk about anticipated growth to MSCC - is space available on site?

18 seats will be available at AFSPC Bldg. 1, and the MSCC contractor must provide access to a TS SCIF not farther than 25 miles from Peterson

AFB.

Are there any concerns with the current prime competing for this requirement?

Negative - there are no Government concerns over the current MSSC (Interim Solution) contractor's participation in the MSCC source selection.

What is the Government looking for to be more impactful to the Government mission, and is there anything that can be improved upon?

MSCC requirements reflect the growing interest and concern over the influence (or lack thereof) of space/cyberspace on warfighter missions in the battlespace. The evolution of current requirements is leading up to an increasing scope and higher ops tempo within MSCC. Improvements to the current paradigm are always of interest, but our prime considerations are the expansion of the integration analyst role and staying on task.

How best can a contractor prepare to support outside agencies and still maintain Government success? Has that changed?

Outside agencies have their own priorities, and an ability to place approved requirements on contract valued at approx. $30M - $40M over the life of the contract. There are external customers who will have funding but no contract vehicle, or have funding and need a contract vehicle. MSCC ordering will be centralized, and the MSCC Program Office is expected to be very selective about who uses the contract so as not to prematurely exhaust the IDIQ ceiling.

Does the Government have any criteria that says this particular task will benefit Space Command?

MSCC will not be available to everyone in the analysis community, and applications to place work on MSCC will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. To date there has been no criteria developed to screen such applicants.

Can the Government provide insight into what that work would be? Do they have to fit the requirements?

We have no particular insight into future requirements from outside agencies, however all such work must be within the technical and dollar scope of the MSCC IDIQ contract.

64 Will there be an opportunity to add teaming members post-award?

Yes.

65 If work falls outside of skill set for labor categories, can new categories be added?

Yes.

Over the next 5 years, does the Government foresee significant changes in the analysis of space?

No changes in the way the Government performs space analysis are anticipated, however changes may be driven by innovations proposed by the MSCC contractor. If the Government identifies a deficiency in the current modeling process, improvements and upgrades will be considered on their merits and instituted accordingly. The goal is to improve MS&A tools and create new M&S tools if needed.

What other cyberspace projects are on the horizon? That is the biggest unknown - interest in all aspects of cyberspace is so recent that it's difficult to predict evolutionary trends. This is an area where innovation and past performance may be especially important in terms of the Government's determination of best value.

What are the Government's main goals for AVAC in six months? A year?

The Government's primary AVAC objective is 100% operational availability in both the near and long term, with improvements and upgrades incorporated as they become available.

How can the requirement needs improve? Can the Government share any "holes" currently identified?

MS&A for Space and cybersecurity needs of the Government are currently being met satisfactorily, with no "holes" to report at this time.

70 Please quantify any anticipated future EADSIM use? GIANT use?

SSNAM use?

SSNAM - three more years, then potential to add more. Others, it depends on future requirements that come down from AFSPC leadership or other agencies.

71 Is EADSIM & GIANT currently being used in HQ? EADSIM & GIANT are not physically in the building, but at STRATCOM.

72 What does the Government expect in level of effort? SharePoint or additional support?

Level of effort, SharePoint and/or additional support will largely depend on USAF senior leadership demands

73 If it does expand, would the Government add a separate TO? Yes.

There was no mention of support to SARP laptops - will they be supported offsite?

If a laptop is required to support SARP the contractor can provide a laptop to the government to load the appropriate service software and VPN access to allow the contractor to access NIPR/SIPR.

Will the SCIF be used and what is the frequency of use? As MSCC workload evolves the Government may require contractor staff to work in the contractor SCIF on certain projects. The Government would also like the option to have meetings at the SCIF site if necessary.

76 Is there processing at the secret level? Will there be AVAC support?

Yes, on the Classified AVAC (CAVAC).

How many people will the Government need to support the analytical work?

The Government has identified at least $60M - $70M for this part of the requirement. We estimate approximately half a dozen people at the contractor facility depending on ops tempo. Primary analysis support may be performed on Government site with contractor site as backup.

78 Using SEAS, does the Government foresee use of AFSIM or

THUNDER?

No, not THUNDER; AFSIM, yes.

Can you provide insight into the work you expect may come to this vehicle outside the existing tasks that will directly support AFSPC and AVAC? Do you have criteria for accepting work brought by other organizations?

Government expects continued Operational Assessments of operational capabilities and expansion of space capabilities vs warfighter mission analysis. Government does not have criteria for accepting work from other organizations, but outside agencies wishing to put work on MSCC will be vetted as necessary.

At Industry Day it sounded as if the MSCC Contracting Officer was leaving the door open for existing contractors/work to be pulled under this IDIQ if all parties agree it is in the best interest of the Government. Can the prime contractor bring on additional teammates post award?

Yes.

If work/requirements come to this IDIQ that fall outside the skill sets bid in the initial labor categories proposed at the IDIQ level, will the Government allow new labor categories to be added?

Yes - new labor categories may be submitted to the Government at any time during the contract, which will then be evaluated for reasonableness and potentially added to the pricing tables attached to the contract.

Over the next five years, do you anticipate any significant changes in the way AFSPC accomplishes the development/modification of MS&A and decision support tools and the analysis of space and cyberspace capabilities?

Obviously, many changes are possible, but mostly changes in data and processes are expected.

83 Can you provide any details as to the support that you will need for the Lessons Learned requirement?

Today, the lesson learned (LL) role at AFSPC is minimal. However, the future of LL may increase to include future exercises/wargames, operational assessments, and various LL space/cyberspace related collections.

The following questions pertain to the SCIF:

A. Will it be used daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly?

B. Please specify your classified storage requirements, e.g.

number of safes, what classification levels?

C. Please specify your VTC requirements?

D. Section 11 of the PWS states that the contractor needs to process TS/SCI – is this on JWICS only? How many JWICS terminals do you need?

E. Do you need processing at any other levels?

F. Do you need NIPRNet and SIPRNet access, if so how many terminals do you need of each?

G. Please outline your phone requirements (number of non-secure and secure phones)?

H. Do you need office space in addition to meeting room space; if so, how many offices and how large do you need them to be?

I. Do you need other IT equipment/support (projectors, printers etc.)?

A. Daily.

B. Two drawers -- SECRET & TOP SECRET

C. SECRET & TOP SECRET

D. JWICS capability will be required within 6-months of contract award E. UNLASS processing also useful F. None on contractor site.

G. Non-secure - contractor determined; secure - VOIP phone required within 6-months of contract award H. Yes, up to 6 analysis work stations.

I. Yes.

If processing is needed other than JWICS, SIPRNet and/or NIPRNet e.g. similar to the AVAC networks, is the contractor responsible for the purchase of all the equipment, software, licenses, network components etc.

A. Please describe your requirements in detail to include:

o classification levels o number of workstations per classification level, o purpose of the network (e.g. what do you want to do on it) o processing capabilities (what applications, tools, models and simulations need to be hosted) o computer storage requirements, memory, processing speeds etc.

o printers and other peripherals B. Will you need this capability on Day 1 of the contract. If not, when?

C. Is there an expectation that personnel assigned to support the AVAC in Building 1, will also support these networks?

D. How much assistance will the Government provide in the Risk Management Framework process to obtain Authority to Operate (ATO) these networks?

A. Unable to define specific requirements at this time. All requested details will be defined by the analysis required.

B. No, however, the capability to support the analysis should be able to be acquired quickly.

C. Contractor determined D. Whatever Government approvals or submissions that are needed to support the ATO of the networks will be provided.

Do you see any gaps with respect to the models, simulations and tools supporting JSWF currently? If so, what space mission/cyberspace mission areas do you need assistance in?

Currently, the major MS&A gap is a Space Campaign model.

Recognizing that Verification, Validation and Accreditation of models, simulations, and tools assists in the credibility of result presented to senior decision makers, how much effort do you want to allocate to the current set of tools being used to support

JSWF?

We anticipate the use of current tools unless analysis requirements cannot otherwise be satisfied.

88 What is the split in effort between supporting engagement, mission and campaign analysis under the JSWF effort?

Mostly mission and campaign levels.

89 What is the percentage of effort will the team support each of the JSWF working groups (WWG, SCWG and WAWG)?

WWG 40%/SCWG 20%/WAWG 40%

90 Will AFSPC need support to SEV/SWC? Will that support fall under Req 1 or Req 4 or both?

Yes -- both Req 1 & Req 4

91 What are some anticipated actions or analysis necessary to support SEV in the near future?

Mission and Campaign level analysis

92 What are the anticipated decisions or types of decisions that JSWF MS&A will eventually inform?

Planning, Core Function Support Plans, Requirements Development, & Acquisition Decisions

Section 9.1 states that ALL personnel require TS/SCI clearances to work on the PWS, however there are only 30 billets identified on the DD254. Some of the work can likely be performed at the unclassified or SECRET level. Did you mean to say “ALL”?

Not all - PWS has been updated to reflect up to thirty classified billets.

It is likely that additional questions will need to be asked upon the release of the proposal instructions (Section L), evaluation criteria (Section M)? and Sample TOs? What is the deadline for submitting those questions prior to the RFP release? Will all questions submitted prior to RFP release be answered and provided on FedBizOpps Ops when the RFP is released or will answers be provided sooner.

Questions may be submitted through the MSCC Contracting Officer until ten days prior to the closing date of the MSSC solicitation.

Will there be an opportunity to ask questions after the RFP is released? If so what will be the deadline for submissions and your expected time to answer? This would be based on the number of changes from the draft pre-RFP documentation.

Questions may be submitted through the MSCC Contracting Officer until ten days prior to the closing date of the MSSC solicitation. Answers will be posted to the FedBizOpps website approx. three days after submittal of the question(s).

During the Industry Day presentation you stated that FAR 52.222- 46 applies. Will the Compensation Evaluation Form be provided when L&M are released? Will the form be submitted for the IDIQ for all labor categories or will you only need it for the specific Sample TOs and only the labor categories bid for those Sample TOs. How will the Government resolve the inherent issue of multiple employees falling under the same labor category but with different benefit packages based on marital/family status, benefits coverage provided by spouses or other military plans) and options to participate in retirement plans, HSAs etc.

MSCC will not require a "form" for purposes of the Government's Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees, however a plan is required. It is not the Government's responsibility to resolve the issue of multiple employees falling under the same labor category with different benefit packages based on marital/family status, benefits coverage provided by spouses or other military plans) and options to participate in retirement plans, HSAs etc.; each must be addressed separately in the contractor's Professional Compensation Plan. As stated in the provision at FAR 52.222-46, "Recompetition of service contracts may in some cases result in lowering the compensation (salaries and fringe benefits) paid or furnished professional employees. This lowering can be detrimental in obtaining the quality of professional services needed for adequate contract performance. It is therefore in the Government’s best interest that professional employees, as defined in 29 CFR 541, be properly and fairly compensated. As part of their proposals, offerors will submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract. The Government will evaluate the plan to assure that it reflects a sound management approach and understanding of the contract requirements. This evaluation will include an assessment of the offeror’s ability to provide uninterrupted high-quality work. The professional compensation proposed will be considered in terms of its impact upon recruiting and retention, its realism, and its consistency with a total plan for compensation.

Supporting information will include data, such as recognized national and

Do you want all of the team members (prime and subcontractors) to complete a Compensation Evaluation Form?

Negative - offerors' Professional Compensation Plans shall reflect efforts performed across the entire contract, inclusive of subcontractors, to ensure the requirements of FAR 52.222-46 have been met - with the submission of their proposal, prime contractors are essentially certifying that their subcontractors are in compliance.

What is the anticipated page count for the Sample TOs? Do you expect this to be consistent for TOs let post award? Attachment 12 of Amendment 1, asks for “Contractor Experience” at the requirement level. Do you anticipate a full citation requirement or a more simplified vignette format as this is proposed as a single award IDIQ and PPIs will be submitted at the IDIQ level?

Please see Section L of the solicitation to determine page count limitations for the task orders referenced therein. There will be no page count limitations in RFPs issued for task orders after award. Not sure what is meant by a "full citation requirement", however the requirements for past performance information referenced in Section L of the solicitation apply - it is the offeror's responsibility to offer whatever recent and relevant past performance they have, in compliance with the provisions of the MSCC solicitation.

99 Do you expect to release the sample TOs prior to formal RFP release?

Please see the posting of the second draft MSCC solicitation for task order information.

Can you clarify which Attachments will be used to respond to the IDIQ, which will be required for each sample TOs only and which are needed for both the IDIQ and TO? Will this be clearly identified in Section L?

Please reference the Solicitation Cross Reference Matrix attached to the draft RFP for this information.

If the prime contractor proposes a subcontractor on a sample TO or TOs let post award, do you require them to submit a sealed bid?

Submission of a separate sealed proposal from subcontractors is at the discretion of the offeror(s); there's no requirement for such submission, but we're aware of the sensitivity of the information, and will accept it separately or as part of the prime contractor's proposal package.

102 Will this contract support JICSpOC (National Space Defense Center)?

Yes -- with Mission & Campaign Analysis

103 Does the Government have an idea of how many people are needed in the SCIF?

For actual analysis, half a dozen or more. The contractor should break it into smaller segments to address TS vice S, etc.

104 Would AVAC need a SCIF? Classified AVAC work will stay on base.

105 Does the Government see a need for SIPRNET? It is performed on base.

What will be covered on this requirement? All space mission areas will be considered under this contract --priorities, however, will be established based on leadership decisions

107 Task Orders will come along as needed? Yes

108 How big of a team does the Government think is relevant? How many companies?

The Government will not comment on the size of teaming arrangements.

Where does the Government feel like it would like to see more support?

AFSPC Leadership provides priorities . The contractor must have the capability to integrate across analysis levels & explain the analysis at each level.

110 Is the Government interested in GPS? Yes - there's interest in threats to GPS as well as the impact of GPC capabilities on warfighter requirements.

Does the Government see this term as a 5 year period and questions can be broad?

Yes.

With the capabilities being developed, does the Government see them flowing over to other groups?

Yes -- the Government will reach out to organizations with the appropriate analysis capabilities. This contract will include integrating MSCC analysis with analysis organizations outside AFSPC.

How does CPFF fit in as a subcontractor? Prime contractors may execute whatever contract types they consider appropriate for the work their subcontractors will perform at any tier, however, based on any given risk analysis, it's not unreasonable to expect that the CLIN types listed in the Basic MSCC IDIQ contract (and associated task orders) will be the same ones used in any subsequently negotiated subcontract.

In general, CPFF vice FFP, would the Government be willing to go

FFP?

By definition, the Government assumes the cost risk on all the CPFF CLIN types that are referenced in MSCC task orders, but for work that is more predictable and less risky (e.g. AVAC) an FFP CLIN may be used, transferring cost/schedule/performance risk to the MSCC contractor.

Funding/CLIN types are determined based on the level of risk for each requirement.

CPFF - does this require DCAA compliance? Purchasing and accounting system requirements will be addressed in Section L (see L.8) of the next draft posting of the MSCC solicitation on the FedBizOpps website on or about 24 April 2017.

From a team perspective, what does the Government see as an agile team?

The right balance of space capability & warfighting expertise; operations analysis, engineering, & software development expertise; and full-time & part-time level of effort.

On the current contract, Segue is the Prime? How long has this contract been in place?

Segue Technologies Inc. is the Prime contractor on the MSSC (Interim Solution) contract awarded last September. Prior to that, they performed as Prime on MSSC II.

118 How many subs can there be on a team? There are no limitations on the number of subcontracted firms.

Small business prime, what is the small business requirement to be met?

Work performed by the small business prime contractor and any small business subcontractors may now be combined to satisfy the minimum 51% participation by small business under the contract.

120 Has DSoft been across multiple primes? Recommend you contact Dsoft for this information.

121 What is the high level prime of DSoft? Recommend you contact Dsoft for this information.

122 In the PWS, different tools are listed but no description is given in the appendix. Can you provide a description?

Yes, a description of available tools will be included in the next draft solicitation posted to the FedBizOpps website.

Please explain an influence diagram. An influence diagram connects the Joint Mission Thread (JMT) with the appropriate Space Touch Points (TPs), e.g. combine the JMT of a Combat Search & Rescue (CSAR) with the impact of weather forecasting.

Looking at an exclusive agreement with a prime. If the prime does not win, are we as a subcontractor then excluded from future work under the awarded prime?

No, the awarded prime can come to you in the future to perform work as a subcontractor.

Do you anticipate releasing L and M prior to the final RFP release?

If so, when do you anticipate the release?

A draft version of Sections L &M will be included in the next posting of the draft MSCC solicitation to the FedBizOpps website on or about 24 April 2017.

Will the technical and past performance volumes (including task orders) be page limited? If so, what are your anticipated page limitations?

Yes, there will be a page limitation on these submittals; ref. Sec. L in the next posting of the draft MSCC solicitation to the FedBiz Opps website on or about 24 April 2017.

With the Government’s best value acquisition strategy, will section M include both a technical rating scale and a risk rating scale or will it be an integrated assessment?

The MSCC source selection evaluators intend to apply an Integrated Technical/Risk assessment.

128 Will task orders have the same best value evaluation criteria as management and technical?

Yes.

129 What will be the contract type for each task order, CPFF or FFP? Could be a combination of CPFF, FFP, and CR CLINS

If a task order is CPFF, is the contractor required to bid IDIQ CPFF celling rates?

Task orders must be priced in accordance with the pricing tables attached to the Basic MSCC IDIQ contract at award. These tables may be modified after award as needed.

Is the Government requiring fully burdened IDIQ rates for just CPFF CLINs or for FFP CLINs as well?

The Government will require submittal of fully burdened labor rates for both FFP and CPFF levels of effort, referenced in the appropriate pricing tables attached to the Basic contract.

Are the base contract rates in Attachment 15 ceiling rates for task order execution or just for IDIQ evaluation purposes?

Attachment 15 will eventually become the pricing tables used for the employment of FFP and CPFF task orders placed against the contract.

Offerors may choose to use identical rates for both FFP or CPFF, or they may be listed separately, but they'll all be subject to a pricing evaluation to determine realism and reasonableness.

How does the Government plan to calculate Total Evaluated Price (average task order fully burdened rates + average base contract full burdened rates)? This is unclear in Attachment 15.

Total Evaluated Prices will be determined using offerors' fully burdened labor rates listed in RFP Attachment 15. The fully burdened labor rates listed in the pricing tables attached to the Basic contract are applicable to all MSCC task order issued thereunder; no distinction between "task order" rates and "contract" rates - they should all be the same, however FFP and CPFF rates may be listed separately.

For the past performance volume, how many references are you planning to require? Is that a minimum or maximum?

Past Performance Information should be provided on no more than five

(5) recent (performed during past three (3) years) contracts performed either as a prime or a subcontractor, and for teaming

For past performance, will there be a value size requirement? To further support declarations of relevancy, past performance references should reflect performance of work of the same size, scope, and magnitude as MSCC.

136 For past performance, what is the recency requirement? Recency is defined as work performed during past three (3) years performed either as a prime or a subcontractor.

Will the total compensation plan be part of the contracts volume or pricing volume? Will there be any trade space in the best value decision for the comp plan, or is this simply a pass fail, technically acceptable evaluation element?

Offerors' Total Compensation Plans should be included in the Cost/Price Volume of the proposal. Total Compensation Plans will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis.

Industry Day slides noted the consolidation of three contracts, including MSSC II ($5.5M/3 years), MSSC Interim ($6.5M/2 years), and AVAC ($2.6M/5 years). Assuming the numbers are per year, this equals $59M. The ceiling for this new MSCC contract is $95M.

Where does the Government anticipate the remaining $36M coming from to get to the $95M?

The dollars listed are total contract values for each contract. The delta between past contract values and the proposed MSCC ceiling reflects the anticipated increase in new requirements for the JSWF and from AFSPC senior leadership.

Will the Government provide current staffing levels for the MSSC II, MSSC Interim, and AVAC contracts or include workload data in terms of historical task orders supported and types and durations of analysis? Will the Government provide anticipated workload data for the new consolidated MSCC contract in terms of projected number of task orders, types, and duration?

Negative - in order to encourage independent and innovative approaches to MSCC staffing, the Government respectfully declines to provide current staffing levels and associated workload information. We anticipate the issuance of 6-9 task orders per year on MSCC with periods of performance ranging from a few weeks up to a couple of years duration.

140 What is the timeframe for release of the RFP? The Government is on schedule for a 6 June 2017 RFP release.

141 Is there going to be a RFP page limit?

Yes - proposal page limitations are expected to be included in the next posting of the draft MSSC RFP.

142 Will there be a weighting factor for each section of the RFP?

Yes - technical/past performance will be significantly more important than cost/price.

143 What is the emphasis of the work to be performed? The majority of the work to be performed will be JSWF.

144 Can we submit classified past performance? Negative - only unclassified past performance will be accepted.

Will there be Government furnished information?

Yes, for purposes of the solicitation a substantial amount of Government Furnished Information will be made available - instructions for accessing the MSCC bidders library will be included in the solicitation.

146 How many key personnel resumes will be accepted? No key personnel resumes will be required in the MSCC solicitation.

147 Does the Government require tool enhancements?

If needed to support the analysis. Our expectation is that the MSCC contractor will focus on current tools and tool innovation.

Is SAPR required or can another system/tool be used?

The Government is receptive to the use of other knowledge management systems besides SAPR, depending on the application.

Does each position require a security clearance?

Most positions will require, as a minimum, Secret clearances. Depending on the requirement there are TS-SCI and SAP requirements on some task orders, which may change over the course of the period of performance depending on circumstances.

Is there a JWICS requirement?

Yes, JWICS accounts will be submitted as required for contractor personnel.

JWICS at the contractor facility shall be required within 6-months of contract award.

151 Does the Government envision the SCIF to be multi-purpose?

SCIF needs to be within 25 miles of Peterson AFB and have space to hold meetings between the contractor and the Government.

152 Does the Government require an AVAC clone system? No, the Government does not required an AVAC clone system.

Can you tell us the number of TOs per year?

Approximately 6-9 per year, but depends on senior leadership requirements. We expect to award 2-3 task orders at award of the Basic IDIQ contract.

Did the Government look at OASIS to meet this requirement?

The Government contemplates a single award IDIQ contract that can be managed centrally, and this can't be done using the OASIS contract vehicle.

Will the Prime Offeror be required to have contract past performance as a Prime Contractor with one or more contracts of similar size and scope to the MSCC effort?

Offerors with a record of past performance as a prime contractor on contracts of similar size and scope to the MSCC effort are likely to be rated more favorably than those without.

Reference Attachments 9 & 10: What are the minimum compliant requirements (i.e. one prime contract with similar size/scope) for compliance and what are the highest rated (exceeds or strength, i.e., 2 or more prime contracts of similar size/scope) evaluation requirements for past performance specific to the Prime contractor for management and technical qualifications? Please refer to Sections L&M of the MSCC solicitation.

Reference Attachments 9 & 10: Will the past performance management evaluation requirements for the Prime Offeror define whether or not the contract must include multiple subcontractors to be a valid past performance citation? No.

Reference Attachments 9 & 10: Will the past performance management evaluation requirements for the Prime Offeror define whether or not the contract must include processing and maintaining a selected minimum number of TS, SCI or SAP personnel accesses (e.g. 5 or more personnel with TS, SCI or SAP access) throughout the life of the contract to be a valid past performance citation? No.

Reference Attachments 9 & 10: Will the Prime contractor be required to validate, with past performance, they can perform 50 percent of the mission/functional technical tasks defined by the Relevance Matrix, Atch 10, DRFP to have a valid past performance citation? How will this be evaluated, minimum compliance versus exceptional compliance? Please refer to Sections L&M of the MSCC solicitation.

Reference Attachments 9 & 10: How will relevancy for technical qualifications for the prime and subcontractors be evaluated to ensure compliance with validity for the missions/functions, Atch 10, DRFP? Please refer to Sections L&M of the MSCC solicitation.

Reference Attachments 9 & 10: Is direct incumbency past performance going to receive a higher evaluation rating than non-incumbent relevant past performance work? No.

Is a newly formed Joint Venture (JV) with no previous JV management qualifications being a new entity, but specifically formed as a new entity for the MSCC procurement, eligible and qualified to Prime the MSCC procurement (assuming they comply with management/technical past performance evaluation requirements)?

A newly formed Joint Venture (JV) with no previous JV management qualifications, specifically formed as a new entity for the MSCC procurement, may be considered eligible and qualified to Prime the MSCC procurement, assuming they comply with management/technical past performance evaluation requirements. Such a firm would likely receive a "Neutral" past performance rating.

Can the SCIF facility and special access security requirements be satisfied using a binding agreement between the Prime contractor and a specified subcontractor?

Yes - offerors must demonstrate local (within 25 mi. of Peterson AFB) SCIF access prior to contract start.

Our assumption is that the final RFP will provide additional guidance on OCI determination specific to completing Attachment 7 for OCI Disclosure and Analysis, is this assumption correct? Affirmative - OCI will be addressed in the RFP.

165 When can we expect to receive Draft Sections L and M of the MSCC procurement?

A second draft MSCC solicitation…