Q&A_from_Draft_RFP.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 30 KB Posted

Attached to
COM-F III Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
FA4452-18-R-0037
Issued by
Department of the Air Force Air Mobility Command

About this file

From the source

Q&A from COM-F III Draft RFP

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to COM-F III, newest first.
File Type Posted
Additional_2_Q&A_11_Apr_19.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Additional_Questions_from_COM-F_Q&A's.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attch_1_PWS_COM-F_III_Amend_02_21_Mar_19.docx DOCX document
Attch_7_Workload_Estimates_MEIS_3_Amend_02.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Pre-Proposal_Q&A_to_contractor.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
RFP_COM-F_III._Amend_02_docx..docx DOCX document
Attch_6_P_and_C._Amendment_01.docx DOCX document
Attch_19_NDA_Amendment_01_COM-F_III.pdf PDF
RFP_COM-F_III._Amendment_01_docx.docx DOCX document
Attch_3_GFP_COM-F.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attch_1_PWS_COM-F_III_15_Mar_19.docx DOCX document
Attch_16_TO_Pricing_Template.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attch_8_Labor_Cat_Description.docx DOCX document
Attch_6_P_and_C.docx DOCX document
Attch_13_Teaming_Consent_Letter__.docx DOCX document
Attch_17_COM-F_III_TO_Staffing_Matrix.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attch_4_Draft_QASP_COM-F_III_15_Mar_19.docx DOCX document
Attch_15_GDSS_TO_Appendix.pdf PDF
CDRL's_1-8_COM-F_III.pdf PDF
Attch_9_IDIQ_Labor_Category_and_Pricing_Template.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attch_14_Strengths_and_Exceedances.docx DOCX document
Attch_5_DD254.pdf PDF
Attch_12_-_PP_Questionaire.docx DOCX document
Attch_11_Client_PP_Authorization.docx DOCX document
Attch_18_Subsequent_Task_Order_Appendices.pdf PDF
Attch_7_COM-F_Historical_Workloads.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attch_10_PPIS_COM-F_III.docx DOCX document
RFP_COM-F_III.docx DOCX document
Show all 28

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Sheet1

Communications, Operations, & Maintenance Functions (COM-F) FA4452-18-R-0037
OfferorsGovernment Only
Question #DocumentPage #Paragraph #Comment/QuestionRO/CO Response
1PWS31 and 375.4, 5,5, 5.6, 5.12Security requirements cited in the PWS, we believe that, because of the ongoing policy to comply with the DoD Risk Management Framework (RMF), the final solicitation might benefit from a directly stated security provision such as: “An offeror shall identify in its proposal, quote, bid or any resulting contract, their strategy for ensuring policy compliance with the May 11, 2017 Executive Order 13800, Strengthening the Cybersecurity of Federal Networks and Critical Infrastructure. The compliance strategy shall conform to cybersecurity risk management best practices set forth in the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity and the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) Security Technical Implementation Guides (STIGs). The methods and processes shall be documented in the System Security Plan and updated as necessary to ensure continuing compliance throughout the period of performance.”

While the DFARS 252.204-7012 clause is comprehensive, albeit lengthy, inserting this provision with specific language addressing compliance (vice referencing the NIST SP 800-171 guidance, as the clause does) will have a more direct impact.

Our experience indicates that much of the overarching policy alludes to, but doesn’t directly address compliance requirements and that adding such a provision to the PWS, or Section H, would clarify the importance of security compliance at the contract level. The accelerating security challenges impacting agency networks require a disciplined approach to maintaining currency. Our suggestion is intended to level this mandate of service providers and to preclude excessive submissions of changes (i.e., FAR 43) related to security changes, as well as to stave off Requests for Equitable Adjustments (REAs).A statement to this effect has been added to the PWS in paragraph 5.4.
5PWS5Regarding the cloud environment, the PWS states: “Support the modernization, technology insertion, performance analysis and turning, maintenance, testing, migration and integration of the Systems supported into a Common Computing Environment (CCE) and DoD or commercial cloud environment (such as IaaS and Cloud.” This applies to System/Network/Database administration. Can the government provide additional explanation for this support , as the PWS also states "the future products for support in the modernization and cloud remain unknown at this time.”The governement can state that this contract at some point will transition to the Cloud, at which time is currently unknown.
6RFP5 & 61.2.1.1 & 1.3Section 1.3 states that the electronic submission shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Office 2016 suite of applications. However, section 1.2.1.1. Page Formatting states that all proposal information shall be submitted in either MS Word, PDF, MS Excel format unless otherwise indicated in the solicitation. Will the government confirm that PDFs are acceptable for submission?The government prefers the proposal documents attachment remain in the same microsoft version, but contractors internal documents can be in PDF format.
7RFP62.1.1The instructions specify a “concise” summary. Is there a page limit for the Executive Summary?Table 1.2a indicates 3 page limit
8PWS61.2Please clarify the word “all” within the following sentence: “The contractor will be responsible for all aspects of operations and maintenance of the AMC C2OE and the systems that reside in the C2OE.” Our understanding is that this also includes engineering parts of O&M of the AMC C2OE and systems that reside in it.The contractor will be responsible for O&M for the entirety of the C2OE environment and the systems that reside in it. The contractor will be expected to only forward trouble tickets to level 3 support (AISS and software developers) when there is a flaw in the system that requires the system creators to fix. Although they will not be directly responsible for developing/engineering the C2OE environment or the systems that reside in it an offeror may find it useful to include engineers in their proposal.
9PWS61.2Can the government provide estimated workloads to support production installs (e.g. Sas, NE and DBAs by program)? Will the government require COM-F to create scripts that automate builds or will they be provided with each major release?Workload estimates are provided in attachment 7 showing the anticipated number of releases per year for each system. The contractor will receive scripts for some releases and may need to create scripts for others.
2The list of software and appliances does not include the items listed below. Please clarify if these should be included as part of the list:The list of software & appliances list in not meant be all inclusive, it is a general list to to help the contractors understand the scope
a. Netscout nGeniusONE
b. Palo Alto
13PWS7c. Checkpoint
d. IBM Datapower Xi52
e. Secure CRT
f. WSUS
g. YUM
h. Postfix (incoming)
i. Solarwinds
j. IIS SMTP
k. RDP Gateway
l. SAN
2The list of current software and appliances does not appear to include those that are in Cloud or planned for implementation in the Cloud. Will the government add additional Cloud related software and appliances?Cloud requirements have not been solidified at this time. The governement can state that this contract at some point will transition to the Cloud, at which time is currently unknown.
2.1.2To assist with proper workload estimates, can the government provide an estimate of the number of recurring/pop-up meetings?The number of meetings attended by contractor personnel varies by system. Pop-up meetings are impossible to predict since they depend on the status of software fieldings and outages. Standard recurring meetings per system are as follows (daily/weekly/monthly): ACAS (0, 0, 1), C2OE Enclaves (1, 0, 0), CAMPS (0, 1.5, 0), DMR (0, 1, 0), GATES (0/1/2), GCCS (0, 0, 0), GDSS (1, .5, 0), MAFPS (1, 1, 0), MEIS 4 (1, .5, 0) (.5 = bi-weekly)
2.5.3.1Just a reminder/note that the text references Attachment 6 for completion of the staffing plan by the offeror. The current Attachment 6 provided with the draft RFP is this template for questions and feedback on the Draft RFP.

Also, the current Staffing Approach evaluation only requires a matrix showing labor categories assigned to tasks and subtasks. The most important element is the people that the offeror can actually deliver. We suggest that the government requests resumes for key personnel to reinforce the ability of the offeror to provide the level of experience and capabilities proposed. Attachment 6 is the provisions and clauses. Attachment 17 shall be used for the staffing plan. The government is not asking for resumes of Key personnel

14PWS72.4The government requests Attachment 9 as part of Volume 3 and Volume 4. Can the government confirm the requirement for the offeror’s IDIQ pricing in both Volume 3 and Volume 4 submissions?Yes, Attachment 9 will be used for both Volume II and Volume III of the IDIQ
15PWS72.1.5References: The current Help Desk Procedures will be provided to the contractor who will maintain and document all changes in the Contractor Maintained Procedures.
Question: Can the government provide this document for review?This is currently being considered and the decision will be addressed in the Pre-Proposal Conference.
16PWS72.1.4The section conveys that asset management requirements are limited to Scott AFB and DECC St Louis (which is going away). This is in conflict with the mention of installation of “all” equipment in the Scope paragraph 1.2. Please clarify: Will this requirement extend to the remote enclave sites?The statement in the scope is separate and distinct from the asset management requirement which refers to inventory control of specific hardware.
17RFP82.1.3The section states, “The contractor shall provide EAS assistance in accordance with (IAW) the 375 Communications Squadron Operating Instruction.” Please clarify: Is EAS support only to COM-F contract personnel?Yes, EAS support is for COM-F contract personnel only
18Draft RFP COM-F III92.1.4The section states, “The contractor shall provide Inventory control, which begins when the government deems equipment operational. Once deemed operational, the contractor shall maintain accountability until removed from inventory.” Will the government define the phrase “deemed operational”?The following statements in section 2.1.4: "The contractor shall provide Inventory control, which begins when the Government deems equipment operational. Once deemed operational, the contractor shall maintain accountability until removed from inventory," will be ameded as follows... "The contractor shall provide Inventory control, which begins when equipment is added to the applicable inventory maintained by the contractor. Once deemed operational, the contractor shall maintain accountability until removed from inventory. The contractor shall maintain accountability until removed from inventory."
19PWS91 (after bullets)To ensure integration across all tasks and services, we recommend that that government include a minimum of IT Infrastructure Library (ITILv3 2011) Foundations or higher as another relevant and desired certification for all staff.This is not a PWS minumum requirement, it is up to the contractors to determine the labor mix and any exceedants
20PWS93.1.2.2The government provides instructions to address Technical Risk in Volume 1. Can the government verify if this should be addressed as part of Subfactor 1 – Initial GDSS TO Technical Approach?The entire section of 52.212-2 (section 3.1) will be evaluated Technical Risk Volume I
22PWS92.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.2.3, 2.2.4The section states, “The contractor shall document all procedures in the Contractor Maintained Procedures.” Is there an expectation that COM-F will develop/generate those procedures if not delivered by external agencies?Current Contractor Maintained Procedures will be provided at the start of the contract. Other organizations (including, but not limited to, the system program management offices, software developers, and AISS) will provide additional procedures which the contractor will add to the Contractor Maintained Procedures. They will also edit procedures and develop/generate new procedures if required.
24RFP103.2.1Can offerors reformat the structure of Attachment 10 to provide all of the requested information? The current format consumes three of the allotted five pages for each Past Performance summary.Yes. The contractor also is alotted liberties on how they complete attachemnt 17, the Staffing Matrix
25PWS10, 11, 15, 193.2.1The section states that the submission “will be evaluated against the Technical subfactors defined in the Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items.” Does the government mean to evaluate against Past Performance factors, or Section 2.2.2, beginning on page 20?Section 2.2.2 explains the past performance evaluation, the government will look for past performance of the projects of similar scope and magnitude, therefore included more than just section 2.2.2
28RFP11Sections 2.1.5The PWS states that metrics are reported for each area in the service summary. While the service summary lists some requirements, it does not specify the metrics to be captured and reported.
We suggest that the government provide more details on the metrics that are expected to be captured for the Monthly Status Report. For example, the government may include a metric to ensure work on tickets begins in a reasonable amount of time for the given priority level. In addition, the government may include a metric for time to closure of routine tickets, such as account creations when activities are within the contractor's control, or timeliness to install approved patches.The metrics are listed on the QASP
29RFP112.2 O&M Support ServicesWe suggest that the government clarify for bidders the instrumentation that exists in the operational environment to measure system availability.
No specific instrumentation exists that measures system availability. It is calculated based upon the information entered in the trouble ticket tracking system (Remedy) for unscheduled outages.
31PWS112.2.2.14The section states, “Upgrade and configure System software that supports infrastructure applications according to project or operational needs including new software releases, hotfixes, and patches, to production, exercise suites and GDSS training site.” Will the government confirm that this is additive work supporting the exercise suite all of the time and adding the GDSS Training Suite?The production, exercise suites, and GDSS training site located in C2OE are supported under the current COMF-II contract. This is not additive work.
32PWS112.2.2.16The requirement states, “Perform software and hardware fielding IAW software version document releasing instructions provided by Level 3 support and Level 3 development organizations.” We understand that the software version document may stipulate that Level 3 leads the fielding with COM-F OTS. If it doesn’t then we recommend that the government provide an environment that can be used by COM-F to practice fielding steps, so that the first hands-on experience with fielding a release is not when it is being fielded into OPS.It is the Government's intention that Level 3 will no longer lead fielding events on C2OE. We will take the suggestion for a practice environment under advisement.
33PWS122.2.2.28References: Keep detailed records/logs of work activities/system performance to support metrics and reporting and include in Monthly Status Report.
Question: Can you provide current operational metrics per shift to include: What are they currently measuring and; Do they have data for the last 3-6 mo. thru last year?This information is kept in the Remedy trouble ticket tracking system and in shift logs. It will not be provided to oferors.
34PWS133.4.1The government specifies inclusion of several Attachments in Volume IV. These attachments are also required in other volumes of the Proposal. Can the government confirm that they desire duplicate copies in Volume IV?No duplicates are desired
35PWS132.2.2.18The PWS states that the contractor will "monitor, maintain, and ensure currency of server certificates."
We suggest that the government clarify if tools for managing Certificates for the servers will be provided.There is currently no specific tools used to manage server certificates.
36PWS142.2.2.38The requirement states, “Coordinate maintenance actions and schedule System outages.” It is our understanding that the System Manager schedules system outages. Please clarify the responsibility of the contractor as it pertains to the schedule for system outages.The SM schedules and/or coordinates the establishment of the overall system authorized service interruptions (ASI's) for preventive maintenance, upgrades, etc. The contractor coordinates the actual maintenance action with specific functional community POC's per directive (SLA, MOU, etc.) and makes recommendations for the required maintenance actions and schedule.
37RFP142.1Does the government intend to evaluate Volumes I and IV of the IDIQ proposal submission? If so, please specify how those will be evaluated.Volume I of the IDIQ Executive Summary will not be evaluated. Attachment 9, IDIQ

Labor Category and Price Template that is listed in Volume IV will be evaluated

38PWS152.2.3.22Traditionally, the COM-F contractor has not been responsible for testing the network. Please confirm if this is a new requirement under the contract. Assuming so, will the government provide a test environment for COM-F use?The contractor is not responsible for testing the network but will be required to check the network for throughput and latency.
39PWS152.2.2.44 and 2.2.4.29 Create and maintain scripts for task automationRegarding the separate requirements to "Create and maintain scripts for task automation," we suggest that the government clarify the following:

How are NetIQ, Altiris, and Splunk used currently and are these tools available for expanded use?

What other tooling is available to aid administration for tasks such as system log aggregation, server and application dependency monitoring, network monitoring, automation, certificate management, etc.?

Is the contractor limited in the ability to create scripts or configure existing tools for use?

What other tooling is available to accomplish automation?

Is the contractor able to recommend, design, engineer, test, and implement additional tooling to aid administration?

NetIQ, Altiris, and Splunk are utilized as intended by their applicable features. The usage of the available features can be expanded. No other tools are available. Additional tools can be recommended to the appropriate system program management office for addition into the systems. Script creation in not limited, however if a script does more than query the system its usage is contingent upon prior analysis of impact to oprerations.
40RFP162.2.3 Network AdministrationWe suggest that the government clarify for bidders the collaboration tools that are available for the administrators who may be both on shift and off.The government will provide a Sharepoint site for this purpose.
41PWS172.2.3.5The PWS states that the contractor will "lead troubleshooting teleconferences with users, Level 3 support, and Level 3 development organizations to resolve open system issues as documented in the TTTS."
For external organizations, such as Level 3 support and Level 3 development organizations, we recommend that the government request Operational Level Agreements (OLA) to outline the expectation for necessary interactions and to clarify responsibilities. If desired, we recommend that the government specify which organizations the contractor should work with to pursue an OLA. In each case, the government should assign a lead resource to clarify any scope issues that may need resolved.Noted.
42PWS17 & 232.2.3.24This statement requires COM-F to “Initiate, process, and track requests for firewall configuration changes and firewall configuration waivers when a customer with established System accounts requires network access and assistance.” Who verifies the established accounts?The PMO
43PWS182.2.1.3.1Attachment 17, TO Staffing Matrix is requested for each Subsequent TO listed in Attachment 18. However, Attachment 17 is set up to specifically accommodate the GDSS TO. Does the government intend to provide separate attachments for each of the subsequent TOs? Alternatively, should offerors reconfigure Attachment 17 to accommodate a response to the subsequent TOs?Attachment 17 is set up to be used for all Task orders. Therefore, each Offeror is expected to submit Staffing Matrix's (Attachment 17) for each task order. The Staffing Matrix is a guide to what the contractor should address in staffing the 24/7/365 requirement, the contractors labor mix will determine how the submitted matrix ultimately looks. Please reference attachement 18 for specific tasks identified in each TO Appendices.
44PWS182.2.3.45Will the government please confirm that “turning” in this instance should refer to “tuning”? Also, COM-F does not normally support “testing.” Can the government confirm this requirement?Yes, corrections will be applied as applicable (turning to tuning). Within this context, testing is occasionally performed within the Production and/or operational environment.
46RFP192.2.4.11The requirements states, “Ensure database systems are configured to meet security directives.” This has traditionally been an engineering level function. Please confirm the intent to have COM-F assume this requirement going forward.The statement in section 2.2.4.11 is accurate. Configuring database systems to comply with security directives is a maintenance and/or technical support function in addition to being an engineering function.
47PWS192.2.4.20Can the government clarify at what level is COM-F responsible for resolving user needs, as opposed to elevating them to engineering or development?COM-F is ultimately responsible for resolving user needs at all levels, regardless of the elevation level of a specific issue. The contractor will be expected to only forward trouble tickets to level 3 support (AISS and software developers) when there is a flaw in the system that requires the system creators to fix.
48PWS202.2.4.23Monitoring compliance with DOD and USAF database security and integrity is currently done by another contract. COM-F currently does not have the tools to perform this function. If this function is indeed intended to be a new COM-F responsibility, will the government provide the needed tools?Another contract is responsible for scanning and reporting vulnerabilities for the systems. COMF will monitor compliance with DoD and US Air Force database security and integrity.
49PWS202.2.4.24This requirement (monitor PII) is out of scope of the current COM-F contract. COM-F DBAs do not have control over the data stored in the databases, or how it is used or made available to users. Please clarify if this is a new requirement for COM-F.This is a requirement in the current COMF-II contract.
50PWS212.2.4.26COM-F DBAs do not currently monitor applications; instead, they monitor databases. Suggest this requirement be reworded to clarify the monitoring of databases. Also, please identify the tools the government will provide for monitoring or if the contractor is expected to create or provide them.Concur, Section 2.2.4.26 will amended to replace "applications" with "databases."
51PWS212.2.4.27The requirement states, “Enforce database schemas, tables, procedures, and permissions.” This is a development issue. O&E cannot change any of these. Please clarify the requirement for COM-F.Non-concur, the statement in Section 2.2.4.27 is a standard support and/or maintenance function.
52PWS212.2.4.28The requirement “Set up data sharing and disk partitioning according to configuration” is an engineering task. COM-F DBAs cannot make any changes of this type until they are installed and validated in the test environment. Please clarify this requirement as it pertains to COM-F.Non-concur, the statement in Section 2.2.4.28 is a standard support and/or maintenance function.
53PWS212.2.2.1.2- RelevanceReferences: “Technical subfactors and Price factor

Question: Please explain how relevance will be determined against the price factor. What will the government use to evaluate? "For each recent past performance contract reviewed, the relevance of the work performed, to include scope and magnitude, will generally be assessed for the Technical subfactors and Price Factor (however, all aspects of performance that relate to this acquisition may be considered)."The project submitted should be for the same size and magnitude of the COM-F, the dollar value of the Past Performance should be of similar size and magnitude as COM-F requirement.

54PWS212.2.4.34Currently the government (SM) is responsible for leading system troubleshooting teleconferences. The technicians are contributors. Is it the government’s intention for the COM-F contractor to lead troubleshooting teleconferences?The contractor is expected to lead troubleshooting teleconferences as the system technical expert responsible for all O&M support for the C2OE. The government SM will facilitate the teleconference, de-conflict opinions, and provide government approval for fix actions, downtime, etc.
55PWS212.2.4.41Please clarify what is meant by “Execute after action notification procedures describing maintenance actions to the MCCC for ASI and OR events.”For ASI's the contractor will notify the MCCC that the ASI has concluded. For unscheduled outages (OR events) the notification is automatically generated when the OR event is downgraded in the trouble ticket and the contractor is responsible for ensuring the trouble ticket is updated appropriately and in a timely manner.
56Draft RFP COM-F III222.2.4.13Other than section 2.2.4.13, are there additional requirements to perform tasks IAW industry standards? For example, we recommend that the government clarify if the contractor should have higher level technicians available on-call after normal hours (IAW industry standards) or if it is the expectation that higher level technicians are on-site 24/7/365?Please refer to the individual appendices in attachment 15 and 18 attachand workload estimates. This is not a PWS minumum requirement, it is up to the contractors to determine the labor mix and any exceedants.
58PWS22Section 4. Services Summary TableWe suggest that the government clarify if the contractor is responsible for the planning process and timeline establishment for implementation of change requests. If not, clarify if the contractor will be afforded an opportunity to review change requests and influence the timeline.
We are unsure of the context of this comment. The listed PWS reference does not mention change requests. The PMO is responsible for managing all change requests. The contractor may recommend change requests that will improve system maintainability to the PMO for consideration for inclusion in future versions of the systems.
59PWS225.7This paragraph states that contractor will provide documentation for COTS and GOTS manuals, etc. System documentation is normally provided by developers or engineers. Please clarify the intent of this paragraph and responsibility of the COM-F contractor relative to system documentation.This question is being addressed and will be answered at the Pre-Proposal Conference
60PWS275.10 Mission Essential PersonnelTo mitigate any execution risk, we recommend that the government request within bidder's proposals that they name the position titles, at a minimum, and proposed staff designated as mission essential personnel.This program is designated as mission essensial, therfore a Mission Essential Plan must be submitted by all offerors, IAW DFARS 252.237-7023 CONTINUATION OF ESSENTIAL CONTRACTOR SERVICES (OCT 2010). Also the PWS para 5.10 identifies which Tasks are speciifcally designated as Mission Essential
61PWS285.23.1 Technical CurrencyWe suggest that the government also specify a requirement for all program management, help desk, network, system, and database administration staff to maintain an ITIL foundations certification or higher at the contractor's expense. This will help ensure a cohesive team that better understands the points of integration and services desired by SDDC within and across contracts and support teams.We are not SDDC and this is not a PWS minumum requirement, it is up to the contractors to determine the labor mix and any exceedants
62PWS305.29.1 Key PersonnelThe PWS specifies that "the Contractor shall provide the name of the contractor Site Manager and contractor Alternate Site Manager."

We suggest that the government require all Task Area Leads be considered Key Personnel as well. In addition to the Site Manager and Alternate Site Manger, we would recommend the Key Personnel would include the Help Desk Lead, System Administration Lead, Network Administration Lead, Database Administration Lead, and Configuration Management Lead.

To mitigate risk, we also recommend that the name, position title, and resume for all Key Personnel - to include the aforementioned addition of the Task Area Leads - be required with submission of the proposal.This information is not required to be submitted in the proposal.
63PWS34-355.33 Power/HVAC Outage NotificationThe PWS states that "In the event building 1575 experiences Power/HVAC outage, the contractor will...immediately report the issue and create a high priority ticket and follow the government provided Building 1575 Power/HVAC Notification Procedures."

We suggest that the government clarify if the contractor is responsible for Power/HVAC issues at other operational sites.

Section 5.33 addresses Scott AFB, Bldg 1575 only
64PWS39GlossaryThe PWS states that the System Manager is the "individual responsible for providing management oversight, ensuring configuration management, and managing the implementation of approved changes to a system during the operations management process."
We suggest that the Government clarify if the contractor is responsible for the scheduling, planning, and coordination of contract activities or if this is the intended responsibility of the government Systems Manager.The statement referenced is in the Glossary. Oversight does not equate to sheduling, planning, and/or coordination of contract activities.
65PWS42-43GlossaryThe PWS states that "the SM does not manage the day-to-day operations of the system, but works closely with the Operations Manager to ensure the system remains capable of meeting mission requirements."
We suggest that the government clarify the scope and accountability for the Operations Manager to include clarification if the Operations Manager is a role attributed to the contractor.The PWS will be corrected to remove this old reference.
66PWS442.3.3 Subfactor 3The government references Attachment 7 to demonstrate the Government's labor categories and functional descriptions to aid offerors and requests completion of similar information in Attachment 8.

Though not provided with the draft, we suspect that most offerors will simply adopt the Government provided labor categories provided in Attachment 7 to complete Attachment 8. This may stifle creativity in the staffing solutions proposed. Furthermore, this does not help the government distinguish between contractors that understand what is required to do that work and those that simply comply with government provided information.

In lieu of providing such descriptions, we suggest that the government consider just stating broad qualification requirements such as "all technical staff shall hold an ITIL foundations certification" and ask the bidders to identify the labor categories and level of experience and education that they believe are most relevant to execute the work. Attach 8 IDIQ Labor Category Descriptions and Attachment 9 IDIQ Labor Category and Pricing Template will remain as is. The creativity should come in the labor mix submitted at the Task Order level 67 PWS 51 2.3.2 The criteria states that "the government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed technical solution…" However, the subsequent instruction (2.2.3.2) asks offerors to "provide a narrative which demonstrates your understanding of the Air Mobility Command (AMC) C2, ITV, and Business Systems structure."

We suggest that government clarify if they want a description of understanding or a "solution." If the latter, we suggest clarifying if the solution sought is relative to specific tasks, systems, and/or management of the contract as a whole.The offeror should provide a statement that demonstrates their understanding.
68PWS512.3.3 Risk RatingThe government indicates that the Technical Approach and Staffing Approach will receive risk ratings. The previously described subfactor 3 has not requested a "Staffing Approach," rather that subfactor is simply asking for a list of labor categories and descriptions.

The Government will likely have a difficult time distinguishing the risk associated with vendors that offer a broad pool of labor categories spanning all levels of experience and education. In order to assess the true staffing risk, the government needs to know what resources/labor categories will be used in what quantity to execute the work.

We suggest that the government request key personnel that will serve as the technical and program leadership across all tasks and task orders. Only then can the government adequately assess the risk associated with the experience and education of proposed staff assigned to the previously defined labor categories.All three Subfactors will receive risk ratings.
70Attachment 342.3.3 Risk RatingThe current instructions and evaluation criterion offer little insight to assess the quality and potential risk of an offeror's technical solution. As part of Factor 1 for the IDIQ evaluation, we encourage the government to consider other means to evaluate the technical risk of the offeror and their potential solution. As an example, the government could require bidders be appraised at CMMI Level 3 for Services to reduce risk of degradation to services and ensure implementation of processes consistent with ITIL best practices.CMMI and ITIL certification isn't required in the PWS, it is up to the contractors to determine the labor mix and exceedants
7152.212-2 Eval42.6The government does not indicate how many past performance contracts are requested for evaluation or the impact of the potential quantity of relevant past performance on the evaluation.

We suggest that the government clarify the number of past performance references required, as well as the information required for each submission. For example, the government may consider requiring at least 1 past performance references from the Prime contractor which demonstrates experience in the full scope of the contract and up to 5 past performance references for the team including any significant subcontractors. **Volume II: Limit past performance volume to five pages per contract reference submitted and no more than three contracts for prime contractor and two contracts for each significant subcontractor with in the past three years. Each reference submitted will count toward the three contracts limit for the prime and two contracts limit for each significant subcontractor. Complete Attachment 10, Past Performance Information Sheet (PPIS) for each contract submitted.

7252.212-2 Eval4Section 4 of PWSThe Attachment indicates that TCNO/IAVA/ Security Patches are mandated for remediation within 21 days or less. The Services Summary of the PWS states that security patches to Systems under contractor control shall be accomplished in accordance with provided installation procedures and within the established timelines 95% of the time baring extenuating circumstances outside the contractor’s control. Please confirm the requirement for consistency.The requirement for routine security patches is currently within 21 days or less. The requirement for TCNO and IAVA patches vary but are typically shorter than the routine requirement. The contractor will be made aware of whether patches are routine or TCNO/IAVA patches when patches are required which will drive the timeline for the patch.
7352.212-2 Eval4All TabsReferences: The historical workload does not identify any call volume metrics or breakdown by systems of calls resolved by shift (for each program listed)
Question: Can the government please provide?This information will not be provided.
7552.212-2 Eval8The Attachment indicates that the quantity of major releases is subject to Agile Development. Can the government provide a-not-to-exceed ceiling of scheduled annual releases so that bidder can accurately assess the required workload?The estimated workloads for each of the systems as they are known at this time is provided in Attachment 7.
77Attachment 7 and PWSACAS, CAMPS, DMR, GATES, GCSS, GDSS, MAFC2, etc.The Attachment states that MESI 3 will never require any TCNO/IAVA/Security Patches. Can the government please confirm if that is the expectation?We estimate 5 security patches per month for MEIS 3, this has been changed in RFP amendment 02
78Attch 7 COM F Historical WorkloadsAll TabsAll TabsAttachment 9 requests rates by year for all potential labor categories. However, the RFP section 1.2.2 Pricing Related Data states that offers should provide the fully burdened rate purposed for each IDIQ labor category and include any mid or swing shift differential rates in Attachment 9. Where and how should the contractor include information on shift differential for each labor category within Attachment 9?When pricing the fully burdened rates, also consider and include mid and swing shift rates when determining your labor rates. The government will not look different rates for the three shifts, the government expects to only receive one average rate for all shifts.
79Attachment 7GATESThe Attachment indicates that the quantity of major releases is subject to Agile Development. Can the government provide a-not-to-exceed ceiling of scheduled annual releases so that bidder can accurately assess the required workload?The estimated workloads for each of the systems as they are known at this time is provided in Attachment 7.
80Attachment 7MEIS 3The Attachment states that MESI 3 will never require any TCNO/IAVA/Security Patches. Can the government please confirm if that is the expectation?We estimate 5 security patches per month for MEIS 3, the workload estimate, Attachment 7 will be Amended to reflect this.
81Attachment 9NANAAttachment 9 requests rates by year for all potential labor categories. However, the RFP section 1.2.2 Pricing Related Data states that offers should provide the fully burdened rate purposed for each IDIQ labor category and include any mid or swing shift differential rates in Attachment 9. Where and how should the contractor include information on shift differential for each labor category within Attachment 9?When pricing the fully burdened rates, also consider and include mid and swing shift rates when determining your labor rates. The government will not look different rates for the three shifts, the government expects to only receive one rate for all shifts as an aveage.

File details come from the government source that posted it.