Solicitation Q and A.pdf

Question Answer 1 :Is Top Secret Safeguarding required at the time of Step-1 submission as indicated by the draft DD-254 and recent Q&A? NA 2 Would the government allow awardees to obtain Top Secret Safeguarding after award and once they receive the requisite DD-254? Yes

3 Is Top Secret Safeguarding required at the time of Step-1 submission for successful down select and invitation to submit for Step 2 as indicated by the draft DD 254 and 02NOV2020 Q&A?

No -- it is not required at time of award.

4 Is Top Secret Safeguarding only applicable at TO level? Task Order dependent.

Credence recommends modifying the Scope and Ordering Guide 3.3 Off Ramping Criteria to state “Awarded VAULT vendors are required to bid

20% of all TOs on an annual basis.” There are 5 anticipated awardees and percentage based requirements are in line with current successful IDIQs.

Declined

Credence recommends modifying the Scope and Ordering Guide 3.3 Off Ramping Criteria to reflect that only “unacceptable” proposals will lead to off-ramping. We believe this necessary for two reasons. First, the government assesses risk subjectively so the contractor cannot ensure they will not submit marginal submissions. Secondly, the leading edge nature of the work may require all responses to be “marginal” given the risk associated with new data science techniques or aggressive objectives.

Declined

To make the procurement more efficient for both the contracting office and industry, Credence recommends an offeror's Written PWS Response be used as a down-select evaluation element to determine which offerors will be selected to participant in the Technical Scenario/Oral Presentation.

Table 1 in Section 2.2 of Attachment 1 Instructions to Offerors implies that the Written PWS Response of the Technical Approach is required for submission before the Technical Scenario will be given to offerors. Other sections in the Instructions to Offerors and the Evaluation Criteria do not clarify this implication and it is unclear that an offeror's Written PWS Response will be evaluated as part of a down-select step prior to the Technical Scenario and Oral Presentation.

Declined. The table in 2.2 states that the written responses for how the offeror will accomplish the PWS tasks. This submission will not be used as a down select and all rated factors will be evaluated for all offerors that participate in the Step 2 process.

Please confirm the one year cut off for non-traditionals began with the date of the solicitation i.e. the start of the VAULT AMS Process on April 10, 2020.

Per the definition of a NTSB "A small business entity that is not currently performing and has not performed any contract or subcontract for DoD that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting standards prescribed pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 1502 and the regulations implementing such section, for at least the 1-year period preceding the solicitation of sources by DoD for the procurement (10 U.S.C.

2302(9))”. This solicitation was officially released on 30 October 2020 so that date is the date that will be used for the IDIQ.

Based on the Scope and Ordering guide language, not all personnel will require a clearance, however the labor category tab indicates that all LCATs require a secret clearance. Please clarify the security clearance requirements of the task orders – will all TOs require a minimum of a Secret Clearance or will the IDIQ include unclassified TOs?

The IDIQ may contain unclassified TO's. Security requirements will be at the TO level.

All labor categories currently require four or more years of experience. Junior staff coming into the workforce directly from universities with

STEAM degrees would not be able to be staffed for four years. It is in the Government’s best interest to include junior data analysts / scientists / architects to better support the IDIQ. Please either reduce the years required or add additional LCATs with 0-4 years of experience required.

Declined.

11 Please confirm that the government will allow non-key personnel who can enter into limited exchanges on behalf of the organization to participate in the oral presentation.

Confirmed.

In its response to the Industry Question on spreadsheet row 177 regarding PECP preparation, the Government instructed that Offerors shall submit a PECP in a format that meets and clearly demonstrates the requirements as required by FAR 52.222-46. Accordingly, paragraph (b) of FAR 52.222- 46 asks for “Salary rates or ranges” be submitted by the offeror to take into account differences in skills, the complexity of various disciplines, and professional job difficulty, etc. as part of the compensation proposed. Additionally, under this program, there are a range of clearance requirements anticipated. Accordingly, please confirm that the Government will accept, as a compliant response, salary ranges for the compensation component of their PECP response.

52.222-46(b) allows for rates or ranges so it is acceptable to propose a range.

13 The DD254 discusses CUI. Will all technical material associated with the program be treated as CTI (controlled technical information), or will that be decided on a case by case basis?

Task Order dependent.

Will all respondents be provided the Technical Scenario on the same date? If the oral presentations take place on different days, and the Technical Scenario is provided 10 days prior to the oral presentation, that suggests that bidders will receive the Technical Scenario on different days. This means that we might not all have the same amount of time to work on the various pieces of the Scenario.

All vendors will be provided the technical scenario 10 business days prior to their oral presentation date. This will give the vendors the same amount of time, in business days, to prepare.

How far in advance of the Oral Presentations are the “Technical Scenario Written Response, Presentation Slides, and Attendee List”? The schedule suggests that the above need to be completed and delivered in fewer than 10 business days. Does the customer need time to review the Technical Scenario written response and slides before the oral presentation?

The Government is requesting the technical scneario written responses and slides prior to the oral presentation so we can have meaningful communications as part of the oral presentation if clarifications are

Attachment 1 states: 2.2.6.5.4 Presentation Slides. Presentation slides shall be the technical scenario solution only Attachment 2 states: 2.3.4 Oral Presentations: Offeror’s oral presentation shall cover the proposed strategic approach, methodology, and understanding of the PWS tasks and scenario as well as any significant findings and recommendations. These requirements conflict. Should the oral presentation address the PWS?

Attachment 1 2.2.6.5.4 will be changed to match the language in Attachment 2 - 2.3.4

3.1 lists 2 submissions, but based on Table 1 it seems like there are 3 submissions, with the third being the materials related to the Technical Scenario and Oral Presentation. Can the government please confirm there are 3 submissions? “The Offeror shall complete and submit the IDIQ

Pricing Sheet with fully burdened off-site rates”. Is this referring to our site or the customer site?” The response is “Rates should be for the National Capital Region Area”. We assume off-site is defined as the Government site in the NCR. Please confirm.

Submission 2 consists of all documents for step 2 which is a staggered submission. Table 2 lists all of the submissions required for this acquisition.

Table 1 which states the Written PWS Response is required to be submitted 20 business days after the notification of step 1 results. It also states the technical scenario will be released only 10 days prior to the oral presentation. Can the Government clarify your intent in relation to the timing of the submission for the written PWS response and the submission for the technical scenario response?

The written PWS response is how the offeror will meet the tasks listed in the PWS. The technical scenario solution will be specific to the scenario that is released.

a. Based on Table 1, it is possible that the Technical Scenario can be released after the submission of the written PWS response. Please confirm if the written PWS response date is independent of the written technical scenario response.

Yes, the written PWS response is how the Offeror will meet the tasks listed in the PWS where the technical scenario response is how the ff t th t h i l i

b. If the Technical Scenario is released 10 days prior to the Oral presentation, can the Government confirm if the technical scenario written response, presentation slides, and attendee list are due 10 days before the Oral presentation or 20 business days after the notification of Step 1 results?

The technical scneario written response, presentation slides and attendee list will be due 2-3 days prior to the oral presentation.

Notification of Step 1 results will have hard due dates on when the Written PWS responses (20 business days), technical scenario solution, oral slides, and attendee list are due. All offerors will be provided the same amount of time for preparation.

21 c. Is the Technical Scenario released to all the offerors on the same date or is the release based on when an offeror is scheduled for an oral presentation?

The technical scenario will be released 10 business days prior to the oral date to allow each offeror the same amount of preparation time

Please clarify the scope of the Orals presentation Per Attachment 2 paragraph 2.3.4 "Offeror’s oral presentation shall cover the proposed strategic approach, methodology, and understanding of the PWS tasks and scenario as well as any significant findings and recommendations"

a. Is it the Government’s intent to evaluate offeror’s understanding of all the PWS tasks through the Orals presentation? Or just in the Written Technical Approach?

Per Attachment 2 paragraph 2.3.4 "Offeror’s oral presentation shall cover the proposed strategic approach, methodology, and understanding of the PWS tasks and scenario as well as any significant findings and recommendations"

b. If it is the Government’s intent to evaluate the understanding of the PWS through the orals presentation, is the Government evaluating the offeror’s understanding of all the PWS tasks as indicated in Section 2.3.2 of Attachment 2 - Evaluation Criteria or just the Section II of PWS, or is the Government only evaluating the “the specific PWS tasks that were utilized for the scenario” as stated in Section 4.1.3.3.2 of Attachment 1 Instructions.

Understanding of the PWS as a whole vs. PWS tasks only.

25 Instructions to Offerors, states “The Offeror shall complete and submit the IDIQ Pricing Sheet with fully burdened off-site rates.” We assume that “off-site rates” mean Contractor-site rates. Can the Government please confirm this assumption is correct?

Confirmed.

Performance Work Statement states “JOINT BASE ANDREWS, MARYLAND” and Attachment 5 Scope and Ordering Guide indicates “Various

CONUS Locations and Various OCONUS Locations.” Can the Government confirm that offerors shall provide rates in Attachment 4 for the National Capitol Region market only?

Confirmed.

For submission, the solicitation states that the email messages are limited to 10MB, so offerors may find it necessary to submit large files via DOD SAFE. Can the Government confirm if the DOD SAFE also has a file size limit for uploading?

DOD SAFE has a limit of 25 files with a maximum size of 8GB. If an offerors package will exceed either the 10MB e-mail size and the

Offeror does not have access to DOD SAFE please inform the Government that the submission will be coming over multiple e-mails.

Will the government confirm that vendors have 12 business days from the time they receive the technical scenario to the time the technical proposal is due as stated in Q&A Row 15?

Vendors will receive the technical scenario 10 business days prior to their oral presenation date. The date for the written technical scenario solution and oral presentation dates will be approximately 2-3 days before the oral presentation to allow the Government time to review the submitted content so that we can have value added communication/clarifications as part of the oral presentation

29 Will the government identify the offices that have committed to use this IDIQ? This ID/IQ will be open to all Air Force offices as approved by

SAF/CO

30 How many funded TOs are ready to released on the IDIQ? Unknown. They will be requested sortly.

31 In order to ensure the greatest opportunity for NTSB, we recommend that the Government modify the Small Business Commitment Plan to be an adjectival rating.

Declined.

32 Please confirm you intend to allow unlimited page count for tables, charts, graphs and figures? "Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures may be used to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. will also not count towards page limitations."

Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures do not count torward the total page limit

Can you please confirm that the order of the timeline events are sequential. Specfically, that "Provide Offerors Tech Scenario" row commences after the first 20 days of STEP 2. Is there any notification or trigger after the first row in STEP 2 that kicks off the second row?

The timeline of events is sequential. The notice that offerors have passed Step 1 and will continue onto Step 2 will have a due date for the written PWS submissions. The submission time for the PWS submissions will be used to schedule an Offerors oral presentation date so the Government will inform each Offeror of the due date for the written technical scenario solution, oral presentation slides, attendee list, and oral presentation slides after receipt of the written PWS response. All Offerors will be provided the same amount of preparation time.

Should the Due Date in the second row of STEP 2 read: "10 Business Days prior to the due date for the Technical Scenario Written Response, Presentation Slides, and attendee list? (Presumably we will have 12 calendar days to draft these items and the orals will not happen on the same day.)

The Offeror will be provided the technical scenario 10 business days prior to the oral presentation date

If you ask offerors to submit their technical solution in the data repository, please permit us to provide our own search and visualization applications so that you can assess the full impact of our solution.

It is up to the offeror on how they expect to best implement the technical solution.

36 Would the Government consider allowing us to present a GitHub project as part of our orals that the Air Force can explore during the evaluation process? GitHub experience was requested in the AMS

It is up to the offeror on how they expect to best implement the technical solution

Would the Government change the scoring of the Small Business Commitment Plan from Acceptable/Unacceptable to a full adjectival rating similar to the Technical Submission ratings? By doing this, the Government will increase the possibility of an outstanding rather than minimal small business commitment and create a way to break a Step 2 evaluation tie other than price

Declined.

38 Would the Govenrment limit future on ramp to companies that participated in the AMS? No

Please confirm that the tech scenario will be provided 10 business days prior to the submission of the Technical Scenario Written Response, Presentation Slides, and Attendee List due date rather than the Oral presentation date to allow the government to confirm receipt and schedule the presentation according to the attendee list.

The technical scenario will be released 10 business days prior to the oral date to allow each offeror the same amount of preparation time

Paragraph 2.2.5.2 states the following: "The Offeror shall submit a completed SF1449 as its representation and certifications, specifically FAR 52.212-3.." We assume the Government is requiring offerors to fill in the blue check boxes in addition to executing the SF1449, and that the offeror's representations and certifications pursuant to FAR 52.212-3 will be verified in SAM.gov, and do not need to be re-executed in the solicitation document.

Offerors should follow the instructions as stated in FAR 52.212-3

41 Will the government please update the table on page 2 for step 1 requirements to include the DD254 (Section 2.2.5.4) and SF 1449 (Section 2.2.5.2.)?

Table will be updated

42 Will the government please clarify if the technical approach to PWS tasks is to only contain the offerors approach to Attachment 3, Performance Work Statement, Section 2.0 - Task Area Description tasks 2.1 through 2.6 and not others sections within Attachment 3 - PWS?

The entire PWS is applicable.

If Representations and Certifications are required to be submitted, please confirm there is no page limit. Offerors should follow the instructions as stated in FAR 52.212-3 to update reps and certs as required. 52.212-3 is part of the 1449 which has no page limit

44 Will the government please confirm that in accordance with Section 4.1.2.6 and Section 3.1.1 Table 2, that the government is requesting copies of the teaming agreements. If so, can the government please update Section 2.2.6 and Section 2.2 Table 1 to reflect that requirement?

Teaming agreements should be included as part of the SBCD. IAW

3.1.1 and 4.1.2.6

45 Will the government please clarify how the labor rates included within Attachment 4 will be utilized during the task order proposal process when no cost element breakdown should be included?

Pricing for TOs will be at the TO level.

46 How will the Government determine who the five awardees will be in the event of a tied score between multiple bids? In the event of a tied score, price will be used as a tie-breaker

Attachment 2, Section 2.2.5.3 states " A verifiable TOP SECRET FCL shall exist in DISS at time of proposal submission. " Please clarify that a Top Secret facility clearance is required.

Per Attachment 2 paragraph 2.1.3 "This aspect is compliant when the locations stated on the DD254 are validated at the TS/SCI level by the

CO that the Facility Clearance (FCL) via the Defense Information Security System (DISS) and DD254"

48 How will these rates be used on future Task Orders? Price will be competed on the individual task order basis

49 Due State currently states 10/30/2020. Please confirm due date of 11/13/20. Per block 8 of the SF1449, the due date is 13 November at 03:00 PM

EST

50 Will the government please confirm that the referenced clause would be completed at the TO level? Clauses are applicable to all TOs.

CLIN 0007, Software and Licenses, is reflected as an FFP CLIN in the pricing table. Since any software purchase or license fees, including annual maintenance fees, would be handled as Other Direct Costs, we believe these costs should be classified as cost-reimbursable with applicable burdens.

We request the CLIN type for CLIN 0007 be changed to cost-reimbursable for pricing purposes

Declined.

Since CLINs 0001-0004 and 0008-0012 include the purchase of tools, licenses, products and materials to the support the PWS Tasks (Data Preparation and Architecture, Agile Algorithm Solutions, Data Governance, Data Analytics, and Data Environment Development), what types of software and license purchase would be potentially included under CLIN 0007? Would the Government consider including all non-labor costs, including software, license, products and material purchases, under CLIN 0007 on a cost-reimbursable basis?

Declined.

CLIN 0005, Travel, is listed as an FFP CLIN. Would the Government consider changing the CLIN type from FFP to cost-reimbursable due to the issue of forecasting travel requirements in advance and then awaiting actual travel expense results that may differ from the original estimate?

Declined.

CLIN 0007, Software and Licenses, indicates that software and licenses, will be purchased in support of task order performance. Attachment 3, PWS Section 5.2, indicates that the contractor will not be required to acquire any property under the contract. Is the PWS Section 5.2 misstated in this case, and does CLIN 0007 take precedence with respect to the need to purchase software and licenses on behalf of the Government.

Purchases under CLIN 0007 are considered Contractor Acquired Property.

If there is a conflict between the Q&A responses and the updated solicitation documents, which one has precedence? Solicitation document has precedence

Attachment 4 describes clearance level as DoD Secret or higher as required by the Task Order. PWS describes multiple security classification levels up to TS/SCI. Would the Government please clarify for pricing purposes, what security clearance level should Offeror propose?

Task orders under this contract have the capability to go up to the

TS/SCI level

57 Would the Government please modify pricing template to allow Offeror to propose separate rates for DoD Secret vs. DoD TS/SCI? Declined.

Section 2.2.5.3 states that a verifiable TOP SECRET FCL shall exist in DISS at time of proposal submission. FCLs are not posted in DISS, but rather in the National Industrial Security System (NISS). Please clarify.

DISS changed to NISS

Would the government please clarify the work location, specifically confirming that the TS/SCI related work will be performed on government site as alluded to in PWS Security Section 6.8 and reference on the PWS cover to “at Joint Andrews AFB”.

Work location will vary on a task order by task order basis

Attachment 4 is for only offsite labor rates, if some of the work will be performed at Air Force locations, does the government want to add additional column for the offeror to propose government site rates? This allows for the maximum price flexibility for the government with pricing aligned to where the work will be performed

Pricing will be established on a task order by task order basis. Pricing submission for the IDIQ shall be off-site labor rates

The DD254 states that the Prime Offeror must have TOP SECRET FCL and TOP SECRET Safeguarding. Attachment 1, Section 2.2.5.3 states that the Prime Offerors shall possess a TOP SECRET Facility Clearance (FCL) at time of proposal submission. It does not state if the Prime Offeror shall possess TOP SECRET safeguarding at time of submission. Please clarify if TOP SECRET safeguarding is required at time of submission or upon contract award.

Contract award

The DD254 and Attachment 1 state that the Prime Offeror shall possess a TOP SECRET FCL. Attachment 2 section 2.1.3 conflicts with this requirement by stating “Facility Clearance: This aspect is compliant when the locations stated on the DD254 are validated at the TS/SCI level by the CO that the FCL via the DISS and DD254.” Please clarify if Prime Offerors are required to have a SCIF at each location listed on DD254 and how will you validate the SCIFs since they are not listed in DISS.

Task Order dependent.

a VAULT vendor and will no longer be able to propose on future TOPRs.Since the task orders may focus on a multitude and varying set of use cases as shared in previous industry communications (Personnel Readiness, F-16 Utilization, Nuclear Mission Manning Assessment, F-16 Maintainer

Workload, Procurement Fraud Analysis, Air Crew Tasking, etc), the final awarded contractors may not have functional experts or past experience in supporting specific data analysts with knowledge for all of these functional areas which would cause a no bid resulting in off ramping what might otherwise be a well performing contractor on other task orders.We ask that the off-ramping number for failing to respond to “no bid” of two task be removed and that the AF continues with use of the performance off ramping criteria

Declined.

The document states the government intends to award the IDIQ up to five highly rated offerors. With the need for data scientists and experts in a highly competitive staffing market across a broad set of use cases, the Air Force would benefit from a larger number than 5 companies with access to Data Analytics/Scientists SMEs. This also provides additional competition at the task order level.Would the government consider adding language that indicates, but reserves the right to award additional offerors as deemed viable by the Government?

Declined.

The PWS section 2.1.3 refers to Air Force Software Factory Best Practices (e.g.: CloudONE, PlatformONE). Can the Government please confirm that the VAULT program will permit unclassified development on these platforms with a "push" of capabilities to operational networks at a higher classification level?

Task Order dependent.

66 In section 2.2.6.4 Technical proposal submission will include technical approach to PWS tasks, please confirm this is for PWS Tasks 2.1-2.6. The entire PWS is applicable.

Solicitation says there will be no Government-provided materials. Based on that, please confirm that actual data will not be provided then or are data from AF systems not considered to be AF property?

Not anticipated, but could be provided (Task Order dependent).

68 Assuming data will be provided, will data be pre-parsed by the AF or will the CTR be responsible for parsing data IAW other programs as part of data collection and acquisition? If yes, please conform the AF will provide all necessary information to enable parsing to occur Task Order dependent.

69 Will PlatformOne and CloudOne be the only cloud-based systems used during this effort? Does the AF permit use of NIST 800-171 environments to test-out approaches prior to investing effort and resources into obtaining 800-53 accreditation for approached that are found to be viable?

No. Task Order dependent.

70 Is the CTR limited to tools and services that are approved for use within CloudOne? Or can the CTR use any and all tools and services they deem feasible and viable for the work at hand? Task Order dependent.

71 Is the AF desire to have single CTR that can support all aspects of this solicitation or to have CTRs specialize within areas of expertise? Confirmed. Either by prime or sub. Up to contractor to figure out how to meet requirement.

72 Please confirm that effort was made to identify Small Businesses that are capable of this work such that a set aside could be offered earlier in the process.

The Government is not setting this requirement aside to small businesses

73 Is the AF expecting a T&M or FFP parent-level IDIQ? What is the first Task Order that is planned to be awarded with the IDIQ?

The ID/IQ will have FFP and FFP-LoE CLINS as stated in Section B of the SF1449. The first TO RFP will be issued to the winning contractors shortly after award of the ID/IQ contracts.

74 Why does the AF require a full list of employees from the CTR? Is this list solely for the personnel supporting this effort only? Only for this effort. Required for clearance and sponsor requirements.

75 Is this work expected to be on-site at Andrews AFB or virtual/remote support? If a mix, what is the division? Work location will vary on a task order by task order basis

76 What agency will act as the CO for this effort? Can an existing contract be leveraged?

AFDW/PKS will be the Contracting Activity for this effort. No current contract contains the scope for this effort.

77 How do small businesses qualified to do this work find out who the interested parties are such that teaming opportunities can be assessed? Small businesses can add themselves to the publically available Interested Parties List contained on beta.sam.gov posting

78 Is there any way for a small business to be part of this procurement who has not been involved up to this point and gone through the Advisory Multi-step Process?

SBs can list themselves as an interestest party on the interested parties list on beta.sam.gov.

With respect to the requirement to submit a small business subcontracting plan, the Government provided $100M as the total subcontracting dollars for the plan. Should offerors use $762M as noted in Solicitation RFP Clause 252.217-7027 Contract Definitization, as the Total Contract Value in the subcontracting plan?

Total contract value should be listed as $100M and we will change to $762M at time of award.

80 Will the government provide a list of data repositories and data types that will be required for this acquisition? Task Order dependent.

What is the process for approving new technical software, hardware, etc. for use on USAF systems?

Task Order dependent; it based on the ATO Process and the Authority governing the applicable environment, the classification level, and functional domain.

82 Will the Data Architecture by deployed on the CloudOne environment for all IL levels (e.g. IL2 and above) or will IL2 and below Data be deployed on a separate cloud service provide (e.g. MilCloud, AWS GovCloud)? Task Order dependent.

83 Is Data Migration from on-premise to current VAULT Aws GovCloud or from on-premise to CloudOne a part of this solicitation? Task Order dependent.

84 Would the Government please clarify if the Sub-totals in row 21 and the “Total Evaluated Price” in cell G22 are needed in the Attachment 4 – IDIQ Pricing Worksheet when submitting Fully Burdened Hourly Rates?

The Offeror is not required to fill out the sub-total or total evaluated price cells

85 Please confirm Offerors can use font Arial Narrow for the Orals Presentation as long as the presentation is legible and viewable by the intended audience? Confirmed

86 Can we use font Arial Narrow for graphics in the Technical Approach/Step 3 submission? Confirmed 87 Please clarify if the PWS approach, methodology and understanding should be included in the oral presentation. Verbiage changed in -1 and -2

88 Do we need a 15 page technical Written Response for the PWS only, or do we need a separate, additional 15 page Written response for both the PWS and the Technical Scenario 15 pages is the response for the PWS tasks. Updated

The Offeror shall submit a completed SF1449 as its representation and certifications, specifically FAR 52.212-3 (Section B is not required to be completed as pricing will be contained within Step 2 submission).” “Representations & Certifications “This aspect is compliant when the Offeror submits a completed SF1449. The CO shall confirm that the Offeror’s representations and certifications are current.”The completed SF1449 requires offerors to fill in the fields for discount terms, name, address, CAGE code, unit price and amount and sign the document. The SF1449 does not contain any representations and certifications, and box 27(a) is not marked as applicable, nor are the FAR clauses referenced therein tt ched 90 a) Are offerors required to submit anything besides the completed one (1) page SF1449 to satisfy the Step 1 reps and certs requirement? The SF1449 is the entire RFP document labeled as Solicitation -

FA701421R0005.pdf on beta.sam.gov posting

91 b) If the Government intended to mark field 27(a), would the Government please provide the required attachments to the SF1449 via an Amendment?

Those applicable clauses (among others) are already incorporated into the RFP document "Solicitation - FA701421R0005.pdf"

92 c) Will the CO use the information provided in the SF1449 (i.e. name, CAGE, address) to access the annual representations and certifications submitted electronically via the System for Award Management (SAM)?

The CO will use the information on the SF1449 (including the information filled into 52.212-3 on page 36) for represetnations and certifications 93 d) If not, would the Government please clarify:

94 i) How the SF1449 shall be submitted as its “representations and certifications, specifically FAR 52.212-3” when the SF1449 contains no reps and certs? See Above

95 ii) What representations and certifications the CO is confirming are current based on the SF1449 submission? See Above

96 IAW 6.1.1 and 6.1.2, the offsite rates to be provided in Attachment 4 are for performance at Government-site(s) (i.e. Government facilities, military bases, etc.) within the NCR only?

6.1.1 and 6.1.2 of the PWS talk about access to a Government facility when the work is required to be at the Government facility (task order b t k d b i ) Th t h d t t lk b t i t ll 97 Offerors shall NOT provide rates for performance at contractor facilities in the NCR? Proposed rates should be contractor site (ie. Offsite)

Offerors shall NOT provide a blended NCR rate (i.e. a single rate applicable to work performed at both Government-facilities (offsite) and contractor facilities (onsite)? Proposed rates should be contractor site (ie. Offsite)

The order of events for Step 2 is unclear as written. Will the Government please confirm that the Technical Scenario will be provided after Offerors submit the Professional Employee Compensation Plan, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Pricing Worksheet, Small Business Commitment Document, and Written PWS Response?

Confirmed

Table 1 indicates Offerors will have 10 business days to develop a 15-pp written Technical Scenario Response, Presentation Slides for a 90-minute presentation, and prepare to present a 90-minute orals presentation. This is a very short timeframe for the amount and complexity of requirements.

We respectfully request that the Government extend the 10 business days to at least 20 business days to ensure quality of input for these complex requirements. If no extension is forthcoming, we respectfully request that the Government forgo the 15-pp written technical scenario response in favor of only the Orals slides/presentation technical scenario solution response.

NA

101 We respectfully request that the Government consider selecting presentation dates randomly rather than by PWS response submission to avoid potential technical issues resulting from multiple Offerors trying to submit at the same time.

Declined.

102 The orals presentation time allotment of 90 minutes indicates a complex, in-depth scenario solution. We respectfully request the Government reduce the presentation time from 90 minutes to 60 minutes to reduce the evaluation burden on the Government.

An Offeror will have up to 90 minutes, an Offeror can elect to not utilize their entire timeblock if they are able to cover the scenario solution quicker

We respectfully request the Government increase the days allotted from 10 business days to 20 business days to prepare the slides and presentation team for the 90-minute oral presentation (currently due at the same time as the 15-pp written technical scenario solution response) to ensure quality of responses for this complex requirement.

NA

104 Please confirm that Offerors will:receive the scenario in January 2021, and be contacted for a time slot for oral presentations in January 2021 Confirmed 105 Will these two events happen at the same time or at separate times in January 2021? Separate times

The “Requirements” column lists “Technical/Scenario Solution & Oral Presentation and Microsoft Teams Presentation Attendees Listing” however the “Delivery Format” column lists only “Email PowerPoint or PDF slides.” Is it the Government’s intent that we provide the Technical/Scenario Solution in the Orals slides only and deliver the Technical/Scenario Solution in PowerPoint or PDF slides?

The requirement is what to submit, the delivery format is the format that the deliveries need to be made in

The “Requirements” column lists “Technical/Scenario Solution & Oral Presentation and Microsoft Teams Presentation Attendees Listing” however the “Delivery Format” column lists only “Email PowerPoint or PDF slides.”Is it the Government’s intent that we provide a written Technical/Scenario Solution as a 15-pp Word or PDF file separate from the Oral Presentation slides?

The requirement is what to submit, the delivery format is the format that the deliveries need to be made in

108 Regarding Oral Presentation format, ITO 3.2.2 states: “ The recommended resolution is 16:9.” Please confirm that this statement should read: “The recommended ratio is 16:9.”

Confirmed each ordering period rates for every labor category. Currently the LCAT tab lists a clearance level of DoD Secret or above, which could result in some offerors providing rates for the minimum clearance required (SECRET) and others for the maximum clearance that may be required (TOP SECRET/SCI). Given that the LCAT rate priced are dependent upon the clearance level of proposed personnel, we respectfully recommend the Government instruct all offerors to propose rates for the same clearance level to allow for an apples to apples comparison. Since offerors are required to possess a TS facility clearance level, would the Government please confirm that all offerors shall assume the rates provided in Attachment 4 are for personnel with a TS/SCI? If not, would the Government please clarify the clearance level that shall be priced for each LCAT in Attachment 4 in order to ensure all offerors are on an even playing field for evaluation purposes?

Per attachment 4, the LCATs require a Secret level at a minimum for pricing purposes at the ID/IQ level. For task orders, it will be whatever level the task order requires and pricing submitted in response to a task order RFP should reflect those rates.

To be deemed compliant, an offeror must have “submitted accurate representation and certifications.” Would the Government please clarify:Which representations and certifications the offeror is to provide in its Step 1 submission? Whether offerors are required to include the completed FAR 52.212-3 clause? Whether offerors are required to complete the clauses on pages 34-49 of the Solicitation?

Per Attachment 1 paragraph 2.2.5.2 the Offeror should submit the completed SF1449, including clause 52.212-3. Any other clauses within the SF1449 that require contractor fill in also need to be completed in order to have a fully compliant submission

Factor I consists of the IDIQ Pricing Sheet and the PECP. This section is to assist Offerors in submitting data other than certified cost or pricing data that is required to evaluate fairness, reasonableness and balance of proposed cost/price. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal. Proposals should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate fairness, reasonableness and balanced cost/price. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices rests with the Offeror. Based on the instructions for proposal submission content for Step 2, can the Government confirm that a written cost/price proposal is not required for Step 2 and that the offeror’s completed IDIQ Pricing Worksheet and PECP will satisfy the requirement that the price proposal be “sufficiently detailed to demonstrate fairness, reasonableness and balanced cost/price”? If so, and the pricing consists of the IDIQ rate workbook and PECP only with no accompanying narrative, would the Government please clarify where any pricing assumptions made by the offeror should be provided within the Step 2 submission?

The Pricing ID/IQ worksheet and PECP are the required submission for pricing. If you have significant assumptions you should state those assumptions.

In Attachment 1 – ITO, the Solicitation has multiple references to different deliverables.Would the Government confirm the following deliverables and timing?2.2 Table 1/Step 2 – Deliver 20 Business Days After Notification of Step 1 results, due 3:00 PM EST (notifications will state firm due date).Include a 15 – Page Written PWS Response2.2 Table 1/Step 2 - January 2021, Notification of Step 2 results will contain firm date.Present Oral Presentation of the Technical Scenario Solution

Correct, Professional Employee Compensation Plan, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Pricing Worksheet, Small Business Commitment

Document, and Written PWS Response will be due 20 days after receipt of notice that an Offeror is proceeding to Step 2. The oral presentation and technical scenario solution will be given firm due dates in the future and each offeror will be notified of their due date

Request the government provide, as soon as possible, access to the Enterprise Information Model and its metadata aspects (catalog, glossary, attributes, business rules), enterprise data dictionary, and other relevant data models referenced in order to ensure fairness and equity with access for all bidders.

Task Order dependent.

114 Does this reflect a revised VAULT IDIQ ceiling? NA

115 Are we correct to interpret the term ‘off-site’ to mean that contractor staff will perform at a Government Site and conversely ‘on-site’ would mean contractor staff perform work at the Contractor’s site?

On-site would mean on a Government facility, Off-site is contractor facility

116 There appears to be double commas and missing text. There is no mention of the “AMS verification” in those sections. Is there missing text in the table and text that references the AMS verification?

No missing text, the Government will verify AMS participation since we have those records

117 The ITO is silent on the date of notification for proceeding on to Step 2. The 20 business days given to respond to Step 2 likely places the submission into the December vacation and Holiday period to include the New Year’s Holiday. To help us plan this response, utilizing these key technical resources, would the Government provide guidance on the timing of Step 2?

This is intentionally to let the Government bring the schedule to the left as much as possible so we can issue noticed as soon as we're done with

Step 1 evaluations. Currently targeting for the Step 2 initial submission to be due the week of 14 December but that is subject to change based upon the Governments evaluation 118 Will the offeror be able to leverage the Platform One or Cloud One environment for VAULT Task Order dependent.

119 Is the environment that will be created for VAULT separate than either Platform One or Cloud One The VAULT environment already exists; it is currently a separate security boundary from Platform One and Cloud One.

120 Will the offeror be able to leverage new technology that is currently NOT deployed at USAF? Task Order dependent.

121 Will the offeror be able to utilize technology that is not FedRAMP compliant? Task Order dependent.

122 Will the offeror be able to utilize technology that is not FedRAMP compliant but currently in process of FedRAMP approval? Task Order dependent.

123 Is there a minimum impact level requirement for all software deployed as part of VAULT (such as IL5)? No. Task Order dependent.

124 Can the Government confirm that AFFARS Clause 5352.209-9000 applies to the entire IDIQ? AFFARS 5252.209-9000 will be incorproated into the basic ID/IQ but applied at the TO level

125 In order to maximize competition, can the Government remove AFFARS clause 5352.209-9000 from the IDIQ and incorporate as applicable into individual Task Orders?

AFFARS 5252.209-9000 will be incorproated into the basic ID/IQ but applied at the TO level

126 Can the Government clarify who is responsible for identifying the Open Data Act compliance requirements?

How a particular task will be required to meet Open Data Act compliance (or any other compliance requirements) will be Task Order dependent.

127 The table includes a line item and NAICS Code 541611, will the government please confirm that this NAICS is listed as an example only? It does not match the NAICS (541990) that was assigned to this opportunity on the SF1449 The information in Table 5 is an example only

Is the Government expecting (or requiring) that all subcontractors be added to this section at the time of Phase I submission? Or will these be required at Phase II submission when we are including evidence of signed teaming agreements? Or is this not required at all, at the IDIQ level, and expected post award at the task order level?

Subcontractors will not be needed at time of award of the ID/IQ. A task order specific DD254 will be utilized for each task order requiring one which will list the subcontractors if applicable

In 52.216-18 Ordering the ordering dates are Jan 2021 through Jan 2026, but in other places in the Model K (252.216-7006 Ordering. 2019-09) and in the RFP it states contract will be 22 Feb 2021 to 21 Feb 2026. Please clarify.

The dates are estimated, the resulting contract will be a 5 year order period from date of award. All dates that reference the term of the contract will be changed to reflect the actual award date + 5 years total duration

130 The Contract Definitization clause states “(d) The definitive contract resulting from this undefinitized contract action will include a negotiated cost/price ceiling in no event to exceed $762,000,000.00 Can the Government confirm if the ceiling is $762,000,000? The current ceiling is $762M between all awarded contracts

131 Step 2: row 2, Provide Offerors Tech Scenario: “10 Business Days prior to oral presentation date.” Step 2, row 3, Technical Scenario Written Response, PresentationSlides, and Attendee List: “January 2021, Notification of Step 2 results will contain firm date”. Step 2, row 4, Oral Presentations: “January 2021 (Presentations will be scheduled in the order that Written PWS Responses were received Ex: if you are the first submission you will be the first scheduled presentation and so on.)”Will all offerors who are notified to proceed to Step 2 and submit the initial Step 2 documents be given the Technical Scenario and an Oral Presentation time slot?Will the Technical Scenario Written Response, Presentation Slides and Attendee List be due on the same day as the Oral Presentation is scheduled?

All Offerors that move onto Step 2 will be given the technical scenario and provided an opportunity for an oral presenation. Specific due dates for the oral presentation an due date for the written technical scenario solution, oral slides, and attendee list. It is anticipated that the written technical scenario solution, oral slides, and attendee list will be due 2-3 days prior to the oral presentation so that the Government can evalaution and have value added communications/clarifications during the Oral presntation. All offerors will be notified of their exact due date for each item and all offerors will be provided the same amount of preparation time

132 All ITO paragraph references in this table are incorrect. Noted

133 Would the Government please confirm that Offerors are only required to submit a completed copy of the SF1449 form and they are not required to submit a completed copy of the draft Solicitation Contract or a copy of their reps and certs if they are available via SAM.gov?

The SF1449 is the entire draft solicitation labeled "Solicitation - FA701421R0005.pdf"

In the section discussing the Small Business Commitment Document, the Government states: “Any proposed subcontractors with multiple CAGE codes shall include all of the codes where work will be performed for this acquisition.”Can the Government clarify that the above statement only applies to Small Business subcontractors or does it apply to Large Business subcontractors as well? If it applies to Large Businesses, where would the Government like this information reflected?

Only applies to Small Businesses as it's for the Small Business Commitment Document

In the ITO: Paragraph 2.2.6.5.4 states, “Presentation slides shall be the technical scenario solution only”. Paragraph 4.1.3.3 it states, “Offerors shall provide an oral presentation covering the proposed strategic approach, methodology, and understanding of the PWS tasks and scenario as well as any significant findings and recommendations.” Paragraph 4.1.3.3.2 The Offeror shall present its findings and recommendations via oral presentation. Offerors have up to 90 minutes to explain its findings and recommendations. Presentation should include, but is not limited to, methodology used during formulation of the findings and recommendations as well as the specific PWS tasks that were utilized for the scenario.

Additionally, in the Evaluation Criteria, 2.3.4 states “Offeror’s oral presentation shall cover the proposed strategic approach, methodology, and understanding of the PWS tasks and scenario…” However, at the end of this section it states, “This aspect is met when the Offeror’s proposal/oral presentation adequately addresses scenario objectives and demonstrates ability to successfully perform scenario objectives.” Both the ITO and Eval Criteria both seem to call for including and not including the technical PWS response in the oral presentation. Please clarify if the oral presentation and oral presentation charts are required to include a discussion of the specific PWS tasks that were utilized for the scenario, or all PWS Tasks?

Language for Attachment 1 will be altered to match the language stated in the Evaluation Critera paragraph 2.3.4

“2.3.4 Oral Presentations: Offeror’s oral presentation shall cover the proposed strategic approach, methodology, and understanding of the PWS tasks and scenario as well as any significant findings and recommendations.” Would the Government allow the offerors to provide a live demonstration during the orals presentation? If so, how should the live demonstration be reflected in the Oral Presentation Slides? If so, could the Government modify the ITO and Evaluation Criteria to allow for a live technical demo?

Language changed in 2.3.4 and 2.2.6.5.4

137 Please confirm Section 3 was removed from the Attachment intentionally and the TOC is incorrect. Confirmed

DD254 Section 13, Para 10.e.(1).3.(a) states: “SCI will be stored and maintained only in properly accredited facilities at the contractor location.”

DD254 further states in Section 13: “SECTION 4 – Security Classification Guides (SCGs): Since work will be performed at Gov facilities, personnel will abide by all SCG's for which the facility is cleared for.”There is no further mention in the DD254 nor the PWS that states a Contractor SCIF is required but rather reads as though all classified work will be performed at customer site. Can we get clarification?

Each task order will have the specific requirements.

139 Will offerors be allowed to submit…