Questions and Answers_COMET_RFP Vol 1.pdf

Industry Questions & Government Answers Vol I

COMET (FA8604‐21‐R‐B024)

25 October 2021

1. Given one of the requirements for TS FCL and our mentor already has the TS FCL, does this meet the requirement?

ANSWER: No, Section L, par 4.2.3 requires TS FCL before 15 Jan 2022. A Joint Venture (JV) Offeror, either (1) the JV possess a TS FCL before 15 January 2022 or (2) each of the entities that make up the

JV must individually possess the TS FCL before 15 January 2022.

2. NASIC is planning on moving to ServiceNow for some component of ITSM requirements. Has NASIC has had the opportunity to evaluate BMC Helix ITSM as an alternative?

ANSWER: NASIC implemented the use of ServiceNow and has no plans to seek alternative systems at this time.

3. Could you please clarify when questions are due to the Government?

ANSWER: Questions may be submitted anytime up through 15 October 2021 5:00 PM EDT.

4. COMET_PWS BASIC‐TOs.zip is not accessible at the SAM.gov site?

ANSWER: The RFP attachment has been updated via SAM.gov.

5. Questions Attached:

a. COMET Section L, Page 5, Paragraph 4.2.3: Section 4.2.3 indicates that “to be eligible as a Joint Venture Offeror, either (1) the Joint Venture must possess a TS FCL at the time of proposal submission or (2) each of the entities that make up the Joint Venture must individually possess the TS FCL at the time of proposal submission.” In the recent Air Force NOVASTAR RFP FA860421RB007, the Government confirmed in a Q&A #9:

“Do Joint Ventures without an FCL at time of proposal submission meet the entry gate requirement?

a. No. In accordance with Section M‐2.2, Entry Gate, “This requirement is met when the proposal provides written documentation the company has obtained a Top Secret facility clearance. If an Offeror fails to provide evidence that it possesses a Top Secret Facility Clearance at the time of proposal submission, the Offeror will be considered ineligible for contract award and eliminated without further evaluation of its proposal.”

Request that the Government clarify, that in line with previously published documents for this opportunity and the NOVASTAR RFP, criteria two is incorrect, and that Joint Ventures as an entity must possess a TS FCL at the time of submission to be eligible to bid on this opportunity.

ANSWER: The NOVASTAR RFP is a separate acquisition and is not related to the COMET RFP. To be eligible for this acquisition, you must follow the COMET RFP as posted on SAM.gov.

Section L, para 4.3.2 has been updated that an offeror must possess a TS FCL before 15

January 2022 and provided to the Contracting Officer(s) prior to the deadline.

b. COMET Section L, Page 9, Paragraph 4.3.1: As the PPI Tool is in MS Access, we respectfully request that the Government please confirm that DoD SAFE permits the upload of the MS Access file type or indicate another method for submission of this information?

ANSWER: The source selection team has tested and confirmed that DoD SAFE does permit users to upload MS Access files.

c. COMET Section L, Page 9, Paragraph 4.3.1: Instructions provided for downloading of the PPI Tool, appear to reference Beta.SAM. As the SAM system has been upgraded, the instructions no longer appear relevant, and there is no link for the download of the PPI Tool. Respectfully request that the government clarify where contractors should download the PPI Tool.

ANSWER: The PPI Tool has been updated and the zip file can be downloaded from the COMET RFP

Attachments List located within SAM.gov.

d. SAM.gov, Description, Paragraph 1: The opportunity description published on SAM.GOV indicates that “the Basic IDIQ contract will be set aside for and exclusively awarded to Small Business concerns. However, in accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F), should a COMET awardee no longer meet the Small Business size standard for NAICS code 541513 Exception A of 1,500 employees during the period of performance of this contract for whatever reason, to include contract novation, the Contracting Officer will thereafter determine if a Small Business Set- Aside is appropriate for each individual Task Order issued against COMET.”

As 541513 does not have an Exception A for 1,500 employees, and due to the likelihood of the limited number of awardees sizing out of the 541513 NAICS code during the life of the COMET IDIQ with an estimated $778M ceiling value, will the Government please confirm that the correct NAICS code for this opportunity is 541715, Exception A which aligns with the 1,500 employees size standard referenced in the SAM.GOV notice?

ANSWER: The NAICS code as posted is correct, however there is no exception as listed above.

The RFP has been updated to reflect the exception correction.

e. Section L – Attachment 7 – Total Evaluated Price, TO 1 Tab: TO 1 appears to be from the 2016

Solicitation and does not align with the PWS. Respectfully request that the government provide an updated pricing spreadsheet.

ANSWER: TO 1 tab has been updated and uploaded to solicitation website.

f. Section L – Attachment 7 – Total Evaluated Price, TO 2 Tab: TO 2 appears to be from the 2016

GSP and does not align with the PWS. Respectfully request that the government provide an updated pricing spreadsheet.

ANSWER: TO 2 tab has been updated and uploaded to solicitation website.

g. Section L – Attachment 7 – Total Evaluated Price, TO 3‐4 Tabs: TO 3‐4 appears to be a repeat of

TO 2. Respectfully request that the government provide an updated pricing spreadsheet.

ANSWER: TO 3 and 4 tabs have been updated and uploaded to solicitation website.

h. Section L – Attachment 7 – Total Evaluated Price, Transition Price: This tab does not align to the Key Personnel positions in TO 1-5.

ANSWER: Pricing spreadsheet has been updated.

i. RFP: Respectfully request that the Government provide the desired proposal validity period for this effort.

ANSWER: Proposal validity is one (1) year from proposal due date.

j. RFP: Respectfully request that the Government provide the ceiling value for the IDIQ.

ANSWER: The anticipated aggregate contract value is $778M. The RFP Description has been updated.

k. COMET Section L, Page 9‐10, Paragraph 4.3.3: The Government indicates in section 4.3.3 that “The Offeror (which includes the Prime and all Teaming Partners), shall also submit past performance information for any significant or critical subcontractors/teaming partners. A significant subcontractor/teaming partner is defined as one completing 25% or more of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price, whereas critical subcontractors/teaming partners are those performing aspects of the effort that the Offeror considers critical to overall success, regardless of percentage of work.” As an offeror may have numerous teaming partners that are critical to success, none of which would be meet 25% work anticipated, we respectfully request that the Government amend this paragraph to indicate that offerors may submit past performance for critical subcontractors/teaming partners.

ANSWER: The purpose of the PPI is to determine the past performance for the company providing the largest amount of work for this contract. Reducing the requirement below 25% would not provide the information the government is looking to obtain.

l. COMET Section L, Page 9‐10, Paragraph 4.3.3: Respectfully request that the Master Table of Contents in the Executive Summary is excluded from page count.

ANSWER: Master table of contents in 4.1.2 is excluded from the page count.

m. SAM.gov, Description: The opportunity description refers to an ordering period of five years with one five-year option period, however there is no area to indicate pricing for the option period. Will the Government please confirm that it only desires pricing for the base period as the pricing template only contemplates five years and Section B for the RFP only have CLINs for the first five-year period? If not, will the Government please amend Section B of the RFP and the pricing table to include the additional five years of performance?

ANSWER: The Government only requires pricing for the 1st five‐year base period of the IDIQ. The

2nd five‐year option will receive pricing prior to IDIQ option exercise.

6. Section L, 4.2.4.1.2 Management Plan (Personnel): The Offeror shall provide one management plan that will that will discuss their approach to applying personnel management to all of the five task orders.

The management plan will address all of the following elements:

a. Staffing Maintenance, Recruitment, and Backup Maintenance Plans: Specifically how the Offeror plans to attract, recruit, hire, train, and retain qualified management and technical personnel to ensure the Offeror’s team possesses or can readily obtain personnel with the appropriate levels of education, professional certifications, experience, and expertise to accomplish COMET tasks (these can be found in each task order’s PWS). Identify its approach to ensure continuation of services during personnel absences due to sickness, leave, voluntary or involuntary termination from employment such that would reduce the impact to the Government. Describe its process for maintaining currency of any required certifications or specialized training.

b. Staffing Plan (Résumés for key personnel (including PM and team leads identified in section 11 of all 5 task order Performance Work Statements), FTEs per functional area of each PWS, organizational chart delineating oversight, information flow, and lines of communication for accompanying contract workload)

c. Personnel Training/Cross Training plan (including manufacturer/vendor/OEM training for current and emerging technologies in each functional area the contractor supports (minimum 2 courses per year

Am I to understand correctly that key resumes must be provided for all 34 positions identified as

PM/Team leads for the 5 Task Areas?

ANSWER: Section L has been updated to change to PMs only in section 5.8.

7. In regards to Communications & Enterprise Information Technology Support Services (COMET) IDIQ

RFP Solicitation (FA8604‐21‐R‐B024), will a multi‐source Blank Purchase Agreement be considered for award?

ANSWER: The acquisition team considered numerous contracting approaches and avenues to meet this NASIC requirement. During acquisition planning, a multi‐award IDIQ was selected as the course of action for this requirement.

8. We’ve composed a number of questions regarding the AF COMET solicitation. Should we email those questions to you?

ANSWER: All questions regarding the COMET RFP are due by 15 October 2021. All inquiries and responses regarding this posting should be sent to all individuals listed on the RFP announcement on

SAM.gov.

9. Would the government please consider extending the contract period for past performance examples from three to five years?

ANSWER: The government has considered the request, but will not extend beyond the 3 years described in Sect L, Para 4.3.3 “Recent and Relevant Contracts”.

10. Requesting simple clarification of the closing date and time for proposals in response to the subject Solicitation and if this solicitation is set aside for Small Businesses or is full and open.

ANSWER: This is a small business set‐aside, see RFP Description and the date offers are due is 12

November, 2021 5:00 PM EDT, see RFP General Information.

11. In following the instructions in Section L – Attachment 1, Past Performance Information Tool, our collective team does not see a “Notice Details” tab , nor any other tab for that matter. The options in the left navigation pane only jump to sections in the solicitation that are already visible from the main page. Would the government please clarify how to access the Past Performance

Information Tool?

ANSWER: The PPI Tool has been updated and the zip file can be downloaded from the COMET RFP

Attachments List located within SAM.gov.

12. following questions regarding the subject solicitation:

a. On Sam.gov, the subject solicitation lists a COMET Model Task Order to be added by September 2021. We have not yet seen the model task order posted. When does the government expect to post that document?

ANSWER: This reference has been removed. The model TOs will be provided to offeror prior to award.

b. Would the government please tell us how many contractor seats exist on the current contract?

ANSWER: The requirements for COMET are not the same as the former N‐ITSS contract. It will not require the same number of contractors as the previous contract to complete the required effort.

c. Task Order 4, Section 11, Transition, page 22, states, “The following (3) incumbent contractor SME’s (listed below)…” but only 2 SME positions are listed. Is an SME missing or are there only 2 positions?

ANSWER: There are only two listed. The number (3) should change to (2) and the government requires the listed personnel to stay during the transition period.

13. Regarding past performance for the subject opportunity, because our Contracting Officers have limited bandwidth, would the government please consider accepting CPARs in lieu of Past Performance

Questionnaires?

ANSWER: The Past Performance Questionnaire provides more detail that the CPAR provides, therefore the government will not consider accepting CPAR as fulfilling this requirement.

14. My company is less than a year old, but I have made several Teaming Agreements to augment my ability to fulfill these Task Orders. Unfortunately, we have not been awarded any contracts requiring a

Security Clearance. I am working with another company that intends to sponsor me for a FCL as a subcontractor for them. I am unsure as to whether that will occur before this bid proposal is due.

Page 3, para 2 of the PWS states that "All contracted support personnel shall have a TS SCI ...". Page 30, para 6.1.1 of the PWS, however, states that, "If the contractor does not possess a facility clearance the

Government will request one". Finally, Section M, page 4, para 2.2.1 states, "If an Offeror fails to provide evidence that they possess a Top Secret Facility Clearance at the time of proposal submission, the Offeror will be considered ineligible for contract award and eliminated without further evaluation for proposal".

ANSWER: Section L, par 4.2.3 requires TS FCL before 15 Jan 2022. A Joint Venture (JV) Offeror, either

(1) the JV possess a TS FCL before 15 January 2022 or (2) each of the entities that make up the JV must individually possess the TS FCL before 15 January 2022.

15. Questions Attached:

a. How should any 24/7 positions be entered into the Attachment 7 Total Evaluated Price workbook? Should an adjustment be made to the number of hours? Or should this be managed in the FTE column?

ANSWER: The 24/7 positions will be managed in the FTE column.

b. The tab “Transition Price (TO 1)” does not appear to contain a column for Contractor Labor

Category. Is it ok for the Contractor to add a column for Contractor Labor Category?

ANSWER: Column has been added to the spreadsheet for labor category.

c. For each Task Order, how much work occurs at Bolling AFB, Washington, DC?

ANSWER: As of 1 Oct, SCM is not part of this contract, therefore no work is currently being performed at Bolling AFB.

d. On SAM in the Description area refers to Small Business size standard for NAICS code 541513

Exception A of 1,500 employees.

Will you please confirm this NAICS code has an exception of 1500 employee and where that exception can be found?

ANSWER: The NAICS code as posted is correct, however there is no exception as listed above.

The RFP has been updated to reflect the exception correction.

e. Will size recertification be required at the end of the 5 year base period?

ANSWER: Awarded contracts/TOs issued under COMET IDIQ will utilized the certifications from initial award for the duration of this acquisition.

f. Do the Help desk work load metrics cited in T01 include TO2 through TO5 ticket counts? If no please provide the information so we can establish work load and staffing.

ANSWER: The same tickets are referenced in TOs listing like metrics.

g. Can the government supply the ticket counts for touch maintenance cited in TO1?

ANSWER: The Government is still processing this request and will include the answer in a future post.

h. PWS 3.3.1 in TO3; how many CCP packages are processed annually?

ANSWER: Approximately 2 common control factors.

i. PWS 3.4.3: how many security fix actions are processed annually and how many CCRs are processed annually?

ANSWER: This question does not have a solid answer as it depends on the amount of when and how many patches are released by the vendors. This is also is impacted by IC and AFIC TASKORD, MTO, TO’s and NOTAMS and TCNO’s. This include the CCR as all changes to the technological baseline require approval prior to implementation.

j. PWS 3.7.1; can the government provide workload data related to GSP Security Engineer

Support?

ANSWER: Current provide support for ACAS, HBSS and mission systems.

k. PWS 3.8; how many A&A packages are processed and/or responsible for?

ANSWER: There are six Mission Systems, but could increase to seven.

l. PWS 3.10.3; can the government provide workload data?

ANSWER: The Government is still processing this request and will include the answer in a future post.

m. PWS 3.11; Can the government supply the ticket counts?

post.

n. PWS 3.12.3; how many service migrations per year?

ANSWER: The Government is still processing this request and will include the answer in a future post.

16. Questions Attached:

a. TO4 PWS 11. On page 22 of TO4 PWS Section 11, the solicitation states “The following (3) incumbent contractor SME’s (listed below) shall stay on‐site...” The list below contains two positions and one bullet without a position:

Can the government clarify as to whether a position is missing from the list or if the preceding text should instead state “(2) incumbent contractor SME’s”?

ANSWER: There are only two listed. The number (3) should change to (2) and the government requires the listed personnel to stay during the transition period.

b. SAM.gov. The description listed on SAM for this procurement states the following: “The Basic

IDIQ contract will be set aside for and exclusively awarded to Small Business concerns. However, in accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F), should a COMET awardee no longer meet the Small Business size standard for NAICS code 541513 Exception A of 1,500 employees during the period of performance of this contract for whatever reason, to include contract novation, the Contracting

Officer will thereafter determine if a Small Business Set‐Aside is appropriate for each individual Task

Order issued against COMET.”

According to the SBA Table of Small Business Size Standards Matched to North American Industry

Classification System Codes dated August 19, 2019, NAICS code 541513 has a $30M size standard.

Can the government please confirm or correct the NAICS code being used?

ANSWER: The NAICS code as posted is correct, however there is no exception as listed above.

The RFP has been updated to reflect the exception correction.

c. Sect L, 4.2.4.1.2 (b). Part b of Section L 4.2.4.1.2 states “...Resumes for key personnel (including

PM and team leads identified in Section 11 of all 5 task order...)”

Section 11 of each of the task orders does contain a listing of positions but each list is framed as a list of “...the following incumbent contractor SME’s” who are directed to stay on site in a consulting capacity. Can the government confirm that offerors are expected to map key positions to those incumbent SMEs listed in Section 11?

ANSWER: Requirement has been changed to only supply resumes for PM positions.

d. Section 4.2.4.3.1 states “The Offeror’s proposal must provide a detailed description of your approach to providing support for datacenter, network, and platform hosting tasks for each of the tasks (a.‐b.) below. In addition, provide a description of your experience with regard to one of the following tasks:” The Section 4.2.4.3.1.a description includes “...in accordance with PWS Sections 3.8 and 3.9 for Task Order 2.” The Section 4.2.4.3.1.b description includes “...as described in PWS

Sections 3.10 for Task Order 2.” The Section 4.2.4.3.1b description includes “…as described in PWS

Sections 3.10 for Task Order 2.”

Can the government confirm that the “detailed description of your approach to providing support for data center, network, and platform hosting tasks” required in Section 4.2.4.3.1 is bounded by/limited to Sections 3.8, 3.9, and 3.10 per the instructions?

ANSWER: Yes, Para 3.8 and 3.9 pertain to Infrastructure Engineering and Installation and Para

3.10 pertains to Datacenter Operations.

e. Section L 4.2.4.3.2.a TO2 PWS Section 3.28, 3.29, 3.30. Section L 4.2.4.3.2 is labeled “Database

Management and Enterprise Application Server Software Administration Tasks”. Section 4.2.4.3.2.a directs offerors to Sections 3.28 and 3.29 of the Task Order 2 PWS. TO2 PWS Section 3.28 is titled

“SC Classified Voice Administration”.

Did the government mean to direct offerors to “3.29 SC Database Management” and “3.30 SC

Enterprise Application Server Software Administration” which seem to align more with the Section

L.4.2.4.3.2 heading?

ANSWER: Yes, the reference should be 3.29 and 3.30.

f. TO Responses (Multiple). Starting with L.4.2.4.2 (Subfactor Two) through L.4.2.4.6 (Subfactor

Six), the government has asked offerors to provide “detailed information describing your approach...” then in each instance lists what would be considered to be the overall scope of each

TO. However, each of those statements ends with “...as defined in [insert task(s)] below. In addition, provide a description of your experience with regard to...the following task(s):” The way these sections are phrased can be interpreted at least two different ways, resulting in very different proposal responses.

Can the government please clarify if they are asking for (1) a technical approach to accomplishing all

TO technical areas for each TO PWS and then examples of experience relevant to the specific TO sections called out in the lettered subheadings or (2) technical approaches to accomplishing the sections called out in the lettered subheadings (e.g., TO 3 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.12) and then experience relating to one of those same called out TO sections?

ANSWER: Directions are to provide detailed information describing your approach to accomplishing the tasks listed in each subfactor. In addition to that, provide experience with regards to one if the listed tasks per subfactor.

g. L.4.3.1 Sect L Atch 1. Section L.4.3.1 appears to state that offerors are supposed to use the PPI tool described in Section L Attachment 1. The Attachment 1 document states that offerors access the PPI tool through SAM.gov but it doesn’t appear that the SAM page for COMET contains the functionality or tabs described. It might be the case that this functionality existed for the last procurement cycle, before SAM was modernized and merged with FedBizOpps.

Can the government provide vendors with updated guidance on how to submit past performance information for this bid? And if the intent is to still use the referenced PPI tool, can the government include updated instructions for accessing this tool?

ANSWER: The PPI Tool has been updated and the zip file can be downloaded from the COMET RFP

Attachments List located within SAM.gov.

h. L.4.5, 4.5.2, and 4.5.3. 4.5: “The Price volume shall consist of the following sections: Section 1

‘…summary descriptions of estimating, purchasing, and accounting systems…’” 4.5.2: “Offeror shall state if they have a purchasing process in place to support Equipment & Material requirements.”4.5.3: “Offeror shall state if they have an approved accounting system, and if so, provide a copy of the audit report.”

sections 4.5.2 and 4.5.3 requests that offerors state if they have a purchasing process/approved accounting system. Should offerors provide a summary description for all three systems, or only their estimating system?

ANSWER: Offeror should provide a summary description of estimating, purchasing, and accounting systems

i. Sect L, 4.5.4. “NOTE: Equipment & Material, Travel, and Emergency Support are Government provided CLINs on the contract having not to exceed (NTE) dollar amounts, which are automatically calculated into your TEP.”

Are the provided NTE amounts for Equipment & Material and Travel inclusive of indirect handling fees such as G&A for travel and material and subcontractor (M&S) for materials?

ANSWER: Yes, the total cost is identified with fees considered.

j. Sect L, 4.5.4 and Sect L Atch 7. “Section L, 4.5.4 states “Transition pricing will need to be provided on all 5 task orders.”

Section L, Attachment 7 only includes a transition tab for task order 1 “Transition Price (TO 1)”. Are transition costs only required for task 1? If not, should offerors add additional tabs for transition costs for task orders 2‐5, or will the Government provide an updated template?

ANSWER: The pricing spreadsheet has been updated.

k. Sect L, L Atch 7. In the “Contractor Labor Rates Summary” tab the sample rates for years 2‐5 of the contract are escalated at 1.5% per year.

Are offerors required to use a 1.5% escalation rate for their outyear labor rates?

ANSWER: Offerors are not required to use the 1.5% escalation rate.

l. Sect L, 4.5.2. 4.5.2 states “Offeror shall state if they have a purchasing process in place to support Equipment & Material requirements.”

Can a subcontractor’s Purchasing System be used to meet this requirement?

ANSWER: Offeror shall state purchasing process to support Equipment & Material requirements.

m. Sect L, 4.3.3. 4. 3.3 states “The Offeror shall submit information in accordance with Attachment

1: Past Performance Information on a maximum of three (3) recent contracts that you consider most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort.” “The Offeror (which includes the Prime and all Teaming Partners), shall also submit past performance information for any significant or critical subcontractors/teaming partners. A significant subcontractor/teaming partner is defined as one completing 25% or more of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price, whereas critical subcontractors/teaming partners are those performing aspects of the effort that the Offeror considers critical to overall success, regardless of percentage of work.

Past performance for no more than three relevant contracts can be submitted for the Prime contractor and no more than a total of two for significant and critical subcontractors/partners.”

Can the government clarify if the maximum number of past performance submissions is three

(inclusive of prime and teammate contracts) or five (three from the prime and two from teammates)?

ANSWER: A maximum of three (3) past performance submission, with the possibility of two (2) additional coming from critical or significant subcontractors/teaming partners for a total of five

(5).

n. Sect L, Atch 7. The functional areas in the “Proposal Labor Price” tabs for Task Order 2, 3, and 4 are identical.

Can the Government provide an updated version of Attachment 7 with the correct functional areas for Task Orders 2, 3, and 4?

ANSWER: The pricing spreadsheet has been updated.

o. L.4.2.4.1.1. 4.2.4.1.1 states “Offeror’s ability to manage the COMET IDIQ contract within the

Wright‐Patterson Air Force Base local area including local management presence.”

Will the government clarify if they require the Contractor to have a physical office facility within the

Wright‐Patterson AFB local area?

ANSWER: NASIC does not require the contractor to have a physical office facility within WPAFB

p. Sect I‐Contract Clauses FAR Clauses Incorporated by Reference. 52.212‐5 Contract Terms and

Conditions Required To Implement Statutes or Executive Orders‐Commercial Items. 2021‐07

(b) The Contractor shall comply with the FAR clauses in this paragraph (b) that the Contracting

Officer has indicated as being incorporated in this contract by reference to implement provisions of law or Executive orders applicable to acquisitions of commercial items:

[Contracting Officer check as appropriate.] Numbers 1‐63

(c) The Contractor shall comply with the FAR clauses in this paragraph (c), applicable to commercial services, that the Contracting Officer has indicated as being incorporated in this contract by reference to implement provisions of law or Executive orders applicable to acquisitions of commercial items:

[Contracting Officer check as appropriate.] Numbers 1‐7.

None of these boxes have been checked by the Contracting Officer. Is it the Government’s intention to not check any of these boxes?

ANSWER: The Government is still processing this request and will include the answer in a future post.

q. Sect L, 4.2.4.3.2 AND TO2 PWS‐3.29 Database Management. 4.2.4.3.2 a states: “Designing, installing, administering, and security hardening various types of Database and Application Server systems, such as Oracle WebLogic, Oracle HTTP, Docker, Apache, NGINX, MariaDB, MongoDB, etc., across multiple on‐premises and cloud based environments in support of custom and commercial applications in a 24x7 support role”

Can government provide details of each production and non‐production database currently in use to include database sizes, number of instances, and number of applications using each of these databases?

ANSWER: Any task orders associated with database services will be for new database services in support of the NASIC modernization effort. Therefore, specifics with regard to vendor, size, instances, etc. are unknown. It is unlikely that support will be requested for existing database, application server or web server services. In the unlikely event we do, the request will be for 1‐2 contractors to temporarily supplement an existing team. Therefore, number and size of supported services is not relevant. Existing DB services ‐ Oracle (Enterprise Ed), MariaDB and

MongoDB (evaluation for use phase). Existing Application/Web Servers OHS, Apache, WebLogic, and NGINX (in evaluation phase).

r. Sect L, 4.2.4.3.2 AND TO2 PWS‐3.29 Database Management. 4.2.4.3.2 a states: “Designing, installing, administering, and security hardening various types of Database and Application Server systems, such as Oracle WebLogic, Oracle HTTP, Docker, Apache, NGINX, MariaDB, MongoDB, etc., across multiple on‐premises and cloud based environments in support of custom and commercial applications in a 24x7 support role”

Can government provide their plans on migrations to cloud or new hardware platforms?

ANSWER: Currently no plans are available. New services will target standup on PaaS. Plans for existing are currently undetermined.

s. Sect L, 4.2.4.3.2 AND TO2 PWS‐3.29 Database Management. 4.2.4.3.2 a states: “Designing, installing, administering, and security hardening various types of Database and Application Server systems, such as Oracle WebLogic, Oracle HTTP, Docker, Apache, NGINX, MariaDB, MongoDB, etc., across multiple on‐premises and cloud based environments in support of custom and commercial applications in a 24x7 support role”

Can government provide the details on existing Database management tools currently in use including any tools used for querying databases and generating ad hoc reports?

ANSWER: Any task orders associated with database services will be for new database services in support of the NASIC modernization effort. Therefore, specifics with regard to available tools are unknown.

t. L 4.2.4.3.2 AND TO2 PWS‐Enterprise Application Server Software Administration. TO2 3.30.3 states: “Monitor the Oracle WebLogic, Oracle HTTP Server and Apache software application, document and analyze problems, and publish maintenance schedule in a Solaris x86 environment.”

Can government provide number of instances, number of servers for both production and non‐ production environments for each middleware server software component currently in use?

ANSWER: Any task orders associated with middleware services will be for new middleware services in support of the NASIC modernization effort. Therefore, specifics with regard to number of servers is unknown.

u. Sect L 4.3.4. L.4.3.4 states “The Offeror shall send the questionnaires for relevant projects that are in progress or completed in the past three (3) years to the individuals who will provide the reference.”

In accordance with "FAR Subpart 42.15 (Contractor Performance Information)," Government agencies are directed to prepare past performance evaluations at least annually, using the

Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR). As a result, many Government agencies no longer complete Customer Past Performance Surveys, since the requirement is to enter this data into a CPAR which is then stored for Government use in the Contractor Performance Assessment

Reporting System (CPARS). In addition, Survey data is not materially different than data collected via the CPAR/CPARS process. Requiring reference clients to complete a PPQ places an unnecessary burden on Government personnel especially during this time when COVID 19 has the workforce widely dispersed. We request the Government incorporate the following: "If the referenced Past

Performance contract has received a CPAR evaluation within the past 3 years, a PPQ is not required.

ANSWER: We are requiring offerors to complete the PPQ.

v. Sect L, 4.3, 4.3.3. L.4.3 .3 states "Past performance for no more than three relevant contracts can be submitted for the Prime contractor and no more than a total of two for significant and critical subcontractors/partners."

Does this mean 2 per significant and critical subcontractors/ partners or 2 total across significant and critical subcontractors/ partners?

ANSWER: A total of two for both critical and significant subcontractors combined.

w. COMET IDIQ PWS‐Section 3, IT Service Management Subsection. COMET IDIQ PWS‐Section 3, p

15 states: Multiple references to “ServiceNow"

Does the government have a roadmap for the planned rollout of ServiceNow platform and applications to replace SCSM and other ticketing systems? Understanding high level milestones and dates would be very helpful?

ANSWER: Yes, Initial ITSM Dec 2021 ITOM spring 2022.

x. COMET IDIQ PWS‐Section 3, IT Service Management Subsection. COMET IDIQ PWS‐Section 3, p

15 states: “Assist with modifying NASIC’s self‐service portal, XML management packs, and service workflows in SCSM and ServiceNow”

What modules of ServiceNow are currently licensed and planned to be licensed (and when will they be aligned to roadmap milestones)?

ANSWER: Service workflows are being delivered in ServiceNow ITSM. Initial workflow delivery is scheduled for December, 2021, with additional worflows to be delivered/implemented during

2022. ITBM and ITOM are also being used or deployed in 2021‐2022, CSM.

y. TO 3 PWS Sect 3.12.3. Section 3.12.3 bullet states: “Create, modify and troubleshoot web dashboards Microsoft Internet Information Server (IIS) using hypertext markup language (HTML), ASP.NET, C#, and Visual Studio.”

Does the government plan allow use of ITSM tools to provide dashboards in lieu of existing custom developed dashboards?

ANSWER: The Government’s goal is to use ServiceNow dashboards.

z. TO 3 PWS Sect 3.12.1 bullet #2. Section 3.12.3 states: “Maintain and support IT Service

Management systems”

What IT Service Management Systems are in the scope of this statement? Please list each tool, module, option, and version)

ANSWER: Service workflows are being delivered in ServiceNow ITSM. Initial workflow delivery is scheduled for December, 2021, with additional workflows to be delivered/implemented during

2022. ITBM and ITOM are also being used or deployed in 2021‐2022.

aa. TO 3 PWS Sect 3.12.3. Section 3.12.3 states: “Non‐Microsoft third‐party service management products (Provance)"

Are there non‐Microsoft third‐party service management products other than Provance within the scope of this statement? Can the government please elaborate with a list of each tool, module, option and version to include Provance details?

ANSWER: Provance is not implemented – we are moving from Service Manager to ServiceNow.

bb. TO 4 PWS. General question for Cloud Services Task Order

Can the government provide a status of existing systems that are currently hosted in the cloud

(IaaS/PaaS, number of instances, services (e.g., databases, active directory, tools, etc.) used, cloud service provider, etc.).

ANSWER: IaaS and PaaS, also S3 storage, ~130 instances, a DB service, platform service, no cloud service provided tools are currently being used, no AD services, CSP is AWS.

cc. TO 4 PWS. General question for Cloud Services Task Order

Can the government provide information on the hybrid cloud strategy? What drives the multi‐cloud strategy? What gaps does utilizing cloud service providers fill?

ANSWER: Goals are cost reduction and access to additional resources.

dd. TO 4 PWS‐Sect 3.1 IaaS, 3.2 PaaS, 3.3 Cloud PaaS. General question pertaining to sections 3.1

IaaS, 3.2 PaaS, 3.3 Cloud PaaS

Does the government have a migration roadmap in place to migrate existing systems? What drives the migration to the cloud (e.g., expected cost savings, apps modernization, advanced technology adoption, capacity issues, etc.)?

ANSWER: Goals are cost reduction and access to additional resources.

ee. TO 4 PWS‐Sect 3.3.1 Cloud PaaS Scope. General question pertaining to sections 3.3 Cloud PaaS

Scope

What specialized computing needs is the government hosting in the cloud (artificial intelligence, machine learning, data lakes, micro services, etc.)?

ANSWER: Yes to all not data lakes, Cloud integration is still being worked.

ff. TO 4 PWS‐Sect 3.1 IaaS, 3.2 PaaS, 3.3 Cloud PaaS. Specific General question pertaining to sections 3.1 IaaS, 3.2 PaaS, 3.3 Cloud PaaS

Does the government have a preference for commercial cloud providers?

ANSWER: No, but currently deployed to AWS.

gg. TO 4 PWS‐Sect 3.1 IaaS, 3.2 PaaS, 3.3 Cloud PaaS. General question pertaining to sections 3.1

IaaS, 3.2 PaaS, 3.3 Cloud PaaS

Can the government provide an overview of the results and challenges experienced during the cloud application migrations?

ANSWER: Cloud integration is still being worked.

hh. TO 4 PWS‐Sect 3.1 IaaS, 3.2 PaaS, 3.3 Cloud PaaS. Specific question pertaining to sections 3.1

IaaS, 3.2 PaaS, 3.3 Cloud PaaS

Can the government provide a list of tools utilized to manage, monitor and automate the environment?

ANSWER: VMware Vrealize automation, VMWare Tanzu, Ansible.

ii. TO 4 PWS‐Sect 3.1 IaaS. Specific question pertaining to sections 3.1 IaaS

Can the government provide a list of the underlying physical IaaS component architecture (Hosts, SW, Network, Storage, BUR) that are currently on site?

ANSWER: Primary Dell servers VX rails, VM ware, cisco (ACI), Dell powerscale.

jj. TO 4 PWS‐Sect 3.1 IaaS. Specific question pertaining to sections 3.1 IaaS

Can the government provide the age/version and size of the IaaS components and the current capacity utilization and trends?

ANSWER: The IaaS consists of a combination of Dell 4140 servers with GPUs that are 5 years old, Dell R640 servers that are 3 years old and Dell VxRails that are 1‐2 years old. Primary VM storage consists of vSAN made up of NVMe and SSD across the 640s and VxRails. Additional storage for

VM’s is mounted via NFS through Dell Isilon/PowerScale. File storage for the IaaS lives on the

Isilon/PowerScale. Automation, monitoring, logging, and self‐service portal are delivered using the vRealize Suite. As onboarding of software and legacy components has just begun, we are currently using <10% of available resources with growth expecting to occur in the next 1‐2 years.

kk. TO 4 PWS‐Sect 3.1 IaaS, 3.2 PaaS, 3.3 Cloud PaaS. General Question pertaining to section 3.1

IaaS, 3.2 PaaS, 3.3 Cloud PaaS

Are there any in‐flight projects pertaining to the IaaS and PaaS hosted systems?

ANSWER: Yes, there are a number of development projects delivering code and containers to the platform (on‐prem and on the U/S/TS AWS clouds). The on‐prem platform is deployed on the IaaS.

There are also a number of legacy systems onboarding into the IaaS.

ll. TO 1 PWS‐Sect 3.8 VTC Operations. Can the government provide the average number of tickets processed per month for VTC support?

ANSWER: On the maintenance side we receive about 2 tickets per day, but on the ops side everything is handled by either telephone or email. They routinely receive 15‐20 phone calls per day and 12‐15 emails.

mm. TO 2 PWS‐Sect 3.3 GXS NSANet Document Speacialist. Can the government provide the current number of FTEs performing this task or how many hours per month of documentation support are required?

ANSWER: This was previously 1 FTE.

nn. TO 2 PWS‐Sect 3.7 GXS Network Documentation Support Task. Can the government provide the current number of FTEs performing this task or how many hours per month of documentation support are required?

ANSWER: The requirements for COMET are not the same as the former N‐ITSS contract. The number of contractors may vary from the previous contract to complete the required effort.

oo. TO 2 PWS‐Sect 3.11 SC Windows System Administration. Can the government provide the total number of Windows servers supported by this function?

ANSWER: The requirements for COMET are not the same as the former N‐ITSS contract. The number of contractors may vary from the previous contract to complete the required effort.

pp. TO 2 PWS‐Sect 3.13 ACY System Administration. Can the government provide the total number of servers being managed by this task? Can the government please provide the number of Oracle instances managed and the average size of the databases?

ANSWER: Any task orders associated with database services will be for new database services in support of the NASIC modernization effort. Therefore, specifics with regard to vendor, size, instances, etc. are unknown.

qq. TO 2 PWS‐Sect 3.14 SC System Administration for Engineering. Can the government please provide the total number of virtual servers being managed by this function by OS type?

ANSWER: The current Lab environment consists of 3 ESXi hosts, 85 Windows VMs (mix of 2012R2 and 2019), 35 Linux VMs (primarily CentOS 7).

17. Whether a bidder need to meet all requirements in the major defined scope areas or is ok to submit a proposal on a specific area of expertise, such as in our case surrounding Data Center cabling design and installation, data center moves and related.

ANSWER: Offerors must meet the requirements for all defined scope areas.

18. Questions Attached:

a. Sect L‐Atch 7 TEP Workbook, Summary TEP Worksheet. The instructions reference three TOs instead of five. We believe this is simply a clerical error. Please advise.

ANSWER: The pricing spreadsheet has been updated.

b. Sect L‐Atch 7 TEP Workbook, Proposal Labor Price (TO 2‐4). The TO PWS titles nor numbering provided in column A do not align to the paragraph titles and numbers in the Basic TO PWS documents provided. Please advise.

ANSWER: The pricing spreadsheet has been updated.

c. COMET Sect L, 4.3 Past Performance, Subsection 4.3.4, Specific Content, p.10; and Sect 3, Proposal Preparation, p.4. "The Offeror shall send the questionnaires for relevant projects that are in progress or completed in the past three (3) years to the individuals who will provide the reference... For Government contracts, send to the Contracting Officer or Contracting Officer’s

Representative..." Two KO contacts are given in Section 3.8 ‐ Is our customer responding to the

PPQs required to send responses to both the KOs?

ANSWER: Yes, send to both Contracting Officers listed in the RFP.

d. COMET Sect L & TO 2 Datacenter, Network and Platform Hosting TO. 11 Transition (of TO2 document), pg 73‐74. The COMET Section L document states "team leads identified in section 11 of all 5 task order Performance Work Statements"; however, TO 2 section 11 doesn't designate which of the 17 FTE are Team Leads. Please advise which positions are Team Leads for TO 2.

ANSWER: The requirements are changing to only refer to PM positions.

e. TO2 Datacenter, Network and Platform Hosting TO. 11 Transition pg 73, last paragraph. The last paragraph references both 15 contractor SMEs and 17 contractors. We believe this is a clerical error. Please advise.

ANSWER: Contractor SME’s should reflect 17.

f. TO3 IT Service Design and Cybersecurity. 11 Transition, pg 33. Is the designation of Lead synonymous with Team Lead used in other TO documents? In the TO 1 document, both terms

"Team Lead" and "Lead" are used, which seems to indicate that they are not synonymous. Please advise whether the positions listed on TO 3 page 33 are all Team Lead roles.

ANSWER: The positions listed on pg 33 are the lead positions for the transition. The team lead or lead role for the operations of the contract period will be determined based on the requirements of each department.

g. TO4 Cloud Services. 11 Transition, pg 22. The paragraph lists three incumbent contractor SMEs, but the bullets only show two roles. Please advise the title of the third role and whether or not it is a

Team Lead role.

ANSWER: There are only two (2) roles.

h. TO4 Cloud Services. 11 Transition, pg 22. Is the designation of Lead synonymous with Team

Lead used in other TO documents? In the TO 1 document, both terms "Team Lead" and "Lead" are used, which seems to indicate that they are not synonymous. Please advise whether the GSP On‐Site

PaaS/Cloud Support is a Team Lead role.

ANSWER: The positions listed on pg 33 are the lead positions for the transition. The team lead or lead role for the operations of the contract period will be determined based on the requirements of each department.

i. TO5 Facility Security System. 11 Transition, pg 19. Is the designation of Lead synonymous with

Team Lead used in other TO documents? In the TO 1 document, both terms "Team Lead" and

"Lead" are used, which seems to indicate that they are not synonymous. Please advise whether the

Physical Access Control System & Intrusion Detection System Support Specialist is a Team Lead role.

ANSWER: The positions listed on pg 33 are the lead positions for the transition. The team lead or lead role for the operations of the contract period will be determined based on the requirements of each department.

j. Sect L‐Atch7‐TEP Workbook. Transition Price (TO 1). There is only one Transition Price worksheet, however all 5 Task Order documents reference transition personnel required during the first 30 days. Do Task Orders 2‐5 also require transition pricing to account for the personnel listed in

Section 11 of the Task Order documents?

ANSWER: The pricing spreadsheet has been updated.

k. COMET Sect L. 2.1 Point of Contact. Section L, paragraph 2.1 only states "Address any questions or concerns you may have to the CO." A date for which questions shall be submitted by is not provided. What is the suspense for all questions to be submitted?

ANSWER: Submit questions to the listed Contracting Officers No Later Than 15 October 2021

5:00PM EDT.

l. COMET Sect M. 2.3.5 TEP. The transition periods are not listed as part of the TEP evaluation.

Please confirm that is the intent and not an inadvertent omission.

ANSWER: That is the intent. The team will not evaluate on the transition costs.

m. SF30 / Model Contract COMET IDIQ PWS. PWS‐Sect 3. Can the government please provide a completed SF30 with the proposal due date and contract period of performance? The model contract provided has a PoP listed that is inconsistent with the SAM.GOV description. The PWS, Section 3 is also inconsistent with the SAM.Gov announcement.

ANSWER: This draft contract and PWS will be updated to incorporate correct dates in these sections.

n. Sect L‐Atch7‐TEP Workbook. Summary TEP Worksheet. If the Government makes up to 4 contract awards, which Offeror is responsible for transition and how can transition be priced without knowing which offeror is going to be awarded which Task Order?

ANSWER: The offeror will be made aware of which TO they have been awarded.

o. Sect L, Sect M, TTO. Sect L‐4.2.4.5.1. The text refers to "local service levels according to NIST SP

800‐145." NIST SP 800‐145 does not define any service levels. Please clarify.

ANSWER: The Government is still processing this request and will include the answer in a future post.

p. SF33 / Model. Block 9. This document states that offers are due 8/25/21 yet the SAM announcement states responses are due 10/28/21. Can the government clarify when solicitation responses are due?

ANSWER: This draft contract and PWS will be updated to incorporate correct dates in these sections..

q. COMET IDIQ PWS. Section 2. Section 2, paragraph 2 states, "Certain contractor personnel shall also satisfy additional security requirements as detailed in section 7." Section 7 only references

Data Deliverables. Can the government please clarify and site the correct section, if applicable?

ANSWER: This section is supposed to be section 6.

r. COMET IDIQ PWS. Section 6.1.2. Section 6.1.2, paragraph 2 states, "selected contractor personnel may be required to satisfy a Counter Intelligence polygraph requirement." Please specify polygraph requirements for key transition personnel or historical LCAT?

ANSWER: NASIC has historically had one personnel will be required to obtain a polygraph.

s. SAM Announcement. Can the government please confirm the NAICS code? It is not referenced within the solicitation documents. On the SAM announcement the description refers to a FAR clause exception for companies with 1500 employees, which does not align to the NAICS code (541513) stated in the announcement.

ANSWER: The NAICS code as posted is correct, however there is no exception as listed above.

The RFP has been updated to reflect the exception correction.

t. Sect L&M. pgs 6‐9. Sections L&M do not include all IDIQ PWS Tasks. Please confirm that if those tasks omitted from Sections L and M are not included in offeror's Volume II Technical proposals, proposals will still be deemed compliant and responsive.

ANSWER: Not required to provide for all tasks, only those referenced in Section L and M.

u. Sect L. pgs 5. Will the government consider allowing experience examples used in the technical volume to include work completed in the last 5 years?

ANSWER: No, the Past Performance requirement for this effort is three (3) years.

v.…