FA8750-17-R-0001_0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

See Block #2

PAGE OF PAGES

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

07 APR 2017

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ.NO.

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY AFRL/RIKD CODE FA8750 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

USAF, AFMC

AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY

26 ELECTRONIC PARKWAY

ROME NY 13441-4514

MEGHAN F. THOMAS 3153302177

meghan.thomas.1@us.af.mil

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

FA8750-17-R-0001

X

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, X is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 0 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER.

If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

(X )

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: ( ) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. ITEM

10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

The purpose of this modification is to revise Section L of the RFP, and include Attachment No. 17 in Section J, as shown on the following page.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print).

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

CHRISTOPHER K. SCIALDONE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

BY________________________________________

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 30-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV.10-83)

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE Prescribed by GSA ConWrite Version 6.15.2 FAR (48 CFR) 53.243 Created 07 Apr 2017 12:00 PM

SCHEDULE OF CHANGES

FA8750-17-R-0001 0001

This amendment to the RFP will not extend the due date for receipt of proposals. IAW with RIK-L006 paragrah 6(d), Offerors must acknowledge amendments within their proposals. The use of the SF 33 for acknowledgement of amendments will suffice.

1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this modification is to revise Section L of the RFP, and include Attachment No. 17 in Section J.

2. SUMMARY OF CHANGES.

(a) In SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS, the following changes are made as shown below.

1. FAR 52.215-01 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION (JAN

2017) - ALTERNATE I (OCT 1997), now includes the following text below clause:

NOTE: Offerors must propose to provide all requirements; partial offers will not be accepted.

2. RIK-L007(a)(V) has been amended as follows:

FROM: Verification of current facility clearance provided by your Facility Security Officer (FSO).

Offerors that do not have the required facility clearance at the time of proposal submission will be found noncompliant with the solicitation requirements, and noncompliant proposals will not be further evaluated or considered for award. Offeror's must possess, at the time of proposal submission, a facility clearance at the Top Secret level and safeguarding capability at the Secret level, as stated on the Contract Security Classification Specification (DD Form 254) attached to this solicitation. For clarification, "facility clearance" refers to having personnel cleared at the Top Secret level and "safeguarding" refers to the storage capability at the Secret level. Offerors can contact their local DSS office to initiate this process.

TO: Verification of current facility clearance and safeguarding capability provided by your Facility Security Officer (FSO). Offerors that do not have the required facility clearance and safeguarding capability at the time of proposal submission will be found noncompliant with the solicitation requirements, and noncompliant proposals will not be further evaluated or considered for award.

Offeror's must possess, at the time of proposal submission, a facility clearance at the Top Secret level and safeguarding capability at the Secret level, as stated on the Contract Security Classification Specification (DD Form 254) attached to this solicitation. For clarification, "facility clearance" refers to having personnel cleared at the Top Secret level and "safeguarding" refers to the storage capability at the Secret level. Offerors can contact their cognizant DSS office to obtain verification information.

3. RIK-L011(b)(1) has been amended as follows:

FROM: Section 1 (Statement of Work): This Section shall describe technical performance of the Statement of Work as outlined in Attachment No. 2, and will be evaluated as outlined under Section M, Evaluation Factors under "Factor 1: Technical," and subfactor 3 (Experience and Qual ifications).

TO: Section 1 (Statement of Work): This Section shall include information regarding the Offeror's experience and qualifications relevant to technical performance of the Statement of Work as outlined in Attachment No. 2, and will be evaluated as outlined under Section M, Evaluation Factors under "Factor 1: Technical," and subfactor 3 (Experience and Qualifications).

4. RIK-L011(c)(1) has been amended as follows:

SCHEDULE OF CHANGES

FROM: Section 1 (Statement of Work): Demonstration of soundness of the proposed engineering approach to meeting the requirements of the Statement of Work with particular emphasis on the fol lowing:

TO: Section 1 (Statement of Work): Demonstration of relevant experience and qualifications to meeting the requirements of the Statement of Work with particular emphasis on the following:

5. RIK-L018(b) has been amended as follows:

FROM:Classified proposals and modifications to proposals UP TO THE COLLATERAL SECRET LEVEL must be submitted in paper only via U.S. Postal Service, registered mail and addressed to:

AFRL/RIKD, 26 Electronic Parkway, Rome, NY 13441-4514. Please address the inner envelope to Christopher Scialdone, Contracting Officer, AFRL/RIKD Info Grid & Systems Contracting Branch, 26 Electronic Parkway, Rome, NY 13441-4514. Electronic media submission of classified information is NOT authorized.

TO: Classified proposals and modifications to proposals UP TO THE COLLATERAL SECRET LEVEL must be submitted in paper only via U.S. Postal Service, registered mail, or USPS Express Mail in accordance with DoDM 5200.01, Volume 3, Enclosure 4, and addressed to: AFRL/RIKD, 26 Electronic Parkway, Rome, NY 13441-4514. Please address the inner envelope to Christopher Scialdone, Contracting Officer, AFRL/RIKD Info Grid & Systems Contracting Branch, 26 Electronic Parkway, Rome, NY 13441-4514. Electronic media submission of classified information is NOT authorized. Offerors are responsible for following proper procedures for transmittal of classified information, and for ensuring proposals are submitted on time IAW FAR 52.215-01 ALT I and ALT

II.

(b) In SECTION J - LIST OF ATTACHMENTS, Attachment No. 17 is included as shown on the next page.

There are no other change to the RFP.

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

DOCUMENT PGS DATE TITLE

ATTACHMENT 17 5 07 APR 2017 INDUSTRY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS -

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FA8750-17-R-

0001, DATED 24 MARCH 2017

Industry Questions and Answers ‐ Request for Proposal (RFP) FA8750‐17‐R‐0001 dated 24 March 2017 7 April 2017

Reference ACT_2_Excel_Template_Final

Question Tabs CLIN 0001, CLIN 0003, CLIN 0005 and CLIN 0007 of the Excel pricing file references "Computer Services", however, there is no definition of what these services entail. Does computer services only include the following:

• Tier 1, 2, 3 Desktop Support

• Office Application Cloud Services

• Server Infrastructure Support

• Technology Refresh Services Could the government please define "Computer Services"?

Answer By definition, Computer Costs (Computing Costs) are computer related costs and services, such as software and hardware necessary to support workstations and the local area data communications network, connections to the Internet and other networks, and helpdesk support. These computer costs cannot be directly assigned to a specific effort and are not covered under any other indirect cost categories. The existence of a specific computer cost rate is dependent on each Contractor’s accounting system and procedures. With that being said, the Excel Template is a tool for the Government to use for evaluation purposes. Offerors should propose indirect rates as deemed necessary, and propose in accordance with the Sample Order 0001 requirements.

Reference RIK‐L011 c(2)(viii) and RIK‐M001 e.1 (iii) Question Resumes are no longer requested in the instructions for Vol III (Technical Volume), Section 2, Sample Order 0001. Will resumes in an Appendix to

Vol III (as requested in the instructions for Section 1, Statement of Work) be considered responsive to the cited Section 2 requirements for personnel related experience and qualifications?

Answer Yes, resumes in the Technical Volume (Vol III), will be considered responsive for both the Statement of Work (Section 1) and Sample Order 0001 (Section 2).

Reference Delivery Date of Proposals Question DSS prohibits us from mailing classified documents over the weekend, i.e., for delivery of a classified proposal on Monday, May 1st. Would the

Government consider either:

1. Accepting classified proposals sent by express mail and postmarked on Monday, May 1st, or

2. Changing the due date to allow for delivery other than on Monday, e.g., to Tuesday, or Wednesday, May 3rd

Answer The Government's required allotted time for requesting proposals is 30 calendar days. For ACT 2, the Government factored in additional time (four

(4) additional business days) for those mailing classified. At this time, the Government is keeping the original May 1st deadline.

Reference Facility Clearance, Section L, RIK‐L007, section a.1.v. It states Verification of current facility clearance provided by your Facility Security Officer (FSO).

Offerors that do not have the required facility clearance at the time of proposal submission will be found noncompliant with the solicitation requirements, and noncompliant proposals will not be further evaluated or considered for award. Offeror's must possess, at the time of proposal submission, a facility clearance at the Top Secret level and safeguarding capability at the Secret level, as stated on the Contract Security Classification Specification (DD Form 254) attached to this solicitation. For clarification, "facility clearance" refers to having personnel cleared at the Top Secret level and "safeguarding" refers to the storage capability at the Secret level. Offerors can contact their local DSS office to initiate this process.

Question Does “safeguarding capability” mean an existing and approved system for storing classified information or the capability of obtaining or recertifying such a system?

FA8750‐17‐R‐0001 0001, Attachment No. 17

Answer "Safeguarding Capability" means having an existing and approved system for storing classified information, at the time of proposal submission. The Government has maintained this position since the first draft RFP, dated 21 December 2016, which was posted to FBO on 22 December 2016. For clarification purposes, the last sentence to the reference above, stating that "Offerors can contact their local DSS office to initiate this process," was intended for verification purposes only. Paragraph (v) has been amended to further clarify these solicitation requirements.

Reference Facility Clearance Question

If an Offeror, intending to prime, has subcontractors on their team, including a large business, which all have an active safeguarding capability at the Secret level, can the prime assert that it's subcontractors having the active capability at the time of submission meets the requirement?

Answer No, the Offeror proposing as the prime must hold the safeguarding capability. Subcontractors may change over the course of the contract, therefore, asserting their capabilities does not satisfy the solicitation requirements.

Reference Facility Clearance Question Will the Government use the Defense Security Service (DSS) Industrial Security Facilities Database (ISDF) to determine the offeror’s possession of

“safeguarding capability” at the time of proposal submission?

Answer Yes, the Government will use ISDF to determine the Offeror's possession of the "safeguarding capability."

Reference Attachment 2, page 12: The ACT 2 Statement of Work (SOW) jumps from para 4.1.7.5 to 4.1.7.7. Attachment 2, page 13: The ACT 2 SOW jumps from 4.1.8.1.3 to 4.1.8.1.3.2.

Question How should the offeror address the missing SOW paragraph 4.1.7.6, & 4.1.8.1.3.1?

Answer The Government will be adding "reserve" paragraphs for 4.1.7.6 and 4.1.8.1.3.1 to the SOW in an upcoming amendment to address these missing paragraphs.

Reference REFERENCE 1: RFP Section RIK‐L011(a)(2) requires that “Technical Proposal be prepared in the same sequence as the Statement of Work and Work

Description for Sample Task Order 0001.”

REFERENCE 2: RFP Sections RIK‐L011(c)(1)(i)(A) through (F) detail specific requirements to be satisfied in the response for Section 1 (Statement of Work). However, quite a few sections from the SOW (the latter portion) are not reflected in the Section L requirements. With RFP Section RIK‐ L011(c)(1)(i)(A) requesting experience in the 8 technical areas (SOW 4.1.1 through 4.1.8) and RFP Sections RIK‐L011(c)(1)(i)(B) through (F) requesting other specific experience not directly mapped to a particular SOW section, it appears the following SOW Sections are missing from the Section L requirements for Section 1 (Statement of Work):

• 4.1.9 Integrate Innovative Cyber Technologies to Enable Cyber Superiority

• 4.1.10 Facilitate Technology Transition

• 4.1.11 Flight Test and Evaluation Requirements

• 4.2 Program Management

• 4.3 Software/Hardware

• 4.4 Safety Requirements

Question Will the Government please confirm that offerors are not required to respond directly to SOW Sections 4.1.9 through 4.4 in their Technical Proposal for Section 1 (Statement of Work) and should adhere to what is requested by RFP Sections RIK‐L011(c)(1)(i)(A) through (F)?

Answer ALL areas of the SOW require responses. In reference to RIK‐L011(a)(2), when responding to the SOW and Sample Order 0001, follow the numbering sequence of the SOW and Sample Order 0001. RIK‐L011(c) (1) and (c) (2), include the detailed information and requirements that are required in your responses to the SOW and Sample Order 0001, within the numbering sequences laid out within the respective documents.

Reference Page L 19 of 25: (b)(1) '…and will be evaluated as outlined under Section M, Evaluation Factors under "Factor 1: Technical," and subfactor 3 (Experience and Qualification) AND Page M 2 of 3: (e) (1) (ii): "Subfactor 2: Management Approach…(Applies to Statement of Work and Sample Task)"

Question Which Technical Subfactors 1‐3 apply to assessing the SOW portion of the Technical Volume? Section L suggests only subfactor 3 applies, but Section M suggests subfactor 2 and 3 apply. Subfactor 2 would only seem to apply (and is stated) to the Management Plan (volume 4). Please clarify which subfactors apply to assessment of the SOW and Sample Order portion of Technical Volume (Volume 3) and Management (Volume 4).

Answer Please reference the Cross‐Reference Matrix. Factor 1, subfactor 3 applies to the SOW in the context of describing the Offeror's experience and qualifications relevant to technical performance of the SOW (Volume III, Section 1, Technical). Factor 1, subfactor 2, and subfactor 3 apply to both the SOW and Sample Order 0001, in the context of demonstrating a sound management approach (Volume IV, Management Capability). Factor 1, subfactor 1 applies to Sample Order 0001 only (Volume III, Section 2, Technical).

Reference Sample Order 0001‐General Question If a Cross Domain System (CDS) is required, does the Government have a particular solution in mind, or is it a choice left up to the contractor, assuming that the CDS must be one chosen from the UCDSMO baseline?

Answer The solution to be used is part of the Offeror's approach. If the solution proposed is not currently accredited for DoD CDS use, the Offeror's approach to obtain accreditation will be evaluated as part of the overall proposal. In the case that the Offeror does not propose to obtain the accreditation, the evaluation team will take into account the likelihood that the system will be accredited outside of the proposed effort as well as the timeline and risks associated.

Reference Sample Order 0001 ‐ p. 2, 4.1, 2nd sub‐bullet Question There is a requirement to maintain three separate security enclaves – Unclassified, Secret, and TS/SCI. Is there an expectation that data will have to move between these security enclaves through an approved Cross Domain System (CDS) and if so, is the contractor expected to deliver this, including going through the appropriate security accreditation processes?

Answer There is an expectation that data will have to move between the security enclaves, hence the requirement for a Cross Domain System (CDS). The CDS is expected to be accredited for use, at the time of use (reference question/answer #10). The Offeror is expected to deliver the CDS as part of the end item deliverable for the task order.

Reference Sample Order 0001 ‐ p. 2, 4.1, 2nd sub‐bullet Question Requirements state that the Unclassified network must be connected to the open internet. Does this mean that the Unclassified system WILL NOT be connected at any point to the NIPRNet?

Answer The sample task order does not require any connectivity to any pre‐established Government network. Should the offeror propose to use a pre‐ established government network (NIPR, SIPR, JWICS, etc...), the development and experimentation restrictions associated with those networks should be taken into account and will be evaluated as part of the approach.

Reference Sample Order 0001 ‐ p. 2, 4.1, 5th sub‐bullet Question Task Order states the SCORE system must operate in three geographically separate nodes located in areas strategic to facilitate experimentation and technology transition of cyber capabilities to the US Department of Defense. Is the contractor free to select these facilities or does the Government require that at least one of these facilities be located near the Government Program Management Office?

Answer The Offeror is free to select these locations and the proposed approach will be evaluated accordingly IAW Section M.

Reference Sample Order 0001 ‐ p. 2, 4.1, 6th sub‐bullet Question The SCORE requirements state that experiments must traverse ‘wired and wireless’ links. Is it expected that the ‘wireless’ links will be limited to the

Unclassified network segment or is the Government expecting the experimentation to be conducted over wireless links at the Secret and TS/SCI level?

Answer The range is expected to be representative of current warfare environments. In current warfare environments, classified data does traverse networks via means other than physical wires, therefore it is expected that the capability be present within SCORE.

Reference Sample Order 0001 ‐ p. 2, 4.1, 6th sub‐bullet Question The SCORE requirements state that experiments must utilize common mobile devices using both CDMA and GSM protocols. Is the Government expecting the contractor to also provide an experimentation network that includes cellular telephony to support these experiments?

Answer Yes, the Government expects the Offeror's approach to include cellular telephony capability within the developed experimentation environment.

Reference RFP Attachment 16, Cost Proposal Pricing Template Question (a) Please verify the dates as shown below are correct for Contract Year.

CY2018 07/31/2018 – 07/30/2019

CY2019 07/31/2019 – 07/30/2020

CY2020 07/31/2020 – 07/30/2021

CY2021 07/31/2021 – 07/30/2022

CY2022 07/31/2022 – 07/30/2023

(b) If this is correct, columns labeled CY2023 and CY2024 in Attachment 16 will not be utilized for this effort. Please confirm.

Answer (a) Correct, as stated in RIK‐L005, the assumed start date for Sample Order 0001 is 31 Jul 2018, and it is a 60 month effort. (b) Offerors may choose not to utilize columns CY2023 and CY2024.

Reference Block 9 of the Standard Form 33 Question The SF33 Block 9 conflicts with the instructions in RIK‐L018(b). Will AFRL accept hand delivered COLLATERAL SECRET proposals?

Answer No, AFRL will not accept hand delivered COLLATERAL SECRET proposals per DoDM 5200.01, Vol 3, Encl 4, para 11.

Reference RIK‐L018(b) Question The instruction in RIK‐L018 paragraph (b) still requests registered mail for classified proposals and modifications to proposals up to the collateral secret level. These instructions conflict with answer #11 of the 23 February Questions/Answers issued by AFRL, which stated USPS Express Mail is acceptable.

Answer USPS Express Mail is an authorized means for transporting classified mail. Offerors are responsible for following proper procedures for transmittal of classified material IAW DoDM 5200.01, Vol. 3, Encl 4 (e.g. CONUS only, don't execute the "waiver of signature indemnity" on USPS Express Mail Label 11 ‐ B, and don't use drop box method). RIK‐L018(b) has been modified accordingly.

Reference Attachment 7 Cross Reference Matrix

Question Can offerors change/delete columns and titles to reflect relevant areas for each volume?

Answer Offerors shall complete the cross reference matrix indicating the corresponding proposal page(s) and paragraph(s) that address the referenced items. Please do not alter the format.

Reference Attachment 7 Cross Reference Matrix

Question Is it the Government’s intent to have one compliance matrix cover all volumes rather than individual matrices specific to each volume?

Answer One matrix is expected to be completed to cover all volumes, and a copy of the matrix is to be included in multiple volumes; II, III, IV, V.