FA8750-21-R-1004 QA_20210202.docx

AGILE CYBER TECHNOLOGY 3

FA8750-21-R-1004

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS AS OF 02 FEB 2021

* Please note the solicitation number has changed from FA8750-20-R-1004 to FA8750-21-R-1004. *

* The Q&A below includes some answer updates (red text) as well as new questions (black text) and answers (blue text). Text for previous updates has been changed to black.*

Q1: Draft Section L and M states: “A work description relating to the Sample Order for this acquisition is available for review by offerors during proposal preparation period.” Please confirm whether or not the Sample Order is available now or only after the final RFP release so that we can request access to a copy at the appropriate time.

A1: The requirements to review the Sample Order are still being finalized. The Sample Order will be made available by/at the time of final RFP release.

Q2: If the Sample Order can only be reviewed in a SCIF, does that imply that our proposal will be classified and require submission under such instructions?

A2: While the Sample Order is available in the SCIF, your proposal and classification level that you would submit the proposal at will be based on your company’s approach. UPDATE: It is strongly recommended that the proposal to the Sample Order be written at the TS/SCI level to avoid exposing requirements that have been written at that level. AFRL will perform a security review on any Sample Order proposal written at a lower level and submitted via non-SCI-approved means to determine if a potential security violation has occurred. The classification for the remainder of the proposal will be based on your company's approach. AFRL requests that all portions of the proposal that are unclassified be submitted via unclassified means and classified sections be submitted separately. UPDATE: The Sample Order will be unclassified.

Q3: Does the Government intend to distribute the Sample Order to offerors for safeguarding at the offeror's location? What is the planned method for distributing the Sample Order (ex. JWICS, courier, etc.)?

A3: The Government can distribute the Sample Order, which is classified TS/SCI, via electronic network means only. Arrangements can be made to review the Sample Order at Rome Research Site (RRS) within the constraints expressed to all offerors (limits on the number of persons, number of hours, travel with regard to state COVID-19 policies, etc). No hard copies will be permitted to be brought out of RRS SSO. Contact AFRL to verify accessibility of any particular SCI level network. UPDATE: See A2.

Q4: In regards to, “For those Offerors located within 150 miles of AFRL/RI,” access to the work description may be obtained by contacting the Government via email, so that the offeror may establish an Agreement between AFRL/RI and a Government agency with the ability to sponsor their Team with an SCI certified vault facility. Please provide additional guidance on your process to establish this agreement and what information you need from the offeror to gain access to the Sample Order work description. Also, would the offeror be able to utilize their JWICS account within another US Government-sponsored facility to access the Sample Order? Is there a form that needs to be submitted to the Government or a letter that the offeror can present to the FSO for submission to the cognizant authority for the facility space?

A4: UPDATE: The 150 mile maximum radius mandate was a COVID-19 policy for traveling to Rome Research Site (RRS) that has since been rescinded. Visitors must demonstrate that all entry requirements for New York State in effect at the time of visit have been met. For information regarding the availability of the RRS SSO, the use of performer SCIFs, or the use of particular classified networks, please contact Bryan Bossert (bryan.bossert@us.af.mil), AFRL’s Special Security Officer. He should be able to answer the questions regarding access to the SCI portion of the proposal and drafting a response in the offeror's SCIF. UPDATE: See A2.

Q5: Given the logistics of navigating secure facilities during COVID lockdowns, would the Government consider releasing the Sample Order at an unclassified level to minimize requirements on offerors to travel or co-locate?

A5: No, this is not possible. UPDATE: See A2.

Q6: If a company maintains a TS Facility Clearance, is it acceptable to implement safeguarding capability at the Secret level upon award with the appropriate DD254?

A6: Yes, however be advised that AFRL will only offer SCIF space to offerors to write the Sample Order portion of the proposal, the requirement for which is at the TS/SCI level. AFRL will not be offering collateral space or classified space for writing the proposal in its entirety. Therefore the level of safeguarding an offeror has access to is the maximum security level that the majority of the proposal will be able to be written at. UPDATE: No, an Offeror must have Secret level safeguarding (at the prime level) at the time of proposal submission.

Q7: If a proposed subcontractor/teammate satisfies the security requirement can that facility be used?

A7: Yes. UPDATE: A subcontractor/teammate facility can be used prior to proposal submission, however please see A10 for requirements for the prime contractor at time of proposal submission.

Q8: If intending to submit a Prime offer, how do we request the appropriate network access should there be any classified material that is necessary for the submission?

A8: If a company has appropriately cleared personnel, they will be permitted to access the AFRL SSO and the network(s) within given the constraints expressed to all offerors (limits on the number of persons, number of hours, travel with regard to state COVID-19 policies, etc). UPDATE: Likewise, if a company already has access to a classified network, contact AFRL SSO personnel to verify the network can be used to receive the sample task order. UPDATE: See A2.

Q9: Does the contractor have to have the “safeguarding” ability prior to submission or prior to award?

A9: The level of safeguarding an offeror has access to is the maximum security level that the majority of the proposal will be able to be written at. UPDATE: An Offeror must have Secret level safeguarding (at the prime level) at the time of proposal submission.

Q10: Is RIK-L007 paragraph (a)(1)(viii) requirement due at contract award vice at proposal submission? Paragraph (a)(1)(v) says that a facility clearance is required at time of proposal submission. But it is being interpreted that paragraph (viii) requirements to be in place at contract award. If our assumption is correct (paragraph (a)(1)(viii) requirements in place as of contract award), would the Government evaluate a proposed plan to meet (a)(1)(viii) security requirements by award less favorably than a proposal that already meets (a)(1)(viii) security requirements at proposal submission?

A10: For RIK-L007 paragraph (a)(1)(v), 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. Offerors must possess, at the time of proposal submission, a facility clearance at the Top Secret level and safeguarding capability at the Secret level. For RIK-L007 paragraph (a)(1)(viii), an offeror must identify in its technical proposal the location and type of SCI accredited system that will be available to the program upon contract award. UPDATE: The offeror referred to in A10 is the prime contractor submitting the proposal.

Q11: Regarding safeguarding, it is understood that it is a requirement to have this capability at the time of submission, but is this a requirement that the Government would allow a candidate to subcontract for?

A11: No. If the Government needs to send classified correspondence regarding the proposal, it needs to be sent directly to the offeror, not a proposed subcontractor.

Q12: Will a Common Access Card (CAC) be required to enter the reading room? If companies are unable to gain access to the reading room, how will this be handled?

A12: No, a CAC is not needed. If a company has appropriately cleared personnel, they will be permitted to access the AFRL Rome NY SSO within the constraints given to all offerors (limits on the number of persons, number of hours, travel with regard to state COVID-19 policies, etc.). UPDATE: Due to the current state of the global pandemic, access to AFRL Rome NY SSO will not be permitted.

Q13: Does the Government prefer single technical volume at a classified level or should the offeror submit an unclassified technical volume with a classified addendum?

A13: The Government would prefer only the portions of the proposal that need to be classified be submitted as classified and all others be submitted via unclassified means.

Q14: If an unclassified volume is submitted with a classified addendum, how will the Government consider the page count for the unclassified volume with the classified addendum?

A14: The overall page count will constitute an aggregate of the substantive pages from the unclassified and classified volumes. See the solicitation for instruction on what constitutes a substantive page for counting purposes.

Q15: Will AFRL be holding an Industry Day or one-on-one sessions with interested primes?

A15: No Industry Day will be held. One-on-one sessions may be scheduled with the Program Management team, however given the global pandemic situation, the meetings may be held virtually.

Q16: Please clarify the percentage an individual company must be able to self-perform in order to qualify as a Prime for submission?

A16: AFRL understands there are tradeoffs with regard to the mix of subcontracting. While subcontracting results in additional pass-through costs to the Government it also allows for a more diversified team. The subcontracting mix proposed by the offeror is part of their proprietary proposal and it is the responsibility of the offeror to convince the Government why the subcontracting mix proposed is of the best value to the Government. Be advised that, in accordance with the regulations for small business set aside contracting, 50% of the work proposed (by dollar value) must be performed by small businesses (small business prime and their small business subcontractors count towards the 50% IAW FAR 52.219-14 (DEVIATION 2020-O0008)).

Q17: As a 100% SBSA solicitation, will the Prime bidder be required to submit a Small Business Plan?

A17: No.

Q18: Is it required the Prime hold an office within X miles of AFRL Rome NY?

A18: No.

Q19: Has the Government determined if additional “points” will be given to small businesses who possess additional small business certifications (i.e. 8(a), HUBZone, etc.)? Will the Government set aside a certain number of awards in these small business categories?

A19: Evaluation will be completed in accordance with Section M of the solicitation. No additional "points" will be given for small business certifications. The set-aside is for small businesses without further distinction. The set-aside determination was based on elements such as market research, procurement history, consideration of future competition, and an objective to receive from industry the most novel and innovate approaches to solving user needs.

Q20: If the term "Restricted Data" is intended to mean what is defined pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, does this mean that Contractors may need a "Q" clearance?

A20: Department of Energy clearances are not required for response to this solicitation. Any additional clearances required, not specifically addressed in the solicitation, will be worked between the Government and the Contractor post-award.

Q21: Must an offeror have direct past performance in every line of the Statement of Work?

A21: The technical evaluation factor includes a subfactor for Experience and Qualifications, which is to evaluate the experience and qualifications of the types of personnel and the quantity and quality of the offeror's corporate experience relevant to the requirements. This includes understanding of USAF Cyber components and respective requirements. (Applies to Statement of Work and Sample Task Order).

Q22: When referring to "experience and qualifications of proposed personnel," is the Government asking for the experience of specific people, as opposed to asking for the company's experience?

A22: Yes.

Q23: Is the Government asking for experience and qualifications for proposed personnel or proposed types of personnel?

A23: RIK-L009 requires in the technical volume information about the experience and qualifications of proposed engineering/scientific personnel that the offeror considers central to performance. RIK-L010 requires in the management volume information about the experience and qualifications of proposed types of management personnel and the quantity and quality of the offeror's corporate experience relevant to program requirements.

Q24: Please define "USAF Cyber components." For example, does this refer to the 16th Air Force wings and Center, or to USAF weapons systems, or to another organization, or to something else?

A24: In the proposal an offeror can demonstrate its knowledge, experience, and expertise regarding Cyber Operations and Cyber Acquisition within the United States Air Force. How an offeror decides to do this is part of their proposal. The intention is not for AFRL to suggest specific organizations and systems for offerors to research and relay back to the Government.

Q25: With reference to RIK-L009 paragraph (c)(1)(ii) “Any technical information pertaining to the SOW and not covered in the Sample Task Order sections shall be included in this section." Will the Government provide clarification of the type of information expected from offerors?

A25: Offerors may share information with the Government they feel is relevant but was not specifically asked for in the Sample Order. The Government does not wish to limit the offeror by mandating what this information should be.

Q26: Are key resumes required or will cameo resumes be accepted?

A26: We ask for resumes of proposed key personnel in an anonymous manner (i.e. the resumes without the names).

Q27: Can the Government define a page limit for individual resumes of at least 5 pages to enable offerors to address the full range of experience and qualifications required in the Technical and Management Volumes?

A27: The Government is not specifying a minimum or maximum number of pages.

Q28: Where are the labor category definitions for the key personnel and how will they be evaluated?

A28: The key personnel (which are up to the offeror to propose) are covered by the labor categories and personnel qualifications in Attachment 8. The evaluation of proposed personnel falls under the Technical factor.

Q29: Section M defines clear and concise technical subfactors that the Government will use to evaluate the Technical and Management Volumes, but the Section L instructions require offerors to submit more information than what is referenced in Section M. In light of the instruction in RIK-L006 that “pages should be limited to the minimum number necessary” we respectfully request that Sections RIK-L009 and RIK-L010 be revised.

A29: RIK-L009 and RIK-L010 require information from offerors that is relevant and necessary for a thorough, meaningful evaluation, as defined in Section M, and for the best value to be obtained.

Q30: Referencing Statement of Work paragraphs 4.1.11 - 4.1.11.8 for Flight Test and Evaluation, does the Government require a technical discussion within the offeror's Technical Volume for this section of the Statement of Work?

A30: Every section of the Statement of Work needs to be addressed within the technical volume. The Government recognizes the page count restrictions and considers the offeror’s decision for how much depth to dedicate to each one to be part of their proposal.

Q31: Statement of Work paragraph 4.1.11 describes work that is not cited in the evaluation factors. It references multiple CDRLs not defined in Attachment 1. We recommend the Government remove this section from the Statement of Work.

A31: As part of the technical volume, offerors will provide a demonstration of the soundness of the proposed engineering approach to meeting the requirements of the Statement of Work. This will be evaluated under the technical factor. Statement of Work paragraph 4.1.11 may be required under future task orders, for which appropriate CDRLs will be specified.

Q32: Are the travel estimates provided in the draft RFP estimates for the entire duration of the contract (5 years) or do the estimates apply to each contract year?

A32: Travel estimates should be considered for the entire duration of the contract. If priced out by year, also provide the yearly breakout/estimates.

Q33: In RIK-L007 paragraph (a)(1)(vi), is the Government asking for names and SSNs for the key personnel who will be available for assignment?

A33: The requirement is for the offeror to provide the "cleared or clearable personnel by name and Social Security Account Number that will be assigned to the program upon award."

Q34: The note for page limitations states, “** Excluding resumes of management/engineering/scientific personnel. No more than 20 resumes representative of your proposed team will be accepted.” Are offerors permitted to provide 20 resumes for the Technical Volume and another 20 resumes for the Management Volume?

A34: No, 20 resumes is the limit for the proposal in its entirety.

Q35: Will the Government allow a smaller font size, such as Arial 8, for charts, tables, and diagrams for the proposal?

A35: No.

Q36: For the proposal cover page, table of contents pages, and any other pages that are exempt from the page limits, will the Government also exempt them from the page numbering specification? We can avoid confusion about whether a proposal volume has exceeded its page limit by starting the Arabic numeral page numbering with the proposal response that is subject to page limits.

A36: Yes.

Q37: Can entire proposals be submitted electronic only regardless of security level?

A37: Unclassified components of a proposal are to be submitted electronically. Paper copies are required for Secret components. Higher level or compartmented classified proposal components will be accepted in paper or electronic format to most securely accommodate varying resource availability of offerors.

Q38: Is a mid-late November RFP release expected?

A38: The revised RFP release estimate is mid/late Jan 2021. UPDATE: The revised RFP release estimate is mid/late Feb 2021.

Q39: Are only Small Businesses eligible to act as the prime contractor, or can any organization be a prime contractor as long as small businesses perform 50% of the work?

A39: This requirement is 100% set-aside for Small Businesses under NAICS 541715. Only Small Businesses for NAICS 541715 are eligible to be considered for award.

Q40: Does the requirement regarding facility clearance flow down to subcontractors, as well? That is, “the Offeror must possess, a facility clearance at the Top Secret level and safeguarding capability at the Secret level.”

A40: The quoted requirement applies to the prime contractor.

Q41: If we intend to participate as a subcontractor, should we provide our information for the List of Registered Parties, or is that only meant for prime contractors?

A41: Potential subcontractors can provide their information for the List of Registered Parties.

Q43: Is a projected award date of Sep 2021 correct?

A43: No further information about projected award date is available at this time.

Q44: Can you confirm the intended contract vehicle?

A44: Multiple award IDIQ.

Q45: Are you expecting a lot of competition on this opportunity?

A45: The Government anticipates competition for this requirement.

Q46: Would you be interested in an opportunity to Sole Source award this project to a qualified Native Hawaiian Organization (up to $100M sole source allowable)?

A46: No, thank you.

Q47: Q&A #11 as of 23 Oct 2020 stated, “If the Government needs to send classified correspondence regarding the proposal, it needs to be sent directly to the offeror, not a proposed subcontractor.” Draft Section L (v) page 5 states: “The TS safeguarding requirement is stated on the pre-award DD 254 solely for the purpose of authorizing pre-contract access for potential Offerors who intend to safeguard the STO work description transmitted to a SCIF at their operating location, or at another contractor’s location.” Please clarify and confirm that the offeror can use a proposed teammate subcontractor’s SCIF to read and respond to the Sample Order.

A47: Please see A7 (updated). RIK-L007 will be updated to indicate a Secret safeguarding requirement on the DD254.

Q48: How will AFRL facilitate the courtesy or SCI read-ins for the pre-award Sample Order proposal response preparation?

A48: The Government anticipates posting instructions to BetaSam by final RFP release. UPDATE: See A2.

Q49: The Deltek GovWin service reported the possibility of potential virtual meetings with industry. Will the Government announce such events in the near future?

A49: Please see A15. The Government anticipates posting instructions to BetaSAM for scheduling private virtual meetings with the PM team by final RFP release.

Q50: Regarding Q&A #10 as of 23 Oct 2020, this seems to contradict the information presented in Q&A #6 and #9 regarding safeguarding capability. Q&A #9 & #10 directly contradict each other. Please clarify: must an offeror need to have a facility clearance at the Top Secret level and safeguarding capability at the Secret level to submit a compliant proposal?

A50: Please see updated answers for A6 and A9.

Q51: Based on Q&A #10 and the announcement, the facility clearance is TS, and the ability to store Secret. Is RIK-L007(a)(1)(viii) alluding that the prime contractor itself must have the ability to host an SCI system at its facility for the program to use? If an offeror satisfies the facility and safeguarding requirements, and also has the means to get TS/SCI information via JWICS, but does not itself host an SCI system accredited to the company, does this disqualify as a responsible contractor? If not, what is the alternate means?

A51: Please refer to A10 for compliance with clearance requirements and proposal evaluation. Offerors do not need to possess a SCIF or TS level data processing equipment to be eligible to propose. Per RIK-L007(a)(1)(viii), an offeror must include in the Contract Forms volume "Verification of an SCI accredited and approved Automatic Data Processing System to run SCI information. Offeror must identify in its technical proposal the location and type of SCI accredited system that will be available to the program upon contract award." Any proposed alternate means is dependent on the offeror's approach.

In an offeror does not possess the necessary resources to access the classified Sample Order portion of the RFP (but is otherwise eligible to propose), AFRL can host the offeror in Government spaces at Rome Research Site to access and write that portion of the proposal. UPDATE: See A2 and A12.

Q52: If a company is interested in this solicitation, but does not have the specified facility or safeguarding clearance, can they still propose while working on getting the facility or safeguarding clearance? Also, do you have any recommendations to obtain this facility clearance?

A52: Please see A10. Potential offerors can contact DCSA. Due to the resource commitment that would be required, AFRL cannot sponsor facility clearances or safeguarding for the Agile Cyber Technology 3 effort prior to contract award.

Q53: Q&A #28 stated “The key personnel (which are up to the offeror to propose) are covered by the labor categories and personnel qualifications in Attachment 8”. Has this attachment been released?

A53: Attachment 8 had not been posted to Beta SAM at the time of A28, but it will be. UPDATE: Attachment 8 has been posted.

Q54: Must the Offeror have 5 or 8 key personnel with access to SCI at time award?

A54: RIK-L007(a)(1)(vi) states: "Immediately upon contract award, the Offeror must have 8 key personnel with access to SCI, and 12 more with SCI access within 6 months after contract award." UPDATE: The Government is contemplating revising RIK-L007(a)(1)(vi) to read: "Verification of the appropriate number of personnel (approximately 5 total, including the prime and any subcontractors) having access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) or clearable for SCI access (i.e. Final US Top Secret Clearance without waiver and a Special Background investigation either on record or in process) that will be available for assignment to this effort. Immediately upon contract award, the Offeror must have 5 personnel with access to SCI, and 12 more with SCI access within 6 months after contract award. Offeror must identify in Section 3 of the Contract Forms volume those cleared or clearable personnel by name and Social Security Account Number that will be assigned to the program upon award."

Q55: Is it the Government’s intention that the up to 20 resumes that may be submitted are the 8 key personnel with SCI access upon award and the 12 more with SCI access within 6 months of award?

A55: Please see A23. The resumes that are submitted are dependent on an offeror's approach.

Q56: In the Contract Forms volume, is the Government requiring those cleared or clearable personnel by name and Social Security Account Number that will be assigned to the program upon award for only the 5 or 8 key personnel or is it all personnel that will be assigned to the program upon award that are cleared or clearable at the Top Secret/SCI level?

A56: RIK-L007(a)(1)(vi) requires names and SSANs for personnel "that will be assigned to the program upon award." Personnel in addition to those referred to in A54 may be identified in the Contract Forms volume.

Q57: Does Secret safeguarding granted by the National Security Agency, which is recorded on the NSA Acquisition Resource Center (ARC) database, but not reflected on a DD254 fulfill the safeguarding requirement?

A57: Yes, as long as the offeror is listed as having Secret safeguarding in the NISS/DSS Portal.

Q58: If a JV is formed, does the JV entity need to cover the safeguarding requirement or can one of the JV members cover it? If so, can either the majority or minority partner cover the requirement?

A58: Please see A10.

Q59: How many billets will the awardees receive for TS/SCI positions?

A59: AFRL/RI SCI-level contracts do not work on the "billet" system. Contractor positions that require SCI clearance for successful performance, as determined by the Government, will be afforded one in accordance with all requisite security policies. Offerors are advised to prepare proposals in accordance with the Section L instructions.

Q60: We have our own SCIF that we can use for writing the classified portions of the proposal. Is it possible to get the classified Sample Task Order sent to a nearby Government facility and then couriered to us at our SCIF location?

A60: See A2.

Q61: Reference: RIK-L017 FIRST ORDER (VOLUME V), page L-15; First Order Work Description at Attachment No. 14; and First Order CDRL (Exhibit A) at Attachment No. 15.

Question: Proposals shall contain a summary of the technical/management effort the Offeror expects to make toward satisfying the First Order Work Description. Is it the Government’s intent that we only explain how we plan to write and execute the Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) and provide a Fixed Price proposal or do you want us to submit the completed SEMP as well?

A61: Please note RIK-L017 is anticipated to be renumbered. The First Order (Volume V) shall contain the offeror's technical/management/price proposal for completing a Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) in accordance with the First Order Work Description and First Order CDRL (Exhibit A). Proposals shall contain a summary of the technical/management effort the Offeror expects to make toward satisfying the First Order Work Description. Only if awarded the task order would a Contractor be required to deliver a completed SEMP.

Q62: Reference: SOW Umbrella, Paragraph 4.2.6 thru 4.2.6.2 Testing/Demonstrations are included under the Paragraph 4.2 Program Management. It does not appear that this section aligns under Program Management. Question: Should the Testing/Demonstrations be its own Section and not fall under Program Management?

A62: The Government will take this into consideration.

Q63: In the update released on November 20, 2020, the government provided Attachment 8 that contains the labor categories and personnel qualifications. Will the government identify which labor categories are considered key personnel?

A63: See A54.

Q64: Regarding section RIK-L007(a)(1)(vi):

(a) Will the government please clarify if the 5 personnel with access to SCI (or are clearable) are part of the "8 key personnel" that must be available upon contract award and thus the contract requires a total of 20 key personnel names and SSNs in Volume I (eight available upon contract award and 12 more within six months)?"

(b) Please clarify if the proposal submission only requires verification of 5 key personnel having access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) or be clearable (Final US Top Secret Clearance without waiver and a Special Background investigation either on record or in process) that will be available for assignment to this effort and the remaining references to having 8 upon award and 12 within 6 months of award are required once the contract has been awarded.

(c) Will the government please clarify if the names and SSNs of available personnel required to satisfy this requirement are the same personnel Offerors will propose in their "20 resumes representative of our proposed team" as stated on page L-3? The resume requirement states that no names are to be provided.

(d) Is the reference to "key personnel" specific key labor categories? Attachment 8 released on November 20, 2020 does not identify key labor categories. Is the reference to "key personnel" referring to any personnel who may need access to future classified solicitation documents (e.g., a proposal writer who would need access to future sample task orders to submit a proposal response but would not be performing directly on the contract or a contracts administrator or similar corporate management type position who will not be charging to the contract) and not necessarily only candidates performing under the contract?

A64: Please see A54, A55, and A56.

Q65: In section RIK-L009(c)(2)(viii) on page L-12 of the draft RFP it states that offerors must "Describe related experience and qualifications of proposed engineering/scientific personnel that the Offeror considers central to performance." This requirement falls within the Sample Order portion of the Technical Volume.

(a) Does the government wish to see resumes of the personnel that would be required to support the sample task or is the government simply requesting a summary of the qualifications of the personnel that would be needed?

(b) Do the candidates proposed to support the sample task need to be a subset of the candidates proposed within the 20 total resumes provided with the proposal, of which many are provided in response to section RIK-L009(c)(1)(i)(F) which states "Resumes of engineering/scientific personnel may be appended to this volume; resumes are not counted toward any page limitation set forth elsewhere herein. List the applicable labor category on each resume. No specific names of personnel shall be provided"?

(c) Are Offerors able to use names for proposed sample task candidates?

A65: RIK-L009(c)(2)(viii) calls for a description whereas RIK-L009(c)(1)(i)(F) allows for resumes. Determining proposed personnel for the Sample Order and which resumes to provide are unique to each offeror. RIK-L009(c)(1)(i)(F) states "no specific names of personnel shall be provided." Also see A22 and A23.

Q66: In section RIK-L010(a)(5) it states that offerors must provide "Experience and qualifications of proposed types of management personnel and the quantity and quality of the Offeror's corporate experience relevant to program requirements. Describe related experience and types of management personnel. List the Offeror's applicable labor category on each resume (resumes of management personnel may be appended to this volume; resumes are not counted toward any page limitation set forth elsewhere herein). No specific names of personnel shall be provided." Must offerors map these management personnel to a government labor category or just list their internal/corporate labor category/title?"

A66: RIK-L010(a)(5) does not require a mapping but it is not disallowed.

Q67: In section RIK-L010 it states that this section “APPLIES TO STATEMENT OF WORK AND SAMPLE ORDER 0001.” Furthermore on page M-2, Subfactor 2 states it applies to the Statement of Work and Sample Task. Please clarify how the management response applies to the Statement of Work and Sample Task when offerors are not permitted to cross reference between the Management and Technical volumes.

A67: An offeror's proposed Management Plan (ex. approach for adequately staffing and managing multiple complex orders under short, time-critical deadlines, including subcontractor management and control to foster a collaborative innovation and experimentation team environment) is pertinent to the Government's evaluation of which offerors represent the best value. Per RIK-L006, offerors can cross-reference between volumes, but not for essential information.

Q68: Is there a restriction on the number of individuals that can be read into the program to have access to and work on the Sample Task Order (STO)? If there is a limit, depending on potential COVID-related stay at home orders that could impact the ability for participants to access the STO requirements upon solicitation release, would the government consider allowing at least 10 people from each Offeror's team to have access to the STO?

A68: See A2.

Q69: Since the Sample Order will be made available by/at the time of final RFP release, will the government provide adequate time (i.e., no less than 3 weeks) for Offerors to access the Sample Task, determine the resources needed to respond to it, and then get those cleared individuals read into the program to write the Sample Task response?

A69: See A2. Additional time should not be necessary due to the change in classification.

Q70: What period of time does the government anticipate providing Offerors to submit a proposal response after final RFP release? We respectfully recommend at least a 60 day response time to accommodate the time required to get individuals read into the program and access the Sample Task, COVID-related restrictions, etc.

A70: See A69.

Q71: Depending on potential COVID-related stay at home orders that could impact the ability for participants to access the STO requirements upon solicitation release, would the government consider allowing more than one SCIF to be authorized to support the STO if COVID travel restrictions preclude being able to use one SCIF?

A71: See A2.

Q72: In section RIK-L009(c)(1) on page L-11 of the draft RFP it states that Section 1 (Statement of Work) requires the, "Demonstration of soundness of the proposed engineering approach to meeting the requirements of the Statement of Work with particular emphasis on the following" followed by the main sub-section requirement of, "Describe related experience and qualifications of proposed engineering/ scientific personnel that the Offeror considers central to performance."

(a) Please confirm Section 1 is requiring both a technical engineering approach for accomplishing all SOW elements (i.e., a technical solution) in addition to the experience and qualifications of proposed engineering/ scientific personnel to support the proposed engineering approach.

(b) Please clarify if the proposed engineering approach is a description of how our proposed engineering/scientific personnel would support each SOW element (i.e., a staffing plan).

A72: Technical Volume Section 1 requires offerors to provide "demonstration of soundness of the proposed engineering approach to meeting the requirements of the Statement of Work with particular emphasis on" the areas enumerated in the provision. Resumes of engineering/scientific personnel may be appended to this volume. Each offeror must determine what to include in its Technical Volume.

Q73: With reference to RIK-L007(a)(1)(viii), would the Government like "the location and type of SCI accredited system that will be available to the program upon contract award" in Contract Forms (Volume I), where similar information regarding SCIF access is also requested?

A73: Please be sure to include in the Contract Forms volume verification of an SCI accredited and approved Automatic Data Processing System to run SCI information and in the technical proposal the location and type of SCI accredited system that will be available to the program upon contract award.

Q74: With reference to RIK-L013, is a Cross Reference Matrix required for First Order (Volume V)?

A74: Yes.

Q75: We understand not to include any names on resumes; however, we respectfully seek clarification concerning the Technical and Management Volumes. Will an offeror be compliant with the RFP should they include names in their Technical and/or Management Volumes responses?

A75: RIK-L009(c)(1)(i)(F) for the Technical Volume and RIK-L010(a)(5) for the Management Volume state where names shall not be provided.

Q76: I found guidelines for body text and page sizes; however, I have not been able to locate specific requirements regarding heading text, paragraph line spacing, and graphics, figures, and table formatting. Can you direct me to where I can find those details (ex. heading fonts and sizes, line spacing within paragraphs, space between paragraphs, graphic text fonts and sizes, graphic color guidelines)?

A76: Formatting instructions are in RIK-L006 Proposal Preparation Instructions - General. Also see A35.

(END)