FA8773-14-R-8001_QA_V1_21Oct.pdf

FA8773-14-R-8001 Questions/Comments and Answers (Q&A)_V1

Q1. Will a TS Facilities Clearance be required to submit a proposal on the subject solicitation?

A1. Yes, TS Clearance is required to submit a proposal.

Q2. What level of market research did the Government perform to determine the 8(a) playing field prior to developing this criteria?

A2. The Government conducted market research analysis with industry which determined offerors will be obtained from at least two or more capable 8(a) firms.

Q3. How did the Government determine that these thresholds were appropriate for this procurement?

A3. No answer. Unable to determine what threshold is being questioned.

Q4. How are these dollar thresholds directly relevant to this procurement?

A4. No answer. Unable to determine what threshold is being questioned.

Q5. How did the Government select the 3 areas for which the relevancy must apply (e.g., Network Detection, Incident Handling, Forensics) while the PWS identifies 10 areas of support requirements?

A5. All ten requirements fall within one of the three areas identified.

Q6. Why can’t relevancy apply to any 3 areas covered in the broader scope of the PWS?

A6. These are the most important areas and will provide 33 NWS confidence that the contractor can perform in all areas of the PWS. The contractor must have experience in all areas identified.

Q7. We are an 8(a) WOSB….We do not have a TS facility clearance but our subcontractor does have one… Will our company be able to submit a responsive proposal for this RFP under these circumstances?

A7. The Prime contractor must possess the TS facility clearance at the time of proposal submission.

Q8. Please provide a scenario wherein the Termination Fee may come into play so that offerors may accurately estimate the scope and cost?

A8. If the services are no longer required during any performance term, the offeror's price for termination during that period would be applied (see DFARS clause 252.232-7007). For instance, if services are terminated in the fourth option period, the price proposed in CLIN 4005 would apply and the contractor would receive that payment for the termination. Option 5 would not be exercised, so the contractor would not receive payment for any of CLINs 5001 through 5005 or the remainder of Option 4.

Q9. Item 4 on page 71 of the SF_33 indicates “the offeror shall provide a cross-reference matrix at the beginning of Part I – Technical part…” Is the cross-reference matrix excluded from the Technical Proposal page limit?

A9. Cross-reference matrix is included in the technical proposal page limit.

Q10. Item 1 on Page 73 of the SF_33 mentions that each offeror shall submit PPI. In cases of joint ventures, if PPI required from each PPI partner, or may the JV PPI come from only one of the JV partners?

A10. The RFP L: E. 1 has been updated to reflect:

Each offeror shall submit Present/Past Performance Information (PPI). Past performance of either party in a joint venture counts for the past performance of the entity.

Q11. Item 2 on Page 73 of the SF_33 indicates regarding the PPI: “The contracts must have been completed in the past three years with on-going actions considered recent as long as the effort has been performed for at least six months prior to issuance of the RFP”. Please confirm whether past performance may include uncompleted/in-progress contracts in the past three years.

A11. Yes, you can include current work that has been in progress for more than 6 months. The work must be similar to what is required for this requirement.

Q12. RFP paragraph 3.1.1 – The paragraph states, “The contractor shall conduct near real-time network security monitoring and intrusion detection analysis for the NIPRNet using the AF's selected IDS/IPS tools and activities related to 33 NWS mission execution.” What tools are installed that support this objective?

A12. Tools include commercial and Government products. The commercial tool at this time is Palo Alto Next Gen

FW.

Q13. RFP paragraph 3.4.1 – The paragraph states, “The contractor shall determine the probability of exploitation of discovered network vulnerabilities. The contractor shall ensure appropriate notification action is taken to reduce the risk to all AF networks.”

a) Has the probability threshold already been determined?

A13a. Contractor will follow a matrix to determine if threshold has been met.

b) Have the notification action procedures been written?

A13b. There are written procedures in place.

c) Will the government provide a history of previously provided data surrounding this requirement?

A13c. There is a workload estimate from the previous year located in Appendix B of the PWS.

Q14. RFP paragraph 3.4.3 – The paragraph states, “The contractor shall manage all investigation/incident cases on suspected and confirmed compromised AF systems to determine the method of intrusion and corrective actions to be taken to prevent or detect similar future activities. The contractor will author an opening and closing Incident Report for every confirmed incident on the AFNet.” Does the government have an automated reporting interface for this requirement?

A14. Government has process and procedures used for this process. It is not automated.

Q15. RFP paragraph 3.4.4 – The paragraph states, “The contractor shall provide support to AF network administrators on the installation and analysis of packet sniffers on their network topology in support of OSI directed activity.”

a) Will the government provide the packet sniffer and associated tools?

A15a. Yes.

b) If the tools are installed, then what tools are currently being used?

A15b. Commercial and Government.

c) If the government does not have these tools, does the government have preferred tools they wish to use?

A15c. Government will provide tools.

Q16. RFP paragraph 3.5.3 – The paragraph states, “The contractor shall perform Hard Drive Analysis of suspected/confirmed infected system. The contractor shall document all findings in the investigation/incident log for each hard drive.”

a) Will the government provide the analysis tools or does the AF have predetermined tools?

A16a. Yes, the government will provide the analysis tools; Yes, the AF has predetermined tools.

b) If the tools are installed, then what tools are currently being used?

A16b. Commercial and Government

Q17. RFP paragraph 3.7.5 – The paragraph states, “The contractor shall perform Blue Assessment scans of AF forward facing public websites. The assessments will be uploaded into the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA)’s vulnerability management website for fix actions performed by the base.”

a) Will the government provide the vulnerability assessment tools or does the AF have predetermined tools?

A17a. Yes, the government will provide the vulnerability assessment tools; Yes, the AF has predetermined tools.

b) If the tools are installed, then what tools are currently being used?

A17b. DISA approved tools, currently ACAS.

Q18. With regards to the CMMI requirement in the PWS which I have listed below, does the prime need to have these credentials or will a sub-contractor having these credentials satisfy the requirement?

A18. There is no CMMI requirement in the PWS.

Q19. Is there a requirement that the Contractor be ISO and/or CMMI certified. Do you anticipate that this will remain a firm requirement?

A19. There is no ISO/CMMI requirement in the PWS

Q20. Does the Prime Contractor need to be ISO/CMMI certified or the Team?

A20. See A19.

Q21. Can the Prime be in the process of its ISO certification or does it need to be a completed ISO

Certification?

A21. See A19.

Q22. There appears to be a conflict between Section L and M. Section L allows a subcontractor to submit a PPI if they are performing 30% or more of the effort, or performing aspects that are considered critical to success of the contract. Section M states that a relevancy determination will be made only on those Subcontractors performing more than 30% of the effort. Would you consider changing Section M to align with Section L?

Section L states:

“E.1. Each offeror shall submit Present/Past Performance Information (PPI) with its proposal IAW the format contained in paragraph eight below. This information is required on the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners who are proposed to perform 30 percent or more of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price or perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to overall successful performance.”

Section M states:

“4.a.iii. RELEVANCY ASSESSMENT. A relevancy determination of the offeror’s present/past performance, including joint venture partner(s) and major and critical subcontractor(s) performing more than 30% of the effort will be made based upon the definitions below. In determining relevancy for the individual contract references, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose contract reference is being reviewed and evaluated.…”

A22. Question cannot be answered. Appears question is referencing RFP FA8773-14-R-8002 for AF DCO

Maintenance & Enabler effort.

Q23. The past performance criteria related to contract value appears to be too stringent. Especially when the last contract award was for less than $4M annually and the scope does not appear to have increased since that award. We believe that the criteria in Section M, 4.a.iii.(1)-(3) are a better indication of scope and relevancy than contract value. Would you consider changing Section M to allow a contract value of $3.5M or higher as relevant; $2.5M - $3.5 as somewhat relevant; anything below $2.5M not relevant?

According to Section M, 4.a.iii:

“To be relevant, Offeror’s PPI submissions shall include demonstrated experience with contracts valued at $4M per year or above in two of the following areas. To be somewhat relevant, Offeror’s PPI submissions shall include demonstrated experience with contracts valued at $3M per year or above in one of the following areas. If the Offeror provides PPI submission that does not demonstrate experience with contracts valued at $3M per year or above in at least one of the following areas, the Offeror will be considered not relevant.”

A23. No, the contract you are speaking of was for a one year period. Since this is a 5 year effort we will stay with the criteria.

Q24. Could you also please clarify the periods of performance for this effort, both for the transition period and the base period?

A24. Transition period: 1 Dec 15 to 31 Dec 15 POP: 1 Jan 16 to 30 Nov 20 Extension of Service: 1 Dec 20 to 31 May 21

Q25. General observation: As presented the Solicitation is extraordinarily restrictive thereby seriously restricting competition. The requirement, as specified in the solicitation, precludes contractors with like capability from being seriously considered. Demands of this solicitation, as presented, most certainly denies the customer the opportunity of evaluating many support alternatives derived from industry wide system experiences.

A25: Based on the scope and scale relevancy of this requirement, the Government does not consider the solicitation too restrictive.

Q26. Acceptable Past Performance citations must be directly relative, operating within the last year, and have a value in excess of $3m in one year. Again that minimum requirement shuts the door on many small businesses interested in supporting this Air Force Mission.

A26: See A25

Q27. It would be in the best interest of the government and this customer’s mission to reconsider the prohibitions inherent in the solicitation.

A27: See A25

Q28. Response to these issues will directly influence our team’s ability to respond. Delaying answers to these issues until 26 June with a proposal due date of 8 July limits the ability of a contractor to plan its strategy and make an appropriate bid/no bid decision. Suggest reconsideration and appropriate adjustments be applied.

a) (PWS REFERENCE): 4. FACTOR 2-PRESENT/PAST PERFORMANCE:

“To be relevant, Offeror’s PPI submissions shall include demonstrated experience with contracts valued at $4M per year or above in two of the following areas. To be somewhat relevant, Offeror’s PPI submissions shall include demonstrated experience with contracts valued at $3M per year or above in one of the following areas. If the

Offeror provides PPI submission that does not demonstrate experience with contracts valued at $3M per year or above in at least one of the following areas, the Offeror will be considered not relevant.”

Solicitation requires a minimum of 4 past performance citations, three of these can be from the designated team members. One past performance must be from the Prime entity. The Past Performance value of $3+M for one year is prohibitive and will significantly reduce competition from the small business communities.

Request consideration of the entire team presentation and accept projects within the last 6 months of $1M value.

A28a: See A22 & A23

b) (RFP REFERENCE): Section L: E. PART II – PRESENT/PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION.

General. Each offeror shall submit Present/Past Performance Information (PPI) with its proposal IAW the format contained in paragraph eight six below. This information is required on the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners who are proposed to perform 30 percent or more of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price or perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to overall successful performance. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use data provided by each offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of present/past performance. Each offeror shall submit Present/Past

Performance Information (PPI), including joint venture partner(s).

A28b: See A22

c) Solicitation indicates that a Past/Performance citation is required from both members of a Joint Venture. A joint venture is a single entity and therefore require on one past performance, which can be from either party of the venture. Please clarify.

A28c: See A10.

Q29. Reference: SF33 Section M-Evaluation Factors for Award B. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors 5. Factor 3—Price Evaluation a.

Reference Text: Offerors’ price proposals will be evaluated, using one or more of the price analysis techniques defined in FAR 15.404, in order to determine fair and reasonableness. The price evaluation will document reasonableness, completeness, balance, and affordability of the proposed total evaluated price.

Comment/Question: To demonstrate reasonableness, metrics that measure suitability, stability, and low risk should be considered. Given events that can happen (such as sequestration or long transitions), the Government may consider requiring a demonstration of the prime’s financial stability and requiring the offeror possess at least $1.5Mil in available cash to support payroll and subcontractor invoices during a 90 day transition.

A29. Comment has been considered and RFP will not be revised.

Q30. Reference: SF33 Section L-Proposal Preparation Instructions C. Organization Reference Text: TABLE 2 – BINDER ORGANIZATION (within binders)

COPY PARTS TO INCLUDE

ORIGINAL I, II, III, IV

COPY 1 I,

II COPY 2 I,

II

BINDER SIZE LIMITATIONS: Binders shall not exceed 1”.

Comment/Question: The original binder requires all parts of the proposal. If the entire proposal is too large, will the Government allow offeror to submit in either two (2) binders, or a larger sized binder?

A30. See A22

Q31. Is the successful contractor expected to provide any hardware (ACD Sensor equipment, etc) as part of this award?

A31. No, hardware is provided

Q32. Para 2.3.1.4 AFI 11-202V3 stipulates that all personnel working on a MR position "weapon system" will have at least 12 hours of crew rest between shifts. Contractor shall ensure they provide sufficient contractor personnel to allow for 12 hour rest. Which positions in Section 3 of the PWS are considered MR positions?

A32. Currently only sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6 are MR. 3.3 and 3.9 requires a MR certification. PWS will be updated to reflect this information.

Q33. Electronic Documents. The offeror shall submit electronic proposal documents via email in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Office Word 2010, MS Office Excel 2010, and MS Office Power Point

2010, as applicable. Does this mean if we send an electronic submission then we don’t have to send any hard copies?

A33. As specified in L-1 C. 1. “Offeror shall provide five (5) hard copies and one electronic copy (see para 8) including all four parts described in Table 2.

Q34 Do we send 5 copies of each Part or 5 of Part I and II and 1 of III and IV?

A34. TABLE 2 – BINDER ORGANIZATION (within binders)

COPY PARTS TO INCLUDE

ORIGINAL I, II, III, IV

COPY 1 I, II

COPY 2 I, II

COPY 3 I, II

COPY 4 I, II

BINDER SIZE LIMITATIONS: Binders shall not exceed 2”. Reproduction of the entire RFP is unnecessary (and unwanted).

Q35. In 2.10 of the PWS, there is a requirement that the Contractor be ISO and/or CMMI certified. Do you anticipate that this will remain a firm requirement?

A35. See A19

Q36. In the estimate of hours provided (Appendix B to the PWS) we only see one FTE Engineer. We understand there have historically been three engineers, one each for the areas of Virtualization, Infrastructure, and Sensor Engineering. Is the intent the three areas will be under the control of supported by one FTE Engineer?

A36. The PWS dated 28 Aug 14 Appendix B does not have a requirement for an Engineer. See A22

Q37. With the historical estimate of hours provided (Appendix B to the PWS) it is difficult to reconcile the $6.4M estimate with current contract value of $3.9M. Can you provide any additional clarification on the estimated budget versus the current contracts anticipated value?

A37. See A22.

Q38. Are both paragraphs 3.4.4.10 and 3.4.4.11 of the Performance Work Statement solely related to the maintenance of SharePoint sites?

A38. See A22.

Q39. Section B. General Instructions (1) on page 86 of the solicitation states, “Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, technical requirements, and Contract Security Classification Specification, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors.” Section 2.10 of the PWS specifies a number of certifications. However these are not actually made mandatory in the Instruction to Offerors or the Evaluation Criteria. We assume that Section B(1) of the solicitation governs and that such certification is indeed mandatory since it is in the technical requirements. Please clarify how the Government will be assessing conformance to PWS Section 2.10 in the absence of any mention of this in the evaluation criteria and if offerors who do not meet Section 2.10 will be considered non-responsive.

A39. See A22. There is no section 2.10 in the PWS dated 28 Aug 14, however Appendix D of the PWS indicates what is required for each position. These certifications must be met prior to start date.

Q40. a ) Must the offeror submit a "Mission Essential Services Plan" in their proposal in conformance with 252.237-7023/7024?

A40a. Yes. See L-1. C. 2. Table 1.

b)If so, which "Part #" of the proposal volume should it be placed inside?

A40b. In Part IV.

c)If so, is it limited by page count?

A40c. No Limit.

Q41. a ) FAR 52.216-1 states that an FFP and Cost Reimbursable contract will be issued. Is the only thing that is cost-reimbursable on this contract travel?

A41a. Yes

b) Besides travel, are there other Other Direct Costs (ODCs) which the Government will reimburse?

A41b. No

Q42. C(1) on p. 86 of the solicitation states, “Each page shall be counted except cover pages, table of contents, matrices, and glossary.” Please clarify if all matrices are not counted or only certain matrices.

A42. All matrices; Page 70 states “Each page shall be counted except cover pages, table of contents, matrices, and glossary.”

Q43. C(8) on page 89 of the solicitation states, “Each volume shall be submitted as a separate attachment”. This proposal only has one volume although there is the version with all four parts and the version with only parts 1 and 2.

a) Please confirm that the Government wants one attachment with all four parts.

A43a. Yes. The Original copy will contain all four parts. Page 71 states “ORIGINAL I, II, III, IV”.

b) Please clarify what the maximum file size attachment restrictions are for e-mail.

A43b. Emails near or greater than 5MB should provide data in multiple emails.

Q44. D(2) on page 90 of the solicitation states, “Each volume shall be submitted as a separate attachment”. Please clarify if the percentages being given in Part I are percentages of the USD total price the offeror is bidding?

Updated to: D(2) on page 90 of the solicitation states, “The proposal shall provide a clear distinction of functions to be performed by the prime and subcontractor to include the following:

... and the percentage of overall effort performed by each subcontractor in each area of service provided based upon the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel (See FAR 52.219-14(b)(1) --

Limitations on Subcontracting, Services).” Please clarify if the "percentages of overall effort" being given in

Part I by the offeror are percentages of the USD total price the offeror is bidding? For example 25% = $250 of an overall $1000 worth of effort, etc.

A44. See A22

Q45. F(1) on page 95 of the solicitation states, “Price Reasonableness, Completeness, Balance, and Affordability.

This section is to assist you in submitting information other than cost or pricing data that is required to evaluate the reasonableness, completeness, balance, and affordability of the offeror’s proposed price. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal.” Will the Government conduct price realism analysis in accordance with FAR 15.4, and if so, on what basis will they be done?

A45. See A22. Page 91 states “Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404.” No price realism will be conducted.

Q46. M-1(B)(1) on pp. 101-102 of the solicitation discuss evaluation ratings of acceptable, potentially acceptable if corrected, and unacceptable.

a) Please clarify if these are the only ratings which will ever be applied to Factor 1.

A46a. See A22.

b) Also, please clarify if each of these ratings will be applied each of the five subfactors of Factor 1.

A46b. See A22

c) Would any other ratings (such as “outstanding”, “excellent”, etc.) ever be applied to Factor 1 and its subfactors?

A46c. See A22

Q47. In the evaluation criteria, the Air Force discussed the “Unknown Confidence” rating.

a) How would an Unknown Confidence rating affect the consideration of a proposal which was rated by the Government technically acceptable for Factor 1? Specifically, the “Government has reserved the right to award a contract to other than the lowest priced offer if the lowest priced offeror is judged to have a performance confidence assessment of ‘Satisfactory Confidence’ or lower”. On the list on page 109, the category “Unknown Confidence” was listed lower than “Satisfactory Confidence”. However, the GAO has determined in numerous decisions that it is improper to penalize offerors for lack of a performance record.

A47a. Page 90 4. Factor 2. c.ii explains “unknown confidence” rating. Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

b)Please explain how the Government will judge the technically acceptable offeror without a performance record.

A47b. See A47a.

Q48. PWS 3.4.2.5: Please estimate how many user accounts are requested to be created in the typical month that the offeror would be responsible for.

A48. See A22

Q49. PWS 3.4.2.5: Please estimate how many user accounts are requested to be deleted in the typical month that the offeror would be responsible for.

A49. See A22

Q50. What is being used (OEM, software) as the 33 NWS ticketing system?

A50. Remedy is used as a ticketing system during incident handling processes.

Q51. The evaluation criteria for subfactor 4 states, “a. An organizational structure that provides qualified and appropriately commercially certified personnel resources, to include any subcontracting and teaming arrangements, in an organizational structure and labor categories, security clearance and minimum acceptable qualifications IAW PWS Sections 3 and 7 at initiation of contract.”

A51. Evaluation criteria for RFP FA8773-14-R-8001 subfactor 4 actually states, “An acceptable organizational structure that provides qualified and appropriately commercially certified personnel resources, to include any subcontracting and teaming arrangements, in an organizational structure and labor categories, security clearance and minimum acceptable qualifications IAW PWS Sections 3, 6.1, and 7 at initiation of contract.”

The Government cannot determine contractors the question.

Q52. Will the Government furnish a communication device to any or all contractor staff (e.g., cellphone, Blackberry, radio, pager, etc.)?

A52. No

Q53. With regard to the Services Summary, historically, approximately how frequently does a CRITICAL network outage occur in a typical month?

A53. This is not a maintenance contract. The contractor will ensure the operational mission continues.

Q54. What is the frequency (per typical month) of “Priority” Trouble Calls/Tickets (how many)?

A54. This is not a maintenance contract. We do not handle trouble ticket/calls

Q55. What is the frequency (per typical month) of “Routine” Trouble Calls/Tickets (how many)?

A55. See A54.

Q56. With regard to the Services Summary, historically, approximately how frequently does a sensor outage occur in a typical month?

A56. See A53.

Q57. With regard to the Services Summary, usually, “providing sufficient personnel to meet mission requirements” is judged by a customer via consideration of whether the contractor can meet its service level commitments or misses on performance standards. How will the Government in the case of this contract, judge if the contractor has provided sufficient personnel to meet mission requirements?

A57. This will be judged based on the performance threshold of the Services Summary - all contract functions have to be performed.

Q58. This solicitation is for “FA8773-14-R-8002”. The Government will also be releasing “FA8773-14-R-8001” in a few weeks. For this particular solicitation, FA8773-14-R-8002, who are the incumbent contractors, what are their contract numbers, what are their respective periods of performance, and the contract dollar values for the performance periods?

A58. This solicitation is not for FA8773-14-R-8002.

Q59. Is this current contract expected to be an increase in scope, decrease in scope, or about the same scope as the incumbent's current incumbent contracts?

A59. The effort for FA8773-14-R-8001 will decrease over time.

Q60. Please confirm that the Service Contract Act (SCA) does not apply to this particular contract.

A60. SCA does not apply.

Q61. PWS 2.8.1 “The contractor shall respond in case of emergencies, outages, alerts, and exercises, 24 hours per day, seven days per week.”

A61. See A22. There is no 2.8.1 in the PWS.

a) Is there an estimate of the number of instances/hours contractor personnel have been required to provide support outside regular work hours?

b) Are those work hours included in 7.2 Appendix B?

A61a & b. There have been on instance where the contractor has been required to work 7 days a week. Usually all exercises are coordinated with the Government and contractor and personnel identified as participants.

Emergencies, outages are usually a more of a maintenance requirement. If there is a national or base emergency the Government will communicate with the Task Lead and provide them direction.

Q62. PWS 1.2.1 and 1.2.3 both address "AF Networks" and PWS 2.3.1.3.3 lists several systems including Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System (JWICS) as 33 NWS support systems. Can the Government clarify if JWICS requires DCO support under this effort?

A62. No it does not.

Q63. PWS 3.1.5 “The contractor shall provide classroom teaching of Government personnel or other contractors newly assigned to conduct the 33 NWS maintenance mission and technical support.” Will the Government provide the currently developed training plans and curriculum for the required training, or will this effort require new plans and curriculum?

A63. This PWS reference in this question is not a requirement under this contract and is not included in the PWS dated 28 Aug 14.

Q64. PWS 3.4.2.2 “The contractor shall support Systems Administration of the 33 NWS operational networks (Patriot and Defender), the 33 NWS COOP network, the training network, local base NIPRNet and SIPRNet Computer System Administration (CSA) actions, and AOL deployment maintenance analysis.” Is the Systems Administration support limited to 33rd NWS NIPRNet and SIPRNet CSA actions, or is the requirement for the “local base” (Lackland AFB)?

A64. This question is not a requirement under this contract and is not included in the PWS dated 28 Aug 14.

Q65. It is unclear exactly what systems are considered to be "33rd NWS systems" throughout the PWS. Can the Government provide a list of 33rd NWS supported systems and equipment?

A65. See A22. Operators will have access to the networks they need to have access to.

Q66. The RFP, para 252.237-7024(b) (page 83 of 113) requires submission of a written plan with offers describing how the offeror will perform the essential services in paragraph 6.2 of the PWS.

a) Will this plan be included within the 50-page limit of the technical proposal or is it to be a separate document?

A66a. Mission Essential Plan is to be included in part IV with no page limit (see page 70 of RFP FA8773 -14-R- 8001.

b) If separate, does the plan have a page limit, and where should it be placed within the proposal?

A66b. See A66a.

Q67. The RFP, Section L-1, paragraph 3 (page 85 of 113) requires offerors to provide the company’s street address, county and ‘facility code’. Will the government clarify what specific information it seeks for the ‘facility code’?

A67. See A22.

Q68. The PWS, paragraph 3.7.4 requires the offeror to supplement exercise activities with additional manpower.

a ) Can the government provide details regarding the frequency, duration, and estimated number of hours per Required Labor Skill Classification (7.2 Appendix B) that will be necessary to support this requirement?

b) Can the government also provide guidance regarding how this cost element should be reflected in the pricing table?

A68. This requirement is not found under 3.7.4 of the PWS dated 28 Aug 14.

Q69. In 2.10 of the PWS, there is a requirement that the Contractor be ISO and/or CMMI certified. Do you anticipate that this will remain a firm requirement?

A69. See A19

Q70. In Request for Proposal (RFP) Section J, Attachment 2: Performance Work Statement (PWS) dated 02 May 2104, Section 6.7.2 states “The contractor’s key personnel are required to be on-site during core hours.” Who are defined as “key personnel”?

A70. See A22.

Q71. RFP Section K, Clause 52.204-8 Annual Representations and Certifications is dated JAN 2014 and makes reference to the Central Contractor Registration (CCR). The CCR has been replaced by the System for Award Management (SAM). SAM is discussed in RFP Section L-1.G.1. Should the current Section K Clause 52.204-8 be replaced by the MAY 2014 version that addresses SAM?

A71. See A22.

Q72. RFP Section L-1, paragraph 2 (Authorized Offeror Personnel) and paragraph 3 (Company/Division Address …) require Offerors to submit the specified information.

a) Is it acceptable to include this information a Cover Letter submitted with the proposal?

A72a. Yes. Page 68 L-1. A. 2. states: “Authorized Offeror Personnel. In the Cover Letter provide the name, title, e-mail address, voice and fax telephone numbers, street and mailing address (if a PO Box is used) of the primary and alternate company/division POC regarding decisions made with respect to your proposal and who can obligate your company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.”

L-1.A.3. states: ‘Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations. In the Cover Letter provide company/division's street address; CAGE code; DUNS code; TIN; size of business (large or small); and labor surplus area designation.”

b) If not, where should this information be included?

A72b. See A72a.

Q73. RFP Section L-1.C. addresses the organization of the proposal submission. Based on these instructions, it appears that the Government is requesting a hard copy submission consisting of five one- inch binders. Each one-inch binder will contain multiple parts of the proposal as defined in Table 2 (i.e., the Original binder includes all four parts and each copy contains Parts I and II). Is this interpretation correct?

A73. Page 70, C. 2. Table 2 TABLE 2 – BINDER ORGANIZATION (within binders)

COPY PARTS TO INCLUDE

ORIGINAL I, II, III, IV

COPY 1 I, II

COPY 2 I, II

COPY 3 I, II

COPY 4 I, II

BINDER SIZE LIMITATIONS: Binders shall not exceed 2”. Reproduction of the entire RFP is unnecessary (and unwanted).

Q74. In RFP Section L-1.C.8, the last sentence states “Each volume shall be submitted as a separate attachment …”

a) Should this sentence be changed to read “Each part shall be submitted as a separate attachment …”?

A74a. L-1. C. 8 states “Each part shall be submitted as a separate attachment”.

b) Is it acceptable to submit Part III in two files—a Word document for the narrative portion and an Excel document for the Pricing Table?

A74b. Part III must be presented in a word document for the narrative portion and Excel document for the pricing table.

Page 77 F. 5 d. states: (2) Electronic Media Submission of Pricing Table. The CLINs in the Pricing Table of this solicitation are an electronic file, presented as Excel for Microsoft Office©2010 spreadsheet/workbook format.

Submit both a hard copy and an electronic copy using the exact file provided by the Government without changing the format of the files.

Q75. In RFP Section L-1.D.1, the second sentence states that “…responses will be evaluated against the Technical Subfactors defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award.” The Section M evaluation Subfactors contain references to specific paragraphs within the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Is it sufficient to address only the referenced PWS paragraphs in our response or must the entire PWS be addressed in our response?

A75. Response needs to be made based on the subfactors identified in Section M. However, it is necessary to use the entire PWS to formulate responsed to the subfactors.

Q76. In RFP Section L-1.E.6, subparagraph i. requires submission of “a copy of any cure notice …” and subparagraph

j. requires submission of “any contract discrepancy reports, …” Is this documentation included within the page limitations for Part II of the proposal?

A76. L-1.E.5. Yes

Q77. RFP Section L-1.F.7 states “Part I shall consist of the following:” Should list be changed to read “Part III shall consist of the following:”?

A77. See A22

Q78. In the solicitation at section M-1, C.1, the following is stated as requirement. “As part of their proposals, offerors will submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract.” However, no reference was found in Section L of the solicitation defining where the total compensation plan should be placed in the proposal. Please confirm this plan is to be included in the Price proposal, Volume III.

A78.

3. Professional Compensation Plan. As part of the price proposal, offerors shall provide a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract IAW FAR 52.222-46 -- Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees (Feb 1993).

Q79. In the solicitation at section 7.3 APPENDIX C – Man-hours Projection, the table has no man-hours projection.

Can historical man-hours projections/estimates be provided for each functional area?

A79. Mission hours are shift work hours, Core hours are 0730 to 1630. See PWS 6.7.

Q80. In the PWS at section 3.3.1, Content Development, this section references “ArcSight Certified Advanced Energy and Sustainability Management Content for Security Use Cases”. Will the government confirm these are the specific Use Cases required?

A80. Yes. PWS 3.3.1 states “The contractor shall also obtain the ArcSight Certified Advanced Energy and Sustainability Management Content for Security Use Cases from Hewlett Packard.”

Q81. Since the Period of Performance for this opportunity does not start until Dec 2015, and the RFP question and answer process is just now beginning, would the government consider extending the proposal due date to 20 Nov vice 4 Nov 2014? This will allow offerors to adequately address any issues found within the questions and answers process.

A81. Proposal due date is not extended at this time.

Q82. PWS para 2.7, pages 7-8. OCONUS Travel. There is a reference that for OCONUS travel, members must show up with passports.

a) As such, does the government expect every person on the contract to maintain a current passport?

A82a. No, however there may be some instances where some individuals will be required to obtain a passport on short notice. Usually only Incident Response (3.4) and/or Forensics (3.5) personnel would travel in this type of response.

b) And if there is a requirement for passports, will their procurement costs be considered a cost reimbursable expense similar to all other travel costs?

A82b. No.

Q83. PWS para 3.4.5 (pg 10) and 3.5.6 (pg 11). Incident Response Deployment. In these paragraphs there is an inference that responders, based on an incident, might have to travel on the same day as the incident to implement corrective support measure.

a) As such, does the government expect the contractor to develop a process or maintain some sort of response posture that would allow immediate travel?

A83a. Yes. The contractor will need a process to obtain quick travel plans for the personnel. The government already has a process to validate the requirement and give the contractor the go ahead to purchase the travel plans.

b) And if so, can the government define their expectation with regards to how soon we must respond (for example - wheels up within 12 hours of notification / tasking).

A83b. Response time will depend on the severity of the incident. The shortest timeframe to-date has been 48 hours.

Q84. Section L, D.3, Subfactor 4, page 72. Please explain what exactly “non-priced labor mix” is?

A84. The technical proposal should include the offerors proposed labor mix categories but DO NOT disclose the price of these categories on the technical proposal.

Q85. Section L, E.2, page 73. Past Performance, Recency/Relevancy.

a) We would like to clarify and confirm that this verbiage and requirement “Discuss the roles and responsibilities of personnel involved in the prior contracts cited. Include a cross-reference matrix with this information supporting your assertion of relevance” pertains only to New Corporate Entities and not all Offerors.

A85a. This information is for all PPI submissions.

b) If the answer is “No” to the previous question and this requirement pertains to all Offerors, will you explain what is meant by “officers” in this sentence, “New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving officers, employees, and personnel….”?

A85b. “Officers” refers to members of management.

Q86. SF_33_AF_DCO_Mission_03Oct14.docx Paragraph L-1.C.1. Number of Copies/Page Limits, Each page shall be counted except cover pages, table of contents, matrices, and glossary. Is the offeror correct in assuming that the Indexing Tabs referenced in RFP L-1.C.5 are also excluded from the page count?

A86. Indexing Tabs are excluded from the page count.

Q87. 7.3 APPENDIX C – Man-hours Projection, Content Development from (Opt Period 4) Core to (6 Month Ext) Mission. Offeror requests verification that this upgrade in Content Development is correct.

A87. No, it should read “Core”. PWS will be updated.

Q88. In response to the previous solicitation for the 33rd, ISO or CMMI was a prerequisite for the Prime. Is this requirement applicable for this solicitation?

A88. See A19

Q89. L-1. Proposal Preparation Instr, A.General Information.

8. To be considered for award, offerors must comply with all security requirements specified in the DD Form 254, Contract Security Classification Specification included in this solicitation, complete Blocks 6.a., b. and c. thereof, and return the completed DD Form 254, Contract Security Classification Specification, along with evidence that: 1) Offeror has an Active TOP SECRET Facility Clearance; and 2) that each position identified in Offeror’s proposal, to fulfill the requirements of this effort has a final TOP SECRET or SECRET personal security clearance; some positions must be eligible for access to Sensitive Compartmented Information in accordance with Intelligence Community Directive (ICD)704 and Intelligence Community Policy Guidance (ICPG) 704.2., along with their offers. A Qualified Offeror must have an Active TOP SECRET Facility Clearance at time it submits its proposal. Failure to do so shall result in the government determining a proposal unacceptable.

The RFP does not specify where in our response we need to include the DD254 along with the evidence noted.

What Part of the proposal does this information need to be included?

A89. DD 254 is an attachment to the RFP as listed in section J. Return the DD254 in Part IV, Contract Documentation.

Q90. Pricing Table DCO MS 11 Sept14.xlsx" attachment, please confirm that the CLIN x003 do not need data populated since noted as "NSP".

A90. CLIN x003 is NSP and should not be populated.

Q91. Pricing Table DCO MS 11 Sept14.xlsx" attachment, please provide guidance in deriving cost for the CLIN x005.

A91. See A8.

Q92. Please extend the proposal due date by 2 weeks to allow sufficient time to review the Gov't answers to the questions submitted and prepare sound response.

A92. See A81.

Q93. Please extend the proposal due date by 2 weeks to allow sufficient time to review the Gov't answers to the questions submitted and prepare sound responses.

A93. See A81.

Q94. What is the incumbent's contract number?

A94. FA8773-14-F-0002 (12 FTE’s) and FA8773-13-F-0013 (78 FTE’s).

Q95. For historical and informational purposes, how many contractors (FTEs) are supporting 33rd NWS DCO?

A95. See A94. This effort is performance based and total replacement of FTE’s is not required.

Q96. RFQ A. – 8, Pg #69, "2) that each position identified in Offeror’s proposal, to fulfill the requirements of this effort has a final TOP SECRET or SECRET personal security clearance; some positions must be eligible for access to Sensitive Compartmented Information…" Which PWS tasks requires Secret, Top Secret (TS), or TS/SCI clearances?

A96. IAW DD Form 254, the contractor shall obtain a U.S. security clearance at the minimum level of TS/SCI for all contractor personnel required to have access to classified information. All PWS tasks can operate at the TS/SCI level, however, it is not required for any PWS task. Please reference PWS 6.1.1, no more than 10% of the contract force will be rated Secret.

Q97. D. Part I - Technical Proposal; Subfactor 4, Pg #72, "Also, include a non-priced labor mix category." Please clarify what Gov't means by the non-prices labor mix category. What is the Gov't intend for the non-price labor mix category?

A97. See A84.

Q98. D. Part I - Technical Proposal; Subfactor 6, Pg #72, "SUBFACTOR 6 – Downward Pricing. The offeror shall clearly describe a process for identifying, assessing, evaluating, and implementing cost efficiency initiatives to achieve continuous downward pricing while ensuring all PWS requirements are met. Substantiate the feasibility of technical efficiencies that may be gained in any area of the PWS, without reducing contract requirements, over the life of the contract. The offeror’s technical efficiencies shall be reflected in their price proposal." Shouldn't this subfactor be for the "Part III - Price Volume" instead of the Part I - Technical Proposal?

A98. Downward pricing will be evaluated as part of technical subfactor 6.

Q99. 3. FACTOR 1 - TECHNICAL; Subfactor 5, Pg #87, "offeror provides an acceptable transition plan including a work breakdown structure (WBS) that identifies parties, dates, critical actions, and deliverables required.." Please confirm that the Transition WBS is excluded from the page count.

A99. The Transition Plan WBS should be included in the technical proposal and included in the technical proposal page count.

Q100. PWS 1.2.4, Pg #3, "The 33 NWS is responsible for the execution of several DCO tasks to include network forensics based on identified cyber incidents/investigations, countermeasures engineering and development, computer system and blue force network vulnerability assessments, e.g. AF’s Assured Compliance Assessment Solution (ACAS), Gateway and Information Operations Platform (IOP) Intrusion Detection System/Intrusion Prevention System (IDS/IPS) sensor operations maintenance, mission enclave systems operations and maintenance, database management, applications, network, and system administration." What COTS tools are used to carry out each of these functions?

A100. Palo Alto Next Gen Firewall and McAfee Intrushield are COTS IDS/IPS devices. The administration of those systems do not apply to this contract.

Q101. 2.6, Pg #7, Work Locations - 33 NWS Operations, Alternate Operations Locations, Remote COOP. Are all 33rd NWS DCO contractor staff typically located at one site, or is there a requirement to support multiple locations concurrently?

A101. Multiple locations - 33 NWS Operations and Remote COOP.

Q102. 3.1.3, Pg #8, "The contractor shall enter event data into mission support systems IAW 33 NWS operational procedures" What mission support systems are in use currently?

A102. 33 NWS developed data bases.

Q103. 3.2, Pg #8, Please confirm that the SIPR Real-Time Detection task is also 24x7x365.

A103. Yes

Q104. 3.2.1, Pg #8, "…using the AF's selected…consolidators…" What does the term "consolidators" mean in this context?

A104. A SEIM used to consolidate multiple sensor events into one location.

Q105. 6.1.1.2, Pg #15, "The remaining 10% contractor personnel must hold a minimum of a Secret clearance pending the completion of the SSBI, and shall obtain their TS/SCI clearance within 90 days of contract award, or be removed from the contract (except for Gunter Annex). Contractor personnel working at Gunter Annex, Alabama are only required to possess a Secret Clearance." Gunter Annex is not mentioned as a work location in Section 2.6.

Is there an expectation of permanent staffing at that location?

A105. Yes, there is a requirement for permanent staffing at this location.

Q106. 7.3, Pg #26, Man-hours Projection - Core vs. Mission vs. No Requirement. Can the Gov't clarify what is meant by Mission vs. Core vs. No Requirement in the Hours Required Table?

A106. Mission hours are shift work, Core hours are 0730 to 1630 (see PWS 6.7) and no requirement means no need to fill the position.

Q107. 3.1-3.2. Please confirm both NIPR and SIPR DCO are 24/7/365 and Govt is requesting the Offeror to provide full coverage?

A107. Yes.

Q108. 3.1.1, pg #8, The contractor shall conduct near real-time network security monitoring and intrusion detection analysis for the NIPRNet using the AF's selected IDS/IPS tools and activities related to 33 NWS mission execution. What IDS/IPS tool is 33rd using?

A108. Commercial IDS/IPS tools (Palo Alto Next Gen Firewall and McAfee Intrushield) as well as a GOTS IPS.

Q109. 3.1.1, Pg #8, All Near Real-Time IDS/IPS alerts shall be reviewed per 33 NWS Operating Instruction (OI) and checklists. Can the Govt please provide an overview of the Operating Instruction and list of the checklists?

A109. Training aids are provided to the analyst as well as processes and procedures. 33 NWS squadron OI and all checklists will be provided to awardee at start date.

Q110. 3.1.3, Pg #8, The contractor shall enter event data into mission support systems IAW 33 NWS operational procedures and reports through the 33 NWS chain. The contractor shall record suspicious events, meeting established 33 NWS thresholds, into the operational database for suspicious traffic. Respectfully request the names and description of the mission support systems and operational database?

A110. Sharepoint and other in-house databases.

Q111. 3.1.5, Pg #8, The contractor shall provide computer security-related support to AF field units. How is this performed today (e.g. email, face-to-face, advisories, bulletins, etc.)?

A111. Performed by email, face-to-face, advisories, bulletins, etc.

Q112. 3.2.1, pg #8, The contractor shall conduct network security monitoring and intrusion detection analysis for the SIPRNet using the AF's selected IDS/IPS tools, consolidators, and activities related to 33 NWS mission 8 execution.

a) What IDS/IPS tools are being used today?

A112a. Commercial IDS/IPS tools (Palo Alto Next Gen Firewall and McAfee Intrushield)

b) Please provide an explanation of consolidators?

A112b. A SEIM to collect alerts from all IPS/IDS/logging devices into one spot

c) Can the Gov't please provide the specific activities?

A112c. Specific activities cannot be provided. All suspicious activity will be reported.

Q113. 3.2.2, Pg #9, The contractor shall not perform historical site batch analysis; however, contractor shall correlate real time suspicious events with data stored within 33 NWS databases and other resources.

a) What 33NWS databases are used?

A113a. Sharepoint and other-in house products.

b) Please specify the other resources?

A113b. Outside agency tippers.

c) Is there an automated correlation…