18._Industry_Day_CRM.pdf

Item Page Para Line Comment Answer

Scope

Scope Timeframes N/A

Can the Government elaborate on how SOFA III interacts with pending TLOSS Scope? Is there any expected overlap in efforts/pricing/integration scope or is the SOFA III effort to be treated as just another R&D effort to be priced, scoped, managed?

The SOFA Specific CLIN will start at 1 July 2020 and will possibly have overlap of the SOFA III Period of Performance. Although the TLOSS contractor will have certain SOFA requirements, SOFA III is a separate R&D effort and should not be priced into

TLOSS.

76 Scope SMMI & ISO N/A

During the TLOSS Industry Day, and following review of the draft PWS, we noted there were no requirements for CMMI or ISO 9000 certifications, or a DCMA approved Purchasing and Accounting System. Requiring these certifications would reduce risk to the Government, as the TLOSS contract mandates Software Engineering, Configuration Management, Data Management, and Cybersecurity activities, as well as the procurement of Hardware and Software for the Government, per the

PWS.

While not a USAF requirement to have these certifications, it is common practice within the U.S.

Government to ensure Industry Standards are maintained and adhered to, and to ensure services are rendered using best practices available

The Government determined CMMI and ISO 9000 certifications are not required for this contract.

Section L, para 6.9 specifies the requirements for the contractors accounting system.

PWS

82 PWS, Pg. 4, 1.1 108-111

Capabilities enhanced or created within the TAP Lab will be tested, validated and verified on the TAP Lab’s open systems architecture called Sensor Open Framework Architecture (SOFA) and the follow-on framework, Future Operationally Responsive Ground Enterprise (FORGE).

This statement implies simultaneous or concurrent capability integrations with SOFA and FORGE. Is the TLOSS contractor expected to support capability validation and verification with both SOFA and FORGE?

If so, what time frame?

No, the TLOSS contractor is not responsible for capability integration with FORGE. The contractor is responsible for open system architecture that the government has in use whether that be SOFA, FORGE or a different follow-on system.

PWS, Pg. 6, Scope Figure 1.1 161

When will the TAP Lab have a "ops-like" environment to support projects like WFOV, Blackjack, etc.?

The WFOV environment is established in the TAP Lab today and included in the artifacts in the Bidder's Library. The Blackjack environment is being procured over the next 4 months. It is expected to be integrated within the TAP Lab SECRET enclave in a similar manner as the WFOV capability has been established. The PWS has been updated to describe in more detail the environments to be supported in this effort.

PWS, Pg. 6, Scope Figure 1.1 186

This section refers to the TAP Lab and SEGA detailed design documents (see applicable documents). The draft RFP did not include these documents. When will these documents be available?

The Government will provide these documents in the Bidder's Library for the final RFP. The names of the documents have been changed to TAP/OBAC High Level designs.

PWS, Pg. 10, Scope

1.5 196

The Contractor selected for this effort will transition these interim capabilities 196 (hardware, software, tools, data, and other equipment) into a final TAP Lab design consisting of 197 Unclassified, Secret and SCI enclaves.

At the Industry Day, the government stated that the government team is responsible for completing the final build out and will transition the Tap Lab to the TLOSS contractors, and interim capability transition activities are not within the TLOSS scope. Please clarify this statement. Also please provide the correct transition dates

The Government team will be responsible for completing the final build out, but the TLOSS contractor will be responsible for interim capability activities. The TLOSS Contractor will be responsible for transitioning equipment from the interim facilities as described in section 4.2.7.8 (TAP Lab) and 4.2.7.9 (OBAC) of the PWS. For planning purposes, the current date for transition to the new TAP Lab and OBAC Facilities is Nov 2020 (1QFY21).

PWS, Pg. 10, Scope

1.5 202-205

The Contractor selected for this effort will transition these interim capabilities 196 (hardware, software, tools, data, and other equipment) into a final TAP Lab design consisting of 197 Unclassified, Secret and SCI enclaves.

At the Industry Day, the government stated that the government team will transition the Tap Lab once build-out is complete to the TLOSS contractors. Please clarify this statement. Also please provide the correct transition dates.

The TLOSS Contractor will be responsible for transitioning equipment from the interim facilities as described in section 4.2.7.8 (TAP Lab) and 4.2.7.9 (OBAC) of the PWS. The current date for planning purposes for transition to the new TAP Lab and OBAC Facilities is Nov 2020 (1QFY21).

PWS, Pg. 9, Scope Figure 1.6 186

Is this architecture duplicated for each classification environment? i.e., one for Unclass, one for secret, and one for SCI? if so then what external connections are needed for each? For network engineering support tasks, the PWS states that the TLOSS contractor is responsible for the network up to the interface demarcation points.

The Government has updated Figure 1-6 (now 1-7) of the PWS to show that the OBAC has two enclaves (Secret and SCI). The external connections to the respective enclaves are shown in that figure (Blue = SCI, Black = Secret).

69 PWS, pg. 10 2 212 Is the SBIRS SCG the only classification guide that will govern the Tap Lab and OBAC?

At this time yes, any changes to this guide and follow on guides will be used for this effort.

71 PWS, pg. 10 2 N/A

Can the government clarify the process for accomplishing security on-boarding for the purposes of developing transition plans? Other contracts have been slowed down by the time required to process security approvals and indoctrinations even when candidates are eligible for the clearances required.

Normally on-boarding can take from two to eight weeks as security is unpredictable by nature. The Government will make every effort to streamline the process for the initial influx of personnel.

62 PWS, pg. 5 1.1 135

This section states that SOFA was developed by Lockheed Martin and that the Government retains full rights to the framework code and documentation. Does this mean the SOFA code is part of the 3rd party software to be maintained?

No, the 3rd party software to be maintained is associated with applications that utilize the SOFA framework. The PWS has been adjusted to clarify that SOFA support is described in paragraph 4.6 and distinctly, the 3rd party applications support is described in paragraph 4.7.

17 PWS N/A N/A

How are all the contractor personnel going to be physically located in the TAP Lab and the OBAC on a day to day basis?

The Government's design for the new TAP Lab facility includes both office spaces and work centers for all TAP contractor personnel. The OBAC is providing 24/7 support and the Government expects that the current OBAC facility has enough space to support the OBAC Ops SMEs and OBAC Ops System Administration personnel. Workspace for other positions at the OBAC will be provided on base but not necessarily in the same workspace. When the new facility build out is complete there will be enough space for both the operations (SME and SA) and other positions in the OBAC facility.

18 PWS N/A N/A Can spaces used by the Colorado University be shared.

Yes, the unclassified TAP space included on the TAP tour during Industry Day is available for shared use by all participants in the TAP Lab. This space will be transitioned to the new facility once construction is complete.

14 PWS N/A N/A

With respect to the unclassified TAP, will development occur in that room?

Yes, it is the Government's expectation that development will occur in all three enclaves (Unclass, secret, and SCI). The PWS has been updated to reflect this expectation in paragraph 1.2 (Background)

15 PWS N/A N/A

How are all 30 projects going to be isolated in the open space room?

The Government's design for the new TAP Lab facility includes both open spaces and rooms where vendors can develop in isolated environments. The PWS (Paragraph 1.3) has been updated to make this point clear.

16 PWS N/A N/A Is everything in the SCIF rooms SCI data?

Within the SCI rooms, we expect processing to occur at all levels (unclassified, secret, SCI). The PWS background section 1.3 has been updated to reflect this expectation.

27 PWS N/A N/A

Since you plan to house 30 projects at a time, do you put a limit on how long a project can stay in the lab?

The Government along with Contractor input will monitor and meter as necessary the amount of time any single project utilizes within the lab to ensure all developers have equal access time.

29 PWS N/A N/A

Discussing fielding capability to OBAC from TAP Lab. If the TAP Lab is the R&D development facility then is the OBAC the Operational Facility?

Yes, The TAP Lab is the development facility while the OBAC is the test Operational facility for Battlespace Awareness capabilities. Section 1.2 of the PWS has been modified to make this point clear.

28 PWS N/A N/A

Will the IT infrastructure have to support moving data up/down security levels?

Yes, the Government has plans to create cross-domain solutions as necessary between the 3 security enclaves. This expectation has been clarified in section 1.4 of the PWS.

PWS,13, 15,

4.1.1.1, 4.2.1.2,

4.3.2.1.1 356, 423, 660

Will the Government consider accepting experience in lieu of a degree to allow the offeror to pull from a more robust pool of applicants?

No. The Government believes that the degree requirements should not be waived in favor of experience. The Government has modified the degree requirements for the PM to allow for "Related Engineering Field; the Chief Engineer to allow for "Related IT field"; and the Lead SA to allow for "related field"

36 PWS, 13, 15

4.1.1

4.2.1.2

Requirements for the PM include 5 years of experience with Agile software development. Requirements for the Chief Engineer also include 5 years of Agile software development. If the Chief Engineer has Agile software development experience, does the PM also need Agile software development experience? Recommend removing the Agile SW development requirement for the

PM.

The Government has reviewed the requirement for the PM needing 5 years of experience with Agile and has determined that it is a proper requirement for both the PM and the Chief Engineer to have at least 5 years of Agile experience

PWS, Pg. 14, Scope

4.1.1.3 361

Would the TLOSS contractor be required to interface with ITW/AA community?

There is no expectation that TLOSS contractors will need to interface with the ITW/AA community.

PWS, Pg. 14, Scope

4.1.1.4 384

The PWS refers to the management of agile development cadence. Can the government provide the existing schedule and/or cadence to the TLOSS offerors?

The Government expects the Offerors to propose a development cadence appropriate the tasks described in the PWS. The TAP Lab is currently working on a 3-week sprint cadence and 4 quarterly deliveries each year.

135 PWS pg. 15 4.1.6 408

Two part question: Is the cost of this lease ($1.25M in FY19) over and above the ODC plug numbers contained in Section L, page 17, table 6.4? Does the government anticipate extended lease negotiations to be handled by the contractor?

The cost for the lease is included in the new numbers provided in Table 6-4 of Section L. The Government expects that the new lease will be negotiated with the building owner by the current lease holder (Lockheed Martin) and the TLOSS contractor and TAP Lab government team will work jointly to negotiate the final sublease arrangements with Lockheed Martin.

Section 4.8.2.1 has been updated to provide more clarity

126 PWS, 15 4.1.6 407

Are lease costs supposed to be in the ACA section and part of ACA with Lockheed Martin?

Yes, and the Government has updated the PWS to describe the expectation for the ACA with Lockheed Martin.

158 PWS 15 & 30 4.1.6.1 & 4.8.2.1

408-409 & 966-967

Under what CLIN should the lease be bid?

The CLIN where the lease should be bid is CLIN 003 and it's options. The Government has updated section L to better indicate the lease and where it should be costed in the proposal.

160 PWS 15 & 30 4.1.6.1 & 4.8.2.1

412-413 & 970-971

Please clarify that "supporting" the lease means paying the 1.25m per year plus escalation in the out-years, beginning at contract start.

Yes. In this case "supporting" means paying the lease on behalf of the government. The Government has updated the PWS to clarify that expectation. The cost for the lease is included in the new numbers provided in Table 6-4 of Section L. The Government expects that the new lease will be negotiated with the building owner by the current lease holder (Lockheed Martin) and the TLOSS contractor and TAP Lab government team will work jointly to negotiate the final sublease arrangements with Lockheed Martin.

PWS, Pg. 16, Scope

4.2.1.7 438

Is this task still required? At the Industry Day, the government stated that AWS was selected as a commercial cloud solution for Tap Lab.

The task is still required especially for TS/SCI instances. The Government will update PWS (paragraph 4.2.1.8) to explicitly state the requirement.

PWS, Pg. 16, Scope

4.2.2.2 449

The Contractor shall create and maintain documentation to support the 449 testing, installation, and operation of networks. Is this effort inclusive of Unclassified and TS/SCI networks?

The Government will modify 4.2.2 to describe all networks that are within scope.

PWS, Pg. 17, Scope

4.2.4 487

Will the SEGA requirements document be available to the TLOSS offerors prior to the final RFP?

No, the government has not established a SEGA requirements document that is ready to be published.

PWS, Pg. 17, Scope

4.2.6.1 514

The Contractor shall be responsible for researching, testing, and making 514 recommendations for new hardware and software technologies. Is this task still relevant for maintaining and sustaining the capabilities?

Yes, this is a R&D environment and we expect technology to mature.

PWS, Pg. 18, Scope

4.2.7.2 514

Sandbox environment: please clarify what is classification level.

The sandbox (which has been renamed the R&D environment) will be included at all three classification levels. The Government has updated the PWS to better reflect that requirement.

PWS, Pg. 18, Scope

4.2.7.3 526

4.2.7.3 The Contractor shall support a TAP Lab

development environment that is more tightly controlled and used to conduct vendor development of new capabilities. Is the TLOSS contractor required to maintain contractor proprietary solutions?

The contractor will not be required to maintain any contractor proprietary solutions. However, there will be projects within the lab where the TLOSS contractor will need to have access to contractor proprietary solutions in order to support the vendors research and development needs in the TAP Lab.

37 PWS, 20 4.2.14 612

The requirement shows the QA Plan as CDRL A013. The CDRL list (Exhibit A) lists it as A014. Please clarify correct CDRL.

The correct CDRL is A014 (now B013) and it has been updated across all documentation.

117 PWS, Page 16 Section 4.2.2.1 N/A

The PWS does not provide enough details to accurate provide BOEs. For example: how many network connections are in place, how often are firewall recommendations required, when will JWICS and SCI enclave be in place? This level of detail is necessary to ensure accurate staff estimations and cost/price estimations.

The Government will provide architecture and design details for the TAP Lab and OBAC as described in Section 2.0 (TAP Lab Detailed Design, Rev D, andOBAC System Design, Version 6).

PWS, pg.

18/25 4.2.7, 4.5.4

Will the final TAP or OBAC configuration include cross-domain devices between the Unclassified, Secret, or Top Secret enclaves? If so, will those devices move data only up or both up and down?

Yes, the Government intends to implement a cross-domain solution technology that will allow data to moved between unclassified and secret, and secret to unclassified

74 PWS, pg. 18 4.2.7.1 520

Will the Unclassified and Secret TAP Lab enclaves be provided "turn key" to the contractor, or will additional build out be required after contract award? When the Top Secret enclave is established, will the contractor be expected to procure the equipment or will it be provided via another mechanism?

The unclassified and secret enclaves will be expected to be delivered "turnkey", however recapitalization and scale out is the responsibility of the TLOSS vendor.

Added tasks within the PWS to build out TS enclave

67 PWS, pg. 19 4.2.9.2 567

Will the contractor be responsible for conducting cyber security scans at the sites (TAP and OBAC) on a regular basis and/or whenever new baseline (SOFA, etc.)

software is installed, or will the sites be subject to external govt (Red Team / Blue Team) scans on a regular basis and/or when new baseline SW is installed at the sites? Or both? What protocols/CONOPS are required for those scans? Will the baseline SW, HW and NW delivered as GFE at the start of the contract be compliant with govt cyber security standards as delivered?

Cyber security scans will be required at TAP and OBAC on a continuing basis as required by the Risk Management Framework. These requirements are described in detail in Section 4.5.4. The contractor will be required to support external cybersecurity compliance testing as described in paragraph 4.5.4.16 Emulation Testing at both the TAP Lab and OBAC.

Both the TAP Lab and OBAC have Authority to Operate determinations granted by AFSPC/A6.

PWS 21 4.3.1.1 & 4.3.1.2 641 & 649

Please clarify that the support mentioned is equivalent to 24/7 contractor support to OBAC operators.

The expectation is the OBAC SMEs will be provide on-site expertise to crew members 24/7. PWS has been updated to be more clear.

162 PWS 24 4.5.1.1 743 PWS 4.5.1.1 should not include OBAC

The reference to 24/7 response was misleading in the DRFP version of the PWS. This reference has been removed. This requirement is simply to state that the Contractor is responsible for taking action when security incidents occur at either the TAP Lab or

OBAC.

128 PWS 28 4.6.1 919

New Development Features are not referenced in the PWS but in industry day it was stated there would be new development needed approximately 7 Months after ATP.

Does the SOFA Support consist of software integration and maintenance only as the PWS states and feature development is on a separate contract from TLOSS?

The Government does not expect the contractor to develop new features, and will only need to resolve deficiencies within the current framework.

65 PWS, pg. 29 4.7.1 937 Please identify the planned amount of 3rd party software that would be placed under the TLOSS contract upon award and an estimate of the increase in this per year.

The Government has updated the PWS to reflect current projected numbers of applications per year.

118 PWS, Page 30 Section 4.8.2.1 N/A Does offeror need to bid this amount in addition to the plug numbers included in Section L (Section 6.7.3)?

The cost for the lease is included in the new numbers provided in Table 6-4 of Section L. The Government expects that the new lease will be negotiated with the building owner by the current lease holder (Lockheed Martin) and the TLOSS contractor and TAP Lab government team will work jointly to negotiate the final sublease arrangements with Lockheed Martin.

125 PWS, 31 4.9.1.7 1007 What is the scope for Lockheed Martin under the ACA?

The Government expects the TLOSS vendor to enter in an agreement with LM to handle the facility lease.

Facility lease data is under PWS 4.8.2

114 PWS General N/A

Given the general scope and magnitude in the Draft PWS, will the Government provide estimated workload and/or historical workload information to help gauge the amount of support necessary in the offeror's bid?

The workload information has been enhanced in the PWS. The Government does not intend to provide historical staffing information due to the revamp of the TAP Lab and the desire to see what solutions Offeror's propose. Offeror's proposal should include that information based on what's provided in the PWS.

115 PWS General N/A Please clearly identify the roles/tasks that will require TS/SCI clearances.

Work areas that require an TS/SCI have been called out in the PWS. It will be up to the contractor to determine how they want to staff their personnel.

116 PWS General N/A

With the ever-changing landscape of the TAP lab and the integration with 3rd party applications/demos and the TS/SCI enclave, please clarify the requirements at contract start as well as the timeframe to propose for changes to the contract (e.g., SOFA sustainment, number/complexity of 3rd party capability integration, etc.)

The Government has added clarity to the PWS to describe the needs in the TS/SCI enclave (paragraph 4.2.6.1). This effort is expected to begin at ATP.

Additionally, SOFA Sustainment (paragraph 4.6.1.1) is expected to start 1 July 2020. 3rd Party capability integration (paragraph 4.2.9 and 4.7) will begin at contract ATP.

119 PWS, Page 35 Section 5.0 N/A

Can you confirm that SOFA and 3rd party application source code will be transitioned from the current contractor by contract start, as well as all standard operating procedures and developer's handbooks that are currently in place will be immediately handed over to the TLOSS contractor?

The Government will provide a bidders library with sufficient detail to propose.

132 PWS General N/A N/A What are the Availability and Dependability requirements of the TAP and OBAC

The Government has not created availability/dependability requirements for the TAP Lab/OBAC. The TAP Lab is available to developers 24/7. The OBAC is in operation 24/7. Support and failure response times for both locations is to be provided as specified in the PWS.

159 PWS 25 4.5.2 774

Please consider providing an ODC CLIN for security force staff.

The security force is a responsibility of the prime offeror and is not included as a part of the lease

122 N/A N/A N/A

The Government currently has secret-level enclaves and plans to add top-secret (TS) enclaves in the spring of 2020. Therefore, would the Government consider revising the Key Personnel requirements to be active Secret level upon contract award with the requirement that key personnel are TS with ability for SCI when the TS enclave is built?

The Government will require the security clearances described in the key personnel qualification at the start of the contract PoP so that they can manage the work to build out the SCI environment.

09._Attachme nt_5__TAP_La b_- _OBAC_Supp ort_Services_ Section_L_v3.

9 wPast Perf

N/A N/A In order to provide fair competition to non-incumbent competitors, will the govt. provide an updated, biddable schedule to industry?

Section 4.2.7 of the PWS has been updated to reflect the most current estimates for the TAP Lab & OBAC build-out completions.

Small Business

123 N/A N/A N/A

The Offeror recommends that the Government set limitations on subcontracting and require primes to submit a subcontracting plan that shows the prime will be doing the majority of the work.

FAR 52.219-14 with Class Deviation 2019-O0003 (dtd 12/3/18)—Limitations on Subcontracting for Small Business will be used for this acquisition. Sections L & M have been updated to address this accordingly.

23 N/A N/A N/A With this listed as a 100% small business set aside, does that only specifically apply to a potential TLOSS prime, or are "bigs" excluded?

FAR 52.219-14 with Class Deviation 2019-O0003 (dtd 12/3/18)—Limitations on Subcontracting for Small Business will be used for this acquisition.

75 N/A N/A N/A Has the Government considered a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) set aside?

The Government has conducted extensive market research and working in conjunction with the SMC small business office, and determined the contract should solicited as a small business set aside under NAICS code 541715.

59 N/A N/A N/A

Will the prime contractor on this effort be able to use the "Similarly Situated Entities" language in the OSD letter dated 2 Dec 2018 (attached) to achieve the percentage of work for the prime.

FAR 52.219-14 with Class Deviation 2019-O0003 (dtd 12/3/18)—Limitations on Subcontracting for Small Business will be used for this acquisition.

GFP

64 PWS, pg. 18 4.2.7 519 Can you provide more detail on the type and volume of hardware requisitions that will be required and whether the contractor will execute these purchases.

The Government has updated the GFP List to better reflect the type and volume of hardware to maintain and upgrade.

19 N/A N/A N/A

Is the expectation that the Tab U/S/TS enclave's hardware will be provided to the TLOSS vendor "turnkey" or will the TLOSS vendor be expected to complete the build out?

The Government has updated the PWS to clarify that the Unclassified and Secret environments will be provided "turnkey". Further the Government has added requirements in paragraph 4.2.6.1 and 4.2.7.2 for design and build of the SCI environments at the TAP Lab and OBAC.

06._Attachme nt_2_GFP_List

_FIAR

N/A N/A

Is this an exhaustive list of OBAC equipment? Are there Servers, Workstations that should be on the list?

The Government has updated the GFP List to better reflect the type and volume of hardware to maintain and upgrade.

20 N/A N/A N/A If provided to TLOSS vendor, will an equipment list be provided as part of the Bidder's Library?

The Government has updated the GFP List to better reflect the type and volume of hardware to maintain and upgrade.

OCI

21 N/A N/A N/A Does a sub on TLOSS exclude participation in any BAA or Apps offered?

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

22 N/A N/A N/A Are FORGE Primes or subs precluded from bidding as a TLOSS sub?

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

24 N/A N/A N/A Please Clarify the Government's OCI concerns mentioned in the Industry day briefing. Competing on FORGE, SOFA, BAAs, Other development?

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

26 N/A Steve Polliards

Intro N/A

Can the Government address any OCI restrictions between existing R&D efforts that precede TLOSS? Are Developers with current R&D projects free to bid/participate on TLOSS Scope? There is an inherent advantage to a few existing customers in the lab. Brent mentioned this is still an item to work on.

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

60 Sect L, pg. 29 7.3 N/A

The OCI guidance provided is not sufficient to accomplish a clear determination of potential OCI. It is unclear whether there is a prohibition on tool developers from participating in this effort

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

72 Sect L, pg. 29 7.3 N/A

Paragraph 4.2.11 of the PWS, Acceptance Testing, appears to create a potential OCI for any contractor that has delivered applications or other capability to the TAP Lab. Will the final RFP provide clear guidance on whether such contractors may bid on the effort or whether such a bid would result in an unmitigatable OCI?

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

OCI, Section

L, Pg. 29

6.3.1 N/A

Please clarify the OCI statement that says "....in the resulting contract which disqualifies the Offeror from further consideration for award of future contracts". Does Gov't view the FORGE development or FORGE SETA/SE&I related contracts as potential future contracts that the offeror may be disqualified to support?

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

134 Section L, 29 7.3 N/A Recommend a stronger stance on OCI and establish 'avoidance' at both Prime and Subcontractor as the most efficient path forward.

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

121 N/A N/A N/A

Will the Government consider current BAA awardees conflicted out of participating in the TLOSS contract? If yes, is the organizational conflict of interest (OCI) considered for a current BAA holder as a prime or as a subcontractor as well?

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

127 Section L, 29 6.3.1 paragraph 3

What scope does the government foresee an OCI limitation impacting the TLOSS prime contractor, subcontractors and teammates in relation to BAAs or other contracts?

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

12._Attachme nt__08_OCI_ mitigation_che cklist__(2017.

08.23)

N/A N/A

Will the Govt. provide clarity on the OCI concerns?

Recommend considering a similar construct to the FORGE Competitions, where the prime contractor of TLOSS cannot be a prime for apps, but can support in a subcontracting role.

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

103 General N/A N/A

Will the Government restrict competition from SOFA/FORGE MDP developer(s) and application developers due to OCI concerns? It appears there would be conflicts for anyone developing solutions (e.g., 3rd party developers) for the TAP/OBAC and the TLOSS contractor who need to be an independent integrator/lab sustainer to avoid OCI concerns and favoring certain application developers.

The Government has revised section L and M.

Potential offerors are advised that the successful awardee and its subs will have potential OCI's that may impact their ability to secure future contracts in the TAP Lab or OBAC.

All offerors are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan detailing any potential OCIs, the methodology used to identify those potential OCI issues and the specific techniques the offeror intends to use to mitigate each potential issue.

In order to receive an affirmative responsibility determination, the Contracting Officer must conclude that the otherwise successful offeror’s proposed OCI mitigation plan is acceptable

Bidder's Library

30 N/A N/A N/A If so, is their an associated CONOPS for the OBAC? Can it be posted in a Bidder's Library?

The Government has not created a CONOP for the OBAC and as such, we cannot post to the bidder's library.

31 N/A N/A N/A If No CONOPS what is the Government Vision if the "to be" state of the OBAC and what are its responsibilities?

The offeror's responsibilities are indicated in the PWS.

How the offeror chooses to bid on the solicitation will provide insight into the proposed CONOPS to be used at the facilities.

33 PWS 2.0 209-261

There are a significant number of referenced applicable documents. Will the government provide these applicable documents in a bidder's library?

Yes, the government will ensure all offerors have equal access to the documents listed.

34 PWS, 4-10

1.0 and subsections (1.1- 1.5)

90-208 To what extent will the Government provide a complete architecture model/description of its TAP lab and OBAC?

The government will provide an in-depth mapping of TAP/OBAC network infrastructure in the Bidder's Library as needed for an offeror to submit a proper proposal. All offerors will have equal access.

38 PWS, 10 1.5 196

PWS Section 1.4, Page 10 states the contractor will “transition these interim capabilities (i.e., TAP Secret and Unclass) into a final TAP Lab design”. Will the government provide a final design based on concept design depicted, or will it be up to the contractor to use current design as point of departure and come up with a final design?

The Government has updated the PWS to clarify that the Unclassified and Secret environments will be provided as fully capable, accredited enclaves. The Government has added requirements in paragraph

4.2.6.1 and 4.2.7.2 for design and build of the SCI environments at the TAP Lab and OBAC.

PWS, 4-5, 15,

1.2, 4.2.1.3, 4.2.3.2, 4.2.3.3 144, 427, 455, The PWS references multiple government approval boards, including TAP Lab and OBAC government approval boards, Configuration Approval Board, and Change Management boards. Will the government provide a description of the activities and roles/responsibilities including approval process for each board? What is the formal control board and approval process to field capabilities into the OBAC.

The Government will provide enough documentation in the bidders library and specificity within the PWS to adequately propose on this effort.

42 Sec L, 9, 10 4.2.2, 4.2.2.1,

4.2.2.2 247-254

Will the government provide a WBS Dictionary to clearly describe the effort applicable to each WBS element?

Yes

63 PWS, pg. 10 2 N/A Will a document library be made available to support the proposal?

Yes, a bidders library will be provided along with the final RFP.

68 PWS, pg. 11 3 Will the Government provide DoDAF architecture products depicting the underlying SOFA and SEGA architectures?

The government will provide in the bidders library an in-depth mapping of TAP/OBAC network infrastructure as needed for an offeror to submit a proper proposal.

Bidders Library

N/A N/A

How do we gain access to the applicable documents identified in the PWS? Initially, the TAP Lab Detailed Design, Rev D, 20 Nov 2018 and the OBAC System Design, Version 6, 20 Nov 2018.

The Government will provide a Bidders Library during the final RFP

98 General N/A N/A Will the Govt. provide a bidders library to include current processes to be taken over, schedules, code baselines, and architectures to industry?

The Government will not provide code baselines, but will provide enough information for a fair and open competition

102 General N/A N/A

Will the Government be providing a bidder's library with current software and incumbent contractor materials that will be transitioning to the TLOSS contractor? At a minimum, each of the applicable documents noted in the PWS should be made available.

Yes the Government will provide a bidders library that includes the applicable documents and other information that allows for an open and fair competition.

Section L

PWS, 13, 15,

21, 21 Sec L, 6

PWS, 4.1.1.1,

4.2.1.2, 4.3.1.1.1, 4.3.2.1.1

Sec L, 3.1

PWS, 350,

423, 647, 660

PWS has a requirement for four key personnel, however, Section L does not have a requirement to submit resumes for those key personnel. Will the Government accept resumes for the 4 key personnel identified in the PWS as an attachment to the Technical Volume?

Suggest 2 pages per key personnel position, excluded from page count.

The Government will not accept resumes. The Staffing matrix will allow for an understanding of the duties assigned. The Scenario allows for a broader interpretation of the proposed processes to be used in managing the facilities.

41 Sec L, 7 N/A N/A

3rd Party Capability Integration (PWS 4.7, CLIN 4001) starts in month 7 after contract award. Is it the Government’s intent that no PWS 4.7 activity occurs in the first 6 months of contract performance?

Due to the slip in RFP release it is anticipated that 3rd party will now start with ATP.

43 Sec L, 11 5.3 1

This section states that Past Performance Information (PPI) will be submitted on no more than 3 recent contracts, and that 1 of the 3 may be for teaming partners or subcontractors. Requesting an increase to 7 PPI's that can be submitted with up to 3 for teaming partners or subcontractors.

No, additional PPIs will not be considered.

44 Sec L, 24 6.7.3 N/A Since the government is providing plug numbers for ODCs/travel, is a CBOM required? A Consolidated Bill of Materials is not required

45 Sec L, 25 6.7.4 N/A Since the government is providing plug numbers for ODCs/travel, are detailed travel estimates required?

Yes, the detailed travel estimates are required as described in Section L, paragraph 6.7.4.

46 Sec L, 10 4.2.3.1 1 CDRL A009 and Section L, paragraph 4.2.3 both have references to PWS 4.4.2.2. There is no PWS 4.4.2.2.

Should this reference be PWS 4.7?

Yes, it was a typo leftover from a previous draft version of the PWS. This error has been corrected.

48 Sec L, 3 1.2 34-38

Section L, para. 1.2 refers to a GFE/GFI list in Attachment 2. However, Attachment 2 is labeled and titled GFP List. Is there a distinction between GFE/GFI and GFP?

We have corrected Section L to be GFP list

49 Sec L, 3 1.2 37-38 Can the offeror request additional GFP, not listed in Attachment 2?

No, The Government will not make any additional GFP available.

50 Sec L, 11 5.3.1 N/A In the second bullet, the government requests a summary page. May the offeror provide more than one page of summary information?

No, the Government has concluded that a one page summary is sufficient.

51 Sec L, 22 6.7.1 N/A Should the referenced Attachment 1 actually be Attachment 3?

Yes. The DRFP version was incorrect. The Government has fixed the error.

52 Sec L, 23 6.7.2 N/A Are we limited to the rationale listed here or can we add additional types, such as Engineering Judgment?

Yes, you may use additional types of estimation for your proposed numbers. Note that the Government will be using an MPC estimate for evaluation purposes.

53 Sec L,13 6.0 N/A Will the government provide a cost template in the form of a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet?

No, the Government will not provide the cost template in Excel format.

54 Sec L, 9, 10 4.2.2.1, 4.2.2.2 251

The staffing matrix (Table 4-1) requires a position description and qualifications among other information.

This table may require numerous pages to complete for the entire staffing plan. Request the table not be included in the page count for the technical volume.

The staffing matrix will remain in the overall page count limit. Position descriptions and qualifications should be written at a high level.

47 Sec L, 13 6.0 N/A

Development of a Bases of Estimate and subsequent pricing is based on the amount of work anticipated to accomplish the PWS. Most of the work effort is highly correlated to the development, integration, and testing of applications. However, there is no information in the solicitation indicating how many applications will be presented to the TLOSS contractor. Please provide information on the number of applications expected on an annual basis.

The Government has updated the PWS to reflect current projected numbers per year.

Section L, Pg.

11, Past Performance

5.3 N/A

One of the required qualifications for a prime offeror includes two relevant contracts for past performance evaluations. Some of the non-traditional emerging small business offerors may not have two corporate level relevant contracts. Recently, GSA IT schedule contracts allowed Joint Venture (JV) members' or offerors' key personnel past performance as a substitution to the corporate level relevant experience to enable emerging small businesses to enter into the DoD IT markets.

Would the RS government consider one relevant past performance from the prime offer with two relevant past performance from team members or allow JV members' or offerors' key personnel relevant past performance as an acceptable past performance?

The Government will allow for up to two (2) relevant contracts and past performance from teaming partner(s).

Section L, Table 3-1 N/A

There is no page limit identified for Volume II (Past Performance Volume) and not further information in Paragraph 5.0. Please clarify the page limit for past performance volume contents.

Past performance page limit and information requested will be updated in the RFP

Section L, Section 3.1.3 N/A

Instructions identify 3 hardcopies / 2 softcopies, but section 3.1.7 (page 8) identifies 1 hardcopy / 2 softcopies. Please clarify.

Fixed section L to reflect 2 hard copy and 2 soft copies

Section L, Table 6-1 N/A

Given the various elements required for the Cost Volume, can the Government clarify when Sections map to the Section L section and/or provide a template for the working excel files to ensure accurate information is included?

Cross Reference Matrix will be included in the RFP.

Section L, Table 6-4 N/A For CLINs 400x, are offerors to include the rates (without fee) for each of the labor categories to perform services within PWS Section 4.7?

N/A subject CLINs have been removed.

Section L, Section 6.7.1 N/A

Instructions note that BOEs should be provided down to the 3rd level of the CWBS / Attachment 1 (which is currently the draft PWS). Does the Government require BOEs based upon the contractor WBS (based upon their breakdown), the PWS, or the Government WBS (provided as Attachment 3 in the draft RFP documents)?

Please clarify the details of BOEs needed and whether or not those need to be inserted in the Cost Model (Attachment CP1 - Working Excel files) to show complete mapping to cost/prices?

The Government WBS is Attachment 3 in the DRFP and the documentation has been updated to reflect that. The BOE will be based upon a contractor WBS using the Government WBS as a starting point.

Section L, Section 6.7.3 N/A Please clarify if the ODCs plug numbers are correct. If so, why do the values significantly decrease in future years?

The Government has updated Table 6-4 with the expected ODCs through all years in the PoP. These numbers include the lease and expected hardware refreshes.

139 L 5 of 30 3.1 147 Administrative correction to line 147 as it states "...complete proposal consists of three separate volumes…".

The Government has fixed the typo.

140 L 6 of 30 3.1 Table 3-1 Please clarify the organization of Volume IV as the outline in Table 3-1 does not align with instructions provided in 7.0

The Government has added instructions to Volume IV to align with section 7.0

141 L 7 & 8 of 30 3.1.3 & 3.1.7 185 & 202 How many hard copies of the proposal is the offeror required to submit?

The contractor will need to provide two hard copies and 2 soft copies. The discrepancy has been fixed.

142 L 10 of 30 4.2.3.1 N/A Please confirm the PWS reference in Section L.4.2.3.1-- 3rd Party Capability Sustainment Requirement should be

4.7 rather than 4.4.2.2.

The discrepancy has been fixed

143 L 11 of 30 5.2 N/A

Please confirm that the completed Past Performance Questionnaire(s) are the only component of Volume II (Past Performance Volume) required to be submitted prior to the proposal due date provided on the SF33 of the Final RFP.

The offerors will be requested to submit the full Past Performance volume prior to the proposal due date.

144 L 11 of 30 5.3 N/A

Please confirm that the "past performance information sheets" referenced in section 5.3 are synonymous with the "Past Performance Questionnaire" in Attachment 1 of Section L.

Yes they are synonymous and it has been updated in the documentation

145 L 11 of 30 5.3.1 N/A Please confirm that the required title for Volume II is "Past Performance Volume".

Yes it is and the documentation has been updated to reflect that

146 L 15 of 30 6.4 N/A

Table 6-2 asks for Philosophy in Proposing Dollar Amounts, however, "plug" numbers are offered later in the RFP for the ODC/Travel CLINs, should a Philosophy be provided for ODC/Travel CLINs?

Explanations for travel and ODCs should be done in accordance with Section L, paragraphs 6.7.4 and 6.7.5.

147 L 17 of 30 6.4.2 N/A Please confirm indirect costs may be applied to ODCs/Travel costs

Indirect cost allocation should be done in accordance with the offeror's disclosure statement and standard practices. Explanations of the indirect rates should be done as required by Section L.

148 L 20 of 30 6.6.1 N/A

Table 6-6 asks for materials, travel and ODCs to be broken out as cost, however the RFP later provides plug numbers for each cost CLIN, how should the offeror propose the plug numbers in Table 6-6?

The plug numbers include expected materials and lease costs per Section L 6.4.2. The Offeror is to propose and explain any additional costs. The Cost Element Summary is to be completed IAW Section L 6.6.1.

149 L 21 of 30 6.6.2 Table 6.7

Current disparity between the PWS and WBS provided in the Draft Solicitation make completion of Table 6-7 a very subjective exercise.