CAMMO_Feedback_Matrix_RFI__4_Govt_Response_ver_1_0.pdf

CAMMO Feedback Matrix Responses RFI #4 Date Updated 5/22/2014 Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

1 Bidder's Library None In review of the Bidder's Library the following documents were not provided:

‐ Software Design Document (SDD) ‐ Software Product Specification (SPS) ‐ Software User Manual for software applications Please provide this documentation for mission and non‐mission systems to be sustained by CAMMO.

In order to provide adequate technical and cost data for PWS sections 3.7.2 and 3.6.2, and to create Section L Attachment 2.

The Government will evaluate and determine if there is an update required for the Bidder's Library.

2 Bidder's Library Please provide the DIDs that apply to the various plans that are to be submitted with the proposal (attachments T1, T2, etc.).

Additional documents needed in Bidder's Library.

The Government will evaluate and determine if there is an update required for the Bidder's Library.

3 Bidder's Library Compliance Documents are listed in the table in Section 4 of the PWS, but several of these appear to be missing from the Bidder's Library. Please add the missing documents to the library.

The Government will evaluate and determine if there is an update required for the Bidder's Library.

4 Bidder's Library The following documents are listed in the Compliance Documents table in Section 4 of the PWS. They are in the Bidder's Library, however, the posted documents are older than revision listed in the Compliance Table. Please replace the documents in the Bidder's Library with the newer revision for the following:

AFI 21‐118

AFI 31‐101

AFI 99‐103

The Government has included the documents in the Bidder's Library.

5 Bidder's Library None The CAMMO_bidder’s_library_index_V1_0 Excel file references NBAFS AT Plan_26Oct12.pdf and NBAFS Security Plan_21Feb12.pdf which are not in the FOUO file, nor in the other files.

Please provide these files to the Bidder’s Library they are required for Security at New Boston.

The Government will review and potentially update the Bidder's Library.

6 Bidder's Library In the software list provided in the bidder’s library, i.e. (7d) 13‐ 002 SW CORE, it appears that some of the data is not current, e.g. licenses expired, not listed, and/or not at expected quantities.

Would the government identify what software is currently on each of the following systems:

• Operational

• Development

• Test

• Support To enable the bidders to scope technical solution and estimate costs more accurately, would the government provide the following details on the software:

• Name

• Vendor/Source

• Description/Use

• Number of licenses/seats (Provide total number available and current number utilized)

• Provide license quantities by site/location

• License type (GOTS/COTS/Enterprise/Mission Unique Software/Development)

• License status and renewal cycle (maintenance/sustainment, renewal or expiration date on current licenses)

The Government will post all available documentation that can be released.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

7 Bidder's Library Does the government have data rights to the NSOM operating procedures/instructions and other site specific procedures/instructions and can they be provided in the CAMMO Bidder’s Library?

Does the government have data rights to the current SCNC and NSOM training documentation and can they be provided in the CAMMO Bidder’s Library?

To enable bidders to transition more effectively as well as scope technical solution and estimate costs more accurately, would the government provide these documents in the CAMMO Bidder’s Library? If not, should bidders include account for their development in our schedule and cost estimates.

The Government will post all available documentation that can be released.

8 Bidder's Library Does the government have data rights to IRON database RBC flat files and can they be provided in the CAMMO Bidder’s Library? Would the government provide recent examples of the IRON database RBC flat files located at each site. Are there any site unique attributes to the RBC flat files (format, content, etc.)?

The Government will post all available documentation that can be released.

9 Bidder's Library In order to understand the GOLD database (PWS 3.5.1.1) for pricing and technical scope please provide reports from the GOLD database. For example:

1) Screen shots of database inputs and outputs

2) Number of GOLD licenses currently in use

3) Current version(s) of GOLD in use on SCNC

4) Data output for all currently maintained information in GOLD including all RMA metrics

5) Any available feedback or metrics from users of GOLD such as trouble tickets or help desk information

6) Training material on GOLD

The Government will post all available documentation that can be released.

10 Bidder's Library The intent of this question is to understand the current RMA metrics (per PWS 3.6.2.2) being collected and reported. Please provide the following:

o underlying data associated with the AFSCN Level RMA Metrics (from both NSOM and SCNC contracts) o Segment Level Metrics, i.e., Command and Control Segment Metrics, Communications Segment Metrics, Range Segment Metrics o Depot and Logistics, i.e., equipment level, LRU, component metrics, to allow for detailed support system analysis.

We request a representative sample (three years) of the existing data products be added to the Bidders Library. This will assist offerors to meet the spirit and intent of guidelines set forth in the “Guidelines for Reliability, Maintainability, and Availability (RMA) Metrics for the Air Force Satellite Control Network (AFSCN) Common User Element (CUE) Volume I, Revision 3 Definitions and Metrics; and Volume II Data Sources and Procedures.”

The Government will post all available documentation that can be released.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

11 Bidder's Library In order to perform analysis needed to address PWS 3.4 and 3.5, what is the current configuration data for the hardware and software elements of the Mission System to be supported? Please provide the following information broken out by site/location and system / sub‐system as applicable:

a. Part Number

b. Item Description

c. Manufacturer/Vendor

d. Unit Cost

e. MTBF

f. What system or sub‐system the item is a part of

g. Parts / equipment with NSNs

h. Parts / equipment non‐NSNs

i. Architecture diagrams showing interconnections or an indentured parts listing

The Government will post all available documentation that can be released.

12 Bidder's Library Reference PWS 3.6.2.7: In order to assess required RMA program with respect to system performance we request that existing Reliability Block Diagrams be posted to the Bidder’s Library. This would provide insight to the mission systems elements allowing assessment of system redundancies and inherent availability of the existing mission system.

The Government will post all available documentation that can be released.

13 Bidder's Library Reference PWS 3.6.2.6: Please post to the Bidder’s Library a working version of the Communications Segment Model as described and the installation instructions.

The Government will post all available documentation that can be released.

14 Bidder's Library PWS 3.9 references deconflicting with a Phase Out plan from the incumbent(s). Please post a copy of the incumbent(s) phase out plan(s) to the Bidders Library.

The Government will post all available documentation that can be released.

15 CLIN pg. 2, line 26, table line 4 beginning 1500

a) 2.1 through 2.1.8, 2.10, 2.11.3 PWS does not contain paragraphs 2.1.1 through 2.1.8. This sentence is likely a typographical error. Suggest correcting to

2.1 through 2.8

Corrected by changing to 2.1 through 2.8

16 CLIN pg. 2, line 26, table (None) Table of CLINs does not appear to reference the PWS 3.5.3 paragraphs of PHS&T. Clarify table by adding 3paragraph references.

f) Sustainment Logistics Support ‐ Corrected ‐ Added PWS 3.5.3.1 through 3.5.3.4

17 CLIN pg. 2, line 26, table (None) Table of CLINs does not appear to reference the PWS 3.6.5 paragraphs of Technical Manual Development/Maintenance.

Clarify table by adding paragraph references.

g) Sustaining Support ‐ Corrected Added

3.6.5.1 through 3.6.5.3

18 CLIN pg. 2, line 26, table (None) PWS requirement 2.11.1 appears to be without a CLIN. Please confirm which CLIN would be applicable.

The following PWS paragraphs do not align to specific WBS elements: 2.9, 2.11.1, 2.12.1,

3.1.1.1. Costs may be incurred/allocated as

required.

19 CLIN Notional CLIN Structure PWS matrix to CLIN PWS sections 3.5.3 Packaging, Handling, Shipping and Transportation (PHS&T) and 3.6.5 Technical Manual Development/Maintenance seem to be omitted from the CLIN Matrix. Recommend adding these PWS elements to the appropriate CLIN(s). Clarifying omission

f) Sustainment Logistics Support ‐ Corrected ‐ Added PWS 3.5.3.1 through 3.5.3.4

g) Sustaining Support ‐ Corrected Added

3.6.5.1 through 3.6.5.3

20 CLIN In the Notional CLIN Structure, it appears that a reference to PWS paragraph 2.11.1 is missing. Please verify, should 2.11.1 be added as a PWS reference for CLINs 1500, 1600, etc., in the row titled "a) General Requirements?" Possible missing reference.

The following PWS paragraphs do not align to specific WBS elements: 2.9, 2.11.1, 2.12.1,

3.1.1.1. Costs may be incurred/allocated as

required.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

21 CLIN CLIN 1500, 1600, 1700, 1800, 1900, 2000, 2100 For the PWS Title "a) General Requirements" the PWS Paragraph(s) column lists 2.1 through 2.1.8. However, there is no Paragraph 2.1.8 in the PWS. We believe this should be Paragraph 2.8. Please confirm. Possible typo on paragraph reference.

Corrected by changing to 2.1 through 2.8

22 CLIN In the Notional CLIN Structure, it appears there may be some missing PWS Paragraph references. Please verify in which CLINs the following PWS paragraphs should be costed, and add to the Notional CLIN Structure:

2.11.1 2.12.1 2.12.3

3.6.5.1 ‐ 3.6.5.3

Possible missing references. f) Sustainment Logistics Support ‐ Corrected ‐ Added PWS 3.5.3.1 through 3.5.3.4

g) Sustaining Support ‐ Corrected Added

3.6.5.1 through 3.6.5.3 The following PWS paragraphs do not align to specific WBS elements: 2.9, 2.11.1, 2.12.1,

3.1.1.1. Costs may be incurred/allocated as

required.

23 DD254 pg. 2, section 13 NISPOM (multiple occurrences) Besides using the NISPOM, does NISPOM SUP 1 or JAFAN 6/0 apply as well. Verification of current security guidance

NISPOM Sup and JAFAN requirements are stated in Block 14 additional security guidance ‐

pg. 12.

24 DD254 pg. 2 , Block 13, Second Paragraph, first and second line

The contractor shall protect critical program information, technologies, and systems (CPI), as identified and supplied by the program office’s Program Protection Plan (PPP). The prime contractor shall develop a Program Protection Implementation Plan (PPIP) from the PPP

Recommend providing the Program Protection Plan. This should be seen by the contractor to better understand additional security requirements, and develop the Program Protection Implementation Plan.

The AFSCN Program Protection Plan is available in the Bidder's Library.

25 DD254 pg. 4 of 12 in DD254 Draft attachments, actual Performance locations.

List 11 physical locations Recommend adding Peterson AFB to the list of actual Performance locations. Completeness of the list.

The are no requirements for The CAMMO performance at PAFB

26 General&Facilities General: TeamCenter (None) Will TeamCenter be used jointly between SCNC and CAMMO?

How many of each type of TeamCenter licenses will transfer to

CAMMO?

After CAMMO award, will SCNC data need to be isolated from CAMMO personnel?

If so, since the TeamCenter system administrators will have access to all data within the tool, which contract will be responsible for that function?

The Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements.

27 General&Facilities General: TeamCenter (None) Will the entire TeamCenter suite, including all hardware and associated software, be transferred to CAMMO, along with the TeamCenter Maintenance and Support contract? What is the age of the server(s) supporting TeamCenter? What is the server maintenance support arrangement for the TeamCenter suite and will that transfer to CAMMO? What TeamCenter version is currently in use and will the update patches to that version be installed prior to transition? Will the Oracle Air Force Licensing transfer to CAMMO?

The Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

28 General&Facilities General: IBM Rational Suite, ClearQuest / ClearCase

(None) Will the IBM Rational Suite (including ClearQuest/ClearCase) be used jointly between SCNC and CAMMO? After CAMMO award, will SCNC data need to be isolated from CAMMO personnel? If so, since the ClearQuest/ClearCase system administrators will have access to all data within the tool, which contract will be responsible for that function?

The Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements.

29 General&Facilities General: IBM Rational Suite, ClearQuest / ClearCase

(None) Will the entire ClearQuest/ClearCase suite, including all hardware and associated software, be transferred to CAMMO, along with the license maintenance and support contract?

What is the age of the server(s) supporting ClearQuest/ClearCase? What is the server maintenance support arrangement for the ClearQuest/ClearCase suite and will that transfer to CAMMO? What ClearQuest/ClearCase version is currently in use and will the update patches to that version be installed prior to transition?

The Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements.

30 General&Facilities General: Facilities (None) Will the government please describe what mechanism will be used to allow the current contractor facilities to be assumed by the awardee?

As noted during Industry Days, the Executive Circle Warehouse facility has a lease that may be transferred. The Government is evaluating clarification on facility requirements.

31 General&Facilities General: Facilities (None) What is the square footage of the current Bayfield and warehouse facilities? What is the Bayfield and warehouse square footage that is available to be assumed for use by the CAMMO contractor? What is the requirement for square footage for both these facilities? What is the square footage that Honeywell will sublease?

Information on the Warehouse facility was provided in Industry Day briefings. Bayfield facility square footage will not be provided;

requirements determined by contractor's approach. The Government is evaluating clarification on facility requirements.

32 General&Facilities General: Facilities (None) Will the government consider adding a cost reimbursable CLIN for facilities? Will the government consider using a plug number for facilities to enable fair competition.

The Government is evaluating clarification on facility requirements.

33 General&Facilities General: Facilities (None) What is the lease cost annually per square foot for the current facilities?

The Government is evaluating clarification on facility requirements.

34 General&Facilities General: Facilities (None) What are the annual operating costs for the current facilities? The requirements will be determined by the contractor's approach. The Government is evaluating clarification on facility requirements.

35 General&Facilities General: Facilities (None) What is the clear height requirement for the warehouse to accommodate items such as transportables?

The Government will review and potentially update the Bidder's Library.

36 General&Facilities General: Facilities (None) What is the amount of electrical power required to operate the current facilities?

The requirements will be determined by the contractor's approach. The Government is evaluating clarification on facility requirements.

37 General&Facilities General: Facilities (None) Please provide a list of all GFE associated with current facilities.

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

38 General&Facilities General: Facilities (None) How much lab square footage is required for the main lab and the classified lab?

The requirements will be determined by the contractor's approach. The Government is evaluating clarification on facility requirements.

39 General&Facilities General: Facilities (None) Should offerors assume a date for AROC implementation or will the gov't provide this to offerors?

The Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

40 GFE Request the location and system/subsystem data be included with the GFE list.

Need clarification. The Government will review and potentially update the PWS for clarification related to system/subsystem baseline data.

41 GFE IA accreditation current status is needed to develop the IA architecture required by PWS 3.6.4 and accurately estimate costs of contract activities. What is current IA accreditation status (i.e. IATO approved, submitted) of the EDI systems listed in 3.6.3.15?

For the EDI tools, would the government provide the following information:

• Classification level

• License

• License type (Open Source/GOTS/COTS/Enterprise/Mission Unique Software/Development)

• License status and renewal cycle (maintenance/sustainment, renewal or expiration date on current licenses)

The Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements associated with

EDI.

42 Incentive Plan pg. 13 of 23, Paragraph PIM‐2, Lines 254 ‐ 257

"The mean downtime associated with each critical failure will be rounded up to the next quarter hour increment up (e.g. 29 minutes will be rounded to two 15 quarter‐hour increments, 32 minutes is rounded to three quarter‐hour increments, etc.)."

"The mean downtime associated with each critical failure will be rounded up to the next tenth hour increment up (e.g. 29 minutes, or 0.483 hours, will be rounded to 0.5 hours; 32 minutes, or 0.533 hours, is rounded to 0.6 hours, etc.)." In the Incentive Plan, the mean downtime associated with each critical failure is rounded up to the next quarter hour increment. This results in very restrictive interpretation of the MDT metric (i.e. 31 minutes of down time would be rounded to 45 minutes. 1 minute would be rounded to 15 minutes.)

The result is an MDT number that is higher than the actual MDT, skewing the results. Further, similar rounding is NOT permitted on the Ao result. In addition, the rounding does not appear to be consistent with the instructions in Section 5.0 of the RMA Volume II. In the RMA Volumes, MDT and MTBDE is measured in hours to one decimal place (tenths of hours). We recommend rounding to the nearest tenth hour, consistent with the RMA calculations shown in the RMA Volumes I and II.

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

43 Incentive Plan pg. 13 of 23, Paragraph PIM‐2, Lines 257 ‐ 259

"No rounding will be introduced into the final calculation of this metric. The metric either meets or exceeds the standard or it will be considered a failure."

"The final calculation of this metric shall be rounded to three decimal places. The metric either meets or exceeds the standard or it will be considered a failure." CAMMO Notional Incentive Plan Version 2.0, PIM‐2 Topic: In the Incentive Plan, rounding is NOT permitted on the Ao result. This does not appear to be consistent with the instructions and examples showing three decimal places for Ao in Section 5.0 of the RMA Volume II. Would the Air Force consider rounding to the nearest three decimal place value? If not, how many decimal places are required in the resulting Ao value to determine compliance with PIM‐2? We recommend rounding to three decimal places, consistent with the RMA calculations and examples shown in the RMA Volumes I and II.

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

44 Incentive Plan pg. 13 of 23, Paragraph PIM‐3, Lines 266 ‐ 268

"The system downtime associated with each critical failure will be rounded up to the next quarter hour increment up (e.g. 29 minutes will be rounded to two 15 quarter‐hour increments, 32 minutes is rounded to three quarter‐hour increments, etc.)."

"The system downtime associated with each critical failure will be rounded up to the next tenth hour increment up (e.g. 29 minutes, or 0.483 hours, will be rounded to 0.5 hours; 32 minutes, or 0.533 hours, is rounded to 0.6 hours, etc.)." In the Incentive Plan, the system downtime associated with each critical failure is rounded up to the next quarter hour increment. This results in very restrictive interpretation of the metric (i.e. 31 minutes of system down time would be rounded to 45 minutes. 1 minute would be rounded to 15 minutes.) The result is a system downtime number that is higher than the actual downtime, skewing the MTTRF results.

Further, similar rounding is NOT permitted on the MTTRF result. In addition, the rounding does not appear to be consistent with the instructions in Section 5.0 of the RMA Volume II. In the RMA Volumes, MDT and MTBDE is measured in hours to one decimal place (tenths of hours). We recommend rounding to the nearest tenth hour, consistent with the RMA calculations shown in the RMA Volumes I and II.

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

45 Incentive Plan pg. 13 of 23, Paragraph PIM‐3, Lines 268 ‐ 271

No rounding will be introduced into the final calculation of this metric. The metric either meets or exceeds the standard or it will be considered a failure. That is, any value greater than 2.0 hours shall be considered as a failure to meet the performance standard.

"The final calculation of this metric shall be rounded to one decimal place. The metric either meets or exceeds the standard or it will be considered a failure. That is, any value greater than 2.0 hours shall be considered as a failure to meet the performance standard." The rounding does not appear to be consistent with the instructions in Section 5.0 of the RMA Volume II. In the RMA Volumes, MDT and MTBDE is measured in hours to one decimal place (tenths of hours). We recommend rounding to the nearest tenth hour, consistent with the RMA calculations shown in the RMA Volumes I and II.

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

46 Incentive Plan pg. 13 of 23, Paragraph PIM‐3, Line 261

"PIM‐3: Mean Time to Restore Mission Functionality (MTTRF)" "PIM‐3: Mean Time to Restore Function (MTTRF)" Per RMA Volume I page 6, the definition of MTTRF is: "Mean Time to Restore Function".

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

47 Incentive Plan pg. 13, Lines 275 and lines 281‐283

"the actual downtime (to the next quarter hour increment), as a percentage of the" Lines 281‐283 "concluded. All fractional times to a quarter hour increment will be rounded up (e.g. 29 minutes will be rounded to two 15 quarter‐hour increments, 32 minutes is rounded to three quarter‐hour increments, etc.). In the event that multiple PDM visits occur over the"

"the actual downtime (to the nearest tenth of an hour increment), as a percentage of the" Lines 281‐283 "concluded.

All fractional times to a tenth of an hour increment (e.g. 29 minutes, or 0.483 hours, will be rounded to 0.5 hours; 32 minutes, or 0.533 hours, is rounded to 0.6 hours, etc.). In the event that multiple PDM visits occur over the" The times identified in RMA Vol II manual table 5.1 (page 27) indicates times measured in tenths of an hour in the examples. Request the same consistency in measurements (to the tenth of the hour) as the RMA guide examples.

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

48 Incentive Plan 21: equations #1 and #2:

line 425

Equation #1: " … ‐ (SR.k * UR * QPI^2) " Equation #2: " … + (SR.g * OR * QPI^2) "

The 31 Jan 2014 version of this plan (18: Table B‐3, line #324) utilizes the quarterly QPI value in a linear equation to compute the Payment Amount (i.e., QPI * Target Profit). This version of the plan (1 Apr 2014) utilizes the quarterly QPI value in a quadratic equation to compute the Contractor Share amount (i.e., ... QPI^2). By changing to a quadratic equation, the Contractor Share amount will be progressively reduced as the QPI value decreases from 1.0.

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

49 Incentive Plan pg. 13, Line 254, Line 264 (ref.)

"The mean downtime associated with each critical failure will be rounded up to the next quarter hour increment up (e.g. 29 minutes will be rounded to two 15 quarter‐hour increments, 32 minutes is rounded to three quarter‐hour increments, etc.)."

Remove sentence Definition of Mean Down time from RMA Guidelines is the "average of downing events" If individual failures are rounded up and then averaged, it incorrectly increases the MTTRF for the AFSCN.

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

50 Incentive Plan pg. 13, Line 258 Delete sentence beginning “The metric either meets or exceeds…” This metric now utilizes graduated scoring so it is incorrect to state either meets or exceeds.

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

51 Incentive Plan pg. 13, Line 271 “That is, any value greater than …” “That is, any MTTRF calculation greater than …” Clarify if the MTTRF calculated value or any actual critical failure over 2 hours means standard not met

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

52 Incentive Plan pg. 15, Line 325 The average of all repair times for the performance period will then be taken and then averaged.

The quarterly QPI calculation will be the average of all the repair times for the performance period. Clarification

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

53 Incentive Plan pg. 15, Line 348 The average of all repair times for the performance period will then be taken and then averaged.

The quarterly QPI calculation will be the average of all the repair times for the performance period.

The Government will evaluate and finalize with RFP release.

54 PWS pg. 17, para. 3.1.1.1, lines 13‐14

STD (Performance Incentive Metric (PIM‐1): a monthly operations performance score per site of no lower than 0.998 IAW procedures defined in 50 SWI 10‐220

The score identified of 0.998 differs from the numbers shown in the actual Incentive Plan. Recommend making consistent with the PIP. Consistency

The Government recognizes the discrepancies.

There is a clarifying statement in the PIP.

55 PWS pg. 61, para. 3.6.3.20, line

h. wInsight Please clarify if CAMMO efforts require Earned Value Management. If so, what elements of the PWS? wInsight is required for Earned Value Management (EVM).

The Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements associated with

EDI.

56 PWS pg. 42, 3.5.1.1. line 28 3.5.1.1 Perform Contractor Supported Weapons System (CSWS) Project Management, Project Planning, Data & Documentation support, Spares Analysis, Item Management, and GOLD database support, IAW the CSWS Guide.

GOLD is referenced in PWS 3.5.1.1 but does not appear in the list for EDI tools of paragraph 3.6.3.19. Please clarify if CAMMO contractor is to maintain GOLD or just use it as GFE.

The CAMMO contractor needs to obtain, use, maintain GOLD software license. This is not provided as GFE.

57 PWS pg. 57, para. 3.6.3.12 , lines 9‐11

STD: As described in the Implement Agreement, at the time of contract start, maintain existing organic depot levels of software maintenance performed by OO‐ALC organic government software maintainers/engineers for both RBC and ESD 3.0

For pricing purposes, will you provide hours and wage rates for the OO‐ALC organic government software maintainers/engineers working RBC and ESD 3.0 at time of contract start? This information is needed to build‐out cost.

PPP issues will be handled directly with OO‐ ALC. Contact POC at OO‐ALC.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

58 PWS pg. 56‐57, para. 3.6.3.12, lines 32‐35 and 1‐7

(In summary, the requirement is for a PPP with OO‐ALC to sustain ESD 3.0 and RBC)

During the One‐on‐Ones with OO‐ALC at Industry Days, the OO‐ ALC representatives stated a common pricing package would be presented to all bidders. When will that common pricing package be available? This information is needed to build ‐out cost.

PPP issues will be handled directly with OO‐ ALC. Contact POC at OO‐ALC.

59 PWS pg. 60, para. 3.6.3.19, line

Performance Standard STD: Accredited IAW DODI 8500.2

Is the contractor EDI environment to be accredited under NISPOM/DSS or DoDI 8500.2? Note: As of March 14, 2014 the DoD 8500.01E and DoDI 8500.2 standards are retired and superseded by DODI 8500.01. The newer standard of 8500.01 is only applicable to DoD IT and DoD‐Controlled IT operated by a contractor on behalf of DoD. Is the CAMMO EDI considered to be DoD controlled?

If not, then NISPOM is the applicable standard.

The Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements associated with

EDI.

60 PWS pg. 60, para. 3.6.3.19, lines 25 & 26

Performance Standard STD: Data is accessible from Government facilities and to all authorized users of the AFSCN with no more than 4 hours down time per month.

Does downtime include scheduled downtime ? Requirements clarification needed.

Scheduled downtime is included. The Government will review and potentially update the PWS

61 PWS pg. 60, para. 3.6.3.20, line

Central Data Library (must be maintained as independent system) Does independent system mean that the CDL function may not be consolidated into other IT systems within the EDI? Offeror requests a technical data package be added to in the Bidders library describing the current CDL.

Requirements clarification needed.

The Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements associated with

EDI.

62 PWS pg. 61, para. 3.6.3.20, lines 1 & 6

e. Electronic Air Force Technical Order (E‐AFTO) (must be maintained as independent system) & i. eIRON (must be maintained as independent system)

Does independent system mean that the E‐AFTO and eIRON functions may not be consolidated into other IT systems within the EDI? Offeror requests a technical data package be added to in the Bidders library describing the current E‐AFTO and eIRON systems .

Requirements clarification needed.

The Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements associated with

EDI.

63 PWS pg. 99, 3.9.1.1, line 10 3.9.1.1 Deliver and implement a Phase‐In Plan which complements the incumbent’s Phase‐Out Plan.

Can the Government please confirm when the SCNC Phase‐ Out Plan will be made available to offerors?

The Government is evaluating transition phase‐ in requirements.

64 PWS pg. 100, para. 3.9.1.5, lines 25, 26

Performance Standard STD: If not relocating EDI, it must be fully operational in 5 calendar days or less.

STD: If relocating EDI, it must be fully operational in 15 calendar days or less.

Given that the existing "as is" EDI locations provided by USAF can be assumed by CAMMO contractor, please provide a data package on the current EDI to include information such as system locations, connectivity, applications, operating systems, servers and storage hardware components. Clarify discrepancy between PWS and government industry day briefing.

The Government is evaluating transition phase‐ in and EDI requirements.

65 PWS pg. 60, para. 3.6.3.20, lines 44 and pg. 61, lines 3 and 4

d. TeamCenter (via secure site) & f. International Business Machines (IBM) Rational Suite web sites (via secure site)& g. Document Management System (via secure site)

Request that the government provide:

1) Technical data for the current SCNC "secure site" and

2) Requirements for the CAMMO "secure site" as the offeror assumes that all EDI sites would be secure. The PWS infers that an architecture is preferred or additional requirements exists for the EDI functions. The government provision of technical data packages for the current SCNC EDI and secure site(s) allows offerors to assess current EDI capabilities and present the best, firm fixed priced proposals.

The Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements associated with

EDI.

66 PWS pg. 60, para. 3.6.3.19, line

Performance Standard STD: Accredited IAW DODI 8500.2…

What level of security and what systems would be included in this development environment?

Government is evaluating PWS for clarification on requirements associated with EDI.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

67 PWS pg. 71, para. 3.6.4.21, line

3.6.4.21 Deliver, as required and necessary, all supportive

Certification and Accreditation (C&A) documentation artifacts for a specific acquisition, modification, or upgrade. IA‐accredited AFSCN systems will require project IA artifacts to support the Certification & Accreditation package.

Is CAMMO responsible for supporting ATO on TSTR? The CAMMO contractor is responsible for TSTR until decommissioning. This TSTR support includes IA artifacts.

68 PWS pg. 71, para. 3.6.4.21, line

3.6.4.21 Deliver, as required and necessary, all supportive

Certification and Accreditation (C&A) documentation artifacts for a specific acquisition, modification, or upgrade. IA‐accredited AFSCN systems will require project IA artifacts to support the Certification & Accreditation package.

What is CAMMO’s responsibility for updating government‐ owned DIACAP Artifacts?

The CAMMO contractor will provide IA artifacts to support the Government ATO packages.

69 PWS pg. 105, line 2 Compliance Documents (Cyber Security) Recommend adding MPTO 00‐33B‐5006, End Point Security for Information Systems, Methods & Procedures Technical Orders (PWS 3.6.4.2 COMPUSEC)

AFMAN 33‐282 cites this MPTO.

70 PWS pg. 105, line 2 Compliance Documents (Cyber Security) Recommend adding MPTO 00‐33B‐5008, Remanence Security for Information Systems Methods & Procedures Technical Orders (PWS 3.6.4.2 COMPUSEC)

AFMAN 33‐282 cites this MPTO.

71 PWS pg. 99, para. 3.9.1.2 , line

If not relocating the ATB, it must be fully operational in 30 calendar days or less.

The ATB currently resides at the SCNC Bayfield facility which, at industry day, was not identified as available for lease by the CAMMO contractor. a. Is there a plan to make part of the SCNC Bayfield facility available for lease by the CAMMO contractor or is the plan to move the ATB to the SCNC warehouse facility prior to CAMMO award (the SCNC warehouse facility was identified at industry day as available for lease by the CAMMO contractor). b. Also, since Section

3.6.3.11 calls for a development environment (which we interpret as including the ATB) to be IA certified, will the current ATB (either now or when/if it is relocated) be certified? c. Will the ATO documents be available in the Bidders Library? Clarify what was presented at Industry Day and subsequent tours and what is in the draft PWS.

The Government is evaluating transition phase‐ in requirements.

72 PWS pg. 100, para. 3.9.1.5, line

If not relocating EDI, it must be fully operational in 5 calendar days or less.

The EDI currently resides at the SCNC Bayfield facility which, at industry day, was not identified as available for lease by the CAMMO contractor. a. Is there a plan to make part of the SCNC Bayfield facility available for lease by the CAMMO contractor or is the plan to move the EDI to the SCNC warehouse facility prior to CAMMO award (the SCNC warehouse facility was identified at industry day as available for lease by the CAMMO contractor). b. Also, since Section

3.6.3.14 calls for the EDI to be IA certified, will the current EDI (either now or when/if it is relocated) be certified? c. Will the ATO documents be available in the Bidders Library? Clarify what was presented at Industry Day and subsequent tours and what is in the draft PWS.

The Government is evaluating transition phase‐ in and EDI requirements.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

73 PWS pg. 102, para. 3.9.1.10, lines 4‐5

STD: If not relocating ClearQuest/ClearCase, complete transition in 30 calendar days or less.

ClearQuest/ClearCase and associated servers currently reside at the SCNC Bayfield facility which, at industry day, was not identified as available for lease by the CAMMO contractor. a.

Is there a plan to make part of the SCNC Bayfield facility available for lease by the CAMMO contractor or is the plan to move ClearQuest/ClearCase to the SCNC warehouse facility prior to CAMMO award (the SCNC warehouse facility was identified at industry day as available for lease by the CAMMO contractor). b. Also, since ClearQuest/ClearCase is part of the development environment, Section 3.6.3.11 calls for the development environment to be certified, will ClearQuest/ClearCase (either now or when/if it is relocated) be certified? c. Will the ATO documents be available in the Bidders Library? Clarify what was presented at Industry Day and subsequent tours and what is in the draft PWS.

The Government is evaluating transition phase‐ in requirements.

74 PWS pg. 102, para. 3.9.1.10, line

STD: ClearQuest/ClearCase and tools must be available to end users 160 hours weekly.

We interpret the cited standard to mean the ClearQuest/ClearCase tools will have no more than eight (8) hours unavailable weekly due to scheduled or unscheduled maintenance. Will the government validate this interpretation or better define their intention as to the 160 hours per week requirement?

The Government is evaluating transition phase‐ in requirements.

75 PWS pg. 102, para. 3.9.2.1, lines 27‐30

3.9.2.1 Develop and implement a transition plan for Phase‐Out.

Maintain overall contract responsibility until the completion of the contract Period of Performance (PoP). Establish procedures with the successors to ensure a smooth transition of all requirements and data without any degradation in service.

Is there a similar requirement for a phase‐out plan on the SCNC contract? Does the government intend on providing this plan with the final RFP or at contract award?

Government is evaluating transition phase‐in requirements.

76 PWS pg. 77, para. 3.7.2.3 and

pg. 78 para. 3.7.2.4

3.7.2.3 Develop and deliver sub system software version releases, IAW government approved implementation schedule, containing multiple software change requests for each software sub system CI area per year (see Historical Software Release Table 3‐6).

These releases support regular sustainment releases, anomaly resolution and address operational outages.

3.7.2.4 Deliver approximately 60 Software Maintenance Action

(SWMA) releases per year, (total for all AFSCN mission systems), including approximately 24 changes per release. A SWMA is a minor sustainment effort used to address minimal changes to firmware or software; fielded software repair or maintenance; a software. A SWMA release typically includes TCNOs and it can include changes driven by STIGs, IA POA&Ms, CVAs, COTS upgrades. Deliver SWMA releases IAW Government approved implementation schedule.

Releases should follow a 60 day release cycle. Upon completion of release, update IA compliance IAW AFI 33‐138 section 3F.

The PWS states a number of actions performed per year, either software change requests (SCRs) or Software Maintenance Action (SWMA) . Request that the government place the historical record of these software changes and the associated technical characteristics such as number of source lines of code associated with the change, if software, into the bidders library. Or should the offeror assume that the representative set is represented by the SVDs under the Software portion of the Bidder's library.

Additionally, request total size of the programs under change and other technical characteristics such as programming language.

This comment does not apply to non‐software areas of the IRON database, para. 3.7.2.5. This information supports offeror bidding of software support for CAMMO.

Government has posted the available documentation in the Bidder's Library.

77 PWS pg. 7, para. 1.2, line 23 The AFSCN contains the following systems and major subsystems: ALPS is not defined as a system/subsystem, yet is identified in Table 2‐1. Please clarify.

ALPS is considered mission unique equipment and therefore is not considered an AFSCN major subsystem. It is included in Table 2‐1 as AFSCN Link Protection System.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

78 PWS pg. 16, para. 2.12, lines 6‐ 9… 15‐17

The contractor shall provide the materials, supplies and equipment required to perform the contract tasks unless specifically identified as local purchase in this PWS.... When approved by the designated Contracting Officer Representative (COR), directly acquire applicable parts, materials, supplies or vendor services identified as local purchase in this PWS. For purchase actions exceeding $3,000 approval must be obtained from the CO.

We believe it is in the interest of the Government and prime contractor to reach acceptance and authorization to proceed upon contract award, subject to funding, on the final proposal’s subcontracted efforts, bill of material (BOM) and Subcontracting Plan, or promptly thereafter, in order to ensure timely program transition and start‐up, including critical milestones. On this basis therefore, the $3,000+ threshold should apply only on new procurements thereafter, but only as part of any new/additional proposal BOM with properly supported basis of estimates (BOEs), rather than treating each one on a stand‐alone basis. CO’s acceptance of such new proposal therefore, should also constitute acceptance of its corresponding BOM. Request industry feedback on dollar limit requiring government contracting officer approval.

Per PWS para 2.12.1, the CAMMO contractor is responsible to provide all materials, supplies, and equipment to execute the PWS (reference notional CLIN structure). The only exceptions are for local purchases as defined in PWS para 3.3.1.4, 3.3.1.9, 3.3.4.3, 3.3.4.7, 3.6.4.8, 3.8.1.1.3.

79 PWS pg. 24, para. 3.3.2.6, line 30‐32

3.3.2.6 At NBAFS and HTS, provide two person TS/SCI (final TS/SCI clearance plus polygraph) control for the Ground Terminal (GT) Antenna. Typical duties include COMSEC management and power up/down or rebooting of the system when required.

Please clarify that 2 persons are required for support of the GTA and must have TS/SCI plus poly?

Two personnel are required (one primary & one alternate) for Ground Terminal COMSEC duties.

80 PWS pg. 26, para. 3.3.2.9, lines 1‐

STD: At SAFB provide the capability to respond, troubleshoot and repair two 29 simultaneous outages IAW Table 3‐1. If more than two outages occur 30 simultaneously, the government will dictate repair priority.

Two simultaneous response requirement for EOSOF conflicts with pg. 28, para. 3.3.2.11, line 5 requirement of three simultaneous responses for EOSOF. Please clarify.

The Government will review and potentially update the PWS

81 PWS pg. 26, para. 3.3.2.11, lines 4,5

STD: Maintain all mission communications systems equipment located in Table 2‐1, and respond immediately to, troubleshoot and repair three simultaneous outages 24/7

Requirement states "three simultaneous outages" and previous line in same paragraph (Page 28, line 1) states "two simultaneous" outages. Please clarify.

The Government will review and potentially update the PWS

82 PWS pg. 29, para. 3.3.3.1, line 14, Table 3‐2

(None) Is the ESD Enterprise support at BNOC/21 SOPS required?

There is none identified.

The Government will review and potentially update the PWS

83 PWS pg. 29, para. 3.3.3.1, line 14, Table 3‐2

(None) Observation: WANIU and OSR Routers for 50 SCS are now being supported/maintained by contractor. Please clarify if these are to be maintained by the contractor or the comm squadron.

Per PWS Table 2‐1 WANIU & OSR are operated/supported/maintained by the CAMMO contractor.

84 PWS pg. 31, para. 3.3.3.6, line 9 3.3.3.6 Provide on‐site ROADS support during normal local duty hours at each site.

ROADS support at the sites is required but the scope of the support is not defined. Please clarify.

The Government will review and potentially update the PWS

85 PWS pg. 92, para. 3.8.3.8.2, line

The contractor shall provide escort for “Escort Required” personnel going into contractor‐operated areas.

Escort requirement unclear. Is it the intent of the gov that the contractor escort all personnel in the contractor‐operated areas or just CAMMO contract personnel?

Yes, The CAMMO contractor will escort any "Escort Required" personnel.

86 PWS pg. 43 line 5 Support test activities on spares that require in‐house IA Seeking a list of spares or guidance on rigor of IA test required Understanding of statement to ensure compliance and balance IA costs with requirements.

The Government will review and potentially update the PWS

87 PWS pg. 100, line 27, PWS 3.9.1.5)

EDI accredited … within 270 cal days This was an added STD with this version; need entire list of items under EDI Details necessary to ensure all IA packages are accounted for and can be scheduled for this STD.

The Government is evaluating transition phase‐ in requirements.

Response # Document Page #, Para#, Line# Was (Original Language) Comment/Suggested Change/Rationale The Government Response to Matrix

88 PWS pg. 17, PWS 3.2

pg. 18, PWS 3.3

pg. 80, PWS 3.8

Please post the following document to Bidder's Library:

1. 50 SWI 10‐215 (PWS para 3.3.1.8)

2. MIL‐HDBK‐61A (PWS para 3.3.3.4)

3. ESE‐TP‐0023 (PWS para 3.3.5

4. ESE‐SIT‐0001 (PWS para 3.3.5)

5. AFI 33‐220, 50 SWI 33‐105, 50 SWI 33‐113 (PWS para 3.8.1.1.2)

6. AFI 33‐106 (PWS para 3.8.1.3.1, LMR Management) Referenced documents are not in the Bidder's Library:

The Government will review and potentially update the Bidders Library

89 PWS pg. 79, line 10 The PWS references IRON database management tools. We assume these tools will be provided as GFE. Is this assumption correct? If so, please provide these tools as part of the Bidder’s Library. Clarification

The Government will evaluate and determine if there is an update required for the Bidder's Library.

90 PWS pg. 38, 3.4.2.1 line 19, pg.

46 3.6.1.1 line 39, pg. 51

3.6.2.10 line 36, pg. 57

3.6.3.12 Line 1, pg. 59

3.6.3.17 line 1, pg. 61

3.6.3.22 line 30.

All subject statements indicate XX calendar days after contract award deliverables are due .

These deliverables will be required to be developed during the transition period yet they are not mentioned in Paragraph 3.9.

Unless this work is identified in Paragraph 3.9 the estimated amount of work to be accomplished under the Transition ‐ Phase In Clin 1400 will not be estimated correctly.

The Government will review and potentially update the PWS

91 PWS pg. 76 3.7.1.2 line 24 Project implementation with zero CAT I and no more than 1 CAT II government approved Deficiency Reports (DRs) during field evaluation.

This appears to be a cost driver Performance Standard in regards to 1 CAT II deficiency. CAT II deficiencies are categorized as "U" or "R". These can be the result of misunderstood requirements, vague acceptance criteria, or misunderstanding the DR root cause. This metric should be imposed after deficiency adjudication and approval of the government. Request the government re‐evaluate performance standard in regards to CAT II deficiencies.

The Government will review and potentially update the PWS

92 PWS pg. 76, 3.7.1.2 line 29 STD : ECPs contractor final documentation processing ‐ calendar days

Number of calendar days not identified. Request the government define number of calendar days for this standard to be met.

The Government will review and potentially update the PWS

93 PWS Para 2.9, 2.11.1, 2.12.1, 3.1.1, 3.5.4.1, 3.5.4.2, and 3.7.2.1

These paragraphs are in the PWS, but are not referenced in the CAMMO Notional WBS at the third level or not at all.

Is this intentional or does the Government intend to add them to the Notional WBS? Completeness of the CAMMO Notional

WBS

The Government will review and potentially update the WBS

94 PWS pgs. 39‐40, Para 3.4.5 Off‐ site Repair

PWS requires repairs for Stocklisted items, Non‐stocklisted items, and CSWS items; however, three are no repair workload factors identified.

Insert the workload factor for each area The CAMMO Offerors need workload factors in order to adequately estimate the number of hours and resources needed to meet the CAMMO requirements.

The Government will post all available documentation related to repair workload data that is available.

95 PWS pg. 50, Para 3.6.2.6, Lines 13‐14 and 17‐18

The last sentence of the requirement states: "Any lab asset contention will be adjudicated by the government if required." But the second standard states: "Resolve scheduling conflicts among projects and with other contractors without government involvement."

Recommend removing the line: "Any lab asset contention will be adjudicated by the government if required." On a Fixed Price contract, this creates a possible scope change situation.

The Government will review and potentially update the PWS

96 PWS Para 82, para 3.8.1.1.5, Lines 19‐20

The requirement is to coordinate and support site visits and familiarization tours and provide briefings, support, and technical information.

How many times does the Government expect these site tours and visits to occur each year at each site?