Repost_Amend_05_Questions.pdf

Pocket-J Questions and Answers FA8523-16-R-0001

# RFP Section PAGE # PARA # Questions to the Government Government Response 1 GENERAL QUESTION N/A N/A The Government has requested a firm fixed price (FFP) for Paragraph 8.1 Block Cycle Upgrade (BCU) / Tech Refresh

Requirements that includes those items identified in PWS 8.1.2. The changes in PWS 8.1.2 will require the contractor to provide pricing from development through fielding of these requirements including all associated data. It is our understanding the PJ system does not currently have a sufficiently baselined data package including: updated technical orders, fully accepted and provisioned drawing package, provisioning definitization including sparing quantities with provisioning parts list, and fully integrated cyber security at all sites. The government previously stated in response to RFP Question #68 that "The existing Maintenance manual requires updating and finalization.”

We do not believe bidders can adequately price BCU/Tech Refresh (CLIN No. 0011) as a Firm Fixed Price item without the Government providing greater definitization of the required hardware, software, and documentation changes, required capability and operational thresholds that must be achieved, and required level of software source code changes necessary to achieve a fully integrated Capability/Product. To remedy this issue and ensure no competitive advantage to any bidder we request the Government provide a plug number for the Block Cycle Upgrade (BCU)/Tech Refresh requirements. Therefore, we request the Government provide an annual plug number for CLIN No. 0011 for the base period and option periods to ensure fair competition.

There is currently an initiative from NORTHCOM, funded by ACC, to replace the remote crypto components (RCMS) with in Pocket J. Although the T.O.s and drawing require finalization, the Gov't believes the documents are accurate enough to conclude level of effort to complete.

The Government feels that after all answer/information from these questions is provided, there will be enough information to provide a Firm Fixed Price proposal. Pricing should be proposal for each years for the entire scope of work. Example: Year 1 should be proposed for a start in the first year with performance to include all actions. The Government understands that the effort may require more than one year to perform, however pricing should not be d th h th

2 PWS 8.1 Appendix J

Pg 28 - 33 of 89 Pg 80 - 81 of 89

Para. 8.1 Appendix J

To fully develop the pricing associated with PWS 8.0 (Block Cycle Upgrade /Tech Refresh Work Requirements -CLIN NO.

0011) as a Firm Fixed Price item, we request that the Government provide detailed information/requirements to ensure that all required work efforts (and associated costs) are completely and properly scoped and subsequently priced by all contractors. The government supplied description of the required Block Cycle Upgrade changes contained in PWS Para

8.1.2 along with very high level descriptions of the AF Form 1067 changes in Appendix J lack the necessary design, engineering, manufacturing, testing, and quality assurance details essential for all contractors to supply the required FFP costs. The Government's PWS cites the following contractor requirements specified in PWS Para 8.1: "The Contractor shall execute structured software engineering and program management processes that facilitate effective and high-quality software development. The Contractor shall ensure that all changes, upgrades, and enhancements to baseline versions of the Pocket J software are in compliance with the approved System Requirements Document (SRD) within 60 calendar days." Additionally contained in that same PWS paragraph, the government lists 12 software-related CDRL documents including the SDD, SVD, and ICD which the Government states that the contractor must comply with. The contractor therefore requests that the Government, at a minimum, supply all of the current versions of the 12 CDRL documents listed in PWS Paragraph 8.1 along with supplying the PWS-referenced software source code for all of the Pocket J TDL software which the contractor is directed (see PWS Para 8.1.8) to "make corrective changes, improvements, or upgrades to the software on a block cycle updates basis". In addition to the changes to software specified or covered by Appendix J AF Form 1067 items, the contractor requests all current Pocket J drawing packages and any updates to the Pocket J Technical Manuals since those manuals were provided to the contractors early in the Proposal development effort. These drawings and Tech Manuals are necessary to perform the hardware and manufacturing evaluation and pricing effort since a number of the Appendix J AF Form 1067s require hardware, drawing, and documentation changes.

The Gov't provided the requirement; design, engeneering, manufacturing, is left to the Contractor. Technical manuals remain unchanged from what was previously provided. The Gov't will provide what is available on the current Pocket J versio (v2.3.1). These items are expected to be developed for v3). Available documents include; TRD, SSP

H/W, SSP S/W, SDD, SVDD, ICD

and drawings.

3 GENERAL QUESTION N/A N/A The contractor believes that an annual plug number for CLIN No. 0014 "REPAIR" for the Base period and option periods is the appropriate method to achieve fair competition. The government did this earlier in the Pocket J Procurement when they provided a PLUG Number in response to Contractor Question 12 of "Pocket J Questions and Answers FA8523- 16-R0001" regarding CLIN Item No 0015 "GFE REPLENISHMENT". Bidders are unable to adequately price this REPAIRS CLIN (CLIN NO. 0014) as a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) item without the Government providing greater status of the current operational status of all hardware at each of the 39 Pocket J sites. This current operational status information is critical to supplying a competitive offer to the government to maintain the serviceable inventory levels at sufficient quantities to sustain Pocket J systems.

All sites are full mission capable or partial mission capable.

Partially mission capable sites are on hold for scheduled maintenance for the following reasons; RCMS fail (workaround in place), ISDN down (x2), T1 line down, link-16 limited range (trouble shooting), crypto loading issue

4 GENERAL QUESTION N/A N/A What exactly is the contractor expected to submit to the government in response to the current modification? Has the government accepted all previously submitted Technical Proposals as meeting the requirement of being "Technically Acceptable" and, therefore, only a new Cost Proposal is required? Or, is the contractor to start over and submit a new technical and Cost proposal.

Each contractor is expected to submit a new cost proposal to include pricing for all CLINs with the exception of 0007 (Travel) and 0009 (Over and Above).

5 GENERAL QUESTION N/A N/A Are all the previous questions submitted to the government and answered by the government still applicable to this new modification? If so, it would seem that some of the responses to those previous questions are now no longer completely accurate or correct or are in conflict with changes presented in Modification 5. Please update all previous questions submitted in light of Modification 5 directed changes to ensure adequate understanding of which items apply and which are no longer valid. To cite some specific examples of conflict, Question #37 regarding scheduled/unscheduled maintenance; Question #56 appears to be no longer valid; Question #69 seems to be OBE; Questions #72 and #73 require significant restating and clarification in light of Mod #5.

Question #37; response was revised to 8-12 unscheuled trips per month. Questions #56 & #73; response is revised to read: The requirement is to start the upgrade in the base year. With TO's, drawings and Gov't testing, it may take 2+ years to complete.

6 GENERAL QUESTION N/A N/A Will the contractor be required to update and go through the Government review process for the PJ drawings, technical orders, provisioning and/or cyber security prior and or separate to implementation of the BCU? Example: Do we provide a new cyber security image and documentation, patches, and scans on the existing PJ system or will this be against Windows 10 in the BCU which will be a significant change. Same with iSMART/eSMART for JRE v5.2.5 (this was done for JRE v5.3.14 but not JRE v5.2.5). Do we need to update the PJ drawings/TOs as they exist today, go through the Government review cycle and then update again and go through another Government review cycle for the BCU?

No need to update iSMART/eSMART for JRE v5.2.5.

Current drawings for non-affected parts can be updated as able but submitted later as a full package until after BCC changes have been incorporated into the system (BL, one review cycle after BCC for both drawings and T.O.s)

7 PWS 8.1.2

Appendix J

Pg 32 of 89

Para. 8.1.2 Appendix J

The Government requested that the contractor provide a FFP quote to update the PJ FE fixed element dashboard software per the BCC and Appendix J requirements. In order to provide pricing, we need the PJ FE dashboard source code to evaluate and determine the scope of the change. Will the software development environment (compiler, make files, third part libraries, etc.) for this be provided by the Government or will the contractor need to supply. Please identify what third party libraries if any will be required to be procured by the contractor.

Source code will be provided via AMRDEC or mail.

8 PWS 8.1.2

Appendix J

Pg 32 of 89

Para. 8.1.2 Appendix J

The Government requested completion of the PJ TDL WAN. It is our understanding the current PJ contractor has done site visits and knows which of the sites have already been updated and what existing sites will require new cards in the network switch. As this information effects cost, please provide a listing of what sites require update, which sites require network cards and any copies of the site visit trip reports to identify any other risk areas.

**EADS, CONR, WADS,

Riverside, Homestead and Andrews are fully operational on TDL WAN.

**New Orleans, Davis Monthan, Ellington, and Fort Bliss should be operational but require troubleshooting with local site comm folks and DISA on circuit path issues **Kelly, Otis, Seymour Johnson, Ellsworth and Grand Forks called out by DISA but have been delayed because of funding **Buckley, Langley, and Luke have equipment required on-order but installation may be delayed due to funding issues.

**Atlantic City, Portland, Fresno, McEntire, Barnes, Bangor, Toledo, Duluth, Milwaukee, and Kingsley were all needing to be DS-3 commercial circuits that will be changed to _T-1_ circuits

9 PWS 8.1.2

Appendix J

Pg 32 of 89

Para. 8.1.2 Appendix J

Remove PRC-117/Fs from Pocket J REs. Confirm that the contractor will not be responsible for removal of the PRC-117/F antenna and RF cable at the site.

Contractor should price for antenna and cabeling removal.

There may be site by site exceptions.

10 PWS 8.1.11 – 8.1.17 Pgs 31-36 of 89 Para. 8.1.11 – 8.1.17

The Government has requested a FFP quote to support Government testing but has not provided the duration or number of people they would like the contractor to send for some of these tests. Please provide the number of people and the number of days required for the contractor to be on-site for the following Government test events. Development Test (DT), Joint Interoperability Test (JIT) and Force Development Evaluation (FDE).

Contractor should be perpared to provide one individual per tets event with a planned duration of 5 days each.

11 PWS 6.0 Appendix J

Pg 28-30 of 89

Para. 6.0 Appendix J

Windows 10 brings along additional cyber security requirements that the Government may or may not want to implement and that have cost consequences. Will the Government require the PJ system to encrypt all hard drives using TPM? Will a smart card reader be required for each computer to satisfy PKI requirements? Note: Some of the PJ computers are not compatible with these items. Will the contractor need to supply new computers (i.e. replace old Dell Laptops) or will the Government supply. How will the Government review the proposals to ensure new hardware to meet requirements has been included?

TPM - the Gov't will require TPM implementation in P-J PKI - no AF approved solution for PKI at this time H/W - Dell M4600 and M4700 specs suggest they are capable of hosting Win10 or can be upgraded to meet the requirement.

12 CLIN 0006 -

Unscheduled Maintenance

Pg 16 of 81 para. 4.6 During an earlier round to Contractor Questions and Government Responses (Specifically question #37), the Government stated that "(additional 2-14 unscheduled trips per mo)". This variance in the number of Unscheduled Maintenance Trips is not biddable from a contractor standpoint and there fore request the government provide a specific number of trips per month or per year and work days on site so that all contractors are bidding from a level playing field.

The Gov't estimates for unscheduled maintenanace have been revised to 8-12 per month. This number will likely decrease as the health of the system improves after regular scheduled maintence resumes and TDL WAN completeion.

13 Modification Number N/A N/A We believe there have been five previous amendments to the solicitation and the current mod should be number 0005.

Please confirm.

Concur, the current amendment # is 0005.

14 RFP Pg 2 of 26 Item #3 Item #3 states "Change CLIN X0007 (Travel) to "To Be Determined" as it is not to be included in the evaluation of proposal costs". Does this mean that "no cost" should be supplied for the CLIN in the Cost Proposal. Please Clarify.

This strictly means that the travel cost proposed with not be evaluated or included in the Total Evaluated Price.

Therefore, pricing should be provided. "To Be Determined" will be removed from the amendment.

15 RFP Pg 2 of 26 Item #5 Item #5 states "Change CLIN X009 (Over and Above) to 'To Be Determined' as it will not be included in the evaluation of proposal costs." Does this mean that "no cost" should be supplied for the CLIN in the Cost Proposal. Please Clarify.

This CLIN will not be evaluated in the TEP, therefore no cost should be supplied for it.

16 PWS 8.1.2

Are the changes in this paragraph for clarification only or is this a new requirement where additional pricing may need to be considered?

CLIN X011 should be fully priced out.

17 RFP Pg 2 of 24 Item #6

This item did not request any pricing for CLIN 0011 of the base year, title only change, however, Amendment #1 stated CLIN 0011 was "TBD" and not evaluated as part of the proposal. Clarification is requested.

This has been changed through this modification. X011 should be priced and will be part of the evaluation of this proposal.

18 RFP Pg 23 of 24 Section M Section M, Sub-factor 5 (Block Cycle Upgrade Requirements), Measure of Merit - excluded PWS paragraph 8.1.2.

Clarification is requested.

This has been correct through Amendment 0006

19 GENERAL QUESTION N/A N/A

If the government clarification identifies paragraph 8.1.2 as a new requirement, will an extension to the due date be provided?

Extension granted til 6 January.

Questions