Attachment_14_RFP_Questions_and_Answers_2018_10.pdf

Responses to Industry Questions regarding RFP HDTRA1-18-R-0045

# RFP Reference Question Government’s Response Questions related to RFP Section I - Contract Clauses 1 RFP Section I - Contract

Clauses, pg. 90 The contract clauses include 52.222-17 Non-displacement of Qualified Workers and 52.222-41 Service Contract Labor Standards. Please clarify if the Government expects a portion of the work force to consist of Service Employees as defined in Part 541 of Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations.

Reference FAR 22.1203-4 and 22.1203-5.

2 RFP Section I, pg. 93 Section I calls out DFAR 252.242- 7004 Material Management And Accounting System but Section L does not. Is this business system a requirement?

No; this clause will be removed in the final contract.

Questions related to RFP Section J - List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments Attachment 1 - SOO 3 RFP Attachment 1 -

Statement of Objectives for DTRA Agency-Wide Information Technology Support Services, Section 3 Applicable Documents

The SOO contains 10 applicable documents, most of which are readily available on the public domain or included in the Supplemental Attachment

13. The following was not found in the package; respectfully request the Government provide this document:

JIDO J6 Whitepaper, 17 April 2018

This document will be provided upon award.

Attachment 2 – TO 1 PWS - Engineering Support 4 Attachment 2 - PWS TO 1 -

IT Solution Engineering and Test Support - Section 3.4 "To support this requirement, the Contractor shall provide support services across all phases of the SDLC. The outcomes of this support requirement include engineering and IT design/development support to the IT service design process, or the full implementation of the IT

Does the Government have an existing development and test environment that may be utilized to support the design, development, and prototyping phases of the SDLC? If so, what capabilities does the development and test environment have? If not, is it the expectation that a contractor-maintained DEV/Test environment connect to the DTRA network or can it be standalone to support the requirements in this

PWS?

DTRA maintains the DITEC development and test environment. This environment is maintained as part of TO 3 under the Core IT Services contract awarded in August. Interface with this DITEC (both government and contractor support teams) will be necessary for integration and testing of any new or modified IT capabilities or systems.

services design/development process (ie, for enhancements to legacy systems or capabilities)."

5 Attachment 2 - PWS TO 1 - IT Solution Engineering and Test Support - Section 9

What engineering software tools are currently available as GFP? Or is the contractor expected to provide?

Representative development and troubleshooting tools include: VMWare vSphere Web Console & Horizon View console, Microsoft Powershell, Wireshark, Microsoft Remote Server Administration Tools (RSAT), One Identity Active Roles Server, Quest Recovery Manager (AD), Quest Change Auditor and SQL Server Management Studio. Tools and associated licensing will be provided by the Government."

6 Attachment 2 PWS TO 1 – IT Solution Engineering and Test Support - Final.docx, Task Order 1; IT Solution Engineering and Systems Test Support, 3.4.

Performance Requirement #4, IT Solution Engineering Support – IT Solution Development and Development Support, In section 3.4 it states the following, "full implementation of the IT services design/development process (i.e., for enhancements to legacy systems or capabilities). In cases where the Contractor performs the capabilities design, testing, and transition to deployment... " Will the contractor be expected to perform deployment to operations or hand off a deployable package to a separate organization?

Yes, the DTRA IT operations are supported by the IT Core Services Contractor, and all approved configuration changes to the environment must go through the DTRA IT Governance process which includes testing, security, integration and transition.

Close coordination through the development and test process with the Operations will streamline this process.

7 RFP Attachment 2

- Performance Work Statement (PWS) for Task Order 1, Section 4.1 Deliverables Summary Table.

Comment: For CDRL A007 it appears the Title has an error: "(to include AI artifacts)" should be "(to include IA artifacts)"

This observation is correct.

The title includes a typo, where AI should read "IA" to be consistent with the description in the next column of the table. This typo will be corrected in the awarded TO 1 PWS.

Attachment 3 – TO 2 PWS – Knowledge Management 8 PWS Task Order 2, Section

11; Pages 10-12 Performance Requirements from Column titled " Performance Requirement (from Section 3 of

Sorry for the confusion.

There was a late restructure of the PWS section 3 and the

PWS) do not align to section numbers in the PWS. Will the government clarify that table item

3.2.1 aligns to PWS 3.1.2, that table item 3.3.1 aligns to PWS 3.1.3, that table item 3.4.1 aligns to PWS 3.1.4, that table item 3.5.1 aligns to PWS 3.5, table item 3.5.2 aligns to PWS 4., and that table item 3.5.3 aligns to PWS 3.7.

PRS (Section 11) didn't get updated. Please make the following changes in column 1 of the PRS:

As Written Change to Read

3.1.1 3.1.1 (no change)

3.2.1 3.1.2

3.3.1 3.1.3

3.4.1 3.1.4

3.5.1 3.7a

3.5.2 3.7b

3.5.3 3.7c

9 Attachment 3 PWS TO 2 - Knowledge Management Final, 4.1. Deliverables Summary Table, Page 7, under CDRL 003

PWS 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 indicate Contractor shall provide authoritative CWMD data (3.1.1.)

and effective CWMD knowledge sharing capabilities (3.1.2) in accordance to deliverable A003;

however, this deliverable requires technical analyses reports as required to support the ongoing network operations.

Can the Government please clarify how this deliverable for enhancing the discovery for data and improving the access and sharing capability for knowledge applies to the network operations of

DTRA?

The PWS requirement includes doing research and analysis and the CDRL A003 provides the vehicle to deliver these research findings and the results of any analyses. The statement was intended to read, "..required to support the KM strategy". This change will be made in the awarded TO

PWS.

10 Attachment 3 PWS TO 2 - Knowledge Management Final, 3.3 Performance Requirement #3, Knowledge Management Support Services – Business Intelligence/ Analytics/ Process Improvement Requirement, Page 5

This requirement is overly restrictive. Unless read on to a current program, the SCI access would be removed. Thus, having a pool of SCI personnel is unattainable. Would the government allow reach back/surge experienced personnel support for Business Intelligence/Analytics with MicroStrategy without a TS/SCI?

The program must have team members at the TS/SCI level in order work with Operational Customers

11 RFP Sections L.3.4.2, pg.

126; M.2.2.2, pg. 138; TO 2 PWS, Sect 3.3, pg. 4

Is the MicroStrategy BI application the only business intelligence software deployed, or is the government open to offerors proposing another business intelligence software?

The government has made a significant investment in the operational dashboards and intends to continue use of MicroStrategy because of the large amount of dashboards.

It is cost prohibitive to migrate to another tool/

12 RFP Sections L.3.4.2, pg.

126; M.2.2.2, pg. 138; TO 2 PWS, Sect 3.3, pg. 4

Reference the statement, "maintaining the unclassified and secret BI infrastructure in a cloud environment." Is the government expecting an on-premise deployment, all-In cloud deployment, or a hybrid on-premise and cloud deployment?

The government plans to migrate as much of the infrastructure as possible.

There could however be a hybrid with a small amount of capabilities on prem and eventually have a majority of the infrastructure in the cloud. Currently in the process of moving infrastructure to the cloud.

13 RFP Sections L.3.4.2, pg.

126; M.2.2.2, pg. 138; TO 2 PWS, Sect 3.3, pg. 4

Reference statement, "...building the dashboard." Is the government referring to a development effort, a self-service feature which will allow end-users to add and/or remove widgets from a dashboard, or both?

The government has a program for self-service BI for simple implementations of Dashboards and developers to create more complex dashboards with multiple data sources. Complex dashboards can also include advanced analytics and predictive analysis.

14 RFP Sections L.3.4.2, pg.

126; M.2.2.2, pg. 138; TO 2 PWS, Sect 3.3, pg. 4

Reference the statement "...determine customer community." Is the contractor responsible for conducting the market research to define specific government user groups?

Consistent with recognized industry best practices, the contractor shall maintain a BI Competency Center (BICC) capability to solicit user requirements that include an understanding of the customer community (i.e.

Operation, CWMD, Finance, logistics, etc)

Attachment 4 – TO 3 – Sample Task 15 Attachment 4 -

Consolidated Sample Task Order - Section 5 "• Phase 1 – Requirements Analysis (PWS 3.2.2) will be consistent with the proposed delivery schedule, but not to exceed 6 months.

• Phase 2 – Application Development and Implementation (PWS 3.2.3) will be consistent

Is the 12 months for Phase 2 inclusive of Phase 1 or is it not to exceed 12 months after completion of Phase 1?

While there could be some overlap between the two phases (if proposed that way) the idea is that phase 2 would follow phase 1, and each would have a period of performance of no more than 12 months.

with the proposed delivery schedule, but not to exceed 12 months."

16 Attachment 4 - Consolidated Sample Task Order - Section 3.1

Can the government provide the current suite of monitoring and collaborative tools utilized to organize and display information for GCC-leadership? Additionally, are there any legacy system interoperability constraints the offeror should be cognizant of?

No additional data is available. This is a sample task intended to provide a notional scenario. Feel free to make whatever assumptions are necessary to provide a credible technical response.

17 Attachment 4 - Consolidated Sample Task Order - Section 3.2

Can the government provide the current technical architecture, tools, databases, etc. that is being used by the legacy DSMS systems (e.g. JADE, NUMIS, NIMACS, DIAMONDS, etc.) and the network is resides (e.g. NIPR, SIPR, JWICS) including any cross-domain solution requirements? If all this information is not available to provide as part of the RFP, would the Government provide a high level OV-1 and SV-1 in lieu of the aforementioned technical documentation?

No additional data is available. This is a sample task intended to provide a notional scenario. Feel free to make whatever assumptions are necessary to provide a credible technical response.

18 STO 3, Section 3.1 Develop and Support Combatant Command Collaboration Tool

This section mentions that current collaboration tool is email for sharing information and documents. There is no mention of legacy collaboration email content being migrated to the new system. Is there legacy content to be migrated to new tool?

This is a sample task intended to provide a notional scenario. Feel free to make whatever assumptions are necessary to provide a credible technical response.

19 STO 3, Section 3.1 Develop and Support Combatant Command Collaboration Tool

The STO states the tool needs to reside within classified system.

Does the Government have a technology stack that needs to be adhered to for development?

(e.g., Windows or Linux operating system, Apache, IIS or NGINX for web server, .NET, PHP, Python version limit?)

No additional data is available. This is a sample task intended to provide a notional scenario. Feel free to make whatever assumptions are necessary to provide a credible technical response.

Attachment 5 – DD 254

20 RFP Attachment 5 - DD254, Block 13 (Continued) paragraph 11e.

Comment: This paragraph includes the statement "The contractor is performing logistical support and services only," whereas the scope of this effort is information technology.

Will be corrected with updated DD 254

Attachment 8 – GPAT 21 RFP Attachment 8 - GPAT Can the Government clarify if this

Information Content Deliverable Accessibility Template document needs to be completed as part of the offeror's proposal or is this provided for information purposes only?

Should be included in proposal at time of submission

Attachment 10 – PPI 22 PPI - Attachment 10 Since the PPI is a part of the 5-page reference limit, can offerors change the format/layout of the PPI to be more space efficient? For example, could we remove instructional content, unused lines and page breaks, put the CAGE Code and DUNS # on one line, and the POC's address on one line?

Yes, it can be modified as long as it contains all the requested information.

23 PPI - Attachment 10 Please clarify the intention of Question 8. It appears to apply to a SB set-aside. Did the gov’t intend to reference 52.219-8 rather than 52.219-14?

Will be corrected. This contract is not intended to be a small business set aside.

24 Attachment 10 PPI & Section L.4.3, page 127

May Offeror’s use items 5 and 6 in the PPI to provide the past performance narrative or must the narrative be a separate submission?

Some find the items 5 and 6 too restrictive to provide the details of their Past Performance, but if an Offeror is comfortable using exclusively the PPI, the government would have no objections.

Attachment 12 – Cost Proposal Spreadsheet 25 Attachment 12 Labor

Categories Tab Will the government clarify or comment on allowing trade space between experience and education as many IT professionals, especially prior military, do not hold bachelors or advanced degrees?

The labor categories are provided as the preferred baseline to use to the extent possible. However, if the Offeror finds it necessary to make additional assumptions or add new categories the government will review the offeror’s assumptions and pricing relative to the perferred baseline.

26 Attachment 12 Labor Categories Tab

Does the government desire/require the offeror to provide expanded LCAT definitions/interpretation for each LCAT/Level whether using USG provided LCATs or generating their own additional LCATs?

Expanded definitions are not necessary when using the labor categories provided without exception. However, unique labor categories or exceptions to the baseline labor categories should be explained.

27 Attachment 12, Labor Categories Tab

Will the Government clarify that column G (Direct Base Rate) is for unburdened direct labor rate and is supposed to tie with column D (Base Period Rate) on the TO 1 and TO 2 tabs?

Yes, the column G (Direct Base Rate) in the Labor Category Tab is intended to unburdended rate for the first period and should be consistent with column D of the TO1 and TO2 tabs.

28 Attachment 12, TO 1 and TO 2 Tabs

Will the Government clarify that the Travel/ODC "plug" numbers provided are to be spread evenly across all 5 periods? Or are these annual (each year) amounts?

The numbers provided are intended to represent annual numbers

29 Attachment 12 Pricing Template - 'Labor Categories' tab

If offerors are using multiple people within a single labor category will the government allow offerors to add rows to provide multiple direct labor rates for the same labor category?

The expectation is that pricing would be by labor category and not be specific individual.

30 Attachment 12 Pricing Template - "Labor Categories" tab

There appear to be identical tables on this tab. Is one table for the base year 5-year period of performance, and the other for the option 5-year period of performance?

Please submit a follow-on question with add'l detail.

We do not see duplication in the Labor Category table.

31 Attachment 12 Pricing Template - "Labor Categories" tab

Column G shows 'Direct Base Rate.' Does the government want to see our baseline rate (unburdened direct labor rate), or the fully burdened rate in that column? Should be escalation be applied for each of the 5-year period of performance?

Unburdened directed labor rate for the base period.

Escalation, if proposed can be reflected in the TO 1 and TO 2 tabs.

32 Attachment 12 Pricing Template

The pricing template appears to ask for subtotals for each potential subcontractor utilized in the execution of TO 1 and TO 2.

The template allows the subcontract costs to be reflected as a subtotal line or

Please confirm providing subtotals for each subcontractor in tabs 'TO 1' and TO 2' is acceptable.

included within the specific task areas as direct labor.

Attachment 13 – Supplemental Data 33 Attachment 13; IT Service

Design Supplemental Information Package.pdf, Labor Category Summary.

Can additional experience be substituted for a degree? For example, 2 years for an AA/AS, 4 years for a BA/BS, and 6 years for an MA/MS.

The labor categories provided in Attachment 13 and in the pricing template (Attachment

12) are provided as a baseline to use to the extent possible.

However, if the Offeror elects to make additional assumptions or add new categories this will be accepted and evaluated.

Questions related to RFP Section L – Instructions to Offerors 34 Solicitation L.1.2; 119 of

145 and 120 of 145 Section states that if there are inconsistencies between the table in Section L.1.2 and the detailed instructions in later section L paragraphs, that the detailed instructions take precedence. The table suggests that Key Person Resumes are not included in the page count, but the list of items excluded from the page count (L.1.3.5.3) does not include resumes. Please confirm that resumes do not count towards the page count.

Resumes for designated Key Personnel do not count against the Technical/Management page count but are to be limited to no more than three pages each. This page limit includes a commitment statement.

35 L.1.2 TO 2 and TO 3 Key Personnel Resume(s)/Commitment Statement(s)

The RFP calls for Commitment Statements for Key Personnel.

Traditionally, the offeror does not have to provide letters from current employees. Does the government require letters of commitment from current employees or just contingent hires?

A commitment statement is required for each Key Personnel designated without regard to employment status.

36 HDTRA1-18-R-004;

9.17.18.PDF, L.1.3.5.1 Page Size, page 120

Will the government allow fonts sizes in graphics to be Arial Narrow 8pt as long as they are legible?

Please adhere to the L.1.3 propose format to for consistency among all proposals.

37 RFP Section L.1.3.5.1 Page Size, pg. 120, para 1

Will the Government consider allowing Arial Narrow 10 pt in Tables and Figures as opposed to Times New Roman 10 pt?

Please adhere to the L.1.3 propose format to for consistency among all proposals.

38 RFP Section L.1.3.5.1 Page Size, pg. 120, para 1

Is it correct to assume that by "Proprietary statements, security markings, and page numbers shall be placed within the defined margin area" that they can be less than 1" from the edge of the page as opposed at least 1" from the edge of the page like the body of the proposal?

Per the instructions in L.1.3.5.1; "margins on all four edges of each sheet shall be at least one-inch. Proprietary statements, security markings, and page numbers shall be placed within the defined margin area."

39 RFP Section L.1.3.5.3 Pages Counted, pg.120 and L.1.3.6 Indexing, pg. 121

L.1.3.5.3 includes tabs/dividers and L.1.3.6 states "Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections."

With this being an electronic submission only, what type of tabs/dividers/indexing is the Government requiring?

Tab indexing allows evaluator to move from table of contents to the section of interest.

40 L.1.3.5.1 Page Size; 120 of

Will the Government consider the following change to allow for sans-serif font and/or 8-point font for figures, as 10-point is quite limiting given the page count and scope/scale/complexity of potential technical solutions: Will the government allow sans serif and/or 8-point font for graphics only? "Lettering within graphical figures and graphs shall be no smaller than eight (8) point Times New Roman, while lettering within tables and charts shall be no smaller than ten (10) point Times New Roman."

Please adhere to the L.1.3 propose format to for consistency among all proposals.

41 RFP Section L.2.4, pg. 122 and L.4.3, pg. 127

Can the government provide some detail/clarification around what is considered "major/critical" so that all offerors are interpreting this and responding in the same manner?

Government defers to what the offeror considers to be a major/critical subcontractor or teaming partner. Is their contribution critical to the success of the offeror's proposed approach? Does the Offeror want the evaluator to consider the subcontractor or partner "major/critical" or incidental?

This is intended to be the Offeror's determination.

42 L.2.4 Government Offices - "Provide the… Government Paying Office (GPO)"

Please define what the Government Paying Office is and what information the Government

If the Offeror has done business with the DoD in the past this information should is seeking from the contractor.

The interpretation is that this would be provided by the Government after award.

be available. If not, the government will establish these identities upon award.

43 Solicitation L.2.6; page 122 of 145

Requires copies of subcontractor teaming agreements. As those agreements can be very lengthy depending on the negotiated terms and conditions, is it sufficient to include the fully executed signature page of each agreement as evidence?

Yes, fully executed signature pages will be sufficient.

44 L.3.5 - QASP Attachment instructions Attachment 6 - Draft QASP IT Service Design IDIQ

Is the offeror allowed to customize Attachment 6 Draft QASP for each proposed task order?

The Section L instructions require the Offeror only to complete the QASP/PRS tables which you'll recognize have been started in the task order 1 and 2 PWSs. The Atch 6 IDIQ QASP is provided for information. The requirement is to complete the PRS table (L.3.5) associated with the Task Order PWSs.

45 L.4.3 Past Performance References; page 128 of

Providing CPARS rather than pursuing PPQs is greatly appreciated. Would Award Fee reports also be an acceptable alternate to PPQs?

no; CPARS are the preferred, with PPQ as an acceptable alternative.

46 L.5.0 VOLUME IV – FACTOR

4, COST/PRICE

L5.4COST OR PRICING

INFORMATION AND

SUPPORTING

DOCUMENTATION,

Paragraph 2. Page 132

Does the Government require subcontractors to submit unsanitized proposals directly to the Government providing all proprietary proposal cost information that subcontractors usually withhold from submission to prime contractors? If so please provide subcontractor submission instructions.

If subcontractors are utilized, the offeror shall provide the results of the analysis conducted by the offeror (prime contractor) establishing reasonableness of proposed subcontract prices (reference FAR 15.404- 3(b) and (c)).

47 RFP Section B and RFP Section L.5.1 pg. 130.

Please confirm that offerors do not need to complete Section B given the IDIQ nature of this solicitation and the instructions in Section L.5.1 stating all cost/price information must only be included in Volume IV.

Confirmed, Offerors do not need to complete Section B

48 RFP Section L.5.3.4.2 Purchasing System, pg. 131

Section L calls out DFAR 252.244- 7001, Contractor Purchasing System, however Section I does not. We assume this a business system requirement.

DFAR 252.244-7001,

Contractor Purchasing System, will be added to Section I in the awarded contract.

49 RFP Section L.5.3.4.3, pg.

The offeror is currently undergoing a DCAA Audit with the final report due from DCAA by mid-November 2018. Will the Government accept the completed Pre-award Checklist along with the other required documents, and then accept our final audit report once completed and received?

Yes, DCAA approval or Independent Certified Public Accountant (CPA) is required prior to Contract Award

50 RFP Sections L.5.4, pg. 132;

M.2.5 Note 2, pg. 143

The government provides 80+ LCATs to be used, but it is our understanding that the only LCATs we are to provide rates and contractor labor category equivalents for in the Attachment 12 template for are those used in TO1 and TO2. Please clarify.

This is correct; select from the standard list the Lcat required to support the Offeror's proposed approach.

If there are Lcats required but not included the Offeror will provide definitions of these unique Lcats.

Questions related to RFP Section M – Evaluation Factors

51 HDTRA1-18-R-

0045_9.17.18.PDF, M.2.1

FACTOR 1—MISSION

CAPABILITY,

TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT

APPROACH (ID/IQ LEVEL),

5th paragraph, page 136

The section states, "Facility Clearance: The Government will evaluate the extent to which the Offeror can support programs up to the Top Secret (TS) – Special Compartmented Information (SCI) level. An approved Top Secret (TS) Facility Clearance, is required for performance under this contract."

Should information pertaining to the offeror's TS Facility clearance be provided in Volume I or Volume II? Is the government looking for a narrative response to this requirement?

In order to be evaluated in Volume II, the Offeror shall include evidence that they have a facility clearance and the capability to support work at the required levels of classification.

52 HDTRA1-18-R-

0045_9.17.18.PDF, M.2.2.1

SUB-FACTOR 1, TASK

ORDER 1; SOLUTION

ENGINEERING AND

SYSTEMS TEST SUPPORT;

TECHNICAL APPROACH,

Transition-in Plan.

The referenced section states:

The transition-in requirement is to be fully operational within 60 days of task order award.

For TO 1 and TO 2: Is the 60-day transition included as part of the yes, the PoP for the first performance period in TO 1 and TO 2 will be date of award through 12 months.

The government does not anticipate awarding a separate transition order, so the transition will need to be

M.2.2.2 SUB-FACTOR 2,

TASK ORDER 2;

KNOWLEDGE

MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS

AND SUPPORT; TECHNICAL

APPROACH

first 60 days of the base year pricing for each task order?

included in the first period pricing.

Questions related to – Other Questions (unassigned)

53 HDTRA1-18-R-

0045_9.17.18 Please confirm offerors are not required to complete the Model Delivery Order (CLINs) and this will be completed after award.

Confirmed; It is not necessary to complete the Model Delivery Order CLINs in the proposal response.