Attachment 8 - TERPS SAM.GOV Q_A.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 34 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- HM047626R0055
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers document addressing vendor inquiries regarding the TERPS (Terminal Instrument Procedures) commercial software acquisition solicitation issued by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) Source Foundation Aeronautical Navigation Office (SFA).
The procurement seeks a commercial software provider to develop and maintain TERPS production software for generating terminal instrument procedures used in aeronautical navigation. The contract structure includes labor-hour CLINs for modernization (X001AA), integration and sustainment (X001AB), and government-directed RDT&E (X002AA), with additional CLINs for software licenses and travel. The government expects the contractor to maintain approximately 150 terminal instrument procedures annually and support quarterly software releases following an eight-week Agile development cycle with four two-week sprints. Vendors may propose phased capability delivery and must integrate with government databases (PostgreSQL with PostGIS extension) using AIXM 5.1 format and other data sources provided upon award. The software must achieve FAA Tool Qualification Level 3, comply with NGA's Software Approval Process (SWAP), undergo Risk Management Framework authorization, and pass cybersecurity scanning through GitLab SAST services. The proposal deadline is August 27, 2026, with contract performance anticipated to begin no later than September 30, 2026. Government Purpose Rights apply only to custom-developed code and modifications funded under the contract; pre-existing commercial software retains standard commercial licensing terms. Cloud infrastructure (AWS or OpenShift), hosting, and system integration deployment will be provided by the government, not the contractor. Large businesses must submit an Individual Small Business Subcontracting Plan targeting at least 10% subcontracting to small businesses, though pure COTS solutions may justify exceptions. The government will not provide AWS EC2 instance security or maintenance, external Fortify licenses, or access to XC/SBU cloud environments; a third-party integrator will handle deployment and security maintenance.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 1 - TERPS PWS - AMD 001.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - TERPS Pricing Template - AMD 001.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 5 - Bidders Library TERPS - AMD 001.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Combined_Synopsis_Solicitation__TERPS_Software_(HM047626R0055) AMD 001.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - TERPS Pricing Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 7 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 3 - CDRLs.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 1 - TERPS PWS.pdf | ||
| Combined_Synopsis_Solicitation__TERPS_Software_(HM047626R0055).pdf | ||
| Attachment 4 - QASP TERPS.pdf | ||
| Attachment 5 - Bidders Library TERPS.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 6 - QA.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 12
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
questions and answers - TERPS
| Q# | Document / Section Reference | Vendor Question / Comment | Government Response / Position |
| 1 | PWS Section 2.0 & 4.1 / Datasets | To support accurate proposal development, will the Government provide representative sample datasets, interface specifications, schema definitions, and data format documentation for the data sources identified in Section 2.0 and Section 4.1 of the PWS? If these materials will not be provided prior to award, what assumptions should Offerors use for estimating software integration, testing, and deployment? | NGA managed data formats that are releaseable are provided in the bidder's library. The AIXM format is publicly available at https://aixm.aero/ with the target being AIXM 5.1. Additional schemas, sample datasets, and documentation will be provided up award after signing an NDA. |
| 2 | Combined Synopsis Section 3.2 / Workload Metrics | Basis of estimate for labor CLINs (Combined Synopsis §3.2, Volume 2; Pricing Template CLINs X001AA/X001AB). Noting the Government's prior answer that no current or past contracts exist for this effort, can the Government provide anticipated workload metrics to support a realistic basis of estimate for example, the expected number of instrument procedures to be developed or maintained annually, the number of airfields or terminal areas in scope, and the expected update cadence (e.g., per AIRAC cycle)? | SFA expects the software to maintain around 150 terminal instrument procedures (all types) annually. |
| 3 | PWS Section 4.2 / Integration Appendix | PWS 4.2 requires the software to "integrate with external SFA databases and sources and maintain data exchanges including databases and sources referenced in Appendix A." No Appendix A is included in the PWS or the attachments. Please provide Appendix A, identifying each external database and source, the interface type, protocol, and data exchange requirement. | The addition of appendix A was erroneous. Necessary database schema and details will be provided upon award and signing of an NDA. Databases are Postgres spatialized with the PostGIS extension. Data specifications of input products are provided in the bidder's library. |
| 4 | PWS Section 9.0 / Exhibit A | Production Timelines (Exhibit A) is listed under Section 9.0 Government Furnished Information. Was Exhibit A meant to be provided, if so please provide. | SFA production follows the AIRAC 28-day cycle which is publicly available. More detailed information, such as cutoff dates, will be provided upon award. |
| 5 | PWS Section 4.2 / Database Integrations | PWS 4.2 requires the software to integrate with external SFA databases and sources and maintain data exchanges including databases and sources referenced in Appendix A.� No Appendix A is included in the PWS or the attachments. Please provide Appendix A, identifying each external database and source, the interface type, protocol, and data exchange requirement. | Duplicate question to Q#3 |
| 6 | Solicitation / Maintenance Bounds | Terminal procedure design criteria are revised on a recurring basis. Are periodic updates to ICAO Doc 8168, FAA Order 8260.3, and STANAG 3759 within the scope of Adaptive Maintenance funded under CLIN X001AA, or will they be ordered under CLIN X002? Please provide the Government's expected annual volume of criteria-driven changes so offerors can size sustainment. | This would fall within the scope of Adaptive Maintenance. Expected annual volume of criteria changes for all applicable regulations is not expected to exceed six revisions yearly. |
| 7 | Pricing Worksheet / CLIN Structure | The pricing structure includes a Government-prepriced Development Labor CLIN (X002AA) in addition to Offeror-priced Modernization Labor (X001AA). For Offerors proposing an existing commercial software product, please clarify the intended distinction between these CLINs and identify which software engineering activities the Government expects to be priced under X001AA versus those already accounted for under X002AA. | Offerors are invited to propose standard commercial licenses. If custom development, modifications, or specialized integration work is required to adapt an existing commercial software product to meet the unique requirements of the PWS, that engineering work should be priced under CLIN X001AA. CLIN X002AA is a pre-priced Labor-Hour CLIN reserved for specialized, ad-hoc RDT&E tasks directed by the Government. |
| 8 | Pricing Worksheet / CLIN X001AB | The activities identified under CLIN X001AB (Integration and Sustainment Labor), including corrective maintenance, integration support, and general program management, are ongoing support services whose scope, frequency, and level of effort will be driven by Government priorities and operational needs during contract performance. Because these activities are not defined by measurable deliverables or objective acceptance criteria, please clarify the basis upon which NGA determined that CLIN X001AB is appropriately structured as a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) CLIN rather than a Time-and-Materials (T&M) or Labor-Hour (LH) CLIN. | The intent of this commercial procurement under FAR Part 12 is to acquire a stable commercial software capability and its associated sustainment. In accordance with FAR 12.207, FFP is the preferred contract type. CLIN X001AB is appropriately structured as FFP because the sustainment, corrective maintenance, and program management services reflect standard commercial practicies. Contractors shall size their FFP team capacity to satisfy the sustainment requirements in PWS Section 4.2. |
| 9 | Pricing Worksheet / CLIN X001AA | The solicitation's CLIN X001AA (Modernization Labor) includes core software development, perfective maintenance, and adaptive maintenance. Because the scope of future modernization activities, release-level deliverables, and acceptance criteria will be established after contract award through the Agile backlog and release planning process, please clarify how Offerors are expected to develop a consistent FFP proposal for this CLIN or whether NGA will consider revising the CLIN structure to better align with the nature of the work. | Under the Agile Software Development methodology outlined in Section 5.0 of the PWS, the Government is not requesting an FFP for a static, pre-defined product scope. Instead, the FFP for CLIN X001AA (Modernization Labor) represents the committed capacity of the Offeror's proposed Agile engineering team over the performance period to maintain the required sprint velocity. Offerors shall propose the optimal labor mix, staffing levels, and fully burdened labor rates required to support the eight-week software release cycle (consisting of four 2-week sprints) detailed in PWS Section 5.1. The prioritized work executed during these sprints will be dynamically managed through the collaborative Agile Backlog Management process (PWS Section 5.2) with the Product Owner. This FFP-Capacity structure is standard in commercial software-as-a-service (SaaS) and commercial software development environments. |
| 10 | PWS Section 4.2 / Cybersecurity | The PWS requires the Developer to comply with SWAP, RMF, ATO, TAC, GitLab, CI/CD, and other NGA enterprise software processes. Will Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) be provided for an external license of Fortify Static Code Analyzer (SCA) to be given to the Developer? | The SWAP & A&S requirement for Fortify static code scans is under revision. Under the new process, scans will be run in the Gitlab SAST service. This is to take effect on Sep 25th. Foritify scans will not be acceptred aafter Sep 25. Details are very limited at this time, this is going to be a discussion point as details are made available. |
| 11 | PWS Section 2.0 / FAA Standards | The PWS states the software must meet functional requirements and be compliant with NGA's Assessment & Authorization cybersecurity requirements, NGA Software Approval Process (SWAP), and FAA Tool quality assessment/qualification/requirements and cloud compliance. Regarding the FAA Tool quality (TQL) assessment, can NGA provide the anticipated TQL rating for the TERPS software? | SFA is anticipating TERPS software will be a TQL LVL 3. |
| 12 | PWS Sections 4.2 & 10.0 / Data Rights | The solicitation identifies this procurement as a commercial software acquisition under FAR Part 12. However, PWS Sections 4.2 and 10.0 require delivery of raw source code with each software delivery and state that code written to perform the functions required in the SOW shall be delivered with no less than Government Purpose Rights. Please clarify whether these requirements apply only to software, modifications, or enhancements developed specifically under this contract, or whether they also apply to the Offeror's pre-existing commercial software and proprietary source code. | In accordance with DFARS 252.227-7015, the Government Purpose Rights (GPR) requirement applies only to custom software code, modifications, and/or enhancements developed specifically under this contract using Government funds. It does not apply to the Offeror's pre-existing, proprietary commercial software baseline or proprietary commercial source code. |
| 13 | PWS Section 10.0 / Intellectual Property | If an Offeror modifies or enhances a pre-existing commercial software baseline to satisfy the requirements of this solicitation, please clarify whether those modifications and enhancements are considered part of the commercial software and remain the Offeror's proprietary intellectual property, or whether they are subject to the Government Purpose Rights requirement identified in Section 10 of the PWS. | Modifications and enhancements developed specifically under this contract and paid for with Government funding are subject to the Government Purpose Rights (GPR) requirement detailed in Section 10.0 of the PWS. Standard commercial licensing terms will apply to the pre-existing commercial baseline. |
| 14 | Combined Synopsis Section 3.2 / Financial Capability | Financial capability letter (Combined Synopsis §3.2, Volume 1, Item 2 Financial Capability Verification). The required banking-institution letter must confirm capability "to receive and perform a contract of this magnitude." (a) What dollar magnitude should the letter address ” the offeror's proposed total price, the base-period price, or another figure? (b) Is a standard bank reference letter acceptable, or is specific language or a specific format required? (c) May the letter reference the existence of readily available capital or an authorized line of credit without disclosing specific account balances? | (a) The bank letter should address the Offeror's proposed total evaluated price (including all option periods). (b) A standard bank reference letter is acceptable; no specific format is mandated. (c) Yes, the letter may reference the existence of readily available capital, standard operating reserves, or an active/authorized line of credit. Specific account balances and proprietary financial statements are not required. |
| 15 | Combined Synopsis Section 3.2 / Sub-factor 1.3 | Evidence of experience under Sub-factor 1.3 (Combined Synopsis §3.2, Volume 3). Sub-factor 1.3 asks offerors to "detail the experience and technical approach" for ingesting and managing DAFIF, DVOF, DTED, SRTM, TanDEM-X, and AIXM data. Will the Government consider demonstrated technical capability ” for example, working software demonstrations or documented non-Federal project work with these formats ” as acceptable evidence of experience under this sub-factor? | Yes, these methods will be acceptable evidence of experience. |
| 16 | Combined Synopsis Section 3.2 / Volume 4 References | PPQs from commercial references (Combined Synopsis §3.2, Volume 4; Past Performance Questionnaire attachment). The PPQ form contemplates Government points of contact (e.g., CO, COR, PM). May offerors submit PPQs completed by commercial (non-Government) client references for recent and relevant efforts, with the equivalent commercial roles (e.g., client program or project manager) completing the form? | Yes, the Government will accept Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) completed by commercial (non-Government) client references for recent and relevant software projects of similar size, scope, and complexity. Commercial roles equivalent to CO, COR, or PM are authorized to complete Part II of the PPQ. |
| 17 | Combined Synopsis Section 3.2 / Licensing Terms | Data rights for pre-existing commercial components (PWS data-rights provisions; CDRLs attachment). For a proposed solution that combines pre-existing, commercially developed software with custom development performed under this contract: please confirm that standard commercial license terms may apply to the pre-existing components (with license terms submitted in Volume 1 as instructed), while Government Purpose Rights or the rights specified in the CDRLs apply to newly developed custom components and data deliverables. | Confirmed. Standard commercial licensing terms will apply to pre-existing commercial software components, while Government Purpose Rights (GPR) apply strictly to newly developed, custom components and custom data deliverables funded under this contract. |
| 18 | Combined Synopsis Section 3.1 / Submission Mechanics | Submission mechanics (Combined Synopsis §3.1). Volumes are to be submitted electronically via email. (a) Please confirm the submission email address. (b) Is there a per-message file-size limit, and are multiple emails acceptable if attachments exceed it? (c) Will the Government acknowledge receipt of proposal submissions? | (a) Proposals must be submitted to the Contracting Officer, Matthew Hoffman, at [Matthew.A.Hoffman@nga.mil](mailto:Matthew.A.Hoffman@nga.mil). (b) The per-message file-size limit is 10MB. Multiple emails are acceptable if necessary; however, the subject lines must clearly be sequentially numbered (e.g., "Proposal HM047626R0019 - Vol 1 of X") for record tracking. (c) Yes, the Government will provide email confirmation acknowledging receipt of submissions. |
| 19 | PWS Section 11.0 / Lists | Section 11.0 lists 10 NGA-specific documents (e.g., "The NGA Software Way"). However, Section 508 compliance is also listed but is not specific to NGA. Please clarify if Section 508 is part of the Bidder's Library. | Section 508 compliance is a broad Federal statutory requirement and is not an NGA-specific technical document. It is listed for regulatory compliance reference and is not a physical document residing in the NGA Bidder's Library. |
| 20 | Bidder's Library | The Bidder's Library references 11 NGA documents (e.g., "The NGA Software Way"). Will NGA provide the documents in the Bidders Library? | Yes. Offerors must request the documents in the Bidder's Library by emailing the Contracting Officer, Matthew Hoffman, at [Matthew.A.Hoffman@nga.mil](mailto:Matthew.A.Hoffman@nga.mil) prior to the question cutoff date. |
| 21 | Attachment 2 / Base Year Start | Price Summary (Base Year tab). On what date is the base year expected to start? | The contract is anticipated to start no later than September 30, 2026. |
| 22 | PWS Section 2.0 / Cloud Maintenance | If AWS EC2 instances are required to access the external database content, is the FS2 Integrator responsible for security and maintenance of the instances? | The government is expecting to utilize a chosen third-party integrator to handle security, deployment, and maintenance as per PWS |
| 23 | PWS Section 5.0 / Tool Access | Based on Section 5, will the Vendor have access to all CORE tools? | Vendors are not anticipated to need access to CORE tooling. |
| 24 | PWS Section 7.0 / Cloud Classification | Will the environment be XC or SBU? Section 7 does not mention CAC access as required by SBU. Will the XC cloud environment be used to satisfy Section 5 requirements? | Vendor is not anticipated to have access to XC or SBU environments. |
| 25 | PWS Section 4.2 / Scanning | Are the scanners and versions to be used the same as the DSO Cloud project? | Yes, scanning tools in the DSO project are the ones expected to be used for SWAP approval. These will be specified to the vendor once finalized. |
| 26 | PWS Section 4.2 / SWAP Expirations | If software used in TERPS is stable, either COTS or GOTS, and a new version is not available to be SWAP approved once the 18-month window expires, will exceptions be granted to continue use of the software package? | Yes, the 18-month rule is no longer applicable |
| 27 | PWS Section 4.2 / Software Licenses | If development is external to NGA's infrastructure as indicated, will software and licenses be provided to the Vendor for testing and checkout prior to delivery for FS2 (i.e., SOAR and CRIBL)? | Expectation is to be compatible with internal observability tools. No external licenses are necessary. Information on how to integrate will be provided during the contract. |
| 28 | Combined Synopsis Section 2.1 / Cancellation | The solicitation states that the prior GSA MAS procurement was cancelled because no acceptable proposals were received. Without identifying offerors or disclosing source-selection-sensitive information, can the Government identify the principal areas in which the prior submissions were considered unacceptable, such as technical capability, commerciality, source-code availability, deployment approach, past performance, pricing, or proposal compliance? | No. Specific areas of unacceptability from the prior cancelled GSA procurement represent source-selection-sensitive information and will not be disclosed. The current SAM.gov combined synopsis/solicitation represents an open-market procurement under simplified commercial procedures with distinct requirements, and all proposals will be evaluated against the criteria in Section 5.0 of Attachment 3. |
| 29 | PWS Section 4.1 / Capability Phasing | Does NGA require all PWS Section 4.1 functional capabilities to be operational at initial deployment, or may offerors propose a phased capability roadmap? If phased delivery is permitted, what minimum operational baseline and priority capabilities must be delivered first? | Yes, a phased approach proposal will be allowed. If that's the case, please provide capability milestones and timelines. |
| 30 | PWS Section 9.0 / Legacy GFI | What existing TERPS software artifacts will be provided to the awardee, including business rules, algorithms, workflows, test cases, configuration data, interface documentation, historical defect information, and incumbent knowledge-transfer support? | There is no existing TERPS software in use. |
| 31 | PWS Section 2.0 / FAA Qualifications | Can NGA identify the specific FAA tool qualification, validation, certification, and quality-management standards that will apply, the organization responsible for approval, and the milestones that offerors should include in their schedules and pricing? The PWS references FAA tool qualification requirements but does not define the complete approval process. | Tool qualification processes are internal and on very rare occaisons require software modifications. The expectation is this will be handled under software maintenance. |
| 32 | PWS Section 4.1 / Testing Data | Will NGA provide representative production quality datasets and operational scenarios for system testing prior to Government acceptance? | Yes, production datasets will be provided prior to acceptance in accordance with appropriate non-disclosure agreements. |
| 33 | PWS Section 4.2 / Acceptance Criteria | Will NGA provide a formal acceptance test plan or traceability matrix that identifies the objective criteria for software acceptance of each required capability? | Test plans and acceptance criteria will be provided after contract award. |
| 34 | PWS Section 4.2 / Release Cadence | Does NGA anticipate scheduled software releases (e.g., quarterly) or deployment on demand as capabilities become available? | Yes, we anticipate quarterly software releases. |
| 35 | PWS Section 4.2 / Target Performance | Beyond the stated functional requirements, are there target performance metrics for application responsiveness, processing time, or concurrent users that offerors should assume? | No, not at this time. |
| 36 | Solicitation Section 3.0 / Proposal Extensions | Given the complexity of this commercial software acquisition, including the technical, cybersecurity, integration, licensing, and proposal requirements, would the Government consider extending the proposal due date to provide offerors sufficient time to develop comprehensive and high-quality technical and pricing proposals that best meet NGA's requirements? | Due Date was extended to August 27th, 2026. |
| 37 | Attachment 2 / Labor Mapping | Volume 2 - Price Proposal #6. Labor Category Mapping: "Offerors shall provide an Open-Market Labor Category Map table detailing LCAT titles, descriptions, and fully burdened hourly rates." However, the CLIN X001AA and AB tab in Attachment 2 doesn't have a column for the LCAT description. Please provide instructions on where the LCAT descriptions should go. | Offerors may provide the required Labor Category (LCAT) descriptions either on a new tab within the Price Proposal Excel template (Attachment 2) or as a separate narrative document included in Volume 2. |
| 38 | Attachment 2 / Pricing Template Errors | In the pricing template, cell C4 is labeled as Attachment 3. Should offerors modify this to Attachment 2 since the attachment is titled Attachment 2 and Solicitation Key Performance Capabilities 2.1 indicates the Price Proposal Template is Attachment 2. | Yes, cell C4 has been updated in the template. The pricing template is designated as Attachment 2, and the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation is Attachment 3. |
| 39 | Solicitation Volume 4 / Page Limits | 3.1 Proposal Submission and Organization designates "PPQs + 1 page of references" for Volume 4 - Past Performance Information. However, the instructions under 3.2 for Volume 4 - Past Performance Information only instruct that PPQs for up to 3 reference projects shall be submitted by the reference POCs and doesn't include any instructions for "1 page of references." Please provide instructions on what shall be included in the "1 page of references." If 1 page of references is not a requirement, will the Government modify the Solicitation to remove Volume 4 in its entirety since the PPQs will be submitted directly to NGA by the reference POCs and therefore, there is nothing for the offeror to submit in this volume? | Volume 4 remains a required submission from the Offeror. The "1 page of references" is a required reference page detailing the project names, contract numbers, values, and client contact information (name, email, phone) corresponding to the completed PPQs that are being submitted directly to NGA by the reference POCs. This allows the CO to track and verify incoming PPQs. |
| 40 | Solicitation Volume 3 / System Integration | The instruction is "Detail the technical approach to partnering with a system integrator to successfully deploy software within NGA IT environments, including software maintenance, SWAP whitelist approval, and cybersecurity compliance in accordance with PWS Section 4.2." In reading the PWS, it is our understanding that the offeror would be the system integrator. Will the Government please clarify if they are looking for a system integrator to integrate COTS products to deploy within NGA IT environments? | This RFP is to provide completed software to hand over to the government selected integrator to install on NGA environments and handle security/maintenance. The offeror will not be in charge of system integration. The PWS will be updated to reflect this. |
| 41 | Solicitation Volume 5 / Subcontracting Plans | There are no instructions for what to include in Volume 5 outside of "Large Businesses must submit an Individual Small Business Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9." In the previous Q&A number 5, the Government's response was to "provide whichever documents you have" and another response from the Government (number 24) stated "No specific small business subcontracting participation targets. Large Businesses are required to submit existing approved GSA schedule subcontracting plan as stated in instructions to offerors." Since the existing approved GSA schedule subcontracting plan is not included in the instructions for Volume 5 - what needs to be provided for Volume 5? Will the Government please specify what information they would like to receive as a part of Volume 5 (verification that the offeror plans to subcontract at least 10% of the total proposed contract value, a copy of offeror's GSA schedule subcontracting plan, an Individual Small Business Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 etc.)? | In this open-market Combined Synopsis/Solicitation (which is not a GSA order), Large Business Offerors must submit a formal Individual Small Business Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 as part of Volume 5. This plan must target subcontracting at least 10% of the total contract value to small businesses. GSA-specific schedule subcontracting plans do not apply here. If the offeror has a commercial subcontracting plan, they are welcome to submit that. |
| 42 | Solicitation Volume 5 / COTS vs. Development | 2.0 states "The Government's objective is to identify and select a commercial provider to develop and maintain Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) production software that delivers an optimal user experience and automates TERPS production processes." However, 3.2 Volume 5 instructions under Valid Justification state "If a Large Business Offeror is unable to meet the 10% target, it must provide a detailed, valid written justification demonstrating why subcontracting is not possible or feasible for this commercial software requirement." These statements are contradictory. Can the Government please clarify that they are looking for a provider to develop and maintain TERPS production software vs. deliver immediately a COTS product that meets NGA's requirement? | The primary goal of this procurement is to obtain a commercial software baseline capability. However, because this is a highly specialized aerospace navigation domain, the Government anticipates that some software modification or Agile development work may be necessary to fully align with NGA databases. To the extent an Offeror proposes a purely commercial software license solution (COTS) with no customized development services, they may cite the "purely commercial, non-divisible nature of the commercial licenses" as a valid justification in Volume 5 to explain why small business subcontracting is not possible or feasible. |
| 43 | PWS Section 2.0 / AWS vs. OpenShift | PWS Section 2.0 states that the software must be deployable in a cloud-hosted environment using OpenShift or AWS. Does NGA require the proposed solution to support both environments, or may an offeror propose one platform for initial deployment? If one platform is acceptable, which environment should offerors use for architecture, licensing, testing, and pricing assumptions? | Yes, either cloud-hosted environment is acceptable. |
| 44 | PWS Section 4.1 / Reports | There is a requirement for the Ability to generate other types of reports.� Is there additional information the government could provide on the types of reports that would need to be supported, or are these future requirements that are yet to be fully defined? | The requirements for more detailed and accurate data (PBN, DAFIF9, etc.) is constiently on the increase. As the system progresses through the various stages of development and maintenance these requirements will be added and defined. |
| 45 | PWS Section 4.1 / End Users | Is there an estimated expected number of end users that will access the system? | Estimated 25 users. |
| 46 | PWS Section 4.1 / System Client | Is there a preferred method to system access? Web Browser, Desktop Client, etc? | Web-Based is the preferred method as that aligns with other operational software currently in use. |
| 47 | Solicitation / Hosting Costs | The CLIN structure addresses labor (X001), development (X002), licenses (X003AA), and travel (X003AB), but contains no line item for cloud hosting, compute, or storage. Please confirm that the Government provides all AWS/OpenShift infrastructure, and that the TERPS Developer is not required to propose or price hosting costs. | Yes, government infrastructure costs will not be leveraged on the TERPS developer |
| 48 | Solicitation / Current Baseline | Is there an existing TERPS production software baseline in use by SFA today? If so, please identify (a) the software, (b) whether this procurement is a replacement, re-host, or continued sustainment of that baseline, (c) whether the awardee must migrate existing procedure data and in what format, and (d) whether an incumbent developer exists. If no baseline exists, please confirm this is a new-start capability and identify the desired initial operational capability date. | There is no existing TERPS software within NGA/SFA. This is a new-start capability. No baseline exists. An MVP, IOC and FOC and continious momentane details and timelines will be addressed after award and in subsquent TEMs. |
| 49 | PWS Section 4.2 / QMS Certifications | PWS 4.2 states that upon receiving QMS certification from SFA Quality Management team, the Developer shall provide their yearly Surveillance or Recertification ISO 9001 or AS9100 Certificate & Report to the SFA QM Team. Please confirm whether ISO 9001 or AS9100 certification is (a) required at time of proposal, (b) required at any point during performance, or (c) applicable only if the Developer independently holds such certification. Please also confirm whether certification is evaluated under any factor or sub-factor. | The certification is not an evaluation factor. Contractor must be working towards an QMS certification such as ISO 9001 after award. |
| 50 | Bidder's Library / Attachment 6 | Attachment 6 contains Q&As from the cancelled GSA posting, furnished œfor context and informational purposes only.� Please confirm that where any Attachment 6 answer conflicts with the current PWS Version 2.1, the QASP, or this Combined Synopsis/Solicitation, the current documents control, and that Attachment 6 responses are not incorporated into the resulting contract. | Confirmed. The terms and conditions of this SAM.gov Combined Synopsis/Solicitation (Attachment 3) and the accompanying Performance Work Statement (Attachment 1) shall strictly govern this procurement. Attachment 6 is provided strictly for contextual background and is not legally incorporated into the resulting contract. |
| 51 | Are contractor personnel required to be U.S. citizens? | No; however non-US citizens will be required to sign an NDA to access limited distribution data and follow proper vetting processes | |
| 52 | Are foreign nationals employed by a NATO ally permitted to perform software development on the commercial product? | Only in limited circumstances. Should the offeror include foreign nationals, please notate this on the proposal. These personnel must be employed by a US contractor with the appropriate security and export control compiance. | |
| 53 | Which contract tasks require access to NGA networks? | No contract tasks require access to NGA networks. The government chosen integrator will handle anything touching NGA networks | |
| 54 | Which datasets or environments are export-controlled or restricted to U.S. persons? If any | Digital Aeronautical Flight Information File, Airfield Foundation Data, Automated Air Facilities Intelligence File, and Digital Vertical Obstruction File all have the potential to contain limited distribution data. An NDA will be required to be signed in order to work with these datasets. | |
| 55 | Can commercial software development occur outside the United States if deployment and support are performed by U.S.-based personnel? | Yes, software development can occur outside the US. | |
| 56 | Does support and deployment need to be done by US personal? | The government chosen integrator will handle support and deployment. | |
| 57 | Does the contractor keep all IP? | If the IP is developed specifically under this contract and paid for with Government funding, then it is subject to the Government Purpose Rights (GPR) requirement detailed in Section 10.0 of the PWS. | |
| 58 | Does the contractor need to share all source code? | If it is a commercial software license, no, no source code is needed to be shared. If it is developed with government funding, then yes. |
&"Courier"&12UNCLASSIFIED
&"Courier"&12UNCLASSIFIED
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .