Attachment 13 - Solicitation Questions and Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 132 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- HQ003420R0079
- Issued by
-
DOD Washington Headquarters Service
About this file
This is a solicitation for the Enterprise Visibility and Management of Operating and Support Cost (EVAMOSC) program. The solicitation seeks proposals to develop an EVAMOSC data platform hosted on Amazon Web Services GovCloud to collect, aggregate, and report operating and support cost data for major weapons systems of the U.S. Army. Proposals are due by June 30, 2020. The period of performance is one 12-month base period and four 12-month option periods. The solicitation requires the development of an EVAMOSC data platform, ingestion of data from 16 identified Army systems, integration of open source and commercial software, self-service analytics capabilities, and training. The Washington Headquarters Services is the contracting agency. The solicitation includes a performance work statement, pricing template, and questions and answers from interested parties.
View the file
Other files
Show all 19
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 Responses
| Question No. | Reference | Question Category | Question | Government Response |
| 1 | Attachment 2, Section 1.3.2 | Technical | The Task Order One PWS states that "Furthermore, CAPE will use ADVANA's 'platform-as-a-service' capabilities to addresses all Authority-to-Operate (ATO) and use management requirements associate with exposing the EVAMOSC application to NIPR access." Can the government provide additional clarity on how the ADVANA ATO will support the EVAMOSC ATO process? Specifically, will the contractor have to ATO the EVAMOSC application independently given that any system connected to any other systems on NIPR would typically require an ATO? | ADVANA already has an ATO and OSD-CAPE has an ATO for the EVAMOSC platform Therefore, the vendor will not need to obtain an ATO for the EVAMOSC platform. Please refer to the diagram in section 1.3.2 of the PWS TO1 for a better understanding of how ADVANA will interface with the EVAMOSC platform. ADVANA will publish data from EVAMOSC and provide an interface to the user community. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 2 | Attachment 2 - Task Order One PWS (1.3; 5.4.3; Technical Exhibit 5) | Technical | Under 1.3 Objective, the PWS indicates there are more than 75 data sources. This is the same number given in the PWS for the overall IDIQ. Also in the Task Order One PWS, 15 potential feeder systems are identified in Attachment 5. Question: Please confirm that Offerors should assume 15 feeder systems in the level of effort estimates for task order 1 pricing? | Technical Exhibit 5 has been updated and now includes 16 feeder systems. The Offerors' level of effort pricing estimates for Task Order 1 pricing must include incorporation of the 16 feeder systems named in Technical Exhibit 5. The description of the "System Interface Agreements" (PWS 5.4.1), in the Technical Exhibit 2 Deliverables Schedule has been updated to specify the 16 system requirement for TO1 and to provide instructions on using the 75-system estimate to scale EVAMOSC's overarching infrastructure. These changes draw a distinction between when the contractor should use the 16 systems in Technical Exhibit 5 (Level of Effort Pricing for PWS Task 5.4) and when the Offeror should use the estimated total number of 75 feeder systems for the IDIQ (EVAMOSC platform PWS 5.3). Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
Jackson, Lorita H CTR WHS AD: Jackson, Lorita H CTR WHS AD:
In the sentence - "These changes draw a distinction between when the contractor successful offeror should use the 16 systems in Technical Exhibit 5 (Level of Effort Pricing for PWS Task 5.4)". Technical Exhibit 5 appears to be identified with the title "Level of Effort Pricing for PWS Task 5.4)", however the title of Technical Exhibit 5 is "LIST OF PROBABLE EVAMOSC FEEDER SYSTEMS FOR INCREMENT TASK ORDER 1" Also it should be noted, the vendor's question refers tp Attachment 5, which is the Past Performance Questionnaire.
| 3 | RFP Section L, A. Proposal Volume Requirements table, Volume I: "The Offeror shall provide sufficient documentation, such as self-certification of ownership or bilaterally signed teaming/subcontracting agreements as applicable Cover Letter" | Contract | Can the government explain what documentation is being requested? | This language has been removed from Section L, A. Proposal Volume Requirements table, Volume I. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 4 | RFP Section L, A. Proposal Volume Requirements table, Volume VI: "CLIN Labor Pricing Summary Tab" | Contract | Is the CLIN Labor Pricing Summary Tab to be included in Volume VI, Past Performance? We did not find a tab with this title in any of the excel attachments. Please confirm that this requirement is not part of Volume VI. | No. the CLIN Labor Pricing Summary Tab to be included in Volume VII Pricing Volume. The Volume numbers have been corrected. Please the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 5 | RFP Section L, A.1.7 'Pricing Data/Cost Information' | Contract | This section identifies Volume VI as Price, whereas the table at the beginning of section L identifies Price as Volume VII. Please confirm that the correct pricing volume is Volume VII. | Yes, Volume VII is Price for IDIQ Contract & Task Order One. See amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 6 | RFP Section L, D. Volume III, 2. Minimum Quantitative Requirement: "Prime contractors – the Minimum Quantitative Requirement (MQR) for small business participation must be greater than 0% of the total contract value, including all option periods." (similar language in M.3 2.1.3 and 2.1.6) | Contract | Greater than 0% is a very low threshold for small business participation. We recommend that the MQR be increased to at least the DoD goal of 22%. Will the government include a total small business goal? | Offerors may choose to propose an MQR aligned with the DoD Small Business Goal. In the solicitation the government has identified the total small business participation MQR must be greater than 0%. Please see the solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 7 | RFP Section L, E. Volume IV, Phase-in Plan "Offerors shall submit a Phase-in plan" | Contract | Is the Phase-in plan to be included in the 15 page limit for Technical Approach and Capability for Task Order One? | Yes, the Phase-in Plan will count against the page limit for the Technical Approach and Capability Volume. The page limit for that volume has been increased from 15 pages to 20 pages. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 8 | RFP Section L, E. Volume IV, Staffing Plan "The Offeror shall explain its staffing approach to meeting the contract requirements" | Contract | Is the Staffing Plan to be included in the 15 page limit for Technical Approach and Capability for Task Order One? | Yes, the Staffing Plan will count against the page limit for the Technical Approach and Capability Section. Volume. The page limit for that volume has been increased from 15 pages to 20 pages. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 9 | RFP Section L, I. Volume VIII Price, "The offeror must include each subcontractor proposal price within the attached pricing template. If the prime offeror’s price volume does not contain full cost information for any subcontractor, the subcontractor must forward an proposal directly to the Government electronically no later than the closing date and time of the solicitation." | Contract | If the subcontractor is under a time and materials (T&M) arrangement to the prime contractor, please confirm that the subcontractor's rate becomes the prime contractor's cost and therefore the subcontractor does NOT need to submit full cost information. | Yes, the subcontractor rate become part of the prime contractor's cost and the subcontractor does not need to submit full cost information. However, as stated in the solicitation, if the offeror price proposal does not contain full cost information for any subcontractor, the subcontractor must forward their proposal directly to the Government. Please see solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 10 | RFP Section M, 2. Volume II, (1) "The Offeror shall submit a letter from an appropriate adjudication agency (DoD accepted) that demonstrates the Offeror holds an active Secret Facility Clearance as identified in the DD Form 254 Security Requirements." | Contract | Please provide the DD Form 254 for this solicitation. | The solicitation is amended to incorporate the attachment for the DD Form 254. Please see the solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 11 | Attachment 2 - Task Order One PWS - 5.5.2 | Technical | Due to the fact that this scope is associated with the firm fixed price CLIN, how many APIs should offerors assume in Task Order 1 level of effort pricing? | Offerors are not required to develop APIs for PWS TO1. The PWS TO1 section 5.5.2 has been updated to remove APIs. Please see amended solicitation, specifically the revised PWS TO1, and respond accordingly. |
| 12 | Attachment 2 - Task Order One PWS - 5.6.2 | Technical | What is the duration of the training (in hours) for both the online training and the classroom training? | The contractor shall provide a 4-hour training period for each in-person or equivalent web conference session. The PWS for TO1 section 5.6.2 has been updated to include the duration of each training session and include only 4 sessions of classroom training per year with an estimated class size of 20 people. See amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 13 | Attachment 6 - Pricing Template - Tab 3 - Task Order One FFP Pricing | Contract | The Phase-in period is identified as 30 days and the Base Period is identified as 12 months. Do these periods run concurrently? | No. They are two separate periods of performance. Please see the solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 14 | Attachment 1, Section 1.6.5 | Contract | The place of performance states the primary places of performance will be the Government facilities. Will contractor facilities with appropriate connectivity and compartmentalization be permitted? | No, contractor facilities with appropriate connectivity and compartmentalization will NOT be permitted. During normal operations, the Government expects the Offeror to be at work on site at the Mark Center. However, in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, the Department of Defense is currently developing a return to work plan. When guidance becomes available, the Government will adhere to all official policies and will inform the contractor of any updates. During normal operations, telework will only be authorized if approved at least three (3) calendar days in advance of event by the COR and the government Task Monitor, on a case-by-case basis, for the completion of specific work products. Telework may be required by the COR if necessitated by operational exigencies. OSD CAPE requirements are inherently classified in nature; therefore, the mission limits telework opportunities. Please see the amended solicitation, specifically the updated section 1.6.5 in the IDIQ PWS and Task Order 1 PWS and respond accordingly. |
| 15 | Attachment 2 - Task Order One; TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 2 and PWS 5.5.1 | Technical | The Development Release Plan Deliverable is listed as part of PWS 5.5.1 in TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 2, however, it is not listed in PWS 5.5.1 for updating the CVT. Could you clarify which PWS this deliverable aligns to? If confirmed for PWS 5.5.1 could you confirm the is only for the CVT. | The Development Release Plan Deliverable is no longer a requirement and has been removed from PWS TO1. The only deliverable associated with PWS 5.5.1 is the CVT Update File. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 16 | Attachment 2 - Task Order One; PWS 5.5.3 and TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 2 | Technical | Security and Patching Plan is mentioned as a deliverable in PWS 5.5.3, however, is not listed in TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 2 and seems potentially aligned more to PWS 5.3.2. Please advise if it should be removed from PWS 5.5.3? | The Security and Patching Plan Deliverable listed in PWS TO1 section 5.5.3 is no longer a requirement and has been removed. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 17 | Attachment 2 - Task Order One; PWS 5.7.2 and TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 2 | Technical | The New Source Data Integration Report frequency is listed as annual in the PWS and quarterly in the TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 2. Could you confirm the frequency? | The New Source Data Integration Report for PWS 5.7.2 is an annual deliverable for PWS TO1. Technical Exhibit 2 has been revised to reflect that information. Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 18 | Attachment 6 - Pricing Template - Tab 1 - IDIQ FFP Labor Rates | Technical | Security Administrator I and II are listed in the FFP Labor Rate tab, however tasks in PWS 5.3.2 may require use of these resources. Would it be possible and appropriate to add these labor categories to Tab 2-CPFF Labor Rates? | Yes. The Government has added rows to Tab 2-CPFF of the pricing template for Security Administrators I and II. Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 19 | Attachment 2 - Task Order One; PWS 5.5 | Technical | Deliverables listed in this section include EVAMOSC analytics application, formatted data extracts, data dictionary. These are not included aligned to this section in TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 2 and may be repetitive of other deliverables already mentioned in the PWS. Should these be removed from the section PWS 5.5? | The PWS TO 1 section 5.5 no longer includes the deliverable: EVAMOSC analytics application, formatted data extracts, or data dictionary. These products were duplicative of other deliverables in the PWS TO1. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 20 | Technical | (1) We are concerned that the contractor/s who developed the OSD Comptroller ADVANA platform was given access to competitively useful, non-public information because they possess detailed technical knowledge of the asset (which no other offerors will have) and thus will create an unequal access to information organizational conflict of interest for these contractors. To this end, will the contractors that developed the underlying ADVANA platform be permitted to submit a proposal for this opportunity? |
(2) If DoD is not limiting the competitive pool as described above, we recommend (a) that the DoD provide a publishable interface/interchange control document for OSD Comptroller ADVANA available for public consumption in a bidder’s library; and (b) include the ADVANA platform as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE).
(3) Please describe the mitigation strategies DoD will implement to establish an even playing field among offerors (e.g. requiring an OCI mitigation plan between the current Advana contractor and the EVAMOSC platform provider). (1) The government is conducting a full and open competition for EVAMOSC. To mitigate organizational conflict of interest, all vendors, to include the current Advana vendor, are permitted to submit a proposal for the EVAMOSC effort, provided that these vendors acknowledge, sign and comply with the organizational conflict of interest policy as published in this solicitation (attachment 3).
(2) EVAMOSC bidders are not required to develop a data stream to Advana in their technical solution for task order 1. An ADVANA interface/interchange document is not publicly available. Additionally, the DoD will not provide Advana as GFE for this solicitation.
(3) As previously stated, the government is conducting a full and open competition to determine the best solution to meet the EVAMOSC requirement. All offerors who submit a proposal for this solicitation are required to submit an OCI which is a mitigation strategy to ensure there is not an unfair competitive advantage.
| 21 | Technical | Is a publishable interface/interchange control document for OSD Comptroller ADVANA available for public consumption? | No. An ADVANA interface/interchange document is not publicly available. Task Order 1 does not require a direct interface/interchange with the ADVANA platform that would necessitate access to such a document for the purpose of responding to this solicitation. Please see the amendment to the solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 22 | RFP Section L Paragraph G - Volume VII page 57 | Contract | Paragraph is labeled Volume VII, but should be labeled Volume VI as per table under Section L. A. | Yes, that is correct, please see revised solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 23 | RFP Section L Paragraph I - Volume VIII, page 58 | Contract | Paragraph is labeled Volume VIII, but should be labeled Volume VII as per table under Section L. A. | Yes, that is correct, please see revised solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 24 | RFP Section L Paragraph G - Volume VII, page 57-58 | Contract | Will the government confirm Past Perfomance Questionairres (PPQs) are not required for contracts with CPARS scores? | Per the solicitation Section L Paragraph G - Volume VII - PPQs are required for contracts not listed in Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)/Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). Please see revised solicitation Volume VI and respond accordingly. |
| 25 | RFP Section L Paragraph A - Proposal Volume Contents, page 50-51 | Contract | Table seems to continue from page 50 to page 51 for Past Performance Volume on page 50 to include an item labelled "CLIN Labor Pricing Summary Tab (Excel)". Please confirm that pricing is meant for the pricing volume and not past performance. | Yes. Please see the Government's response in question #4. |
| 26 | PWS for Task Order One (1), Technical Exhibit 2 | Contract | Please confirm the Quaity Assurance Management Plan (QASP) is not a contractor deliverable. | The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is not a contractor deliverable. The contractor shall develop and maintain a Quality Control Plan (QCP) as identified in PWS TO 1 section 1.6.1. Please see solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 27 | PWS for Task Order One (1), section 5.2.3 | Contract | Can the government clarify that cost and planned versus actual expenditure reporting required as part of Monthly Status Reports does not apply to FFP CLINs? | The reporting of cost and planned versus actual expenditures in the Monthly Status Report (MSR) deliverable only applies to CPFF CLINs, not FFP CLINS. The description of the MSR in PWS 5.3.2 and Technical Exhibit 2 have been updated to specifically state that the reporting of cost and planned versus actual expenditures in the MSR only applies for CPFF CLINs. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 28 | RFP B-1.1 and B-1.2 | Contract | Please confirm that PWS for Task Order One Task 5.1 Basic Services is not priced. If this is not correct, will the government clarify how to incorporate Task 5.1 into the pricing. | The workload estimates in Technical Exhibit 3 and the Pricing Template have been amended to facilitate pricing of PWS 5.1. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 29 | RFP. Volume II | Contract | Traditionally the government provided a DSS Form 381-R as proof of an entity's facility security clearance. However, this form is no longer provided, and currently the DoD accepted documentation for proof of facility clearance is National Industrial Security System (NISS) printout. Will the govenment please confirm that the NISS printout is acceptable documentation for the Pass/Fail criteria? If this is not acceptable, please clarify what alternative documentation is acceptable. | The NISS printout is acceptable documentation for the facility security clearance pass/fail criteria. Please see the solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 30 | RFP, SF-33, Box 28 | Contract | For resource planning purposes, is there a planned award date? | There is not a planned award date. Award will be made once proposals have been evaluated and rated and a source selection decision has been made. Please respond to the solicitation accordingly. |
| 31 | PWS for Task Order One 1.6.14, and Volume VII, Attachment 6 Pricing Template | Contract | The PWS states in 1.6.14 that "The contractor shall be responsible, at the direction of the COR, for purchasing any software licenses, hardware, and/or virtual computing products required for performance of the architecture tasks described in Part 5 of this PWS." In addiiton, it states "The contractor will be reimbursed for these ODC’s as a Cost CLIN." Will the government please confirm that third party SW products can be included in bidders platform solution and costs included in the Task Order One price as ODCs? Also, assuming that’s correct, will the government please provide an updated pricing template? | The government has updated Section 1.6.14 of the PWS TO1 and removed the requirement for vendors to propose ODCs. The pricing template will not be updated and vendors are not to propose ODC software costs. To further clarify how the vendors shall address software tools in their proposals, the government added Section 3.6 to the PWS TO1. Vendors are required to identify the software products needed to complete proposed technical solutions. Vendors are allowed to propose third party COTS solutions, provided that these identified solutions comply with Section 3.6 of the PWS TO1. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 32 | Volume VII, Attachment 6 Pricing Template | Contract | Please confirm the requirement to include each Subcontractor proposal price within the pricing template only applies to the Task Order 1 pricing? Will the government please provide guidance on how offeror's should incorporate Subcontractor labor in offerors FFP and CPFF IDIQ Rates? | The subcontracting proposal pricing will be used to develop the IDIQ rates for FFP and CPFF. The offeror shall submit composite rates (i.e. prime/subcontractor) for the FFP and CPFF IDIQ Rates. Please see amended solicitation, specifically the revised Pricing Volume VII and respond accordingly. |
| 33 | Volume VII, Attachment 6 Pricing Template | Contract | Tab 2, CPFF Labor rates, does not allow for Offerors to propose blended rates with prime and subcontractor labor. Is it the government's intent for Offeror's to propose rates only for the prime? Or can offerors modify Tab 2-CPFF labor rates to accommodate accounting practices associated with proposing Subcontractor labor? | Yes, the offeror shall propose composite rates for the FFP and CPFF IDIQ Rates. Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 34 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 1.3.2 and 5.5.1 | Technical | 1.3.2 The EVAMOSC data platform and production environment will reside on Amazon GovCloud and will host the development and test environments necessary to produce O&S cost data profiles for major weapons systems. The EVAMOSC platform will then transmit, or otherwise make available for ingestion, these cost data profiles for production and publication on the OUSD (Comptroller) ADVANA platform. |
Section 5.5.1 Generate VAMOSC data, organized by fiscal year, in a standard output file, containing then-year dollar O&S costs for all US Army programs, to update the EVAMOSC application hosted in ADVANA.
| Can the government please confirm the platform will not be hosted in ADVANA? (please reference graphic on 1.3.2 and paragraph 5.5.1) | The EVAMOSC platform will not be hosted in ADVANA. As depicted in the graphic under PWS 1.3.2, EVAMOSC will be hosted in AWS GovCloud within an OSD-CAPE environment. The vendor will produce a CVT file (Technical Exhibit 7, PWS 5.5.1). CAPE will ensure that the data is transmitted to Advana. Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. | ||||
| 35 | Attachment 7 WD#2015-4218 | Contract | The Administrative Assistant labor catagories (Administrative Assistant I, Administrative Assistant II, and Administrative Assistant III) appear to be SCA - covered positions with wage determinations. Would the government consider eliminating these labor categories from this acquisition as the majority of the acquisiiton positions are non-SCA? | No. Please see the solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 36 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 5.5 and Technical Exhibit 2 | Technical | Section 5.5 references the following deliverables: EVAMOSC Security Architecture, Formatted data extracts, data dictionary, Technical Exhibit 7, Self Service Analytics Architecture, Release and Configuration Management Plan, and Security and Patching Plan. Exhibit 2 references the following deliverables for Section 5.5: CVT Update File, Self Service Analytics Architecture, Release and Configuration Management Plan, and Developent release plan. Can the government please confirm the Exhibit 2 requirements take precedent? | PWS TO1 Section 5.5 has been updated to remove the EVAMOSC Security Architecture, Formatted data extracts, data dictionary, and Security and Patching Plan deliverables. |
Technical Exhibit 2 has been updated to remove the Development Release Plan deliverables.
PWS Section 5.5 and Technical Exhibit 2 now contain a consistent set of deliverables: CVT Update File, Self Service Analytics Architecture, and Release and Configuration Management Plan. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly.
| 37 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 1.6.14 | Technical | Can the government provide a remotely accessible link to the JSP product list? The .mil site provided is not accessible while working remotely. | The Government has updated PWS TO1 to add Section 3.6 which includes a link to a website that lists approved software. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 38 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 3.5 | Technical | Can the government clarify the role of C5ISR, the cybersecurity Service Provider, and how the contractor is required to support them? | Per TO1 PWS 5.3.2, the contractor will work with CAPE to support Risk Management Framework requirements and patching above the operating system. For EVAMOSC and IAW PWS 3.5, C5ISR is the government cybersecurity provider and may generate requirements for RMF artifact updates in support of the CAPE ATO. The contractor will not interact directly with C5ISR but his products may support the cybersecurity process through work performed under PWS 5.3.2. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 39 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 5.5 and Exhibit 2 | Technical | Understanding that the government will provide solutions on AWS GovCloud to store, rapidly access, and maintain large amounts of UNCLASSIFIED Impact Level 4(IL4) DoD data, what will be the process for provisioning those resources/services and are they paid for by the contractor or government? | The Government will use a separate contract vehicle to provision these services/resources on AWS GovCloud. The contractor will not be responsible for these costs. For additional clarity on which software the vendor may propose, please refer to the updated PWS TO1 Section 3.6. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 40 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 1.3 and Exhibit 5 | Technical | The RFP states that "Successful completion of EVAMOSC Task Order 1 likely requires ingestion of data from this entire list of systems, at a minimum." and refers to the list of systems found in technical exhibit 5. The RFP also states "This Performance Work Statement covers the tasks and objectives associated with EVAMOSC Task Order 1, which will aim to meet O&S cost data requirements for U.S. Army weapons systems during the base period."Will the government clarify whether the awardee will be required to ingest the data from the 15 source systems by the end of the base year or by the end of the full period of performance? | Technical Exhibit 5 has been updated and now includes 16 feeder systems. The Offerors' level of effort pricing estimates for Task Order 1 pricing must include incorporation of the 16 feeder systems named in Technical Exhibit 5. The description of the "System Interface Agreements" (PWS 5.4.1), deliverable in the Technical Exhibit 2 Deliverables Schedule has been updated to specify the 16 system requirement for TO1 and to provide instructions on using the 75-system estimate to scale EVAMOSC's overarching infrastructure. These changes draw a distinction between when the contractor successful offeror should use the 16 systems in Technical Exhibit 5 (Level of Effort Pricing for PWS Task 5.4) and when the Offeror should use the estimated total number of 75 feeder systems for the IDIQ (EVAMOSC platform PWS 5.3). Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 41 | Volume IV, Technical Approach | Technical | Can the government please provide an estimate of the total number of expected system users over the course of the contract? | The expected number of Government system users in PWS TO1 is limited to 100 personnel within OSD-CAPE. The PWS TO1 section 5.5.2 has been amended to specify the requirement to support 100 OSD-CAPE personnel. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 42 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 5.3.1 | Technical | Referring to the EVAMOSC Data Platform, the RFP states that "Integrate both open source and Commercial-Off-the-shelf (COTS) components, as provided on the government furnished cloud environment.." Will the government please confirm that the awardee's solution can utilize COTS products previously deployed in AWS GovCloud IL4 or higher? If this is not the case will the government provide a list of existing COTS tools in use? | Yes, the Offeror's technical solution can utilize COTS products. Section 3.6 Software, has been added to the TO1 PWS and includes additional software information. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 43 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 5.4 | Technical | The RFP states "Once the contractor determines the data owners and data elements required to provide the desired O&S cost data output for each Military Department, the contractor shall implement an automated ingest approach of data from each identified source system." Will the government clarify that the scope of task order 1 only covers Army systems? | The scope of PWS TO1 only covers Army systems. Data owners may include non-Army entities within DoD, but O&S cost data output for TO1 will only include Army systems. PWS TO1 section 5.4 has been updated and please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 44 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 5.4, Technical Exhibit 2, Technical Exhibit 5 | Technical | The RFP states that the contrator will "Create a System Interface Agreement (SIA) for each source system to record the details of access and interface between the source system and EVAMOSC" and the deliverable table in techncal exhbit 2 states "An estimated number of 75 systems have been identified as systems from which data is required, hence 75 such SIAs are estimated to be delivered during the PoP of this contract." Will the government clarify whether the scope of task order 1 requires the creation of SIAs for all 75 system or only those listed in technical exhibit 5? | Technical Exhibit 5 has been updated and now includes 16 feeder systems. The Offerors' level of effort pricing estimates for Task Order 1 pricing must include incorporation of the 16 feeder systems named in Technical Exhibit 5. The description of the "System Interface Agreements" (PWS 5.4.1), deliverable in the Technical Exhibit 2 Deliverables Schedule has been updated to specify the 16 system requirement for TO1 and to provide instructions on using the 75-system estimate to scale EVAMOSC's overarching infrastructure. These changes draw a distinction between when the contractor successful offeror should use the 16 systems in Technical Exhibit 5 and when the Offeror should use the estimated total number of 75 feeder systems for the IDIQ (EVAMOSC platform PWS 5.3). Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 45 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 5.4, Technical Exhibit 2, Technical Exhibit 5 | Technical | The RFP states "Based on direction from the U.S. government EVAMOSC TM, the contractor shall identify source data systems, data elements, and possible reporting frequencies to support EVAMOSC’s O&S data requirements" Will the government confirm that, within the scope of Task Order 1, the contractor will be required to conduct data discovery outside of the source systems listed in Technical Exhibit 5? | Yes, the contractor will be required to assist the US Government with data discovery efforts outside of the source systems listed in Technical Exhibit 5. |
| 46 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 5.3.1 | Technical | Task 5.3.1 discusses the development of the EVAMOSC data platform but only has the data architecture approach as a deliverable. Will the government clarify that the platform itself is a required deliverable within the scope of TO1? | PWS TO1 section 5.3.1 has been updated to reflect EVAMOSC platform as a deliverable in the section and in Technical Exhibit 2. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 47 | Volume IV, Technical Approach, Section 5.4.1 | Technical | The RFP states that the data platform will "Provide a secure and scalable repository of all data types and origins that can scale to 100 terabytes (TB) of data for the primary purpose of collecting, aggregating, and reporting O&S costs for major weapons systems". Understanding that the government anticipates the eventual need for 100 TB of storage for all weapon system data, does the government have an estimate of storage required for the systems covered under the scope of TO1? | The government does not have an estimate of the storage required for the systems covered under the scope of TO1. The contractor will assist the government in establishing this storage requirement as part of TO1 PWS 5.4.1 and development of System Interface Agreement deliverables. Please see the solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 48 | Section L, Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors or Respondent, A. Proposal Volumes Requriements | Contracts | In the table provided, under the Section column for Volume VIII, it cites: Must use and Complete the Small Business Subcontracting Plan Format Provided as Attachment 3. Will the government confirm that this should read:: "Must use and Complete the Small Business Subcontracting Plan Format Provided as Attachment 9 based on the actual attachments provided and described under Section J - List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments? | Yes, the Offeror must complete Attachment 9 as indicated in the revised solicitation. Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 49 | Section L, Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors or Respondent, Volume III - Small Business/Contract Reference, 3. Small Business Participants | Contracts | At the end of the first paragraph it states; Use Attachment 5, Small Business Participation Commitment Document, in proposing this required information.Based on the attachments provided in the RFP package, will the government confirm that the requirement should read as: At the end of the first paragraph it states; Use Attachment 10, Small Business Participation Commitment Document, in proposing this required information.? | Yes, the Offeror must complete Attachment 10 as indicated in the amended solicitation. Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 50 | Section L, Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors or Respondent, Volume III - Small Business Subcontracting Plan | Contracts | In this section, the Small Business Subcontracting format is referenced as being provided at Attachment 3. Will the government confirm that the section reference the Small Business Subcontracting format as being provided at Attachment 9 based on the actual attachments provided and described under Section J - List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments? | Yes, the Offeror must complete Attachment 9 as indicated in the amended solicitation. Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. |
| 51 | Section L, Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors or Respondent, Volume III - Small Business Subcontracting Plan | Contracts | In this section it states that the Offeror shall provide a Small Business Subcontracting Plan to include the following information: |
1. Offerors shall include a detailed approach to achieving and maintaining the small business goals throughout the life of the ID/IQ contract as established by the Offeror with its proposal in Attachment 3, Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD). Based on the attachments provided in the RFP package, will the government confirm that the instructions should read as: "The Offeror shall provide a Small Business Subcontracting Plan to include the following information:
| 1. Offerors shall include a detailed approach to achieving and maintaining the small business goals throughout the life of the ID/IQ contract as established by the Offeror with its proposal in Attachment 10, Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD).?" | Yes, the Offeror must complete Attachment 10 as indicated in the amended solicitation. Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. | ||||
| 52 | Section L, Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors, D. Volume III - Pass/Fail Criteria Small Business/Contract Reference | Contracts | At the end of this section it includes the following statement: Note: The SBPCD is an enforceable, contractual requirement which will be incorporated in the resultant IDIQ awarded contract. It will require periodic progress reporting by the contractor to facilitate government monitoring of the prime contractor’s performance in meeting their MQR in the event of an award. Offerors are to propose semiannual reporting for their Minimum Quantitative Requirements above in accordance with Attachment 5, Small Business Participation Commitment Document. Based on the attachments provided in the RFP package, shouldn’t this read as: | ||
| Note: The SBPCD is an enforceable, contractual requirement which will be incorporated in the resultant IDIQ awarded contract. It will require periodic progress reporting by the contractor to facilitate government monitoring of the prime contractor’s performance in meeting their MQR in the event of an award. Offerors are to propose semiannual reporting for their Minimum Quantitative Requirements above in accordance with Attachment 10, Small Business Participation Commitment Document.? | Yes, the offeror must complete Attachment 10 as indicated in the amended solicitation. Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. | ||||
| 53 | RFP Section L.,A: Proposal Volume Requirements, Volume I – Administrative | Contract | This section states “the offeror shall provide sufficient documentation, such as self-certification of ownership or bilaterally signed teaming/subcontracting agreements as applicable Cover Letter”. Please clarify this requirement as it is unclear what the offeror is to certify and why signed teaming/subcontracting agreements would be necessary to support the offeror’s ownership information. Additionally, should this information be included in the cover letter, or as a separate section in Volume I? | This language has been removed from Section L, A. Proposal Volume Requirements table, Volume I. Please see the solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 54 | RFP Section L.,A: Proposal Volume Requirements, Volume I – Administrative | Contract | Both sections refer to a DD254. Will the government provide a copy of the draft DD254? If so, will the offeror be expected to complete Blocks 6a-6c (Contractor security details) and Blocks 7a-7c (Subcontractor security details) of the DD254 and provide it as part of Volume I and/or Volume II of its proposal? | A Copy of the DD254 is included with the amendment to the solicitation. Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 55 | Section L, Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors or Respondent, A.1.4.1, Page and Font Size | Technical | Will the government relax the requirement on font size for graphs and figures (graphics) to 8 point font? | No, please see the solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 56 | Section L, Instructions, Conditions and Notice to Offerors or Respondent, G. Volume II - Past Performance for Task Order One | Technical | The Government is requesting that the offeror provide up to three (3) past performance contract references that reflect recent and relevant experience. However, Section M.1 indicates Factor 3 Past Performance for Task Order One. Will the government confirm that Past Performance references are exclusively in support of Task Order 1 and not the Performance Work Statement (PWS) for Single Award IDIQ Contract? | As identified in the solicitation Past Performance contract references will be evaluated for Task Order One. Please see the solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 57 | A23 Request for Proposal, Section G. VOLUME VII - PAST PERFORMANCE FOR TASK ORDER ONE page 57 | Contract | In order to promote a larger field of competition, gain a truer picture of the offeror’s team, and improve small business participation, will the Government please consider allowing Past Performances from any teammate that has, performed a significant amount of the work effort, regardless of whether they were a Prime or Subcontractor? Please consider changing the following language in the RFP from: "Past performance contract references can come from the offeror or the Subcontractor, as long as they served as the Prime Contractor for the past performance reference." To: "Past performance contract references can come from the offeror or the Subcontractor, but Subcontractor must have performed a significant portion of the past performance reference." |
Jackson, Lorita H CTR WHS AD: Jackson, Lorita H CTR WHS AD:
| This question was also incuded in the email from Carol Gordon of BAH date 3.17.20 8:05 am | The Government will not change the rule that past projects must have been performed in the role of prime contractor. Please see the solicitation and respond accordingly. | ||||
| 58 | Attachment 2 Task Order One PWS, Section 5.4, Exhibit 5 | Contract | PWS section 5.4 on page 14 states that “As previously stated, EVAMOSC Increment 1 will focus on U.S. Army weapons systems in the ground vehicle commodity group…” However, Technical Exhibit 6, List of EVAMOSC Weapon Systems Coverage for Increment 1, includes a wide range of other-then-ground vehicles weapon systems and commodities including Missile Defense Systems, Unmanned Aircraft, Munitions, Helicopters, and C4ISR systems. | ||
| Does the scope of section 5.4 EVAMOSC Data Acquisition and Preparation include developing cost profiles for these other systems/commodities as well as part of Increment 1? If so, did the Government estimates for labor include the level of effort associated data acquisition and preparation for these additional systems and additional data sources not included in Exhibit 5, LIST OF PROBABLE EVAMOSC FEEDER SYSTEMS FOR INCREMENT 1? Please verify that the Government’s intent is limited to weapons systems in the ground vehicle commodity group. | The scope of PWS TO 1section 5.4 includes development of cost profiles for all Army systems. The Government's intent for PWS TO1 is to develop O&S cost data profiles for the weapon systems listed in Technical Exhibit 6. The Government's estimates for labor include the level of effort for preparation of these additional systems as identified in Technical Exhibit 4. Please see the amended PWS TO1 section 5.4 which clarifies the requirements, and respond accordingly to the solicitation. | ||||
| 59 | A23 Request for Proposal, page 51 | Contract | In the RFP table within “A. PROPOSAL VOLUMES REQUIREMENTS” at the top of page 51, "CLIN Labor Pricing Summary Tab" does not appear to have clear applicability to Volume VI on the preceding page. Can you clarify its applicability to Volume VI or VII? | CLIN Labor Pricing Summary is applicable to VII Pricing Volume. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 60 | A23 Request for Proposal, page 58 | Contract | In the RFP Page 58 I. Volume VIII with regards to ODCs, does the government plan to provide ODC “plug” dollar amounts for both the IDIQ and Task Order 1? If so, can we assume that these amounts are already accounted within the maximum value of the IDIQ? These amounts have financial implications to the overall expected value that we can provide to the Government. | The government will not identify a plug dollar amount for ODCs. The government will use a separate contract vehicle to provision AWS GovCloud resources. The contractor will not be responsible for these costs. To provide additional clarity of software the PWS TO1 has been updated to include Section 3.6. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 61 | Attachment 6 Pricing Template, Tab 3, Column B | Contract | In Pricing Template Attachment 6 within Tab 3, column B includes this text “The contractor shall provide EVAMOSC Support Services in accordance with Task Order 1 Performance Work Statement Section 1.6.17-Phase-In Period, attached documents and all other requirements listed in this document.”, does the Government expect specific data to be supplied in this column instead or should it be left as is? A similar question is applicable to Tab 4. | No, the Government does not expect specific data to be supplied in column "B" of tabs 3 and 4 as it lists EVAMOSC support services that are required for PWS Task Order 1. That text is the description of services for Firm-Fixed-Price CLIN 0001 and the CLINs listed in section B of the solicitation. Please see solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 62 | A23 Request for Proposal, page 56 | Contract | Page 56 Phase-In Plan: Offerors shall submit a Phase-in plan that complies with Task Order 1 PWS Sections 1.6.17 – 1.6.17.2 that addresses the following: |
• Provide a detailed transition methodology in logical sequence to ensure a smooth transition of all tasks/subtasks of the contract without interruption or degradation of services levels;
| Since this is a new contract without incumbency, please clarify “without interruption or degradation of services levels”. | The government has no incumbent. PWS TO 1 section 1.6.17.2 has been revised to remove "without interruption or degradation of services." Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. | ||||
| 63 | A23 Request for Proposal, Section L, part A.1.8, (Cross Referencing & Volume Designation), Page 53 | Contract | Because Scenario 1 is a special consideration of the technical solution and may be impacted by decisions made regarding solutions for the PWS tasks, can a proposal Scenario 1 solution reference elements of the technical solution (I.e., Volume V makes reference to Volume IV)? | The Scenario 1 solution may address elements of the Offeror's proposed technical solution but the solution must be addressed in the Scenario Volume. As specified in section A.1.8, each volume, other than the pricing volume, must be written on a stand alone basis. Please see solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 64 | Attachment 2 Task Order One PWS, Section 5.5.2 | Contract | Will the Government please elaborate what is meant by the analytics toolkit? Is it something that the offeror is proposing or already implemented? | The PWS has been updated and replaced "analytic toolkit" with "analytic capability". The Offeror shall propose specific capabilities. Please see amended solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 65 | Attachment 2 Task Order One PWS, Section 1.6.14 | Contract | Will the Government allow the offeror to propose tools that are not native in AWS GovCloud, or on the JSP Approved Product list as long as there is evidence of those tools being currently deployed in an accredited JSP AWS GovCloud instance | The government will use a separate contract vehicle to provision AWS GovCloud resources. The contractor will not be responsible for these costs. To provide additional clarity of software the vendor may propose, please see Section 3.6 which as been moved from Section 1.6.14. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 66 | Attachment 2 Task Order One PWS, Section 5.5 & 5.5.1 | Technical | Are there additional self-service analytics and dashboard requirements beyond the development of the Common VAMOSC Tool. For example, are there an anticipated number of users that would be preforming Self Service Analytics outside the proposed team. | TO1 PWS 5.5.2 has been updated to reflect the requirement to deliver Self-Service Analytics capability for up to 100 CAPE EVAMOSC users. Please see the amended solicitation and respond accordingly. | |
| 67 | Attachment 2 Task Order One PWS, Section 5.3.1; RFP Section M, Rating Methods, page 66 | Technical | In Section 5.3.1, the PWS states: "The vendor is not required to demonstrate prior experience with AWS GovCloud". However, in Section M, Section 1.c Evaluation Factors for Past Performance the Government states Step 2 for the evaluation is Relevance. Considering the solution described throughout the PWS is a AWS GovCloud Solution, would having experience in AWS tools be considered highly relevant and likely required? | As explained in Section M, as part of the past performance evaluation process, each past project is individually evaluated and rated based on its relevance to the solicited work. In determining how relevant a particular past project is, the agency will examine the past project as a whole; it will not just examine whether the project involved use of AWS GovCloud. Use of AWS GovCloud on a past project may tend to make that project more relevant than it would be had it not included AWS GovCloud. However, use of AWS GovCloud on a particular project does not guarantee that the project will be rated as “Very Relevant,” nor does it guarantee any other minimum relevancy rating for the project. (Where a project included use of AWS GovCloud but otherwise has little relevance to the solicited Task One, it is possible that the project could still be rated as “Not Relevant.”) |
Factor 3 is a past performance evaluation factor, not an experience evaluation factor, and there is no requirement that that the offeror’s submitted past projects have included use of AWS Gov Cloud. Please see the solicitation and respond accordingly.
| 68 | Attachment 2 Task Order One PWS, Section 1.6.14 | Technical | In Section 1.6.14 the PWS states "OSD CAPE will provide vendors to Amazon WebServices (AWS) in a FEDRAMP impact level 4 secure enclave." Will the government please explain the relationship between the offeror and the provided GovCloud instance provider? Specifically, will the offeror have full control over the hosting environment in order to implement architectural changes. | Architectural changes in AWS will be made through and in coordination with the CAPE group that manages the AWS VPCs and the CAPE MAE ATO. Granting full control of the environment is not possible, however the CAPE MAE AWS infrastructure management team is highly responsive and foresees no issue in implementing architectural changes that do not impact the security posture of the ATO. Please see the solicitation and respond accordingly. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .