BMDS_CSM-CND_Industry_Questions_-_Amendment_0001.pdf

BMDS CSM/CND Response to Industry Questions November 7, 2016

HQ0147-17-R-0003

Amendment 0001

RFP /

Attachment Subject

Page #, Paragraph Reference

Question / Comment Response

Section L Page 29: L-

13.4 - Indirect Rate Build Up Tab

Please confirm the Government will accept DCMA/DCAA Forward Pricing Rate Recommendations (FPRR) or Forward Pricing Rate Proposals (FPRP) in lieu of an FPRA and in lieu of populating the Indirect Build‐up table.

The Government will accept a DCMA/DCAA Forward Pricing Rate Recommendation in lieu of an FPRA and populating the Indirect Build-up table.

Attachment L-10 and L-07

Years of Experience Requirements

Attachment L-07 list years of experience for the Analyst (Advanced) at 15 years while Attachment L-10 states 13 years for the same position. Attachment L-07 list years of experience for the Specialist (Advanced) at 10 years while Attachment L-10 states 15 years for the same position. Attachment L-07 list years of experience for the Specialist (Intermediate) at 5 years while Attachment L-10 states 10 years for the same position. Attachment L-07 list years of experience for the Engineer (Advanced) at 15 years while Attachment L-10 states 20 years for the same position. Please confirm which attachment is correct and update accordingly.

The experience levels are correct in Attachment L-07 and Attachment L-10. The experience levels listed in Attachment L- 07 (Labor Category Tab) are for the ERI mean and 90th percentile rates. The offeror should ensure that the proposed personnel in the labor competencies meets or exceeds the experience listed in Attachment L-10.

Attachment J-01

PWS BMDS CSM

CND v56 Attachment L-09 Historical Information v11 Attachment L-10 Labor Competencies v15.pdf

Full documents During the time period from Draft RFP to Final RFP, there were significant revisions to the Attachments. For example, Attachment J-01 increased the number of Performance Objectives from 2 to 5, and Attachment L-09 went from v4 to v11, and reflects a considerable expansion in level of effort. In a addition, offerors have only just received the Bidders Library disks for review. To allow all non-incumbent offerors sufficient time to present the Missile Defense Agency with truly competitive responses that incorporate these revisions, we request that the final due date be extended from Nov. 16th to Nov 30th, 2016.

The RFP response date will be 01 December, 2016.

RFP Response to bidders questions

Offeror has only just received Bidders Library disks necessary for developing technically coherent responses. Bidders anticipate additional clarification questions. To allow for further questions, we are requesting extension of final questions due date to November 4th, 2016.

The Government will consider questions from industry up until 14 November.

This will allow for a response to be staffed and released to industry.

PWS 3.0,

Performance Objectives and Detailed Requirements

The draft version of the PWS included a decomposition of BMDS elements into discrete technology elements. The draft PWS contained this information but was removed from the final PWS. Can the government provide a similar inventory of BMDS constituent components in order to appropriately scope the level of effort for this initiative?

This information is classified and cannot be provided in an unclassified open source document. Attachment L-09 details were expanded to provide metric information.

TS3 All TS3 seeks to identify the most important RMF controls for the particular weapon configuration described in the scenario. Does the government wish the offeror to provide a listing of the top 10 RMF controls irrespective of existing security capability or compensating controls described in the narrative detail, or is the intent to choose the additional controls important to the system beyond the stated attributes?

The Government is interested in the Offeror's technical understanding and approach in applying RMF controls to the weapon system configuration.

7 RFP Page 3, Schedule B Schedule B starts with Item 0002. Is there an Item 0001? Can the government clarify or update with inclusion of Item 0001?

Schedule B is correct. Item 0001 is not included in this RFP.

8 Section L.1, Page

Proposal Organization The Small Business Plan is identified in the table as Volume IV. However, in Section L-8.0, page 16, Small Business Plan is identified as Volume V. Could the government please clarify the correct volume number for the Small Business Plan? Cost and Price is identified in the table as Volume IX. However, in Section L-13.0 page 25, it is identified as Volume X and is called Cost/Price.

Could the government please clarify the correct volume number and volume name?

The Small Business Plan is Volume IV. The Cost and Price is Volume IX and also the correct volume name. Section L has been updated to reflect these changes in Amendment 0001.

BMDS CSM/CND Response to Industry Questions November 7, 2016

HQ0147-17-R-0003

Amendment 0001

Attachment L-10

BMDS CSM /

CND Labor Competencies

Page 2, Capability Group 4:

BMDS CSM/CND and DoD 8570.01-M IA Workforce Position Description requires a set number of years of IT Career experience and a set number of years of dedicated experience.

Industry experience has proven that years of experience is not truly indicative of the ability to do the work. We recommend more flexibility within the Cybersecurity-related labor categories to allow offerors to present the most cutting-edge resources available. Would the government allow a lower total years of experience such as 5-7 years of IT experience?

As part of DoD 8570.01-M IA Workforce Improvement Program, DoD identifies the number of years of dedicated experience requirement for each IA Labor Category. As to the Total Years of experience requirement, please note there is no longer an education requirement but IT years of experience. As advisors, the Government is looking for a depth of experience.

10 RFP Model Contract Will you provide the Model Contract in Word format versus PDF to allow for easier updating of the file with the required information?

Yes, a word format of the model contract will be provided with Amendment 0001.

PWS Page 58, Section 9.0

While not explicitly stated in Sections L or M, the referenced PWS statement implies that all "Advanced" labor categories are "key personnel". Can the government confirm that all staff proposed in "Advanced" labor categories (i.e., Specialist Advanced, Analyst Advanced, and Engineer Advanced) are intended to be designated as key personnel?

Yes, it is the Government's intent that all advanced labor category positions are key personnel. Amendment 0001 has revised Clause H-14 of the solicitation.

PWS & Section L Page 10, Table L-1 With the addition of two new areas since the Draft RFP, request the government expand the page count. Will the government grant an additional 15 pages for the Technical Approach to ensure adequate coverage of requirements?

Volume VII-Technical, Tab 1: Technical Approach has been changed from 25 pages to 40 pages in Amendment 0001

13 PWS Page 58, Table 9.1

Is it the government's intent to limit the available labor categories for each PO as listed in the chart (as an example, PO#2 can only be staffed with Engineer Advanced qualified staff)?

Per DoD 8570.01-M, MDA, identify all IA function requirements to be performed by the contractor in their statement of work/contract. PWS PO#2 Cyberspace Management Office has only IASAE Level III functions identified. The IA Workforce category IASAE Level III equates to an Advanced Engineer within the TEAMS labor categories.

14 Attachment L-09 Page 2, Positions by

CLIN

Does the government have a preferred labor mix of labor categories in each location and for each stakeholder/CLIN?

The Government does not have a preferred labor mix of labor categories in each location and for each stakeholder/CLIN.