QuestionsandAnswersPostedtoFedbizopps020707.doc

Government Response to Questions submitted on the AT21 draft RFP

February 7, 2007

Q225. Reference CDD Page 14, foot note 16

“Would the government make available the Monte-Carlo trials studies that resulted in the 17-1 ROI savings figures."?

Government Response: The Government has no plans to provide this information in the solicitation library.

Q226: Reference DRFP Para 1.5.1.4 Earned Value Management

With regards to the Cost Performance Report (CPR) is contractor format acceptable or will the Government provide Data Item Description (DID)?

Government Response: The Government will provide the DID for the CPR as an attachement to the RFP, but also giving the bidders an opportunity to propose an alternative format.

Q227: Should TransViz be considered part of the Government legacy environment similar to GATES, JOPES, etc. Or, does it need to be pat of all AT21 contractor solutions since it is listed in the CDD as a system currently being used at USTRANSCOM?

Government Response: TransViz is part of the legacy environment but the Government is aware that other COTS packages include visualization and collaboration tools.

Q228: Has there been discussion making small business set-aside?

Government Response: The Contracting Officer has reviewed the requirements for AT21 and has determined that neither a small, 8(a), HUBZone, or SDVOSB business set-aside (partial or full) is appropriate for this requirement. Our market research indicates there are small businesses that have some AT21 capabilities; however, there does not appear to be any one business that can successfully complete all aspects of the AT21 program. While this acquisition is broken into three (3) distinct increments, these increments all build upon each other and cannot be broken into severable services. The Government determined that purchasing and configuring the tools and processes in a single program reduces overall program risk by having one supply chain integrator provide integration across the major task areas supporting business process reengineering, change management, and COTS configuration and implementation – each of which must be executed as tightly integrated components. Based upon our market research we have no reasonable expectation of receiving offers from at least two small business concerns. As a result, a small business set-aside will not be used.

Q229: CLIN for travel – primarily site visits. Are you going to define that better?

Government Response: The PWS has been revised to include sample trips. In addition, the contractor will be allowed to propose any travel deemed necessary with justifying rationale.

Q230: Travel portions of RFP does not provide flexibility for contractor to get right talent, in right place, at right time. Will government allow travel for subject matter experts?

Government Response: The PWS has been revised to include sample trips. In addition, the contractor will be allowed to propose any travel deemed necessary with justifying rationale.

Q231: In staffing section there are only minor discussion for chief engineer and no other mention for other disciplines. What are the staffing requirements?

Government Response: The bidder’s shall propose the team/staff necessary to accomplish the tasks in the PWS. The Government is not dictating the staffing requirement other than for the Key Personnel categories of Project Manager, Senior Engineer, and Lead Business Process Reengineering. In addition, the Government has asked the offerors to address the additional critical skills of systems integration, change management and test. Offerors are free to identify other key personnel.

Q232. Reference Section C, Page 47, Paragraph 3.3 and Section M, Page 106, Paragraph b (5). Section C states “After award, the Contractor shall recommend and procure any hardware and software…” Section M states “If the offeror has separately priced this CLIN….” Is it the expectation that ODCs will be priced and included in the Phase II submittal?

Government Response: Yes. The Contractor shall recommend and price all hardware and software required for completion of this requirement. The Government will approve any ODC’s prior to purchase. See PWS paragraph 3.3 of the final RFP release.

Q233. If you are only looking for companies who have extensive experience in supply chain execution engagements (as presented on page 102 of the PWS), is the expectation that this requirement will be included in the 10 page technical summary document; are you planning to include that requirement as a threshold issue in the “go/no go” Phase 1 of the competition?

Government Response: The Government has decided not to use the two-step acquisition approach; therefore, there is no longer a requirement for a 10 page technical summary.

Q234. What types of funding is the Government using for the AT21 requirement?

Government Response: Investment type (not appropriated) switching over to operating on the tail end. Open to creative solution sets that could change that equation.

Q235. In the CLINs identified as Other Direct Cost (ODC) and Travel, there is a place to enter the cost amount, but no profit. Is it intended that these items will be non-fee bearing?

Government Response: Award Fee will not be paid on ODC’s and Travel.

Q236. Will gateways be provided by USTRANSCOM?

Government Response: SIPRNet/NIPRNet guards will be provided as GFE.

Q237. You mentioned at the conclusion of the Industry Day briefing that you would be willing to entertain alternative approaches to the “government hosted” model. The alternatives would most likely be priced as usage fees. Would you provide notional transaction volumes to allow for cost comparisons between the two models? Would that evaluation consider life-cycle costs across 10 years or another specified timeframe?

Government Response: 1) The Government is working to collect this information. 2) The life-cycle would include 10 years of operations after the system/service achieves full operational capability.

Q238: Will AT21 use a “sandbox”?

Government Response: No.

Q239. Must bidders submit a proposal that meets the current CLIN structure/RFP requirements in order to be compliant if the bidder also plans on submitting an alternate proposal that bids a different technical approach/CLIN structure? Or may bidders just submit the different technical approach proposal only and still be considered compliant?

Government Response: Bidders may choose to submit only an alternate proposal as long as they understand the risks associated with this approach.