QuestionsandAnswersPostedtoFedbizopps121506.doc

Government Responses to Questions submitted on the AT21 draft RFP December 15, 2006

1. Please provide a list of attendees to the AT21 Pre-Solicitation Conference to include a Point of Contact, Phone Number and Email Address.

Government Response: A list of interested vendors was posted to the Federal Business Opportunities website on 17 Nov 2006. Due to privacy issues, the name, phone number and e-mail address of individual attendees may not be released.

2. Are you planning to publish a list of possible primes for potential team possibilities?

Government Response: No. The Government has no indication of which vendors are interested in participating as primes. A list of vendors attending the AT21 Pre-Solicitation Conference was posted to the Federal Business Opportunities website on 17 Nov 2006.

3. How can a contractor get questions regarding the draft RFP answered?

Government Response: All questions should be submitted in writing to Terri Francoeur at terri.francoeur@ustranscom.mil AND Michael Pardue at michael.pardue@ustranscom.mil no later than 4 December 2006 for consideration by the government prior to final RFP release.

4. Will all interested parties be given the questions and answers from the one-on-one sessions?

Government Response: A complete list of questions and answers from the one-on-one sessions as well as any written questions received by the contracting office will be posted to the Federal Business Opportunities web site for all interested parties.

5. Section L, Page 87, Para (e) (2): What is the correct proposal delivery address? The proposal delivery address on the draft RFP SF33 differs from the delivery address specified in the Section L instructions.

Government Response: The address listed in Block 7 of the SF33 is the USTRANSCOM official mailing address. The address listed in Section L, Proposal Submission Requirements, Hand Carried Proposals, is our physical address. The Block 7 address should be used for all correspondence except those being hand carried to this office. NOTE: We have recently moved our physical location; therefore, the address in Section L will be updated in the final RFP.

6. Section J, Page 78: When will the Non-Disclosure Agreement be provided?

Government Response: At final RFP release.

7. Why did the Government decide to go with a separate stand-alone contract for AT21 rather than using an existing IDIQ vehicle?

Government Response: The Government determined that a unique contract and PWS was better suited to the requirements than a general purpose IDIQ contract.

8. Have you considered a FFP contract type for portions of the work, such as O&M, that should be relatively easy to estimate?

Government Response: The Government is considering the use of FFP CLINs for portions of the contract.

9. Does the Government have some sense of how many teams they expect to go forward?

Government Response: The Government has no way to determine how many teams will submit proposals.

10. What would the Government consider to be the ideal team?

Government Response: We have no preconceived notion of the “ideal team”, but would expect to see vendors with expertise in business process re-engineering, change management, supply chain/transportation management and expertise with the tool set proposed, etc…

11. How far are we taking the freight delivery or the people delivery – All the way to Baghdad or Kuwait?

Government Response: Baghdad - This contract will not actually perform the transportation but implement procedures and IT tools for planning, routing, and booking freight and personnel all over the globe.

12. When you look across AT21 from an End to End – Who do you envision the primary customers for AT21 and will you prioritize the customers for us?

Government Response:

USTRANSCOM J3 (Primary)

Component Commands (AMC, MSC, SDDC)

COCOMS

Services

DLA

13. Who will use the tool and who will use the product being developed?

Government Response:

USTRANSCOM J3 (Primary)

Component Commands (AMC, MSC, SDDC)

COCOMS

Services

DLA

14. What is the government’s position on having a heuristic system versus optimization engine?

Government Response: Government is open to offerors proposal.

15. Will they offers have an opportunity to discuss various approaches with government team prior to the submission of their proposal? Will additional one-on-one sessions be held?

Government Response: There are no further plans to hold one-on-one sessions with potential vendors. The Government may hold discussions during the Phase II evaluation phase, but reserves the right to award the contract without discussions.

16. Would it be possible to have a 3 year base in lieu of a 1 year base making it easier for the contractors to secure subject matter experts in the area?

Government Response: The Government is not in a position to guarantee three years which is why we have a one year base with options.

17. Any discussion to reduce less than ANSI (American National Standard Institute) standards?

Government Response: ANSI standards will only be reduced if the majority value of proposed contract CLINS change from cost plus to firm fixed price.

18. Does the Government anticipate physical hardware to be centrally located and where?

Government Response: The location is dependent upon the hosting solution proposed. The Government does expect a Contingency backup site (COOP) for this system.

19. What is the focus of AT21? Is it crisis planning or long range planning?

Government Response: The AT21 focus is crisis, near, long-term and re-planning; also intermodal optimization and execution.

20. Does the Government expect to make any major changes to the scope of the RFP?

Government Response: No. While the Government is re-evaluating the make-up of the increment, based on the questions published in FedBizOps, the overall scope will not change.

21. Will the Government evaluate proposals on specific COTS solutions or will you make recommendation of the COTS solution?

Government Response: The Government expects the offerors to submit a recommended solution, which will be evaluated during the phase II demonstration against published evaluation criteria.

22. Are you looking for someone to bring benchmarking as part of the solution?

Government Response: Yes

23. Can the Government explain the Milestone B approval process?

Government Response: The Milestone B approval process validates that the program team has completed all of the necessary documentation, accomplished all of the required tasks and is adequately prepared to move forward with program development. This approval process will occur prior to the release of the final RFP.

24. Is the JROC approval an all or none approval process or can you receive partial approval?

Government Response: All or none

25. Found references to ERP solution – what is our definition of ERP?

Government Response: USTRANSCOM does not expect to implement a full ERP for AT21. While some ERPs have supply chain/transportation tools, there are also non-ERPs with similar capabilities. The Government expects bidders to propose the best value solution. There is a possibility that AT21 will interface (directly or indirectly) with the Service ERPs in the future.

26. Section C, Page 50, Para 4.12 and Section L, Page 92, Para “ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST”: There are two OCI clauses, one in the PWS, and one in Section L. Both are addressing future procurement activity. Are you requesting that a mitigation plan for future procurements be provided with our proposal, or are you simply stating that a mitigation plan may be required of the successful offeror for any future related procurements?

Government Response: Any bidder, whether prime or subcontractor, for the AT21 development contract that has reviewed or participated in developing AT21 requirements must have an OCI mitigation plan in place.

27. Any companies that are Organizational Conflict Interest (OCI) in this effort that have not been identified?

Government Response: Any contractors identified having OCI issues are required to submit a mitigation plan in accordance with the OCI clause listed in Section L of the RFP.

28. Please clarify the difference between the Section L reference to 10% and Section M reference to 5-10% for Award Fee.

Government Response: Both areas should reflect 10%. This will be corrected in the final RFP release.

29. For the Development CLINs, would the Government consider going above 10% Award Fee?

Government Response: The Government has established a target for the award fee pool of 10%; however, the contractor may propose a higher award fee percentage. The Government will evaluate higher award fee proposals as part of the Best Value Determination.

30. Will the Government consider allowing the prime contractor to add a base fee percentage to sub-contracted labor to cover additional costs of sub-contractor management?

Government Response: Depending on how the prime contractor has established its accounting system (according to Cost Accounting Standards), it is allowed to add some combination of G&A and Material Handling to cover the additional cost of subcontract management.

31. One of the award fee criteria is team integrity. What is the Government trying to incentive in this area?

Government Response: The Government expects the prime contractor to maintain the proposed team to the maximum extent practical, throughout the life of the contract. This includes personnel and subcontract relationships. The Government understands that relationships can sour and will evaluate team changes on a case-by-case basis.

32. Would the Government be open to tying some other award fee tied to supply chain metrics?

Government Response: The Government will consider proposals that tie award fee to relevant supply chain/transportation metrics on a Best Value basis

33. If you do accelerate would the Government be willing to offer award fee incentives for earlier performance?

Government Response: Increasing the speed does not, in itself, deprive the contractor of substantial profit, except for efficiencies in areas such as program management. If the program accelerates, the Government may consider extending the contract for additional sustainment options.

34. What is the Government looking for in the Phase I (10 Page) Technical Summary?

Government Response: A technical summary and past performance examples of contracts to show experience similar to AT21.

35. Would exhibits be included in the 10 page limit?

Government Response: Yes

36. Are teams locked in place after receiving the Phase I go/no go decision?

Government Response: No. That would be an industry decision; however, there is only 30 days allotted from Government notification of the “go” “no go” decision until full proposals are due.

37. Cost evaluation factor – could the contractor propose solution that mimic where their resources are located?

Government Response: Yes. The Government is open to everything except daily/weekly travel for staff living outside the commuting area. The contractor needs to look at evaluation criteria to see how that would impact them.

38. Can the Government provide some background on why you did not decide to move forward with program after the ACTD?

Government Response: The primary issues was funding, which has been resolved.

39. Did you find that the tools in the ACTD fell short of what you were looking for? Would you consider these tools in the AT21 award?

Government Response: The Government will not base the evaluation of proposed IT suite based on the ACTD outcome. The evaluation of the IT tools will be specified in the evaluation criteria established for the demonstration phase.

40. From the ACTD the Government adopted one technology / visualization. Would data from that solution continue to power that solution or are you looking for a new solution to power that as well?

Government Response: The Government is not specifically looking for another visualization tool. Initially, the new IT suite will interface with TransViz. If the proposed tool suite contains a visualization tool, the Government will consider conducting a cost-benefit analysis for changing visualization tools at some future date.

41. Will the contractors be given access to all material produced in the ACTD documents?

Government Response: The Government will provide as much material from the ACTD as possible.

42. Are there required or preferred tools for data modeling, architectural modeling? USTRANSCOM standard?

Government Response: There are USTRANSCOM standards but no specified tools.

43. Are you going to establish a data library with additional documents for those that were not involved in the ACTD?

Government Response: Yes.

44. Please define the relationship between this effort and the ACTD effort?

Government Response: The ACTD proved that COTS technology could enable a substantial portion of USTRANSCOM requirements.

45. How important is it to understand the ACTD effort to be successful on the AT21 effort?

Government Response: There may be some value to the ACTD data but nothing imperative.

46. On ACTD effort was there any type of benefit or ROI analysis done?

Government Response: Yes, the analysis showed a significant ROI.

47. Know that MITRE did the original ROI – will MITRE do that again?

Government Response: This is left up to the Government’s discretion.

48. Have you looked at the Defense Knowledge On-line?

Government Response: Yes.

49. To what extent if any has USTRANSCOM consider using ACTD as starting point?

Government Response: It was considered, but due to our market research the Government decided not to use the ACTD as a starting point since there are multiple options available. We want vendors to bring us the best possible solution.

50. ACTD – was there consensus reached on what was good on ACTD and what were the GAPS?

Government Response: There was consensus on what was good. Many of the gaps were a function of the limited scope of the ACTD.

51. The proposed solution should be submitted for all three increments, not just Increment I. Is that correct?

Government Response: Correct.

52. The Government asked for feedback on the increment structure. Does the Government anticipate incorporating just one solution or will each vendor be allowed to submit their own solution?

Government Response: The Government is evaluating industry feedback and may incorporate any combination of changes. In addition, the Government is considering the possibility of allowing bidders to provide one alternative proposal that must be substantially different in technical approach—keeping in mind the Government has funding constraints.

53: Would the Government be willing to entertain options within the increments as long as we keep to the 10 year CLIN structure?

Government Response: The Government is considering the possibility of allowing bidders to provide one alternative proposal that must be substantially different in technical approach—keeping in mind the Government has funding constraints

54. Would the Government be interested in something less than the current 10 year increment structure?

Government Response: The options are structured to give flexibility to exercise increments simultaneously thereby reducing the 10 year period of performance to something less.

55. For reduced development cycle would incentives be provided to the contractor?

Government Response: Additional Award Fee would be available based on simultaneous exercise of the options. The bidder may consider proposing additional incentives that would be evaluated on a Best Value basis.

56. Is the Government open to recommendation for alternative roll-out strategies?

Government Response: The Government is considering the possibility of allowing bidders to provide one alternative proposal that must be substantially different in technical approach—keeping in mind the Government has funding constraints.

57. Can you provide some insight into the Government estimating each Increment will be broken down into 4 to 6 spirals?

Government Response: This was a general estimate based on past experience and not a requirement. The bidders will propose a spiral delivery schedule.

58. Will the Government be evaluating the cost across the total 10 year contract?

Government Response: Yes. We will evaluate over the entire 10 year period and/or whatever period the offeror proposes if it is something less than 10 years

59. Would you be looking for a resource loaded schedule down to a work breakdown structure (WBS) level in the proposal? Would that have to be included in the total 30 pages for the technical volume?

Government Response: With the implementation of Earned Value Management, the Government will require an integrated master schedule but has removed the resource-loading requirement. The proposed schedule will be at a level sufficient for the Government to be satisfied the bidder understands the scope of work (at least to WBS-level 3) with emphasis on increment I. The schedule will not count in the technical volume page count but will be an appendix. See Section L for formatting The contractor will also be required to provide an electronic copy in MS Project 2000 compatible format.

60. Is there a specific format to be used for submission of the cost proposal?

Government Response: Yes. The required format will be provided with the final RFP.

61. If the contractors proposal includes having a system at the end of 5 years will that cost savings be considered in the evaluation process?

Government Response: Early delivery, within Government resource constraints, is encouraged and will be part of the Best Value determination.

62. Any requirement to have the prime have CCMI III or better?

Government Response: The evaluation criteria will consider Capability Maturity Model® Integration (CMMI) or similar certifications, with additional consideration given to independent certification.

63. How will the Government structure/ format Earned Value Management capability down to each subcontractor?

Government Response: The Government will apply the standards as outlined in the ANSI. It is the prime contractor’s responsibility to determine how the structure and implement.

64. How do you assign earned value to a continuing evolving plan? Creates a conflict between evolving plan and meeting earned value milestones.

Government Response: The baseline is the contract, as proposed to the RFP. Any evolution not accounted for in the baseline would be a scope change.

65. How long before Integrated Baseline Review (IBR)?

Government Response: 90 days is standard.

66. Approach and the CDD. Start in the SIPRNet arena and then migrate to SIPRNet NIPRNet . Low to high or High to Low?

Government Response: High to low.

67. Is there an example at USTRANSCOM now of a high to low solution?

Government Response: The SIPRNet to NIPRNet guard will be GFP. The contractor will be responsible for integrating the GFP.

68. COTS products on SIPRNet? Any accreditation plan?

Government Response: The contractor will be responsible for the accreditation plan.

69. RFP shows contractor personnel must be cleared to secret level – is that everyone?

Government Response: The security section of the PWS is under revision to clarify the security requirements. Personnel requiring a Secret clearance will be defined in the final RFP release.

70. Are there classified algorithms that will result in the AT21 program needing a classified development environment?

Government Response: AT21 will require a classified development environment due to classified data, not necessarily classified algorithms.

71. Why is the Government approaching this from a FAR Part 15 perspective versus a FAR Part 12 perspective?

Government Response: COTS IT tools are an option but not necessarily the only solution. The intricacies of configuring COTS tools for the AT21 requirements are not necessarily amenable to a firm fixed price contract. However, the contractor may propose a FAR Part 12 solution.

72. If given an out of the box solution would you consider totally outsourcing?

Government Response: The Government is not prepared to outsource the entire transportation planning and execution (booking) mission.

73. What is the expected level of customization for this project? Baseline expectation of the code is off the shelf versus how much is customized?

Government Response: There will be no customization/modification of the COTS tools. Any gaps in capability will be filled through additional tools or process reengineering.

74. Discuss the plan for change management and expectations from the contractor’s perspective?

Government Response: Change management is a necessary, but often overlooked, part of any process reengineering and/or IT implementation. The contractor is required to develop a change management plan and work with the Government on implementing the necessary change management activities.

75. What do you see the role of the supplier in terms of education in developing workforce in supply chain concepts?

Government Response: The contractor team will develop and deliver the first round of training, along with the plan for long term training.

76. Reference Section L, Page 92, Paragraph Proposal Content (5) (a). Please expand upon how the requested labor categories and hourly labor rates (exclusive of fees) will be utilized.

Government Response: The contractor is responsible for bidding labor categories and rates. The cost for labor will be reviewed in the Cost Proposal as part of the Best Value determination.

77. Reference Section L, Page 92, Paragraph Proposal Content (5) (a) Will there be additional detail provided as to the required formats (such as MS Excel templates) for Section B back-up documentation required for the Cost Proposal?

Government Response: Yes. Additional details will be provided in the final RFP.

78. Do you prefer .doc or .pdf files for the proposal submission?

Government Response: Document compatible with MS Word 2002.

79. What is the expected Small Business participation percentage? Will there be specific goals for categories of small businesses?

Government Response: The Government encourages the use of small business but is not requiring a specific participation percentage. The offerors small business subcontracting plan will be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria listed in Section M of the RFP. For informational purposes only we are providing The United States Transportation Command’s targets for subcontracting opportunities for the timeframe FY07 – FY11.

United States Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM)

Note: Targets are subject to change.

PRIME CONTRACTS

Small Business

HUBZone SB

SDB

WOSB

Svc Disabled VOSB

HBCU/MI

SUBCONTRACTS

Small Business

HUBZone SB

SDB

WOSB

Svc-Disabled VOSB

80. Will the measure of small business participation be expected to be constant across the program or “overall” (with consideration of peaks and valleys in level of small contractor involvement based on changing program requirements and opportunities)?

Government Response: Offerors are expected to make a good faith effort to meet or exceed the small business goals stated in their proposed subcontracting plan. Failure to make a good faith effort to comply with the subcontracting plan, is defined by FAR 19.701 as the willful or intentional failure to perform in accordance with the requirements of the subcontracting plan, or willful or intentional action to frustrate the plan.

81 Will the Government evaluate past performance working with clients in developing solutions to meet their requirements?

Government Response: To the extent that past performance is relevant to this solicitation.

82. Will the Government be providing a format/template for submission of past performance information?

Government Response: This is under consideration. Any template will be made part of the final RFP release.

83. Should past performance information be submitted on the prime and all subcontractors?

Government Response: Yes. Past performance submitted for each team member should be proportionate to work being done by that team member.

84. What are your Evaluation Categories and Criteria for success for the demo?

Government Response: The evaluation criteria will be included in the final RFP.

85. Where will the demo take place?

Government Response: The demonstrations will take place at MITRE, 1662 Windham Way, O’Fallon, IL 62269.

86. Can the demo be performed at the contractor’s facility if it is not in the Scott AFB IL area?

Government Response: No. All demonstrations will take place at the same location in order to ensure all offerors are afforded the same opportunity.

87. What types of requirements data will be given for the demo?

Government Response: Requirements data will include deployment, redeployment and sustainment.

88. Will the contractor’s be given the demonstration scenario in advance?

Government Response: The initial scenario will be provided no later than the beginning of Phase II proposals. There is also a potential that a scenario update, with additional data, will be given to the contractors the day of the demonstration.

89. Will RFP specify detailed evaluation criteria for demo?

Government Response: Yes. Section M of the final RFP will cite the evaluation criteria being used for the demonstration.

90. Will the demos take place in the April timeframe?

Government Response: The date is dependent on the time required for interim source selection evaluations but is anticipated in the Apr-May 07 timeframe.

91. Are you going to use live data?

Government Response: The data will be extracted from actual historical data records.

92. How will you reconcile the demos if you like parts of one vendors demo and parts of another vendor’s demo?

Government Response: Any questions the Government has regarding the demos will be addressed during discussions.

93. Do we have just 28 days from the time the scenario comes out to build the demo package?

Government Response: No. The initial scenario will be provided no later than the beginning of Phase II proposals. The 28 days is from the competitive range determination.

94. Would the Government consider increasing the page limit for the technical proposal from 30 pages to 50 pages?

Government Response: This suggestion is under consideration and will be identified in the final RFP release.

95: Technical volume count – Are graphics part of the page count?

Government Response: Yes. With the exception of the schedule as described in question 59 above.

96. Will the Government be releasing the weightings for the evaluation criteria?

Government Response: We do not assign numeric weights. The relative order of importance will be listed in Section M of the final RFP.

97. Request Government provide additional information on the current DDOC / JOC organization structure. Does the Government envision that AT21 will necessitate changes to the DDOC / JOC organization?

Government Response: DDOC/JOC current and planned organizational structures will be provided with the final RFP package. The bidder is responsible for describing potential changes driven by AT21, based on industry best practices.

98. What is the plan to involve COCOM?

Government Response: JFCOM will likely represent the regional COCOMs throughout the acquisition phase. Individual COCOMs will be engaged as necessary.

99. Specifically if we look at travel requirements per year we see there is travel to COCOMs. Recommend more travel involvement to COCOMS – looks like number of trips in current RFP is limited.

Government Response: Bidder’s may propose additional travel based on their proposed technical solution, subject to limitations identified in the solicitation and in response to other travel-related questions.

100. Integration across DPO - not a lot of mention around the entire DPO. How does DLA fit into this program? What is the integration point? Is it necessary in the AT21 program? Follow-up – do you expect it to be defined or is it a separate initiative?

Government Response: DLA will be invited to participate in the Distribution Operations & Planning IPT and on the program management team. The integration points include visibility of DLA movement requirements and, eventually, interfacing with advance demand planning data.

101. Command and distribution initiative to reach the next plateau for DPO. In order to do that many of the current initiative within the USTRANSCOM domain have an immense impact on the AT21 initiative. What is the thought pattern within USTRANSCOM with how these programs will be merged into AT21? Will the executive steering committee be the POC?

Government Response: As the AT21 program proves that it can successfully deliver capability, the command will evaluate the opportunities to merge or replace legacy systems.

102. How will government give contractors access to the COCOMS etc. to ensure uninterrupted access to systems, ie… JOBES, test data….. does it include DISA?

Government Response: The Distribution Operations & Planning IPT will be functional organization that will be assisting with the lower level requirements definition – will be the venue to get access to those people and or data sets. This does include DISA.

103. What is the relationship between AT21 and other programs and how will winning vendor be expected to interact with those programs?

Government Response: The AT21 PMO will establish formal interface requirements agreements (IRAs) with all interfacing systems.

104. How will USTRANSCOM key subject matter expert participate in program?

Government Response: The Distribution Operations & Planning, Program Management and Technical IPTs, assisted by the Executive Steering Group, will be responsible ensuring access to subject matter experts.

105. How do DTCI and AT21 integrate/overlap one another?

Government Response: Initially, DTCI will operate without consideration of AT21 capabilities. AT21 will access DTCI data for visibility of cargo movement. Eventually, AT21 envisions performing the movement planning and mode determination for CONUS surface cargo, then pushing movement requirements to DTCI for execution.

106. What role does USTRANSCOM place on DTCI?

Government Response: DTCI handles CONUS surface transportation for certain classes of cargo.

107. Is there a potential that if contractor can show benefit within first 36 months to use these savings in the next 2 phases?

Government Response: No. The Government can not use these savings for use for other increments, but we are planning on potential acceleration once we prove we can deliver.

108. Considering a Jun or Jul 06 contract award, does the Government anticipate any problems using TWCF dollars?

Government Response: No.

109. Request Government provide additional information regarding AT21 solution hosting. Please clarify the ownership of information technology assets and physical solution location. If the Government will requests multiple solution hosting alternatives from the contractor, please provide the technical and security requirements, and how alternative solution hosting options will be evaluated. For example, does the Government prefer:

Government-owned, Government-operated solution (GOGO)

Government-owned, Contractor-operated solution (GOCO)

Contractor-owned, Contractor-operated (COCO)

Other arrangement?

Government Response: The Government has no preference and will evaluate all possible solutions using Best Value criteria.

110. Commercial, Government or contractor site. Do you have an accreditation plan for that?

Government Response: The accreditation would be the same as a Government site. Threat/vulnerability that we have to meet.

111. If Government hosted solution would it be at a DISA site?

Government Response: Yes

112. Entry way using the GCSS framework?

Government Response: The program intends to utilize a portal GCSS is still under discussion.

113. Will systems integrators ignore what USTRANSCOM is doing for Service Oriented Architecture (SOA)?

Government Response: No. AT21 will leverage any USTRANCOM framework once fielded.

114. Detail up front for design over 9 year period. How specifically do you expect for Phase II and Phase III given that it can go obsolete over 9 years?

Government Response: Bidder’s proposal must demonstrate an understanding best industry practices for meeting the requirements, including the IT tools available today to accomplish the entire scope of the contract. Once awarded the contract requires an end-to-end design will have more detail for the Increment I than for Increments II & III.

115. Any preference for architecture to be used?

Government Response: The IT tools must adhere to USTRANSCOM architecture standards subject to the limitations of the COTS/GOTS tools proposed. Tools will be eliminated from consideration if they do not meet USTRANSCOM standards for data elements required for interoperability.

116. How will the selection team weigh Increment I to the overall DPO?

Government Response: The proposed AT21 technical solution must meet all requirements identified in the solicitation as identified in the PWS and evaluation criteria.

117. What are expectations on bidding current versus future capability? Will we be open to planned and future releases of software approved 6 – 12 – 18 months in the future?

Government Response: The proposal must be based on capabilities that exist at the time of the solicitation. If the bidder is aware of capabilities that are scheduled for release in the future, this information may be included in the proposal but will only be compared against known capability shortfalls in all proposed IT tool suites.

118. Would we need to flag those elements that are immanent but not available today?

Government Response: See immediately preceding question. To the extent allowed by the evaluation criteria, it would be better for the bidder to flag capabilities not available today than for the evaluation team find the capability gaps.

119. Docs show commercial transition mgt type systems. Other sections discusses TC master model. Seem to be in conflict. Can you define?

Government Response: The IT tools should adhere to USTRANSCOM architecture standards to the extent possible subject to the limitations of the COTS/GOTS tools proposed. The goal is to achieve a system that meets interoperability standards.

120. Look at business process reengineering – do you look at it from a traditional point of view?

Government Response: The Government objective is to implement industry best practices. The point of view is irrelevant.

121. In terms of the RFP wondering if contractor required to develop software requirements specification as part of the proposal submission

Government Response: A software requirements specification is not required as part of the proposal submission. The evaluation criteria will assess bidder’s understanding of the requirements provided in the solicitation.

122. How confident that systems requirements for AT21 will yield required outcomes?

Government Response: The ACTD proved that COTS can accomplish approximately 80% of IT requirements.

123. Architecture. What do you perceive the architecture – open? Do you perceive it to be proprietary or non-prop?

Government Response: The Governments primary goal for the IT tools is for ownership rights that will allow competition for any follow-on contracts.

124. How many environments do you anticipate aligning with the current AT21 vision?

Government Response: It is the bidder’s responsibility to propose the number of environments.

125. Within the AT21 current KPPs, is it reasonable to assume there will be a need for an AT21 COOP SITE?

Government Response: Yes