Consolidated_Industry_Day_Q_and_A__28_Dec_15.pdf

Defense Threat Reduction Agency and

United States Strategic Command Center for Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction

8725 John J. Kingman Road, Stop 6201 Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6201

MEMORANDUM FOR INDUSTRY

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency appreciates the feedback received on the J10 Nuclear Enterprise Support Directorate Organizations draft versions of the Performance Work Statement, Sections L & M, and the Virtual Industry Day slides. It is in our best interest to ensure there are no nuisances or errors in our documents and for industry to provide input on our actions.

In an effort to keep the submissions general in nature, some of the questions/comments have been reworded but the intent of the submission were left intact.

Questions and Responses on Draft PWS, Draft Sections L & M and Virtual Industry Day Slides

DRAFT PERFORMANCE WORK SCHEDULE (PWS)

PWS Reference Question / Comment / Feedback Government Response

General Does the Government intend to keep the J10 A&AS acquisition separate from the J3/7 A&AS acquisition?

If so, what is the timeline for the J3/7 A&AS procurement and which scope areas are anticipated to be included?

For this solicitation, the Government is only looking for support to the J10.

2.0.

Scope

Change fourth bullet: “Provide personnel with expertise in the areas of: nuclear weapons surety, safety, security, accountability, reliability, and control as it applies to the DoD and DOE nuclear weapons programs, to include DoD Logistics.”

The PWS has been updated based on comments/feedback

2.0.

Scope

Add bullet: “Provide personnel with programmatic and technical expertise to research, analyze, plan, and execute life cycle management of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile and transformation of national nuclear weapons strategic deterrent policy.”

A bullet was added in Section 2.0 to compliment paragraph 3.5.3

3.1.1.1.

Support To Directorate

Leadership (J10)

Para 3.1.1.1 states the contract manager and the senior project manager will be the same person. Will the government consider filling this position with more than one person?

The Government is willing to consider an offerors approach to utilize more than one person as long as it is fully detailed/justified in the Management/Technical Approaches, meets the needs of the Government and does not detract or negatively impact other areas of the proposal.

3.2.

Contingency And Exercises

Department

(J10CE)

The requirements for program management and acquisition support for the Contingency and Exercises Department (J10CE) are not included in paragraph 3.2. Do you agree that the following Contingency Operations Program Management and Acquisition Support additions are required for J10CE A&AS support?

Paragraph 3.2 is a high-level overview of the mission of J10CE and is not meant to include the requirements of this effort, those are identified in the sub paragraphs that follow.

3.2.

Contingency And Exercises

Department

(J10CE)

Add new paragraph 3.2.3: “CONTINGENCY

OPERATIONS PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND

ACQUISITION SUPPORT. The Program Management and Acquisition Specialists provide program management support for the execution of current and future J10CE programs/initiatives. Support includes, but is not limited to, requirements definition, financial reporting, network administration, security, facility management, and travel support. The contractor shall also provide personnel with expertise in Federal Government Acquisition to assist in the development and execution of current and future requirements throughout the acquisition life cycle inclusive of assisting with the drafting of statements of work (SOW) / Statements of Objectives (SOO), Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs), and market research reports;

obligating and tracking funding expenditures; and supporting pre and post-award administrative requirements of the applicable J10CE program offices.”

3.2.1.

Nimble Elder Support

Is it correct to assume that the 4th level heading under 3.2.1 should be 3.2.1.1 as opposed to 3.2.2.1?

This is correct. The PWS has been corrected based on comments/feedback

3.5.

Nuclear Logistics

Operations Department

(J10NL)

Nuclear weapons reporting and accountability support requirements need to be included and characterized in the PWS paragraph 3.5. Do you agree that the following addition is a requirement for J10NL A&AS support?

Paragraph 3.5 NUCLEAR LOGISTICS OPERATIONS

DEPARTMENT:

Add new second bullet: Nuclear Weapons Reporting and Accountability Support.

- Provides analytic and administrative support for nuclear weapons stockpile management, accountability, and reporting. Support includes reviews, analysis and drafting nuclear weapons reporting and stockpile management directives, plans, reports and procedures.

This is not a requirement for J10NL

3.6.

Nuclear Surety Division

Is anyone located at the Pentagon for 3.6? In accordance with Paragraph 6.0, the primary duty location for all positions in this solicitation are located either in DTRA facilities at Ft Belvoir VA or Kirtland AFB, Albuquerque NM

3.6.1.

Use Control Project

Officers Groups Support

A&AS support for Use Control includes more than Project Officers Support so the title of paragraph 3.6.1 should be changed to reflect a broader Use Control role. Also, Use Control support should include Controlling Authority (CONAUTH) for Permissive Action Link (PAL) logistics codes/keys. Do you agree these changes are required?

Paragraph 3.6.1. USE CONTROL PROJECT OFFICERS

GROUP SUPPORT:

Change paragraph 3.6.1 title: “USE CONTROL

SUPPORT.”

Add new paragraph 3.6.1.2:

The Nuclear Weapons SME provides technical expertise to support the Controlling Authority (CONAUTH) for Permissive Action Link (PAL) logistics codes/key materials.

Primary duties include:

- Analyze and coordinate logistics codes/key requirements

- Provide support drafting logistics codes/key orders

- Update and revise associated technical publications and checklists in support of CONAUTH responsibilities

- Provide analytic support evaluating waivers and potential compromises involving logistics codes/key materials and recommending corrective actions

- Perform periodic assessments and other related duties

Knowledge, Skills, and Ability Requirements:

- Subject matter expert in DoD and DOE nuclear weapons logistics coding requirements, to include shipping, depot, delivery, Pantex Staging and Processing, and joint test assembly

3.6.3.

Nuclear Weapons Program Support

Paragraph 3.6.3.1 does not fully state or describe the A&AS requirements for Nuclear Weapons Program Support. Do you agree the following addition and changes accurately describe the A&AS requirements for this support?

Paragraph 3.6.3. NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM

SUPPORT:

Add to paragraph 3.6.3.1, new first bullet: “Provide analytical support as related to nuclear weapon physical security policy”

Change paragraph 3.6.3.1, third bullet: “Collect and analyze data during tests and evaluations”

Change paragraph 3.6.3.1, fourth bullet: “Provide support coordinating meetings and conferences”

Change paragraph 3.6.3.1, fifth bullet: “Provide technical and administrative support to include meeting minutes and briefings”

3.6.4.1.

Nuclear Surety/NATO

Support

Is the position for 3.6.4.1 located at NATO? In accordance with Paragraph 6.0, the primary duty location for all positions in this solicitation are located either in DTRA facilities at Ft Belvoir VA or Kirtland AFB, Albuquerque NM

3.6.6.

Nuclear Physical Security Modeling And Simulation

Support

What 3D software is used?

What types of M&S are expected to be developed?

The Nuclear Physical Security Modeling and Simulation Support is currently using software (Lancaster and Monte Carlo simulations) statistical modeling software incorporating 3D Auto Desk rendered terrain models with pH/pK data tables; and AVERT (Automated Vulnerability Evaluation for the Risk of Terrorism software)

There are no M&S expected to be developed.

The PWS has been updated to reflect experience with this software

3.8.

Facilities

Will the government consider revising the facility proximity to DTRA from 15 miles to 20 miles? This will expand the number of existing contractor facilities providing more choice for the government.

The Government considered this request and has changed the requirement to 20 miles.

3.8.

Facilities

What are the specifications for the connectivity requirements for UNET and SNET?

For UNET access, PWS 3.8 Facilities specifies the facility shall have sufficient Internet bandwidth; the Government will issue necessary hardware capable to access the DTRA Unclassified Network (UNET) for those individuals directly supporting the J10 requirements.

For SNET access, PWS 3.8 Facilities specifies to operate on the DTRA Classified Network (SNET), users must comply with the requirements identified in the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (DoD 5220.22-M) and the Defense Information Systems Agency DISN Connection Process.

3.8.

Facilities

It states “The facility shall be able to operate on the DTRA Classified Network (SNET)”. When will the SNET be required to be operational?

The Government understands this is not a quick process. If the Offeror doesn’t currently have SIPR access, the Government does expect the Offeror have an effective plan and to initiate the plan upon award.

3.8.

Facilities

Is the prime required to have SIPRNet connectivity, or is this a requirement for the Team?

The intent is for the facility located within X miles of DTRA to have SNET connectivity

3.9.

Training

What is the nature of the position/job that requires unique training that the Government will be providing?

If it is a Government mandate for specific training (e.g. Navy Basic Weapons Officer Course) before an individual can perform their duties (PWS 3.6.5. Nuclear Weapons Safety Support) the statement in paragraph

3.9 is required in order for the training to be provided free of charge. This does not include IT certifications or any other prerequisite requirements listed in the PWS.

3.15.

Key Personnel

Please verify that all personnel bid on this contract will be considered key personnel.

The Government has reviewed the “key personnel” requirement and has modified Table 6.0. Estimate Workload Data, to reflect those labor categories that are key personnel. We have updated Sections L and M to reflect the change.

3.15.

Key Personnel

Since all positions are considered key, would the Government please specify, for all positions, minimum degree requirements (as in 3.3.2.1, pg. 7) and years of experience characteristics personnel who are desirable to J10 can be identified?

Those positions requiring degrees or years of experience are currently identified in the PWS. IAW Section L para L.3.3.3 Resumes will include a Summary of Professional Experience, and in Section M para 3.5.1.2 we will evaluate “relevancy and experience (work and education) against the PWS Requirement(s). As long at the prospective employee’s meets the stated Knowledge, Skills and Abilities, they will meet the requirement.

Table 6.0.

Estimated Workload Data

Table 6, 3.3.2.1 Nuclear Accident/Response Instructors is referred to as 3.3.2.2 on page 8 of the PWS.

The PWS has been corrected based on comments/feedback

Table 6.0.

Estimated Workload Data

Table 6 has two 3.2.2.1 and no reference to 3.2.2.2. The PWS has been corrected based on comments/feedback

Table 6.0.

Estimated Workload Data

Table 6 appears to be missing the position for 3.3.6.2 from the position descriptions

Unlike the other requirements, the Government has inserted a NOTE in paragraph 3.3.6 allowing the Contractor the flexibility to distribute duties and number of specialists required to support their approach as long as all requirements of PWS 3.3.6 are met. The PWS Table 6 will be updated to reflect the correct paragraph number for IT positions.

Table 6.0.

Estimated Workload Data

Table 6 refers to 3.5.1.1, however there is no reference to

3.5.1.1 in the position descriptions. Additionally, 3.5.3 (Nuclear Weapons SME) is referenced in the positions descriptions, but is missing in Table 6 therefore; no hours are associated with 3.5.3.

The PWS has been corrected based on comments/feedback

DRAFT SECTIONS L & M

L&M Reference Question / Comment / Feedback Government Response

Throughout Section L In several places, the Cost Proposal is referred to as Volume V; however, in Table L.1.2, the Cost Proposal is Volume IV.

Is the correct Cost Proposal Volume IV?

Sections L and M have been corrected based on comments/feedback

L.3.3.3 Last Paragraph Resume page length. What is the page limit for resumes of staff exceeding 455 hours?

The Resume length for anyone not exceeding 455 hours is changed to “not to exceed one page”. Resume length for anyone exceeding 455 hours is listed in Table L1.2 Proposal Organization and is “not to exceed two pages”.

L.3.3.3, Tab 2- Staffing Plan Matrix

Paragraph L.3.3.3, Tab 2- Staffing Plan Matrix requires names for any individual working more than 455 hrs/yr , and resumes for all individuals in the staffing plan matrix under Tab 3.

These requirements may be very difficult for any offeror other than the incumbent to meet. The talent pool of individuals with the requisite skills and experience to perform the J10 PWS is very limited, finite and not growing.

In recognition of these factors, recommend that the government consider modifying the requirement for naming non-key individuals and providing resumes to something less than all/100 percent. For example, the requirement could be modified to require names/resumes for 50 or 75 percent of the non-key positions.

Due to the unique qualifications of this solicitation, specific positions are considered key personnel for the J10 effort. The Government has reviewed the “key personnel” requirement and has modified Table 6.0.

Estimate Workload Data, to reflect those labor categories that are key personnel. We have updated Sections L and M to reflect the change.

L.2.12 Socio-Economic Commitment

It states that DTRA plans to use NAICS code 541990 as the basis for Small Business (SB) for SB eligibility. Will the government consider using a NAICS code that would expand the number of eligible SB for use on this contract?

When the DRAFT RFP is released, the Contracting Officer recommends industry submits NAICS codes to consider for inclusion as part of the review/question phase.

VIRTUAL INDUSTRY DAY SLIDES

Subject Area Question / Comment / Feedback Government Response

Acquisition Strategy Understanding that the acquisition strategy has not yet been approved, can DTRA provide assurance to industry that A&AS support for J10 will be a separate procurement from J3/7?

For this procurement, the Government is only looking for support to the J10. .

Socio-Economic Goals Question: what is the government rationale for setting SB goals as a percentage of TCV rather than as a percentage of subcontracted dollars. The DoD goals for SB subcontracting are expressed as a percentage of total subcontracted dollars.

Recommendation: use the percentage of total subcontracted dollars rather than TCV for SB goals

The Governments rationale by setting a Small Business percentage of TCV is the Prime must utilize Small Businesses at the rate of 25% of TCV, rather than subcontracting out X% and utilizing only 25% of that amount to Small Businesses. If socio-commitment economic goal were to be expressed as a percentage as planned subcontracting, large business prime contractors could in turn propose to self-perform the entire contract and not provide any opportunities to small business concerns.

Socio-Economic Goals Question: what is the government rationale for setting SB goal at 25% of TCV rather than the 2015 DoD goal of say, 21.6%, for prime contracting awards?

Every contract is different and DoD Goals are just that, goals. The Governments rationale in this case is we believe there are sufficient opportunities available for both Small and Large business in the J10 Functional area and 25% of TCV is fair and attainable.

Contract Type In order to incentivize the offeror to achieve efficiencies and manage labor costs, recommend considering FFP LOE for this contract. Second preference for same reasons would be Cost plus Incentive fee

The Government appreciates the input and will consider it as it continues the acquisition review process which is ongoing. The Government intends to issue a Draft RFP and a response to these questions in the future.

General "The Department is using this opportunity to refocus attention and resources . . ." Does the J10 foresee changes in the PWS Section 6 as a result of this refocusing? If so, please identify potential changes.

The statement quoted was in respect to recognizing the importance of the nuclear role and standing-up the J10 Directorate. At this time we do not foresee any changes to the J10 mission.

Organizational Conflict of Interest

We generally favor an OCI approach that uses Mitigation for the primary basis as opposed to avoidance. We feel that identification and disclosure of potential OCI issues and corresponding mitigation procedures provides the government more complete information to form a foundation to make OCI decisions on a specific opportunity.

We do recognize that the concept of unique access to the government inherent to A&AS-type contracts may increase the potential for OCI, but feel that each individual situation is unique and should be analyzed and decided separately.

Avoidance OCI restrictions will reduce the overall possibility of OCI, but may automatically preclude some teams from participating in a solicitation effectively restricting competition resulting in fewer options for the government.

Specific to the OCI approach stated in the J10 A&AS Industry Day and draft L&M section, we feels the required mitigation plan is a good idea as is the approach to subcontractor ability to bid on J10 non-A&AS work as long as they are not in the same Division and no potential OCI exists. The part precluding the prime contractor from participating in any future non-A&AS work in the J10 effectively removes them from any additional support to the J10 which we feel is too restrictive.

The last issue is that of the language that applies to the OCI restrictions on future non-A&AS work by the prime. This does not address current non-A&AS work in the J10. Does this mean that a prime offeror on the J10 A&AS may keep existing non-A&AS J10 contracts or will they be required to divest themselves of these vehicles if awarded the J10 A&AS contract? As the potential for OCI extends throughout the life of a contract we would like clarification on why the restriction only applies to future non-A&AS opportunities.

The Government appreciates the input and will consider it as it continues the acquisition review process which is ongoing. The Government intends to issue a Draft RFP and a response to these questions in the future.

Contract Type / Incentives and Disincentives

This A&AS opportunity lends itself to a Cost Plus Fixed or Award fee contract (CPFF/CPAF) due to the nature of the work and government requirements. Of the two, we feel a contract of this scope and duration that a CPAF– type contract provides the government greater leverage to maximize the effectiveness of contractor efforts as well as the efficiency of government expenditures. Financial incentives/disincentives for the contractor is one more tool for the government to exercise positive control of the work and services provided by the contractor.

The Government appreciates the input and will consider it as it continues

Incentives and Disincentives / Contract Type

The Incentives and disincentives for each Performance Review Standard are fine. The incentives focus on CPAR and use of issuing new options which are good. The disincentives are few in number and focused on regulatory deficiencies which makes sense. The addition of more detailed disincentives for performance across the scope of the contract are probably unnecessary. We believe, however, the use of an award fee contract provided additional incentives and disincentives the government can utilize to maximize contractor performance.

The Government appreciates the input and will consider it as it continues

Based on the response from industry and a final review of the PWS by Program and Contracting personnel, the following changes will be incorporated into the PWS released for the Draft RFP.

PWS Reference

3.2 Based on the realignment of responsibilities within DTRA, there will not be a requirement to support the Foreign CBRNE Exercise Program and the bullet will be removed from this solicitation.

3.2.2.2 Based on the realignment of responsibilities within DTRA, there will not be a requirement for CBRNE Exercise Specialists and the requirement will be removed from this solicitation

3.3.6 Based on the determination of what A&AS support is and is not, there is no longer a requirement for Informational Technologies (IT) support and the requirement will be removed from this solicitation.

4.0 Based on the realignment of responsibilities within DTRA, Performance Objectives related to PWS paragraph 3.3.6 will be removed from this solicitation

6.0 Based on the realignment of responsibilities within DTRA, Estimated Workload Data for CBRNE Exercise Specialists, the Lead IT Specialist and IT Specialists will be removed from this solicitation.