N00421-20-R-0161 Q and As.pdf

Question Number Reference Question Response

RFP page 98, L. Part B 1.b)4.g.

The Government specified that this paragraph is only applicable to projects that are TOs/DOs on an IDIQ contract. Would the Government also include projects that are TOs issued on a Basic Ordering Agreement (BOA)?

BOA Orders are not awarded under FAR Part 16.5 Procedures, they are awarded under FAR 16.7 Procedures, but yes, under Paragarph b) 1. d. on Page 98, BOA Orders are acceptable.

RFP Attach 7 (Sample Task Worksheet); pages 100-101, Written Responses

To respond adequately to the required sections and subsections for the Proposed Solution Architecture and the Program Management Plan, would the Government change Attach 7 page count to 15 pages (an increase of 5 pages)?

Please see Amendment 01 to the Solicitation for updated page limit guidance

RFP page 101, Written Responses 1.c)I BIT Test

Would the Government please clarify what is meant by “BIT testing” of software? Built-in test equipment (BITE) primarily refers to passive fault management and diagnosis equipment built into airborne systems to support maintenance processes.[1] Built-in test equipment includes multimeters, oscilloscopes, discharge probes, and frequency generators that are provided as part of the system to enable testing and perform diagnostics. The acronym BIT is often used for this same function or, more specifically, in reference to the individual tests. BIT often includes:

The detection of the fault The accommodation of the fault (how the system actively responds to the fault) The annunciation or logging of the fault to warn of possible effects and/or aid in troubleshooting the faulty equipment

RFP page 95, Section L part A, para 3.0 (Proposal Contents and Volumes)

The RPF states Volume 3 is Representations and Certifications, while Section L part B, para

3.0 (Volume 3: Systems, Certifications, and Clearances) lists Facility Clearance (FCL) and Approved Accounting System. Is Reps and Certs (Section K) in addition to the FCL and Approved Accounting System what is required for Volume 3?

Yes, the FCL and Approved Accounting Documents are considered certifications

RFP page 95, Section L part A, para 3.0 (Proposal Contents and Volumes)

The RPF states Volume 3 is Representations and Certifications, while Section L part B, para

3.0 (Volume 3: Systems, Certifications, and Clearances) lists Facility Clearance (FCL) and Approved Accounting System. 1. 2. Is there an additional naming convention for the Approved Accounting System Documentation? If yes, please add to the table in Part A para 3.0.

No, there is not an additional naming convention for Approved Accounting System Documentation

N/A Offeror formally changed the company name several years ago. One of our proposed qualification projects reflects the old name. Should we include the name change documentation in Vol III?

Yes, this will be required for validation purposes.

L. Part B 1.b)2.; page 98 Offeror’s qualification project is a TO on a Navy Classified BOA and certain documents such as the award document (i.e., SF33) are not releasable. Will the Government accept alternate documentation (i.e., a Letter of Authorization issued by the KO) as verification of contract award and period of performance?

Please see Amendment 01 to the Solicitation for updated guidance on submitting qulification projects which are Classified.

L. Part B, Vol 2 Sample Tasks; page 99

Would the Gov confirm that COVID 19 pandemic (travel restrictions and quarantine procedures) is not required to be addressed in developing the Sample Task responses?

COVID 19 procedures are not required for the sample task responses

N/A Travel and meeting limitations imposed by states and municipalities have impacted offeror’s ability to meet the current timeline for the solicitation. Would the Government please extend the proposal due date by 7 days?

Please see Amendment 01 to the Solicitation

L. Part B, Vol 2 Sample Tasks, 2 Program Management Plan, d) Staffing Plan

Will the Government confirm offeror can use offeror defined labor categories for the Staffing Plan?

All Labor categories should be alligned with the Bureau of Labor Statisctics (BLS) Labor Categories and Labor Category Definitions.

L. Part B, Vol 1, b)5; page 98 Section states that offeror may not submit more than one excerpt for each AV MAC PWS/SOW Paragraph. Offeror’s proposed qualification project SOW contains high-level initial section statements (i.e., for Planning, Procurement, Software) which reference (i.e., “including the following:”) subsequent subsections describing more detailed requirements.

Example: proposed SOW section 3.4. might contain a brief overall requirement to support COTS and GOTS software modules, etc.; while section 3.4.d specifically calls out coding and debugging. Would the Government permit offeror to use the high-level primary SOW section and a detailed subsection within that section as a single excerpt?

Yes, this would be considered allowable. However, the Offeror would not be able to use section 3.4.d again.

L. Part B, Vol 2 Sample Tasks, 2. Program Management Plan, f) Maintenance Approach; page

In order for offeror to develop a maintenance approach, would the Government please clarify what maintenance is required post total AV system delivery and acceptance (i.e., Tier level support, remote vs on-site, etc.)?

It is incumbent upon the offeror to propose their level maintenance support should a previouslly installed system have problems. For instance, they will include in their proposal any required deliverables involved with fault isolation should a technical problem occur after installation.

L. Part B, Vol 2, Sample Task B, Scenario Background; page 100

“Three (3) dual screen PCs per classification will be available as sources for the video systems”; however, Site Survey Information states at f) sources: 1 Top Secret PC, 1 Secret PC, 1 Unclassified PC. Would the Government please clarify this discrepancy?

The Government does not see a descrepancy in this write up or description. The standard desk top user in a multi-enclave scenario (TS, SIPR, NIPR) will have a KVM to switch between the three (3) different classification systems. Each CPU will be capable of a dual monitor (Left Screen & Right Screen) output. Once the classification is selected at the KVM both monitors will be connected to the appropriate CPU in a dual screen output configuration. It is up to the offeror to describe how they will capture the video from each enclave (TS, SIPR & NIPR) as a video source to the AV System.

F2. AV MAC Deliverables Section L3

Will the Government be requesting a DCAA audit report from all offerors? Yes, validation for all Offerors Accounting Systems will be conducted.

F2. AV MAC Deliverables Section L3

Will the government be willing to extend the deliverable date to the right until after a DCAA audit is performed and will the Government be willing to request a DCAA audit be performed?

No, at this time the deliverable date will not be updated due to DCAA Audit.

H. CENTCOM Clauses CENTCOM Regulation 5152.225-5916 Mandatory Eligibility for Installation Access (OCT 2015) requires the submission of a list of proposed subcontractors with proposals. However, the Section L structure does not allot for this content. Where within the proposal response shall the listing of proposed subcontractors be submitted?

There will be no Subcontractors bid at the MAC Level, the applicability of this clause occurs at the Order Level.

Attachment 9 Attachment 9, per the table in L-A 3.0, is limited to 8 pages, however the Attachment itself states that the PWS/SOW must be attached. “Are the two PWS/SOW files that will be included in Attachment 9 excluded from the 8-page limit?”

Attachments are not counted against the page limits in any of the required submission forms.

SOW/PWS section 1.2 The SOW/PWS section 1.2 states that “A routine tasking type will be considered a dual class Video Teleconference system; a complex tasking type will be considered as a significant Operations Center with considerably larger than average video walls and a significant considered as a significant Operations Center with considerably larger than average video walls and a significant number of inputs/outputs.” However, both sample tasks are similar in nature and related to the VTC requirement. Has the Government considered including a sample task to address the Operations Center requirement, or perhaps changing one of the sample tasks to address this requirement, to ensure that bidders are qualified to execute complex tasks?

The Government does not wish to change the sample tasks as written in this RFP.

The Offeror is to respond to the sample task as written and provided.

Sample Task e) I Drawings This states a requirement to “Provide communications wiring diagrams to include Video, Audio, Control, Power and Equipment Rack Elevations”. This requirement constitutes a detailed design solution (i.e. essentially a build-to-print design) for the room, which is not typically required during a proposal effort. This level of detail also seems to be unnecessary given the level of detail requested in remainder of the sample task outline. Can the Government provide relief on this specific requirement?

The Government does not wish to relax this requirement and feels the offeror should have the ability to provide a sample if they have the proper experience in this type of work.

Section L-B.1.0(b)(5) “Each Qualification Project justification narrative must address no more or no less than three of the PWS/SOW Paragraphs 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.5, and/or 3.3.6.” This seems unnecessarily restrictive given that a QP that addresses four sections and a second that addresses three (with overlap SOW coverage) would be non-compliant. Can the Government remove the limitation of three PWS/SOW paragraphs for a QP to allow bidders to provide maximum SOW coverage for each QP since we are limited to two projects?

This is the MINIMUM Requirement for the solicitation and there is no exceeding the requirement at the MAC Level, therefore more proof is not necessary.

Section L-B.1.0(b)(5) 1. Are bidders limited to only two qualifying project submissions? Can additional QP be provided and considered during the evaluation?

This is the MINIMUM Requirement for the solicitation and there is no exceeding the requirement at the MAC Level, therefore more proof is not necessary.

N/A Given the unusually high level of year-end RFP requirements this fiscal year (likely due to

COVID impacts to contracting efforts), would it be possible for the Government to grant a two week extension on the response due date?

No, at this time the deliverable date will not be updated due to end-of-year requirements.

L. Part B, Vol 2 Sample Tasks (ST) A and B

Would the Government provide details on where the PCs are to be located in the room (i.e., conference table; equipment rack; workstation)?

End User Devices are located at each individual work area. A typical work station would consist of a CPU for each enclave (TS, SIPR, NIPR) with a KVM connected to a single Keyboard and Mouse and a Dual-Video output with two (2) monitors.

L. Part B, Vol 2 Sample Tasks (ST) A and B

If at a workstation, where would the workstation be located? The workstation is under the desk

L. Part B, Vol 2 Sample Tasks (ST) A and B

Is there gallery seating? If so, will those seats need microphone coverage? No gallery seating. Each of the SAMPLE TASKS are a typical confernce room layout. Offeror should be familiar with what is required for audio set up in a conference room configuration.

L. Part B, Vol 2 Sample Tasks; page 99-101

DISA Video Services STIG is mostly focused on configuration of the codec or systems that process a single codec. Codec configuration is often the responsibility of the customer and would fall into a different System Security Plan domain. Will the Government define the responsibility demarcation point?

The offeror shall be responsible for initial setup and verification testing of CODEC for proper communication with the AV System thru the touch panel. Once this verification is accomplished the CODEC will be configured for proper network operation by the gaining units network service provider. The offereor will then provide verificaiton testing and acceptance testing. STIGS or other IA requirements will not be in NAVAIR or offeror scope.

L. Part B, Vol 2 Sample Tasks; page 99-101

Would the Government provide the organization policy on codec availability? For instance, can codecs be powered off when not in use? If so, this can make it a challenge for administrators to push updates to their systems.

CODECS may be powered off when not in use. The CODECS will be configured and maintained in accordance with the Units network Standard Operating Procedures.

L. Part B, Vol 2 Sample Tasks; page 99-101

STIG compliance is required for these STs; however, associated security Risk Management Framework (RMF) is not a stated requirement. Would the Government please clarify if RMF requirements are to be addressed in offeror’s solution.

Network compliance and maintenance to include STIG & RMF are the responsibility of the gaining unit command and not incumbent upon the offeror for these sample tasks.

SOW\PWS 3.1.2. – Work Location and Facilities:

Will the government accept qualified facilities from subcontractors if the prime contractor does not own qualified facilities?

There will be no Subcontractors bid at the MAC Level, an Offeror must meet all MAC Level minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Part B: Specific Instructions

– 1.0 Volume 1:

Qualification Projects:

Will the government accept qualification projects which meet the stated requirements from subcontractors if the prime contractor does cannot provide sufficient qualification projects?

There will be no Subcontractors bid at the MAC Level, an Offeror must meet all MAC Level minimum requirements of the solicitation.

L. Part B, Vol 1, b)4.g. page

Section states “If an Offeror is submitting a DO/TO Project that was performed under the Master IDIQ contract and the Offeror concludes that the NAICS code assigned to the Master IDIQ contract does not account for the greatest percentage of value for the DO/TO Project, the Government will allow the Offeror the opportunity to request and submit correspondence from the awarding agency, signed by a Warranted Contracting Officer, to identify a more appropriate NAICS Code for the DO/TO Project.” Would the Government confirm that a letter/memorandum signed by the Contracting Officer, included in Vol I, is acceptable to meet this requirement? If not, would the Government provide guidance on submittal of correspondence?

Yes, this is the correct procedure for this requirement.

L. Part B, Vol 1, b)4.g. page 99, 100. Sample Tasks A&B, Scenario Background, Site Survey Information: a) Conference Room Dimensions

Section states that displays will be located on the north wall. However, for Written Response, 1.e) Drawings, III., it makes reference to Front Wall. Would the Government confirm that the “north wall” is the Front Wall?

NORTH WALL & FRONT WALL are synomous.

PART B SPECIFIC

INSTRUCTIONS 1.0

VOLUME 1:

QUALIFICATION

PROJECTS

One of the projects under consideration was NAICS 334310 and a requirement for classified performance. The classified performance involved AV equipment installation, setup, operation, and training during active field exercise up to TS Level. However, as the field exercises were episodic and variable, the user cleared personnel via JPAS instead of issue a DD254 for continuous clearance. For this contract, would it be sufficient to submit, in lieu of a DD254, a statement from the contracting officer that classified performance was required at TS-Level and that a DD254 was not issued for government convenience?

Please see Amendment 01 to the Solicitation for updated guidance on submitting qulification projects which are Classified.

PART B SPECIFIC

INSTRUCTIONS 1.0

VOLUME 1:

QUALIFICATION

PROJECTS

We were issued a Top Secret DD254 for a 12-month prime contract for Cyber Ops Center Video Wall Maintenance under NAICS 811213, Communications and Electronics Maintenance. While we are not submitting this contract as a QP, can we submit this DD254 to establish our ability to perform AV work with appropriate TS FCL?

If the work is not being submitted as a QP, then this is information is not required.

N/A Although subcontractors are mentioned in the clauses, there is no discussion of how the offeror would identify and subcontractors for this solicitation. If the offeror desired to include subcontractors to broaden technical capabilities and improve ability to scale, what information would be requested? Where would this information be placed in the volumes?

There will be no Subcontractors bid at the MAC Level, an Offeror must meet all MAC Level minimum requirements of the solicitation. Subcontractors will be evaluated as bid at the Order level, per order.

Section A The NAICS code for this effort is 334310 – Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing with a size standard of 750 employees. We would like to create a teaming effort in response to the solicitation, my question is, would the prime have to have the NAICS code of 334310 or can the partner be a holder of the code?

The Prime Contractor must meet the NAICS Requirements.

3.0 VOLUME 3: SYSTEMS,

CERTIFICATIONS, AND

CLEARANCES

Is It a requirement to have a DCMA approved Accounting System? Yes, in accordance with DFARS Subpart 242.75, an approved accounting system is required

3.1.2.1 WORK LOCATION Would the government consider extending the mileage to 200 miles? No, the Government requires that the Contractor’s primary fabrication and productions facility shall be located within 125 ground transportable miles of NAS Patuxent River Webster Outlying Field, St. Inigoes, MD.

3.1.2.4 MEETING

SUPPORT

Can an office within 25 miles be established after contract award (within a reasonable time, ie….30 days)?

Yes, this requirement shall be met in for DO/TO Performance

Section L Volume III The RFP section L on page 96 the chart for Volume III is asking for reps and certs -Section K only, however, on page 101 of section L bottom page Volume III is asking for : a-FCL, Verification of FCL and DMCA accounting-no mention of Section K, please clarify.

As a part of Volume III of Section L, the Offeror must provide the appropriate Systems, Certifications, and Clearances, the Section K Reps and Certs are included in this requirement.