Att 21_Q1 Q and As (11May2026)_AMD 0004.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 41 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N0042126R3005
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers document for a federal task order solicitation (N00421-26-R-3005) titled "NAWCAD WOLF ASI Secure Executive Network Software Support (SENSS)." The Q&A document contains 83 clarifying questions and responses issued across four amendments addressing various aspects of the solicitation, including proposal submission requirements, labor category qualifications, cost proposal formatting, and technical evaluation criteria.
Key clarifications from the Q&A include: Top Secret Facility Clearance is required prior to proposal submission; total labor hours are 796,828 across all contract years including the base year and four option years (excluding the six-month extension); escalation for non-SCA labor must be at least 3.6% for option years 1-4 unless historical data supports a lower rate; the proposal due date has been extended to May 19, 2026 at 1:00 PM; oral presentations will be 90 minutes with up to six contractor attendees, though only proposed Key Personnel may present answers to government questions; telework-eligible positions require two days per week on-site at government facilities only; and contractors may use alternate worksites with Chief of Contractor Representative (COR) approval. Additional guidance clarifies that Attachment 14 (Cost Workbook) and Attachment 17 (Government Labor Hours) have been revised to reconcile inconsistencies, technical writer and warehouse specialist labor categories must be included in cost proposals, and the written PowerPoint slides will not be evaluated as part of the technical factor—only the oral presentation itself. Proposals must include Controlled Unclassified Information markings across Volumes 1-3, and subcontractor cost narratives may be submitted by the prime contractor rather than uploaded separately to PIEE.
View the file
Other files
Show all 44
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
SENSS RFO N00421-26-R-3005
Questions & Answers
| ID | RFO Reference | Referenced Text (if applicable) | Questions | Response |
| AMD 0001 (Q&A #1) | ||||
| 1 | Attachment 01, Statement of Work, paragraph 3.2.3 | Does a contractor need an active top Secret Facility Clearance Level (FCL) at the time of proposal submission? If a contractor is currently in process of obtaining but does not have it at time of proposal submission, would the contractor still be eligible to submit a proposal? | FCL of Top Secret is required to obtain the required personnel clearances. The requirements and timeframes associated with the personnel clearances are listed in Attachment 01, Statement of Work, paragraph 3.2.3. As FCL is required for the personnel clearances, the FCL must be in place in sufficient time to meet the required timeframes listed in Attachment 01, Statement of Work, paragraph 3.2.3. | |
| 2 | Attachment 18, Section L, Part A, Paragraph 4.1.2 | Attachment 18, Section L, Page 4, Paragraph 4.1.2 states "It is the Contractor’s responsibility to obtain written confirmation of receipt of all electronic files of the TO proposal by the NAWCAD Contracting office." Given that Offerors will be submitting their proposals via PIEE, would the Government consider removing this requirement? Otherwise, please provide instructions for obtaining confirmation to include deadline to request confirmation and how to proceed if confirmation is not received prior to the due date and time of the RFO. | The Government revised Attachment 18, Section L, Part A, Paragraph 4.1.2 to remove the requirement, "It is the Contractor’s responsibility to obtain written confirmation of receipt of all electronic files of the TO proposal by the NAWCAD Contracting office." | |
| 3 | Attachment 18, Section L, Part C, Paragraph 3.5.1 | Attachment 18, Section L, Page 16, Paragraph 3.5.1, Labor Hours states "The Government estimate is 723,880 hours for the entire work effort, inclusive of all options"; however, Attachment 17, Government Labor Hours, indicates that the total labor hours are 796,828. Please clarify the correct labor hours for the entire work effort. | The Government has revised Attachment 18, Section L, Part C, Paragraph 3.5.1, Labor Hours to 796,828. Attachment 17, Government Labor Hours correctly reflects the total labor hours to be 796,828. | |
| 4 | Attachment 01 Statement of Work | Attachment 17, Government Labor Hours, includes hours for Technical Writer I (SCA 30461), Technical Writer II (SCA 30462), and Warehouse Specialist (SCA 21410); however, these labor categories are not included in Attachment 01 Statement of Work. Please confirm whether these labor categories are to be proposed within our cost proposal. | An updated Attachment 01 Statement of Work, has been incorporated into Section J and provided as an attachment. The hours for labor categories Technical Writer I (SCA 30461), Technical Writer II (SCA 30462), and Warehouse Specialist (SCA 21410) are to be proposed within the cost proposal. | |
| AMD 0002 (Q&A #2) | ||||
| 5 | Attachment 18, Section L, paragraph 3.3.1.2.2.1 vs Attachment 14, “Cost Summary” tab | Paragraph 3.3.1.2.2.1 states that, in the absence of historical escalation rate, Contractors and Subcontractors shall propose escalation for non‑SCA labor categories at a rate of 3.6% or higher for Option Years 1–4. However, the Cost Workbook reflects a 3.3% escalation rate for non‑SCA labor. Please clarify which escalation rate (3.6% per Section L or 3.3% per the Cost Workbook) should be used when historical escalation data is not available. | An updated Attachment 14, Cost Workbook 26-R-3005 (SENSS), Reference Identifier C1, has been incorporated into Section J and provided as an attachment. The updated document includes the esclation of 3.6% and removes Option Year 6. Please use Attachment 14, Cost Workbook 26-R-3005 (SENSS), Reference Identifier C1 with AMD 0002 for your proposal submission. | |
| 6 | Attachment 18, Section L, paragraph 3.5.2 vs Attachment 14, “Cost Summary” tab | Section L provides ODC and Travel plug numbers for the Base through Option Year 4 (five years). However, the Cost Workbook is structured for Year 1 through Year 6 and includes input fields for ODCs and Travel across all years. Please clarify whether or not ODCs and Travel are required for Year 6 (Option to Extend) in the Cost Workbook. | Please see the answer to question number 5. | |
| 7 | Att 01 Statement of Work, Paragraph 3.1.2.3 | Telework-eligible positions require routine on-site performance of two days per week. | Will the government modify the Telework language to allow remote workers with COR approval, in order to provide the maximum flexibility to identify the right subject matter expertise needed to solve critical warfighter gaps, even if that expertise is not available within 50 miles of PAX. |
As an example, if the subject matter expert needed to resolve one of the warfighting gaps lived in San Diego, the Contractor would not be able to meet that need under the current requirement.
| Reference 2.1.9 DoDI 1035.01, Telework and Remote Work, 8 Jan 2024 addresses Remote Work in addition to the Telework requirements. | Contractors may utilize alternate worksites/locations to support continued performance of SOW tasks IAW company policy. At anytime during performance COR may provide guidance with changes in telework/remote requirements in support of mission requirements. | |||
| 8 | Att 01 Statement of Work, Paragraph 3.1.2.3 | Telework-eligible positions require routine on-site performance of two days per week. | Would the Government confirm that the "on-site performance of two days per week" for telework-eligible positions can be performed at a contractor facility not within 50 miles of WOLF when the position is not designated as government site. |
On-site refers to Government facility only
| 9 | Att 01 Statement of Work, Paragraph 3.4.6 | The following lists the minimum labor category education and experience requirements, BLS SOC Code, telework work eligibility, and functional descriptions for each labor category. | Paragraph 3.4.6 indicates that the CSWF Services Labor Qualifications would address "telework work eligibility" yet only paragraph 3.4.6.1 Computer and Information Research Scientists, Intermediate addresses Telework Work Eligibility. Are we to assume that is the only CSWF position eligible for telework? 3.4.3.6 does not have similar language so are we to assume all positions in that section are eligible for telework with COR approval? | Telework eligibility applies to all positions with COR approval. Attachment 01 Statement of Work has bee amended to update telework LCAT guidance. |
| 10 | Att 18, Section L, 2.1.3Sample Task Scenario and Att 01, Statement of Work, Paragraph 3.1.1 | The sample task scenario states, "In support of this platform, the Contractor will maintain a hybrid multi-classification operational and development environment to include system of interest and system development environment software and hardware." The SOW references classifications "up to TS/SCI" but the sample scenario is unclear on operational vs. development requirements. | For the sample task scenario involving the "Government-owned NAVAIR aviation mission system": |
a) What is the highest classification level of the operational baseline(s) that contractors will be required to maintain? (UNCLASS, SECRET, TS, TS/SCI)
b) What is the required accreditation level for the "hybrid multi-classification operational and development environment"? (System High, Multi-Level Security, Compartmented)
| c) Are there separate development and operational enclaves, or is this a single environment requiring multi-level access? | No additional information will be provided. Offeror can document key assumptions as described in Sample Task | ||||
| 11 | Att 18, Section L, Part C, Section 3.3.1.2.1 of the RFO and Att 14, Cost Workbook, "Cost Summary Tab" | In section 3.3.1.2.1, "the Contractor and Subcontractors shall propose escalation for non-SCA labor categories at a rate of 3.6% or higher if a rate increase is anticipated prior to the TO PoP start date." | Please clarify if the escalation factor for the non-SCA labor categories? In section 3.3.1.2.1, "the Contractor and Subcontractors shall propose escalation for non-SCA labor categories at a rate of 3.6% or higher if a rate increase is anticipated prior to the TO PoP start date." However, in Att 14 of the Cost Workbook on tab "Cost Summary", there are two (2) escalation factors. One for BLS Escalation of 3.30% for non-SCA and one for SCLS Escalation of 1.02%. | Please see the answer to question number 5. | |
| 12 | Att 14, Cost Workbook | If there is an existing Excel link within the Cost Workbook template provided by the Government, would you like the offeror to break the link? | Please see the answer to question number 5. | ||
| 13 | Att 17, Government Labor Hours, Total Hours | Please clarify if the total Level of Effort should include the Extended Option? In the RFO, the total hours for LOE is 723,880. However, the total hours for the LOE total in Att 17 is 796,828. | Attachment 18, Section L (reference identifier L1) and Attachment 17, Government Labor Hours, (reference identifier L2) have been updated. Please note the answer to Question 3 for Amendment 0001 is no longer valid. | ||
| 14 | Att 18, Section L, Part A, Paragraph 2.3 | Section 2.3 states "lists of definitions or acronyms do not count toward page limits" | Once an acronym is defined in the "List of acronyms", does the acronym need to be spelled out in the attachments? | No, the acronym does not need to be spelled out in the attachments if it is defined in the 'List of Acronyms'. | |
| 15 | Att 17, Government Labor Hours, Total Hours | In Attachment 17, Total Hours tab, on rows 72-73 (Base year = 1 FTE; out-years = .47 FTE). | In Attachment 17 the key position for the Software Developers, Advance is full-time for the Base year. However, this position is not full-time for the out-years. Can you please clarify if this position should be full-time for the duration of the contract? | Attachment 17 has been revised to remove the 'draft' text, update Software Developers, Advanced, 15-1252 *1 KEY hours, and remove FAR 52.217-8 hours. | |
| 16 | Att 16, Fixed T and M Price Narrative, Table 1, OCI Provision Completed Submitted | OCI Provision Completed and Submitted | Can the government provide the "Choose an item" dropdown options, for Table 1 second column, or shall the subcontractor manually type it in? | Updated Attachment 16, Fixed T and M Price Narrative 26-R-3005 (SENSS), to incorporate "Choose an item" dropdown option of 'Yes or No', for Table 1, second column. | |
| 17 | Att 18, Section L, Part C, Paragraph 2.1.2.5 and 2.1.2.6.5 | Section L, Part C Para. 2.1.2.6.5 states that Proposed Key Personnel facilitate the Q&A exchanges with the Evaluators. |
| Section L, Part C Para. 2.1.2.6.5 (Page 8). Section L, Part C Para. 2.1.2.5 states that only Proposed Key Personnel are permitted to present the Oral Presentation. | Would the Government please specify if Key Personnel may consult with the three, non-Key Contractor attendees before answering questions presented during the targeted interchanges with the Government? | The contractor may consult with the non-Key Contractor attendess before answering questions presented during interchanges. A breakout session will be provided. The responses must be facilitated solely by the Key Personnel. | |||
| 18 | Att 18, Section L, Paragraph 2.1 | Section L, 2.1 states, "The Offer must be structured such that its volume/paragraph number matches the Section L – Instructions to Contractors volume/paragraph number provided in section “Part B: Specific Instructions” to which it is responding; however, the Contractor may add lower tier subparagraphs. The Contractor shall provide rationale when and if it does not provide a response for a particular paragraph." | Should this reference be to "Part C: Specific Instructions" and not Part B which is titled "Prerequisite Instructions?" | The Government has revised Attachment 18, Section L, Paragraph 2.1 now stating "Part C: Specific Instructions". | |
| 19 | Exh+A+CDRLs+26-R-3005+(SENSS) | Block 16. REMARKS | Did the Government intend to fill in the yellow highlighted elements with the RFO such that CDLR A004 can be delivered within 5 DAC? | CDRL A004, Block 16 highlighted areas will be updated at time of task order award. | |
| 20 | ATT 18 Section L-Instructions Conditions and Notices 26-R-3005 (SENSS) | 2.1.2.3 Location of Oral Presentations: Location will be specified in the notification stated above in 2.1.2.1. | Section 2.1.2.1 Does not provide a location. Please advise location building so plans can be made for access. | Attachment 18, Section L, Part B paragraph 2.1.2.1 states, The Contracting Officer will notify each Contractor of the scheudled date and time in oral presentations at least seven calendar days prior to the Contractor's scheduled oral presentation date. The location will be provided within the notification. | |
| 21 | ATT 18 Section L-Instructions Conditions and Notices 26-R-3005 (SENSS) | 4.1.1 Offers shall be marked “Controlled Unclassified Information” and “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.” |
4.2.4 The package shall be stamped or marked “Controlled Unclassified Information” and “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.”
Can the Government provide the source of the CUI requirement to include the required information for the cover of each Volume (i.e., for “Controlled by, CUI Category, Distribution Statement, and POC)? Controlled by: Department of Navy Controlled by: NAWCAD WOLF Procurement Group CUI Category: SSEL Distribution: DL Only POC: Kristen Ferro, kristen.w.ferro.civ@us.navy.mil, 240-808-9963
| 22 | ATT 18 Section L-Instructions Conditions and Notices 26-R-3005 (SENSS) | 2.4 Table of Contents (must provide sufficient detail to enable easy location of important elements) | ||||
| 2.5 The Contractor shall number the pages sequentially and use a 12-point Times New Roman font. The Contractor shall not utilize compressed or condensed spacing between lines or characters in order to circumvent the provided page limits | Please advise if Vol II /2.1 Att T1 - Oral Presentation PPT slides are required to have a Table of Contents and abide by the 12-Point Times New Roman font compliance, spacing? | The Oral Presentation Power Point slides are at Contractor discretion. | ||||
| 23 | ATT 18 Section L-Instructions Conditions and Notices 26-R-3005 (SENSS) | 2.1.2.4 The Government will record the oral presentation. The Contractor may not record or transmit the oral presentation session. | Will a copy of the recording be provided to the Offerors? | The Government has revised Attachment 18, Section L, paragraph 2.1.2.4 to incorporate language that the Government shall provide the recorded oral presentation to Contractor upon written request. | ||
| 24 | ATT 18 Section L-Instructions Conditions and Notices 26-R-3005 (SENSS) | 2.1.2.5 Contractor Employee Participation - The Contractor, including its Subcontractor representatives, are limited to no more than six attendees to be present at the oral presentation. However, the oral presentation shall only be presented by one or more of the proposed Key Personnel. | What is the Government's intent in permitting the Contractor to have up to six attend, what is the role/participation of non-key personnel? In lieu of potential breadth of and delay between presentation and these interchanges described in section 2.1.2.6.5, consider offering detailed time-boxed presentation, break, Government Caucus, Government ask question(s), Contractor caucus, then Contractor respond cycle (possibly up to 2), in this, permitting the Contractor show breadth and depth of offering. | As Section L, Part B paragraph 2.1.2.6.2 states, the Contractor will be allotted 90 minutes to present its information. Paragraph 2.1.2.6.5 states, Following oral presentations, the Government intends to conduct targeted interchanges with each Contractor to clarify specific aspects of their proposed methodologies and approaches. Contractors will be given a breakout session from the Government to discuss with all Contractor attendess (including non-key personnel) the interchange questions from the Govenrment. | ||
| 25 | ATT 18 Section L-Instructions Conditions and Notices 26-R-3005 (SENSS) | 2.1.1 Microsoft PowerPoint Presentation | Does the Government have any required standards for the PowerPoint presentation (ratio, different size font/margin req't, etc.)? Or are these at the discretion of the Offeror for Attachment T1? | This is at Contractor discretion. | ||
| 26 | ATT 18 Section L-Instructions Conditions and Notices 26-R-3005 (SENSS) | The Contractor shall provide a computer and any desired peripherals that can be connected to an overhead projector/digital projector. | Will the Government confirm the overhead projector type - or the type of compatibility connection required (HDMI?, etc.) so offerors may bring appropriate peripherals for connection? | The Government will state what will be required when notification is provided for Oral Presentations. | ||
| 27 | ATT 18 Section L-Instructions Conditions and Notices 26-R-3005 (SENSS) | On the day of the oral presentation, the Contractor will be allotted 90 minutes to present its information. | Will the Government allow Offeror oral teams advance access to the presentation room the day before to set up/test presentation equipment? | Due to time restraints, access will not be provided a day in advance of the oral presentation. The Government will provide the block of time to the Contractor with the notification stated in Section L, Part B paragraph 2.1.2.1. | ||
| 28 | Att_18_Section_L___Instructions_Conditions_and_Notices_26_R_3005__SENSS_.pdf | "If the Contractor/and or Subcontractors do not have historical escalation rate actuals, then the Contractor and Subcontractors shall propose escalation for non-SCA labor categories at a rate of 3.6% or higher." | The RFO on page 13 specifies escalation is 3.60% for all non-SCA labor unless based on historical escalation rate actuals. The Cost Summary Tab of Attachment 14 shows 3.30%. Please confirm Offeror's should disregard the escalation percentage listed in Attachment 14. | Please see the answer to question number 5. | ||
| 29 | Att_14_Cost_Workbook_26_R_3005__SENSS_.xlsx | "This is a Service Contract Act (SCA) designated TO. Wage Determination 2015-4279 Revision 30 (12/03/2025) for St Mary's County, Maryland was utilized for applicable SCA labor categories." | The minimum direct labor rates for the SCA positions in Attachment 14 exceed the WD hourly rates in Attachment 10. Please confirm if Offeror's are to bid the SCA WD rates or the RFP minimum direct labor rates for these labor categories. | Attachment 14 Cost Workbook, Minimum Direct Labor Rates tab has been updated to reflect the updated Wage Determination, Attachment 10. | ||
| 30 | Att_14_Cost_Workbook_26_R_3005__SENSS_.xlsx | "If the Contractor and/or Subcontractors do not have historical escalation rate actuals, then the Contractor and Subcontractors shall propose escalation for non-SCA labor categories at a rate of 3.6% or higher for option years 1-4." | The RFO references escalation for option years 1-4, not the FAR 52-217-8 extension. The Cost Summary tab shows 3.3% escalation for Year 6 in Cell AI4. Please confirm Offerors should remove the escalation % listed as Year 6 is for FAR 52-217-8, Option to Extend Services and therefore should not be escalated. | Please see the answer to question number 5. | ||
| 31 | Att_18_Section_L___Instructions_Conditions_and_Notices_26_R_3005__SENSS_.pdf | "The Prime’s total proposed cost will be determined by the rates/costs inserted in Attachment C1, Cost Reimbursable Workbook." | ||||
| "3.3 Cost Reimbursable Narrative, Attachment C2 (Parts II-XV)" | The Cost Workbook in Section L is referred to as Attachment C1 whereas the RFO attachment is Attachment 14. Additionally, the Cost Narrative is referred to as Attachment C2 and C3 in Section L, but the RFO attachments are Attachments 14 and 15. Could the Government please confirm which reference is accurate? | Section J provides an Attachment Number Column and Reference Identifier Column for each referenced document in the RFO. The documents in the RFO will be referenced by the Refernce Identifier. | ||||
| 32 | Att_19_Section_M___Evaluation_Factors_for_Award_26_R_3005__SENSS_.pdf | "A failure of the Contractor or its Subcontractors to provide rationale to support proposing a lower escalation rate than the most recent historical escalation rate actuals may result in a determination that the rate is unrealistic;" | Please confirm Section M.3.3.2.5.1 historical rate actuals refers to last 3 years as referenced in Section L.3.3.1.2.2. | Confirming, Section M.3.3.2.5.1 historical rate actuals refers to last 3 years as referenced in Section L.3.3.1.2.2. | ||
| 33 | Att_17_Government_Labor_Hours_26_R_3005__SENSS_.xlsx | "Draft" | Could the Government please confirm the hours listed on the Total Hours tab of Attachment 17 are final? The tab currently says "Draft". | Please see the answer to question number 15. | ||
| 34 | Section L, Part B, Prerequisite Instructions | Section states contractor shall complete an Attachment P1 for each Key Personnel proposed in it’s Volume 1 submittal. The RFO package released for the opportunity contains a template for the key resume under the filename Att_20_Key_Personnel_26_R_3005. Can the Government confirm the file Att_20_Key_Personnel_26_R_3005 is the template to be saved and submitted as Attachment_P1? | Please see the answer to question number 31. | |||
| 35 | Section L, Part B, Section 2.0, Volume 2: Technical | Section contains detailed instructions to offerors for development of a Microsoft PowerPoint Presentation as it’s Sample Task Oral Presentation. Instruction 2.1.1.1 states the contractor shall “identify, within the slides, all authors of the slides by name and association. Can the Government please clarify if the desire is to have all authors identified in one location (on one slide), or if the desire is have authors identified on each individual slide which they contributed? | The Contractor may include all authors and their associations on one slide. | |||
| 36 | Section L, Part A, General, section 4.1.3 | Section references the submission date in Block 9 of the RFO SF33 (1:00PM on 18 May 2026). This instruction also references FAR Clause 52.107(b)(i); encouraging offerors to submit 1 working day prior to the date specified in Block 9 of the SF33. This is amplified by inclusion of Provision 52.215-1 on the SF-33 which provides for safe harbor for electronic submission delayed by Government Systems. With a submission date of 18 May 2026 falling on a Monday, one working day early would be the preceding Friday (15 May) for submission, thereby effectively reducing total proposal development time by 2 additional days. Would the Government consider extending the proposal due date by 1 day (to 1:00 PM on 19 May 2026), resulting in a recommended submission date of 18 May 2026, thereby restoring the two days lost due to these FAR Clause recommendations? | The Government has extended the proposal submission due date to Tuesday, 19 May 2026. | |||
| 37 | Section L, Part B, Section 2.0, Volume 2: Technical, paragraph 2.1.2.6.5 | RFP Section States “following oral presentations, the Government intends to conduct targeted interchanges with each Contractor to clarify specific aspects of their proposed methodologies and approaches”. This paragraph also states the interchanges will be “facilitated solely by Key Personnel. For planning purposes, can the Government please provide additional guidance based on the following two questions. 1) Can the Key Personnel Caucus with any of the 6 allowed representatives at the Oral Presentation, with one of the three Key Personnel presenting an answer? Or will a caucus be restricted to between the 3 Key Personnel permitted to speak? | Please see the answer to question number 17. | |||
| 38 | 5) | Section C, Statement of Work, paragraph 3.4.6 CSWF Services Labor Qualifications | RFP Section provides reference to “Attachment_04_CSWF_Foundational_Qualification_Matrix_25_R_3005_SENSS” which includes education, training and certification options that are customized for this TO for each CSWF labor category. The education, training, and certification options included in Attachment_04 differ from those provided through the Navy COOL website. Can the Government please confirm the education, training, and certification options included in Attachment_04 are the correct minimum certification requirements to be used for personnel qualification on all SENSS CSWF labor categories, even if the qualification criteria established in Attachment_04 are less than those identified through the Navy COOL website? | The Government confirms the information in Attachment_04_CSWF_Foundational _Qualification_Matrix_26_R_3005 SENSS is correct for this effort and will not be revised. | ||
| 39 | Section C, Statement of Work, paragraph 3.4.1.1.4 | Paragraph states "College degree" shall mean all degrees shall be obtained from an accredited college or university as recognized by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). This includes Associate of Arts (A.A.), Associate of Science (A.S.), Bachelor of Arts (B.A.), Bachelor of Science (B.S.), Master of Arts (M.A.), Master of Science (M.S.), and/or Doctorate (Ph.D.) degrees. Can the Government please clarify if a Master of Engineering (from an accredited college or University) would be accepted under the Master of Science (M.S.) requirement? | Master of Engineering will not be accepted under the Master of Science (M.S.) requirement. | |||
| 40 | Section C, Statement of Work, Paragraph 3.4.1.1.6 | Paragraph 3.4.2.1.6 states “Engineering or engineering discipline," when used in relation to educational or work experience requirements, shall mean any of the following specific subjects, disciplines, or areas of work experience only: aerospace, computer, electrical, electronics, mechanical, information systems, engineering technology, network, physics, software, systems engineering, or industrial engineering. Since this list expands beyond the traditional engineering disciplines and includes degrees such as information systems, software, computer, etc, would the Government consider revising the final RFP language to include Computer Science and Mathematics as allowable degree paths for the engineering discipline? | Computer is listed as one of the subject, disciplines, or areas of work experience. The RFO remains unchanged. | |||
| 41 | Section C, paragraphs 3.4.3, 3.4.3.4, and 3.4.3.5 | Paragraph outlines exceptions to the Qualification Substitution Chart provided in paragraph 3.4.3.4 and states “If a master’s degree is required for any of the labor categories listed below, a substitution of a Bachelor’s degree plus four years of relevant experience exceeding the experience requirements stated in paragraph 3.4.3 for the applicable labor category is allowable.”. The list referenced includes all engineering related LCATs as well as that of General and Operations Manager (Program Manager) Senior. With this description of suitable substitutions for the engineering related disciplines included in paragraph 3.4.3.5, can the government please confirm that a Bachelor’s Degree in a Technical Discipline (or even a Master’s degree in a technical discipline), plus four additional years of experience above and beyond the experience requirement stated for an engineering position requiring a Master’s degree (in an engineering discipline) is an acceptable substitution (which seems appropriate for the type of work defined within the Statement of Work) | The RFO remains unchanged. | |||
| 42 | Attachment 04 CSWF Foundational Qualifications Matrix | The (461) Systems Security Analyst Role/LCAT seems to have incorrect qualifications when compared to earlier versions of the DoD Qualification Matrices. Currently the Intermediate and Advanced proficiency levels have the same certification requirements. Would the government consider revising these certification requirements to distinguish the skillsets expected at varying levels of expertise to align to 8140 requirements and recognizing earlier advanced certifications such as CSSLP which remain relevant today. | The RFO remains unchanged. | |||
| 43 | Section C | Within the SOW, The government included the updated reference to the DOD 8140.03; however the Interim Guidance for the DoD 8140 Foundational Qualification Matrix Version 2.1, effective 19 September 2025, was not explicitly referenced in either the SOW or Attachment 04. The new DoD 8140 Interim Foundational Qualification Guidance for Education also expands the allowable IT-related degree disciplines from 6 to a total of 59 degree disciplines. For CSWF LCATs, will the government allow the expanded degree requirements to include the expanded list of 59 disciplines? The current DoD 8140 Interim Guidance can be found at the following link: https://www.cyber.mil/dod-workforce-innovation-directorate/dod8140/qualification-matrices | The RFO remains unchanged. | |||
| 44 | Section L | If a joint venture is submitting as a subcontractor, which PIEE account should be used for submittal of the proposal? Both entities of the JV have PIEE accounts. Should the JV’s proposal upload go through its own PIEE account, or should the partner upload the JV’s proposal through the partner account? | It is the discretion of the Joint Venture whose PIEE account is used to submit its proposal. | |||
| 45 | Section L, Page Limitations Chart, Section 2.3 on page 2, provides for a 5 page limit per key personnel resume. Within these 5 pages, offerors must present written evidence demonstrating how proposed Key Personnel meet specific qualifications, experiences, and performance requirements (by totaling the years/months of experience across all career employers, and the many programs they may have supported qualifying them as Senior Staff). Additionally, within the resume, offerors are required to complete a performance qualification matrix to help the Government evaluate the Key Personnel’s experience against that of the SOW requirements containing the functional description of the position. Given the broad experiences of many Sr Level Personnel, the potential need to list multiple employers/contracts supported to achieve those years of experience, and the need to complete the qualification matrix, can the Government (1) validate the 10 point font requirement for tables, figures, and graphs applies to key resumes (for information that appears in the tables the Government provided in the Att 20 Template) or (2) extend the page count for key resumes to 6 pages to accommodate for the real estate consumed by the qualification matrix (if the 12 pt font requirement does extend to all elements of the resume? | The RFO remains unchanged. | ||||
| 46 | Section L, Part A, paragraph 2.5 on page 3 restricts formatting for offers to letter sized (8.5” x 11”), single spaced, with one-inched margins, 12pt Times New Roman Font. These restrictions are typically found specifically for written narratives. Does this requirement apply to attachment T1, as well, or can offerors use discretion per the “Contractor format is acceptable” note in the table on page on page 2? Given the tech volume is an oral presentation (built in Microsoft Power Point), can the government please confirm submission requirements for the oral presentation power point presentation. Specifically, can the Government please confirm if: 1) “wide format” is acceptable (or if Gov’t prefers Narrow / 4:3 format), or 2) an alternate font is allowable/acceptable for the Presentation (e.g. Ariel Narrow) as Time’s New Roman often encounters readability issues when projected via projector/large display? | Please see the answer to Question number 25. | ||||
| 47 | SF33 (N00421-26-R-3005.pdf) | Can the Government provide all clauses with effective date of Feb 2026 (RFO Clauses) in full text. While these are listed in acquisition.gov, there is no version(date) control. | The clauses will remain as incorporated by reference. The clauses can be found at Acquisition.gov. | |||
| 48 | Att_18_Section_L | May Contractors use either standard or widescreen format for presentation slides in Microsoft PowerPoint? | Please see the answer to Question number 25. | |||
| 49 | Att_18_Section_L | Section L of the solicitation provides instructions for the completion of Attachment C3 (Fixed/T&M Price Narrative); however, it does not specify how the Government would like to receive subcontractor non‑proprietary Attachment C3 information. Could the Government please clarify whether subcontractor non‑proprietary Attachment C3 data can be submitted by the prime within the Cost/Price Volume, or whether each subcontractor is required to upload this information directly into PIEE (https://piee.eb.mil)? | Attachment C3 can be submitted by the Prime. | |||
| 50 | Att_18_Section_L | Who has ownership and configuration control of the testing lab baseline, and will the Contractor be authorized to install applications or perform necessary configurations on the testing networks to support mission-specific objectives? | No additional information will be provided. Offeror can document key assumptions as described in Sample Task | |||
| 51 | Att_18_Section_L and |
Att_13_SBPCD
| Section L of the solicitation does not include instructions for submitting a Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP). However, the solicitation package includes an SBPP template Att 13_SBPCD. Please clarify whether an SBPP is required as part of the Offeror’s submission, and if so, in which volume it should be included? | Attachment 13 is not required at time of offer submission. See CDRL A004 for time of submission. | ||||
| 52 | Attachment P-1 Key Personnel | Att. 18, Section L, 2.5 (pg. 3) allows Contractors to "remove the turquoise highlighted instruction text from Attachment P1." As we fill out Attachment P1, may Contractors also remove purely instructional language, such as directions on what info a table cell should contain, from our submissions? | |||
| For example: "Copy & Paste Function (from the respective labor category in PWS, Paragraph 3.4) in its entirety here." | Yes, Contractors may remove instructional language from submissions. | ||||
| 53 | Attachment P-1 Key Personnel | As we fill out Attachment P1, in sections where the Government asks that functional qualifications and required experience requirements from the RFP be copied directly into the form, may bidding Contractors add numerical reference tags to the Government text to facilitate traceability during evaluations? | |||
| For example: "Plan, direct, or coordinate the operations of public or private sector organizations, overseeing multiple departments or locations [F1]. Duties and responsibilities include formulating policies[F2], managing daily operations[F3], ...." | Adding numerical reference tags is not allowed. | ||||
| 54 | SOW | In accordance with new OPM guidance per OPM's Information Technology (IT) Management Series 2210 (Alternative A), may Contractors omit non-relevant education (e.g, high school, BS/MS) in our Attachment P1 responses? | The RFO remains unchanged. | ||
| 55 | SOW | Is the Government willing to support access to SIPR and/or SAP networks to contractor facilities via FENCES or ICON to enable surge support from contractor facilities outside of the PAX River area? | No, Program requirements inhibit external access at this time. | ||
| 56 | SOW | The Statement of Work file posted with the final solicitation documents is identified as Attachment 1 by its filename. The DD 254 is also identified as Attachment 1. Is the SOW intended to be Attachment 2? | The Government reviewed Section J and the Attachments and has confirmed the Attachment Numbers are correct. Attachment 01 is Statement of Work and Attachment 02 is DD254 | ||
| 57 | Final RFO | Att_18_Section_L_-_Instructions_Conditions_and_Notices_26-R-3005_(SENSS).pdf | PAGE: 3 | SECTION NO.: L.2.5 | | SECTION TEXT: Offers shall be formatted using letter-sized (8.5” x 11”) pages, single-spaced, with one-inch (1”) margins all around. | Will the Government allow the PowerPoint Standard (4:3) format and maintain margins of no less than 0.5 for Volume 2 – Technical, Section 2. Oral Presentation – Sample Task Attachment T1. | Please see the answer to Question number 25. | |
| 58 | Final RFO | Att_18_Section_L_-_Instructions_Conditions_and_Notices_26-R-3005_(SENSS).pdf | PAGE: 3 | SECTION NO.: L.2.5 | | SECTION TEXT: The Contractor shall number the pages sequentially and use a 12-point Times New Roman font. | Will the Government allow Headers and Footers font to be no less than 10-point font Volume 2 – Technical, Section 2. Oral Presentation – Sample Task Attachment T1. | Please see the answer to Question number 25. | |
| 59 | Att C1 Cost Workbook 26-R-3005 (SENSS) | Att C1 Cost Workbook 26-R-3005 (SENSS) is currently linked to an external source. Are Offerors permitted to remove the link? | Please see the answer to question number 5. | ||
| 60 | Att_18_Section_L_-_Instructions_Conditions_and_Notices_26-R-3005_(SENSS) and Att_19_Section_M_-_Evaluation_Factors_for_Award_26-R-3005_(SENSS).pdf | L PAGE: 6 and M PAGE: 16 | SECTION NO. 3.5.2 Other Direct Costs (ODCs) and 3.4 Evaluation of Options. | SECTION NAME(s): | | SECTION TEXT: “Specifically, the evaluated cost/price of this six-month period will be calculated by dividing the final option period by two (2) to establish the estimated cost for the six-month option to extend services. “ | | Evaluation criteria state that the evaluated cost/price of this six-month period will be calculated by dividing the final option period by two. However, the Government Furnished Information does not provide an ODC NTE amounts for the 6-month extension. Can the Gov’t please confirm if ODCs are to be proposed for the 6-month extension? | Please see the answer to question number 5. | |
| 61 | Att_18_Section_L_-_Instructions_Conditions_and_Notices_26-R-3005_(SENSS).pdf and Att C1 Cost Workbook 26-R-3005 (SENSS)| PAGE: 13 | SECTION NO.: 3.3.1.2 | SECTION NAME(s): Escalation and Cost Summary tab| | SECTION TEXT: “Any Contractor and/or Subcontractor that does not propose escalation or include an explanation as to why escalation is not proposed, may be considered unrealistically low and may have its Offer adjusted by the Government to include escalation applied to option years 1-4.“ and Cells AI4 AI5 of Cost Summary | Per Att_18_Section_L_-_Instructions_Conditions_and_Notices section 3.3.1.2 Escalation, escalation is to be applied to option years 1-4. The Gov. included escalation factors in tab Cost Summary tab of Att C1 Cost Workbook 26-R-3005 for year 6. Can the Government confirm if escalation should be applied to the 6-month extension? | Please see the answer to question number 5. | |
| 62 | Att_10_Wage_Determination_26-R-3005_(SENSS).pdf | It appears that a newer Wage Determination with a Date Of Last Revision: 2/11/2026 was released since the WD that was provided with the RFO. Can the Government confirm if the WD issued with the RFO or the most current available WD dated 2/11/2026 should be used by Offerors? | Please see the answer to Question number 29. | ||
| 63 | Final RFO | Att_01_Statement_of_Work_26-R-3005_(SENSS).pdf | Page: 38 and 43 | SECTION NO.: 3.4.6 and 3.4.7 | SECTION TEXT: CSWF Services Labor Qualifications and Service Contract Act (SCA) Labor Qualifications | Computer Systems Analyst II/III (SCA 14102/14103) appear in both CSWF and SCA labor qualification sections. Can the Gov. confirm if Computer Systems Analyst II/III are SCA-covered? | There is a SCA Computer Systems Analyst LCAT and BLS Computer System Analyst II/III LCAT. | |
| 64 | : Final RFO | Att+15+Cost+Reimbursable+Narrative+26-R-3005+(SENSS) | SECTION NO.: I PAGE: 4 | SECTION TEXT: “Contractor’s Cognizant DCAA/DCMA Office, POC(s) Information and Defense Finance Accounting Service (DFAS) DoDAAC (to be completed by the Contractor only” | There are multiple DFAS DoDAACs included in the solicitation, please specify the DFAS DoDAAC to be referenced in Table 3 of Att C2 Cost Reimbursable Narrative. | The DFAS DoDAAC is unique to each Contractor based on Contractor's CAGE Code. | |
| 65 | Amendment 1 | Att_18_Section_L_-_Instructions_Conditions_and_Notices_26-R-3005_(SENSS)_Rev_01_AMD_01.pdf | PAGE: 8 | SECTION NO.: Part C.2.1.3 | SECTION TEXT: In support of this platform, the Contractor will maintain a hybrid multi-classification operational and development environment to include system of interest and system development environment software and hardware. | For the Multi-Classification environment is the contractor expected to be responsible for building a Cross-Domain Solution (CDS) or implementing a CDS in the Software Development Environment? | No additional information will be provided. Offeror can document key assumptions as described in Sample Task | |
| 66 | Amendment 1 | Att_18_Section_L_-_Instructions_Conditions_and_Notices_26-R-3005_(SENSS)_Rev_01_AMD_01.pdf | PAGE: 8 | SECTION NO.: Part C.2.1.3 | | SECTION TEXT: In support of this platform, the Contractor will maintain a hybrid multi-classification operational and development environment to include system of interest and system development environment software and hardware. | For the Multi-Classification environment is the environment moving from Unclassified to Classified or Secret to Top Secret? | No additional information will be provided. Offeror can document key assumptions as described in Sample Task | |
| 67 | Amendment 1 | Att_18_Section_L_-_Instructions_Conditions_and_Notices_26-R-3005_(SENSS)_Rev_01_AMD_01.pdf | PAGE: 2 | SECTION NO.: 4.1.1 | SECTION TEXT: Offers shall be marked “Controlled Unclassified Information” and “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.” | Which Response Volumes and Attachments are required to include “Controlled Unclassified Information” markings? | Attachment Volume 1 Prerequisites, Volume 2 Technical, and Volume 3 Cost/Price should utilize CUI / SSI markings. | |
| 68 | Amendment 1 | Att_18_Section_L_-_Instructions_Conditions_and_Notices_26-R-3005_(SENSS)_Rev_01_AMD_01.pdf; Att_19_Section_M_-_Evaluation_Factors_for_Award_26-R-3005_(SENSS).pdf | L PAGE: 7, M Page 2 | SECTION NO.: L.2.1.2.6.1, M.4.2.2 | | SECTION TEXT: L: …. The written slides will not be evaluated as part of the Technical Factor., M:… Step 2: The Government will evaluate Volume 2 - Technical via comparative analysis as described below. | Will the Government consider clarifying the apparent conflict in Section L, to include the Written Slides will be evaluated to agree with Section M and to be sure all material is considered. | As stated in Section L,Part B paragraph 2.1.2.6.1," The written slides will not be evaluated as part of the Technical Factor." As stated in Section M, 4.2.2.1, "Following receipt of the Offer, including the Oral Presentation - Sample Tasks, the Government will rank the Technical Offers via a comparative analysis, that directly compares Contractor proposals to one another, to determine the HTRO that is best suited to fulfill the TO requirements by considering the following Technical Element: Sample Task." The written slides will not be evaluated. Only the Oral Presenation will be evaluated. | |
| 69 | N00421-26-R-3005_AMD_0001.pdf (002) | PAGE: 4 | SECTION NO.: B | Section B currently does not contain CLINs for the 6-month extension. Will the Government add CLINs to Section B for 6-month extension? | Please see the answer to question number 5. | ||
| 70 | Attachment 18, Section L, paragraph 2.4 | Paragraph 2.4 states "each volume shall contain the following information:...Table of Contents". Does this requirement apply to the PowerPoint presentation that will be submitted as Volume 2.0, Technical? | Please see the answer to Question number 25. | ||
| 71 | Attachment 18, Section L, paragraph 2.5 | Paragraph 2.5 states "Offers shall be formatted using letter-sized (8.5” x 11”) pages, single-spaced, with one-inch (1”) margins all around. The Contractor shall number the pages sequentially and use a 12-point Times New Roman font". Do the margins and font size restrictions apply to the PowerPoint presentation that will be submitted as Volume 2.0, Technical? | Please see the answer to Question number 25. | ||
| 72 | Att 14 Cost Workbook and Att 18 Section L | Row 4 of the Cost Summary tab in the Att 14 Cost Workbook includes a BLS Escalation at 3.3%; however, Att 18 Section L Part C Specific Instructions repeatedly references escalation of 3.6% in Section 3.0 Volume 3 Cost Price, paragraphs 3.3.1.1.2, 3.3.1.2.1, 3.3.1.2.2.1. Can the Government confirm the correct escalation? | Please see the answer to question number 5. | ||
| 73 | Att 14 Cost Workbook | Year 6 in the Cost Summary tab of Att 14 Cost Workbook includes Escalation for both BLS and SCLS categories; however, Att 18 Section L Part C Specific Instructions Section 3.0 Volume 3 Cost Price, paragraphs 3.3.1.2.2, 3.3.1.2.2.1 and 3.3.1.2.3 only require escalation on option years 1-4 (Years 2 – 5). Can the Government clarify which years escalation should be applied to? | Please see the answer to question number 5. | ||
| 74 | Please confirm whether the “Controlled Unclassified Information” marking is intended solely as a protective marking for Source Selection Information, rather than as a formal CUI designation under DoDI 5200.48. | Confirming, “Controlled Unclassified Information” marking is intended solely as a protective marking for Source Selection Information, rather than as a formal CUI designation under DoDI 5200.48. | |||
| 75 | Please confirm whether offerors are required to apply any specific CUI category, designation indicator, or additional DoD CUI elements beyond the exact wording provided in Section L. | Please see the answer to Question numbers 21 and 67. | |||
| 76 | To avoid inconsistent interpretation across offerors, would the Government be able to provide a sample page or template (e.g., header, footer, and cover‑page example) illustrating the exact markings expected for proposal submissions? | A sample page will not be provided. Please see the answer to question number 21 for appropriate CUI information and also refer to Attachment 18 Section L Part A paragrah 4.1.1 | |||
| AMD 0003 (Q&A #3) | |||||
| 77 | |||||
| In reviewing attachments Att_14_C1_Cost_Workbook_26_R_3005__SENSS__AMD_0002 and Att_17_C4_Government_Labor_Hours_26_R_3005__SENSS__AMD_0002 of Amendment 2, there is an inconsistency in hours for the Software Developers, Advanced LCAT between the Key versus Non-Key. The hours for Key and Non-Key LCATs are consistent from year to year in the Total Hours tab of Att 17 C4 Government Labor Hours, while the hours shift from Key to Non-Key after Year 1 in Hours Check - FOR GOVT USE tab of the Att 14 C1. The Total Hours tab on Att 17 C4 Government Labor Hours totals 9,600 hours for Key and 21,360 for Non-Key Hours, while the Hours Check - FOR GOVT USE tab of the Att 14 C1 attachment totals 5,520 hours for Key and 25,440 for Non-Key hours. Att 17 doesn’t break out the hours between the two Government site locations like Att 14 does, and since the information in the attachments differs, offerors don’t have sufficient information in Att 17 alone to bid the hours between PAX and WOLF. The Hours Check tab in Att 14 does not reflect a full FTE in the out years for the Key LCAT, while Att 17 does. Can the Government provide clarification for the discrepancy between the attachments? | The Government has revised the inconsisencies between Attachment 17, Government Labor Hours and Attachment 14, Cost Workbook. | ||||
| 78 | Att 17 - Amend 0002 | Tab - Total Hours | Please clarify should the total be 796,828 vs 723,880? The sum in COUMN I is missing the six months option hours. | The total hours are 723,880. Please see the answer to question Number 15 regarding FAR 52.217-8. The Government has revised Attachment 17, Government Labor Hours to remove 'on-site' and 'off-site' tabs. The Total Hours tab has been broken out by 'PAX' and 'WOLF' for Government site as reflected in Attachment 14, Cost Workbook 'Hour Check - FOR GOVT USE' Tab. | |
| 79 | Att 17 - Amend 0002 | Tab - On site Hours tab | There are hours for the 6 months extension on Attach 17, but there are not hours in the Gov't Cost model (Attach C1). Please advise. | Please see the answer to question number 78. | |
| 80 | Att 17 - Amend 0002 | Tab - Off site Hours tab | There are hours for the 6 months extension on Attach 17, but there are not hours in the Gov't Cost model (Attach C1). Please advise. | Please see the answer to question number 78. | |
| 81 | Att 17 - Amend 0002 | Tab - Hours Check - FOR GOVT USE | There are no hours for the six months extension which does not match Attach 17. Please advise | Please see the answer to question number 78. | |
| 82 | Att 14 - Cost Workbook | Link name "8.18.25 Template Att C1 - Cost Reimbursable Workbook | Can you please let the offeror know if we can break the external link in the Amend 2 Cost Workbbok? We are not sure if we break the link within the workbook will affect other tabs where the Governement restricted us not to touch for evaluation purposes. | The Government has removed the external link from Attachment 14, Cost Workbook. | |
| 83 | Section L, Part A, Page 2, Subsection 2.3 | Attachments C2 and C3 must be submitted as "Microsoft Word 2016/.docx | Section L, Part A, Subsection 2.3 (Table 1) specifies that Attachments C2 and C3 must be submitted in Microsoft Word 2016 (.docx) format. Given the number of required enclosures and the signature elements associated with these attachments, would the Government permit offerors to submit Attachments C2 and C3 in .pdf format instead of .docx? | The Government has revised Attachment 18, Section L, Part A, Paragraph 2.2 and 2.3 Table 1 to incorporate Adobe Software, if applicable. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .