Attachment 0007- Questions and Answers for Solicitation W15QKN21R5001.pdf

W15QKN21R5001

Questions & Answers Afghan Personnel and Pay System (APPS)

22 October 2020

#1 - Question: Can local afghan companies send a proposal for the Requirement service?

Answer: Yes. As stated in the Request for Proposal (RFP), “This Procurement is restricted, limiting competition to services from Afghanistan, in accordance with DFAR 225.77991 (a)(2).”

Per Deviation 2020-O0002, Service from Afghanistan, a Central Asian state, Pakistan, or the South Caucasus” means a service (including construction) that is performed in Afghanistan, a Central Asian state, Pakistan, or the South Caucasus by citizens or permanent resident aliens of these countries.

#2 - Question: Is this an “Afghan First” Project? Please Verify.

Answer: Please see answer 1.

#3 - Question: Our company has determined that the incumbent for this effort is a firm in Afghanistan, NETLINKS. Is NETLINKS able to bid on this?

Answer: Yes.

#4 - Question: What are the contract numbers that NETLINKS were awarded to provide services and personnel for APPS?

Answer: Previous contract for APPS; W91B4N-20-C-2000 & W56SGK16C0016.

#5 - Question: Does the Afghan or U.S. Government have a budget for this APPS contract?

Answer: Yes, there is a budget for the APPS contract

#6 - Question: The PWS (Section 4.1.3) calls for an “APPS Modernization Plan” that “shall be included as part of the Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) IAW CDRL A012 and be submitted to the COR 30 days after contract award for review”, however, the solicitation document requires offerors to submit the “APPS Modernization Plan” as part of their response (see page 74 of 85). Please clarify when the APPS Modernization Plan is to be submitted.

Answer: The initial APPS Modernization Plan shall be submitted as part of the solicitation proposal. That same plan shall be included as part of the SEMP and submitted to the COR 30 days upon contract award. This is when the plan will be reviewed and approved by the APPS PMO (U.S. Government) for feasibility and implementation.

#7 - Question: APPS appears to be a new system. We have the following questions regarding the AMP:

7a. Why is a Modernization Plan being sought for this relatively new system?

Answer: With the fast pace, technological growth in the field of Information Technology there is always room for growth and improvement with the system. Keeping the APPS system user friendly (ease of use) to the Afghans while meeting ongoing requirements, staying in sync with inherent law and policy, maintaining structure and data integrity while maintaining system viability, are all key pieces in the modernization vision.

7b. Can the Government provide any details regarding problems they have encountered with the system?

Answer: The Government has not encountered any problems with the system.

7c. Has the incumbent (NETLINKS) provided adequate services and personnel over the history of the APPS effort?

Answer: Yes

7d. What would the Government like to see done differently in the next contract for APPS?

Answer: Continue modernization to make the system more user friendly.

#8 - Question: Would the Government provide other system documentation (architecture diagrams, user manuals, trouble tickets, design concepts, etc.) for APPS in its current state?

This will greatly help our team to determine where we can modernize the application.

Answer: PWS 4.1.3 has been updated to clarify AMP requirement.

#9 - Question: Would the government please produce and distribute database documentation (data dictionaries, schemas, ER Diagrams) for the APPS Database? This will help our team determine where we can modernize database performance.

Answer: PWS 4.1.3 has been updated to clarify AMP requirement.

#10 - Question: Would the Government please provide a list of external systems that currently interface with APPS and explain whether these systems are linked to the financial institutions in Afghanistan?

Answer: There are no external systems that currently interface with APPS

#11 - Question: If the government is unable to provide any other documentation regarding the inner workings of APPS, we request that the government please remove the requirement to produce the APPS Modernization Plan as part of the proposal. Once our team can review the system, we will have a stronger idea as to how we can modernize the system and can produce a better Modernization Plan in accordance with CDRL A012.

Answer: PWS 4.1.3 has been updated to clarify AMP requirement.

#12 - Question: The government provides an example table for the staffing plan which includes a column for clearance. Does the government anticipate clearances will be required for this contract? If so, can the government elaborate on when a clearance would be required and for what personnel?

Answer: A clearance is not required unless required by contractors internal requirements. The table was an example, and has been revised.

#13 - Question: Does the Government have a time constraint for when the Transition-In period must be completed (e.g. 30 days)?

Answer: Transition-In Period is based on 60 days and must be completed prior to the end of the current PoP (30 April 2021)

#14 - Question: The requirements for Volume II (Past Performance) are unclear. Please explain or rephrase the requirement to produce 3 pages for the major subcontractors. Are these 3 pages for the major subcontractors we have chosen to work on APPS, or are the 3 pages for the major subcontractors for the past performance contracts we have chosen?

Answer: As stated in the Request for Proposal, the Offeror may submit up to 3 Past Performance References. These references can include references for major subcontractors.

The Maximum page limit is 3 pages per each reference. The Narrative Portion shall not exceed 2 Pages per reference.

#15 - Question: Regarding the Past Performance requirement, can our company provide past performance references from our Afghan Government customers to include the Ministry of Defense and Ministry of Finance? Or would it be more beneficial to provide past performance references from our U.S. Government clients such as USAID and Department of Defense?

Answer: The Offeror shall provide past performance references in accordance with the RFP.

#16 - Question: Other than the details provided in the RFP regarding major subcontractors, are there any other requirements for the RFP response regarding the use of a U.S. company as a subcontractor?

Answer: No.

#17 - Question: Regarding the Price Proposal, why must the price be submitted in U.S.

Dollars?

Answer: Per DFARS 252.232-7014, vendors shall submit quotations and offers in U.S. dollars.

#18 - Question: In light of the above questions, may we request / will you consider an extension on the RFP?

Answer: Response date has been extended to 30 October 2020.

#19 – Question: What are the current contractor manning levels for APPS? In particular, what are the current positions and locations?

Answer: Positions and manning levels on current contract cannot be compared. The PWS 2.1 defines the key personnel. The PWS in 3.1.2 describes location “GIROA will provide the facilities at MoI and MoD locations to include desk space and telephones. The Contractor shall have an office located in Kabul, Afghanistan that will be utilized in addition to the MoI and MoD locations”.

#20 – Question: Volume II (Past Performance) contains a section “Submissions” that discourages offerors from providing POCs from another firm. We do not understand the Government’s requirement with this. Can the Government elaborate on this and provide a more clear example of when this may not be suitable? Would it ever be suitable to use a POC from a prime in any case for reporting past performance?

Answer: As stated in the RFP, this submission requirement is in case an offeror (or one of his/her team members) is in a subcontract with another contractor who has submitted a proposal on the same requirement.

#21 – Question: Volume III (Price) is unclear in that it requires the contractor to submit an unpriced price/cost volume “with all rates, dollars, and amounts removed” and “shall include the unit price for each part”. What is the definition of “part” in this context? Please elaborate on what is required for the unpriced price/cost volume with regards to labor/services.

Answer: Volume III has been updated to remove Bill of Materials.

#22 – Question: Volume III (Price) directs the offeror to submit prices “rounded to the nearest dollar”. This seems unusual and we want to make sure that we understand this as to not provide a non-conforming price proposal. To be clear, each proposed labor category should be priced rounded to the nearest dollar for the base year and all option years, regardless of escalation increase in each option year?

Answer: The statement “rounded to the nearest dollar” has been removed. Per the RFP, when calculating the total evaluated price, the Government will round each CLIN to the nearest dollar.

#23 – Question: PWS states, "The Contractor shall ensure it obtains and complies with the most current version of the USG and commercial IA-748-B, Earned Value Management Systems, JUN 2007, Electronic Industries Alliance. If the contract is predominantly Firm Fixed Price (FFP) why is this compliance item required?

Answer: EVM will not apply to this proposal as this contract is predominantly it will be FFP.

#24 – Question: Majority of the project staff will work exclusively at Contractor facility or at MOI and MOD facilities and do not have a "need to access" USG bases. Please clarify the following statement, “All personnel must meet initial screening requirements. Employees must obtain an escort base access badge." Does this apply to ALL personnel at working with the Contractor under the APPS Program?

Answer: This is a US legal required statement within the PWS and will not apply to this contract unless required by the ministry or internal to the contractor.

#25 – Question: Referring to 4.1.3, APPS Modernization Plan (AMP). APPS Modernization would require substantial effort and resources to be able to update, upgrade and maintain a world class system taking capacity management and scalability into account. As such, there will be many unforeseen scenarios that may not present themselves until the actual modernization work is in progress. As a result, it is likely that some may have not been included in the proposal as a solicited ECP (ECPII). Given this scenario, will the Government be willing to review such exceptions, discovered during the Modernization process and potentially re-classify them as Class I ECP’s in accordance with the process laid out in 4.3.1?

Answer: PWS 4.1.3 updated for clarification.

#26 – Question: Should the AMP include cost proposal for Class I ECPs in the proposal for this contract or the cost can be submitted later on after the contract award?

Answer: PWS 4.1.3 has been updated to clarify AMP requirement.

#27 – Question: Does the Government intend or foresee replacement of Hardware and Software as part of the APPS Modernization Plan? If yes, should the cost proposal for the Hardware and Software replacements be sent as part of the AMP in the Contractors initial proposal and offer?

Answer: It is on the contractor to determine if this is a requirement and/or a necessity. See PWS 4.1.3 for update to clarify AMP requirement.

#28 – Question: The PWS provision states that "When the Contractor has sufficient insight into the change, the Contractor shall submit a Software Requirements Specification (SRS) for approval to the COR defining the requirement and the proposed way forward." The changes or request for enhancements/modification are received by the RS APPS PMO, prioritized and submitted to the Contractor for action, who will then create detailed SRS and provide time and effort details for design, development and deployment of those. Can the government revise the verbiage in this provision and clarify that the requirement will actually be provided to the Contractor for drafting the SRS, as the Contractor will not be directly receiving the requirements from the Ministries?

Answer: PWS 4.1.4 has been updated for further clarification

#29 – Question: The PWS provision states that “Enhancement shall include but is not limited to: software and architecture changes with existing baseline data, source code changes, modifying of software products, software/hardware/architecture product performance scalability, replacements for obsolete components, safety, compatibility, security, product improvements and technology improvements that currently exist in workflows, module and reports, process changes that affect the process while not affecting other workflows and processes.” The definition of Enhancement should be clarified in terms of scope. Hardware and Licensed Software component replacement carries cost implications and should be classified as Class I

ECP.

Answer: Enhancements are not considered a modification and shall not be separately proposed, billed, and/or charged against the contract.

Modification will require a Class I ECP.

PWS 4.1.4 has been updated for further clarification

#30 – Question: Request that definition of Enhancement and Modification under provision 4.1.4 should be more clearly defined. even although it says states, "Modification is when the workflow itself is changed causing current operability of a feature/module to be significantly changed/modified", we have had the same concern in the current APPS contract. Because almost all the enhancements might bring change in the operability of the feature. How should we define the magnitude of the change if it is a minor or significant change/modification? Could the Government please provide more clarification and guidance regarding its distinctions definition from between Enhancement and Modification and include that in the verbiage of this provision 4.1.4?

Answer: PWS 4.1.3 & 4.1.4 has been updated for further clarification

Any concerns on additional work or costs required to perform enhancements should be priced into the proposal.

#31 – Question Would the Government only term define "changes being made in the current flow which can either affect other processes or workflow that is inter-related to it or the changes requested modify the current operability of the feature/module" as a Modification?

Answer: PWS 4.1.4 updated for further clarification. Modernization and enhancement is included in Sustainment.

#32 – Question The provision states that "Updates required to manuals, guides and SOPS are to be completed prior or upon release of enhancement". For updating the manuals, the changes should be released so the Training Department of the Contractor could go and use the system, and take screenshots of the process flows for the Training manuals and SOPs. In our experience, minor changes, will take approximately 2 to 4 days to update the manuals and for some big changes, it will might take up to two weeks to update all the manuals and SOPs.

Some changes will affect the workflow of many other modules and the manuals of other modules may also require updating. Could the Government please revise the language or provide additional guidance and clarification?

Answer: PWS 4.1.4 updated for further clarification

#33 – Question Provision 4.1.9 states that " The Contractor shall update and maintain all existing special design considerations to include: network design approaches, data control, security and audit procedures; archived historical data, current data purging and data entry criteria, scheduling, disaster recovery, special quality assurance (QA) factors and configuration control (QC) requirements." How long should the archived historical data be maintained? What is the time period and policy for the retention of the data? Clarification to the mentioned questions from the Government will assist in identifying the procurement of the necessary hardware needed for archiving of the data.

Answer: Archived data has to be maintained in perpetuity since it is used to calculate retirement benefits, historical claims for lost benefits, etc.

#34 – Question Referring to provision 4.2, as the Tier 1 helpdesk has already transitioned into the ministries, the Contractor will only be responsible for all activities associated with Tier 2 and Tier 3 Helpdesk levels and that needs to be mentioned in this provision. Is the Contractor expected to perform data entry, manage data and cleanse data based on the requests from the ministries through the US Government? What are the expected number of records to be managed/cleansed and do we require to engage data entry teams to do the same? Would the Government consider adding a separate CLIN if the effort required is substantial?

Answer: PWS 4.1.5 has been updated for further clarification. No, a CLIN will not be added for this effort. The number of records to be reviewed will vary pending pay issues. An estimate of records is difficult to identify and can vary from month to month, an average there could be 6000-8000 records reviewed for changes to be made monthly.

#35 – Question Referring to provision 4.3 and 4.1.4, based on our current experience, a lot of change requests from the ministries require enhancement/modification. Either these CRs request a completely new feature in the system or changes to the current feature which will affect the current operability of a feature and module. Given the time required to vet the ECP by

COR/KO and to modify the contract through multiple ECPs, could the Government perhaps add a time and material CLIN for software development/modification and hardware, saving the PMO and Contract Office time to modify the contract every time there is a new requirement?

Answer: No. Additions to the PWS are required to be added to the contract via a contract modification.

#36 – Question Referring to 4.3, all ECPs need to be added to the contract with KO's approval.

However, 4.3.2 (Class II ECP) states that Class 2 ECPs can be approved by COR - Does this mean that only Class 1 ECPs where there is additional firm fixed price (via an ECP Proposal), will need to be added to the contract via a modification or would all class ECPs need to be added to the contract via a contract MOD with KO approval, some as no-cost ECPs?

Answer: All ECP’s, regardless of Class or associated cost, shall be incorporated into the contract via modification.

#37 – Question The system performance and concurrent usage as listed under this provision (The systems architecture shall be able to sustain 300 hundred hits and concurrent queries with no degradation) will be solely dependent on the APPS hardware and software infrastructure which is not supported by the current hardware infrastructure of APPS.

Answer: Yes

#38 – Question In addition to the technical functionality availability of the system, APPS’ availability as listed under this provision (APPS service shall be available twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week) is also dependent on the availability of other physical, environmental and logistical factors such as electricity, network-connectivity, infrastructure support and accessibility which should be considered and listed here which cannot be guaranteed by the Contractor. Also, the system will need downtime for scheduled (pre-announced) and unscheduled maintenance purposes. Will the government please consider revising the verbiage of this provision?

Answer: Down time of the system is in coordination with the ministries, the APPS PMO and during non-working days for the Afghans. Otherwise service shall be available twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week

#39 – Question Referring to provision 5.2.1, 5.2.2 and 5.2.3, the Tier 2 and Tier 3 trainings consist of multiple SME level courses which cannot be covered in a single class. Could the Government possibly elaborate what responsibilities fall under Tier 2 and Tier 3, based on the Government’s understanding and expectation from these trainings?

Answer: PWS 5.2.1, 5.2.2 & 5.2.3 has been updated to elaborate on tier 2, 3 and training.

#40 – Question The RFP states that “The Offeror shall provide a Transition-In plan with a reasonable, realistic approach for assuming full contractual responsibility without disruption or degradation of performance during the Phase-In period. The proposal shall include 1) a Transition-In plan to ensure sufficient resources are on board and available to begin work; 2) the required ramp-up time and approach to initiating project execution and bringing personnel on board at project start; and, 3) the identified risks, proposed appropriate mitigation strategies, and a realistic and achievable Phase-In schedule”. Is the incumbent contractor currently managing the APPS program, require to submit a Phase -In Transition Plan as part of the proposal and also as mentioned in provision 6.0 of the PWS?

RFP Volume 1, Technical Factor – Modernization Plan – Sub-Factor 3

Answer: Yes.

#41 – Question In regards to RFP Volume 1, Technical Factor – Modernization Plan – Sub- Factor 3

Answer: All vendors are required to submit an AMP.

41a.Should the AMP include cost proposal for Class I ECPs in the proposal for this contract or the cost can be submitted later on after the contract award?

Answer: Because the AMP is only a proposed approach, cost will have to be submitted after contract award and approval by the USG.

41b.Does the Government intend or foresee replacement of Hardware and Software as part of the APPS Modernization Plan? If yes, should the cost proposal for the Hardware and Software replacements be sent as part of the AMP in the Contractors initial proposal and offer?

Answer: This will be based on the contractor’s recommendations after the AMP has been executed. Because the AMP is only a proposed approach, cost will have to be submitted after contract award and approval by the USG.

#42 – Question In regards to RFP, CLINs 0005, 1004, 2004, 3004, 4004 Defense Base Act (DBA). DBA CLINs listed in the RFP are all Firm Fixed Price (FFP). Normally the offerors are asked to submit an estimated DBA insurance premium using a percentage of labor. The DBA insurance premium varies with payroll and the nature of services. The actual amount paid by the Government under a DBA CLIN will be based on the stamped "PAID" receipt from an approved Department of Labor (DoL) insurance career and submitted by the offeror after award for reimbursement. As such should these CLINs be designated as Cost Reimbursable (CR) CLINs?

Answer: This will not be a CR CLIN, contractor is to make a best case estimate with payroll and the nature of services based on RFP, history and similar scenarios.

#43 – Question In regards to RFP, Proposal Submission, Volume I, Technical Factor, Sub Factor 2, Management/Staffing. Staffing Plan Table as well as the narrative below the Table call for security clearance requirement for the Key Personnel. The offeror may submit Key Personnel who fall under various categories, Local National (LN), Third Country National (TCN) and US National (USN). Could the Government please clarify as to the clearance requirement needed for each category (LN/TCN/USN)?

Answer: No clearance is required unless required by contractor internal requirements, the staffing plan table is for a sample format only

#44 – Question In regards to the RFP, Section SF 1449- CONTINUATION SHEET, General Information. 4. Procurement Information, Page 3 states “This Procurement is restricted, limiting competition to services from Afghanistan, in accordance with DFAR 225.77991 (a)(2).” Would the Government please clarify, if this solicitation is issued in accordance with Afghan First Initiative or it will also be equally open to non-Afghan companies?

Answer: In accordance with Class Deviation 2020-O0002 DFARs 225.77991 (a)(2) the following services are limited to services from Afghanistan.

225.7799 Authority to acquire products and services (including construction) from Afghanistan or from countries along a major route of supply to Afghanistan. (DEVIATION 2020-O0002)

225.7799-1 Acquisition procedures.

(a) Subject to the requirements of 225.7799-2 and except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, a product or a service (including construction) from Afghanistan or from a country along a major route of supply to Afghanistan, other than small arms, in support of operations in Afghanistan, may be acquired by—

(2) Limiting competition to products or services from Afghanistan, a Central Asian state, Pakistan, or the South Caucasus.

#45 – Question Contract W15QKN18C0024, awarded to IronArch Technology provided the USG a SETA contractor to support APPS activities. The government has not included any of the provisions of FAR 9.5 (Organizational Conflict of Interest). We propose the government to include an OCI mitigation plan:

If the Offeror, to include its subcontractors, has provided support, is currently providing support or anticipates providing support to the Government that presents an actual or potential OCI with the requirements for this acquisition, or, if the Offeror or its subcontractors have performed, is currently performing or anticipates performing any other work for the Government under any quote for any solicitation relating to the requirements for this task order, the Offeror shall include in its quote submission:

(1) a statement identifying and describing the actual or potential OCI, and

(2) a proposed OCI mitigation plan detailing the Quoter's recommendation for how the potential OCI may be avoided, neutralized and/or mitigated.

If the Government determines an OCI cannot be avoided, neutralized, or mitigated, the Quoter may be excluded from consideration for award. This information shall be disclosed in the

COVER LETTER.

Answer: The referenced contract has ended its period of performance. No changes have been made to the PWS.

#46 – Question In regards to the RFP, Clauses Incorporated by Full Text. Page 64

"The Government has included a clause for Government Furnished Contractor Support (FAR 5152.225-5908) but does not provide any locations for which the Government may provide services. We would like the government to provide:

46a. The locations (bases) for which U.S. Contractors are authorized billeting.

Answer: This Procurement is restricted, limiting competition to services from Afghanistan, in accordance with DFAR 225.77991 (a)(2) & (c) (2) which is performed by Afghanistan citizens or permanent residents aliens of Afghanistan, therefore no US contractors are authorized billeting on any of the bases.

46b. The type of Installation Access Badge (i.e. NATO ID) that will be provided.

Answer: No Installation badge (i.e NATO ID) will be required per answer stated in 46a

46c. Request that Contractor also be allowed a CAC to access U.S. Government Systems"

Answer: No CAC access will be allowed per answer stated in 46a, Afghan personnel can have access to US government systems, nor is there a requirement for this.

#47 – Question Page 3 of the solicitation, paragraph 4 (A), Procurement Information, states that, “A. This Procurement is restricted, limiting competition to services from Afghanistan, in accordance with

DFAR 225.77991 (a)(2).” Please clarify that this statement means that only Afghan companies can compete for this procurement. We were also unable to find DFARS 225.7799(a)(2) at the DFARS tab on the Acquisition.gov website at https://www.acquisition.gov/content/regulations.

Please correct the cite or provide the verbiage associated with the cite.

Answer: Answer: Please see answer 44.

#48 – Question Section L, paragraph 2(b) on pagers 72-73 states the following: “File Packaging. All of the proposal files shall be compressed (zipped) into one file entitled proposal zip using WinZip version 6.2 or later, or as separate uploads in their native format, i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc., and sent electronically to the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer. Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files.” The following two sentences state, “Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. All price breakdown information to aide in the price/cost evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2007.” Please clarify whether native format or read-only format in PDF are required.

Answer: This section has been updated.

#49 – Question Section L, Volume II – Past Performance Factor, on page 74 states, “This volume shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts. This volume shall include 3 recent and relevant previous contracts, not to exceed 3 pages…” The Past Performance/Maximum Pages block in the table on the top of page 72 states, “This volume shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts. This volume shall include 3 recent and relevant previous contracts, not to exceed 3 pages…” Please confirm that the three pages for each contract includes two pages of narrative and one page containing the data required in the Volume II - Past Performance Factor, Section 1 Contract Descriptions on pages 74-75.

Answer: Yes. Please see answer 14.

#50 – Question Section L, paragraph 2(c), Content Requirement, on page 73 states, “Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file.” Please confirm that the Table of Contents and Summary sections are not included in each Volume’s page count as shown on the top of page 72.

Answer: The Table of Contents and Summary Section are not included in the page count.

#51 – Question Section L, Section 3 - Subcontracts states, “The information provided for the prime offeror and each proposed major subcontractor must include the entire company name, company address, CAGE Code, DUNS Number and type of work to be performed by citing the applicable Government PWS subparagraph number. This includes all subcontractors who will be providing critical hardware/services or whose subcontract is for more than 25% of the total proposed price/cost.” FACTOR 2 – Past Performance, paragraph (b) on page 82 states, “ ‘Major

Subcontractors’ are defined as the top three subcontractors, based only upon the highest total proposed

CONUS and OCONUS labor costs combined.” Please clarify the definition of a major subcontractor.

Answer: Information is required for major subcontractors, including subcontractors. This section has been updated.

#52 – Question The Past Performance/Maximum Pages block in the table on the top of page 72 states that there is a “3 Reference Maximum,” implying that fewer than three references may be submitted. Volume II – Past Performance Factor on page 74 states, “This volume shall include 3 recent and relevant previous contracts…” Please clarify if there is a maximum of three references for past performance or a requirement for three references.

Answer: Please see answer 14.

#53 – Question The APPS Performance Work Statement (PWS) is labeled ‘Draft’. Can the Government please confirm that this is the correct PWS that the offeror should be working off of?

Answer: The PWS was labeled draft with the expectation it would change slightly once all questions were received and responded to. The revised PWS will be a final version.

#54 – Question Can the Government please confirm that the required Table of Contents and Summary Sections are not included in the volume page limitations?

Answer: Please see answer 50.

#55 – Question The SF 1449 states that the solicitation release was on August 24, 2020.

However, the APPS solicitation was not released to GovWin and BetaSAM until September 11, 2020. Can the Government confirm the release date of the solicitation?

Answer: The solicitation W15QKN21R5001 was released 11 September 2020. The August 24 date ties to the pre-solicitation notice date.

#56 – Question Does the offeror need to submit a Letter of Commitment (LOC) for a Key Personnel who are currently employed by the offeror?

Answer: As stated in the Request for Proposal, Section L, Submissions, Volume I Technical Factor, Management/Staffing Subfactor, “The Offeror shall provide a letter of commitment for each Key Personnel identified, documenting availability to begin performing this effort at time of contract award. The letter of commitment does not count against the Technical Volume page limitation.”

#57 – Question PWS Section 4.5.5 is mislabeled. The PWS skips Section 4.5.4.

Answer: The PWS sections have been revised.

#58 – Question The solicitation states billeting and meals are authorized. Can the Government clarify what installation contract personnel are anticipated to reside?

Answer: No billeting or meals are authorized per answer stated in 46a

#59 – Question Is the Modernization Plan to be unpriced at the time of the solicitation submission and funded separately during the period of performance based on approved changes?

Answer: PWS 4.1.3 has been updated to clarify AMP requirement.

#60 – Question: Are the proposed modernizations and enhancements unpriced at the time of the solicitation submission and funded separately during the period of performance based on approved changes?

Answer: The Government is not asking for proposed modifications and enhancements when submitting their proposal. PWS 4.1.3 has been updated to clarify AMP requirement.

#61 – Question: The Government states the place of performance will be at designated MoI and MoD locations. Can the Government provide a listing or overview of the number of locations APPS has been fielded and locations scheduled to be fielded at a later time?

Answer: APPS is located on the server at each ministry, the only fielding required was initial setup on the server. APPS can be accessed by anyone who has an account through their computer, therefore afghan users can access APPS from several/various locations throughout Afghanistan. Place of performance for contractor will be at an office within each of the ministries, visitations to the ministries and at the contractor’s home base office in Kabul, Afghanistan.

#62 – Question: The PWS states the contractor must be compliant with DODI-8500.2, Information Assurance Implementation. Since the system and application will be hosted on Afghan Government facilities and installations, and utilized by Afghan personnel not subject to US DoD standards, can the Government clarify its intent for this requirement?

Answer: This reference is required in a US document and is provided for information and guidance in the execution of this effort. This is to be identified and documented post award If not applicable.

#63 – Question: Do all key personnel need to be bid as full time equivalents?

Answer: It is on the contractor to decide their manning level requirements

#64 – Question: Do all key personnel need Afghanistan to be the place of performance or can the vendor use discretion to have some positioned at the corporate HQ?

Answer: Yes key personnel are required to be in Kabul Afghanistan

#65 – Question: Can a vendor propose additional years of experience/military service in lieu of a degree for key personnel positions?

Answer: No.

#66 – Question: Can the Government clarify if US contractors would be authorized workspace on a US/NATO installation alongside USG counterpart? Par 2.3.6 indicated US contractors will be on a US/NATO installation, but this is not addressed in the GFP or facilities paragraphs of the PWS

Answer: US contractors will not be authorized workspace on US/NATO installation, refer to DFAR 225.77991 (a)(2) & (c) (2). PWS Updated to reflect requirement

#67 – Question: Are approved replacement, updates, and upgrades approved by the Government to be priced separately at the time of the request and outside the scope of the solicitation pricing?

Answer: Recommended changes, updates, upgrades are to be given to the PMO for approval after contract award. Determination of in or out of scope and pricing will be determined then.

#68 – Question: Can the Government clarify that all system modernization and enhancements approved will be priced separately at the time of submission and not included in the current solicitation pricing?

Answer: System modernization and enhancement, changes, updates, upgrades are to be given to the PMO for approval after contract award. Determination of in or out of scope and pricing will be determined then.

#69 – Question: Will interim Secret clearances be accepted?

Answer: A secret clearance is not required, if referencing the key personnel table, that is a sample template only and does not apply

#70 – Question: In the past performance section of the table the Government has provided a page count for contract references. Can the Government also provide a page count for the other required sections, i.e. Section 3: Subcontracts?

Answer: Please see answer 14.

#71 – Question: Will the Government consider increasing the technical page count from 50 pages to 60 pages?

Answer: No.

#72 – Question: Per Volume III, ‘Due to the anticipated competition for this effort, certified cost or pricing data is not required,’ yet Vol III a. 6 references subcontractor proprietary cost data (for contracts over $700,000) and the ability to provide that data directly to the Government. Is subcontractor cost and pricing data required if there are multiple offerors?

Answer: Yes.

#73 – Question: Can the Government confirm in-country transportation is not provided? If so, should transportation costs be placed in a particular CLIN or over all CLINs?

Answer: The Government will not provide in-country transportation nor will it be covered on this contract.

#74 – Question: How many servers are running the APPS solution and how many sites?

Answer: There is 1 server and back-up for MoI, and 1 server and back-up for MoD

#75 – Question: Is the solution deployed as cloud based or on premise?

Answer: No

#76 – Question: If you have several databases are you performing data consolidation?

Answer: MoI and MoD have separate data bases and will not be consolidated

#77 – Question: What type of database is the solution using?

Answer: SQL database

#78 – Question: What kind of programming language is the solution built on?

Answer: Business Objects, Business Rules, Business Workflow, Reports, UI High Level Description

#79 – Question: Are there any third party and/or integrations with the current APPS solutions.

Answer: No

#80 – Question: Are there any API functionality?

Answer: Yes see table in question #78

#81 – Question: How many users utilizing the solution?

Answer: Anyone (Afghan or government) with the APPS account uses the system, total number unknown.

#82 – Question: Do you have a document management library solution available in order to maintain an up-to date library in support of the APPS capability or the contractor needs to supply this? (4.4.1Government Repository, last sentence).

Answer: PWS 4.4.1 states “The Contractor shall maintain an up-to-date document library in support of the APPS capability”.

#83 – Question: Do you have a helpdesk system to manage requests from users?

Answer: The APPS Tier-1 level Help Desk has been transitioned to the ministries to maintain and manage. All APPS questions are submitted to the help desk here by the users for assistance.

#84 – Question: Can you elaborate on what you mean when you say “Provide database entry”?

Answer: Through official ciphers from the ministries and the US Government, the Contractor shall perform back end system data entry, to include at a minimum; reviewing of records, identifying errors, ensuring validity/accuracy of request and proper documentation required for prior to system entry.

#85 – Question: Do you have an assessment enabling us to prove effective control; its status quo enabling us to see its loopholes within the current system.

Answer: No

#86 – Question: Do you have an operations plan available for review to access the baseline, architecture, soft/hard ware for the modernization plan?

Answer: No

#87 – Question: In lieu of an actual operations audit about the current systems status quo, it would be challenging to create an efficient modernization plan without a site visit.

Answer: See PWS 4.1.4

#88 – Question: Ten percent COLA per annum?

Answer: No.

#89 – Question: DBA is based on total contract value or per employee?

Answer: DBA insurance is a variable based on vendors proposed payroll and the nature of services.

#90 – Question: Tax exempt status?

Answer: Tax exemption does exists and applicability is dependent on Contractor

#91 – Question: What is the difference between enhancement & modification? (4.1.4 Enhancement)

Answer: PWS 4.1.4 has been updated for clarification.

#92 – Question: What has been implemented by the incumbent is what is to be enhanced or modernized only?

Answer: The APPS system as a whole is to be modernization to include processes, hardware, software, etc.

#93 – Question: Is there an existing living quarters available from the last incumbent? Located at the MOI/MOD that they will facilitate for the contractor? Or do we facilitate our own living quarters?

Answer: The current contractor’s employees (Afghan residents) reside outside of US/Coalition/Afghan installations. It’s the contractor’s responsibility to facilitate their own living quarters.

#94 – Question: If a site visit is offered, will an extension of time be offered for the RFP due date?

Answer: No site visit will be offered

#95 – Question: (pg 84/85; 3rd para) FFP Equipment, Material, License: these these prices refer to attachments #4 & #5? And inclusive of the same?

Answer: Yes and Yes

#96 – Question: SITE VISIT for Transition Plan, when will that take place?

Answer: The Transition-in Plan will be for a 60 day period prior to the end of the current’ contracts PoP. I site visit will be arranged and determined in coordination with all stake holders after contract award.

96a. Could you please explain the "The Contractor shall provide all documents, drawings, and data required to fully integrate the APPS, and those documents required to support concurrent detail design"? The APPS system to be integrated with which system? Are we talking about the modules of APPS itself? if yes, it will require system analysis including checking the availability of the source codes, APIs? Please explain

Answer: PWS 8.15 was changed to clarify requirement – The Contractor shall provide all documents, drawings, and data required to fully understand and document the technical aspects and the working details within APPS, to include documents required to support concurrent detail design and technical support”.

#97 – Question: How about the APIs of modules and their source codes? Will they be shared and provided to us? Can you please specify?

Answer: Due to sensitivity and security, no source codes will be released to vendors.

#98 – Question: GFP only consists of equipment list, there is no details of user manuals, training materials, standard operating procedures (SOP) and source code? When will they be shared?

Answer: GFP does not include manuals or SOPs. These along with the source code will be shared to the awardee post contract award during the Phase-in Transition

#99 – Question: There is no overall system architecture and design, including diagrams, which can help us in preparing the technical proposal? Can they be shared? If no, what approach shall the bidder consider based on well-practiced standards? Please explain

Answer: PWS 4.1.3 has been updated to clarify AMP requirement.

#100 – Question: For System replacement, updates and upgrades, we’ll need to have an inspection and assessment to propose possible solutions, when will this be possible, prior to contract signing or after? What to consider in the proposal submission stage?

Answer: PWS 4.1.3 has been updated to clarify AMP requirement.

#101 – Question: In SLRL Attachment 0005, EOL (End-of-Life) section, the APPS (Primary, Secondary, DR Application, and Database Servers) are given EOL date April 2019, it is not clear what exactly it includes as most of the software is open-sourced and the rest of them already licensed? Please elaborate.

Answer: APPS (Primary, Secondary, DR Application, and Database Servers) are given EOL date April 2019 is for Ubuntu 16.04, the latest release is 18.04 and shows an EOL of April 2023.

It is an open source software, what it includes is public knowledge. The rest is defined on the list under license type, with expiration of license under EOL.

#102 – Question: When will the current available Technical Data Package (TDP) be shared? It will help us in getting overall idea of the system and preparing the technical proposal.

Answer: The TDP will be provided to the vendor at time of contract award.

#103 – Question: For APPS Modernization Plan (AMP), we need to know details about the current infrastructure, baseline, and architecture in order to propose the system performance and efficiency improvement, is it deliverable after the contract signing?

Answer: PWS 4.1.3 has been updated to clarify AMP requirement.

#104 – Question: What is the scope for enhancement or modernization?

Answer: PWS 4.1.3 & 4.1.4 has been updated for clarification.

#105 – Question: Which language is the baseline utilizing? English, Pashto and Dari? Or is it different for this RFP requirement?

Answer: English, Pashto, and Dari

#106 – Question: How to obtain the escort base access badge and what will be the validity of the badge? (PWS - 2.2.1)

Answer: Access (visitor) badges required to get on a government facility will obtain at the time of visit and is only temporary. The individual will be escorted at all times by a government representative and the badge will be turned in upon departure. If a badge is required by the ministry, requirements for that badge may differ and will have to be processed accordingly

#107 – Question: What will be the percentage of access to the government furnished property?

(PWS - 3.1)

Answer: 100%, all GFP is located and maintained at the contractor facility or at the ministry.

Contractor will either be in possession of GFP (spare parts) or will have access to it (servers at the ministry)

#108 – Question: Third party warranty or service is applicable if the warranty of any GFP is expired? (PWS - 3.1.1)

Answer: An extended warranty (third party) currently in affect, covers all parts listed under that warranty until it expires. Then a new extended warranty on system parts shall be considered

#109 – Question: What all are the facilities provided by the client for the MoI and MoD facility, apart from Desk and telephones? (PWS - 3.1.2)

Answer: A contractor representative is located at the ministry to be the first line contact between the customer and the contractor to assist with system issues, questions, and visibility an eyes on the ground position. The ministry may provide a computer but that must be worked with the ministry at the time.

#110 – Question: Please clarify the requirement of the life cycle support program. Since all the new components have their own manufacturer warranty min 1 to max 3 year? (PWS - 3.2.1)

Answer: The program visibility the life cycle support program is in place to identify, track and monitor all new components installed, identifying warranty time frame to each part, end of life, monitoring of part failures etc. This should be tracked with all GFP if warranty’s exist.

#111 – Question: Is there any separate billing for Paid system upgrades such as subscriptions, renewal etc? (PWS - 4.1.1)

Answer: There is a CLIN identified for Equipment, Material, License Procurement if and when upgrades, procurement or renewal of a license is required

#112 – Question: Is there any subscription duration for Licenses and anti-virus software for Preventive maintenance? (PWS – 4.2.1)

Answer: The identification and duration of all system license are listed on the SLRL in attachment B of the PWS. Preventive maintenance concept is determine by the vendor/contractor.

#113 – Question: What will be the unexpected or immediate incident response lead time?

(4.6.4)

Answer: Per PWS 4.6.4 the contractor has within 4 hours to notify COR/IRT of any network activity or an event that could be defined as a possible incident.

#114 – Question: What will be the intervals for the risk management plan with progress status report? (PWS – 8.6)

Answer: The risk management “plan” is not included with the Monthly Progress Report only risk identification, risk assessment, and risk mitigation reporting and updates are done on a monthly basis.

#115 – Question: While considering the software and licenses used in the GFP, EOL is not mentioned. all the products licenses are live? (GFP)

Answer: EOL software and licenses shall be replaced.

#117 – Question: In the software license requirement list, can we propose the replaced latest version instead? (SLRL)

Answer: Yes

#118 – Question: Is it possible to replace the EOL products with the latest? (SLRL)

Answer: Yes

#119 – Question: What will be the maximum extension period of the contract after 66 months of duration? (RFP – page 57 – 52.217-9)

Answer: If all options are exercised, the contracts maximum length is 66 months.

#120 – Question: What is WAWF training /methods? (RFP – page 60)

Answer: Wide Area Workflow (WAWF), now called Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PEII), is the electronic method used to process vendor payment requests. The links for training and registration as well as instructions for this process is identified on page 59-

#121 – Question: During the contract duration, who will provide the site office and its related facilities?

Answer: The contractor is responsible for their own site office in Kabul, Afghanistan

#122 – Question: 5152.225-5914 COMMODITY SHIPPING INSTRUCTIONS (AUG 2011) is applicable for international shipping also?

Answer: Refer to DFAR 5152.225-5914.

#123 – Question: For customs clearance, AWB and declaration will be downloaded through online. Kindly confirm the acceptance of the same.

Answer: The Government does not understand the question.

#124 – Question: VOLUME III – PRICE/COST FACTOR, all costs for Equipment, Material and Licenses have been provided by the Government. For evaluation purposes, the base and each option period shall utilize the provided plugged in number.