DCGS-A_CD-1_Q&A_Part_3.pdf

Page/Paragraph Number

Comment Answer/Comment

100 Attachment 0012, CLIN Pricing Tab

For CLINs 0001-0005 and 0009-0010 there is only one cell to enter a single unit price for the 5 year Base Period and 5 year Option Period.

Will the government amend the spreadsheet to allow for entering annual prices, similar to CLIN

0006-0008?

See RFP Amendment #3.

101 L.2.3, Page 63, Paragraph 4

The government states that under no circumstances should pricing data be included outside of Volume III. However page 58 paragraph 1 allows for pricing information in the Executive Summary. Can the government please clarify whether pricing information is allowed in the Executive Summary?

See RFP Amendment #4.

102 Attachment 0012, CLIN Pricing Tab

For CLINs that require systems be provided such as User Trials CLIN 0001 (8 systems) and

Operational Assessment CLIN 0004 (17 systems) should offerors include the cost of the

HW/SW required for the systems into those CLINs or will those costs be recovered via CLINs

0006 and 0007?

All pricing under UT and OA to include the cost of HW/SW will be covered under CLIN 0001(UT) and

CLIN 0004 (OA). CLIN 0006

& 0007 cover HW/SW under Delivery Order 0003 which is after completion of OA.

103 Attachment 0012, CLIN Pricing Tab

For the range quantities specified for CLINs 0006-0008, will the unit prices billed in a progressive manner? For example if 100 units are ordered are the first 50 billed at one unit price and the second 50 billed at the next unit price, or are all 100 billed at the same unit price?

Orders shall not be cumulative per Narrative

Section B0001. All units in one order will be billed at same unit price.

104 M.3.2, page 69 Will the government confirm that the pre-determined affordability caps of $1.5m for each Delivery Order will be the actual values used in evaluation, and are not just place-holders for values to be determined post-submittal?

The Offeror's offer will be the ceiling. The ceiling must be $1.5M or lower.

105 L.2, page 58/ L.2.3, Page 58 of 70 states that Volume III Price Factor includes a Price/Cost supporting documentation file. Section L.2.3 on page 63 of 70 does not identify what If any information would be provided in this file and does not indicate it is a requirement to submit one. Is this file only to be included if the offeror has proposed ‘unbalanced pricing’ which requires supporting rationale and explanation? If not, is

Attachment 12 alone sufficient?

See RFP Amendment #4

106 L.2.1, page 60 Section L says “Other than U.S. Small Businesses must submit acceptable subcontracting plans to be eligible for award.” Since this is a commercial item procurement, under FAR 52.219-9 (g) a commercial plan is the preferred type of subcontracting plan, since the commercial plan covers the entire production of commercial items sold by the entire company or a portion thereof and the subcontracting under this opportunity may be a small percentage of this total – recommend removal of the requirement for a small business subcontracting plan?

Requirement remains unchanged as stated in the Solicitation.

107 PRD Annexes A&B (Draft RFP)

Missing Product Exchange details:

B-I-19-A: Threat Characteristic Composition

(p.12) B-I-19-B: Threat Characteristic Disposition (p.

12) B-I-08 & 09: High Payoff Target List (pp 14, 22, 24, 31). What makes B-I-08 different from B-I-

09?

B-I-17: Target Selection Standards (p.31) Target Selection Standards are labeled B-I-16. Is that correct or an error? B-I-

10: Indicator List (p.24) B-I-16: Tactical Reporting (pp.27, 29)

B-I-21 & 22: Threat COA (pp. 14, 29). What are the differences between the two formats?

B-I-12: Kill Sheets (p. 33)

B-I-19-A: VCAB in, Vendor Format Out

B-I-19-B: VCAB in, Vendor Format Out

B-I-08, 09: Text, Vendor Format Out

B-I-17: Typo, should be 17.

B-I-10: Vendor Format Out

B-I-16: Text B-I-21 & 22: One is text and one is layers over a map B-I-12: Vendor Format

108 VCAB schema, Product Demonstration Sample

Data (GFI).

There appears to be redundant data in the file. Is there any documentation on rules for parsing the VCAB data?

No

109 CD-1 Demonstration Plan

Will the USG be providing an IP to set for demo?

IP information will be provided NLT 1 week after proposal submission deadline.

110 CD-1 Demonstration Plan

Is the 15 minutes up from power on to map or power on to software loaded?

It is from power on to the system being able to start performing the requirements in the PRD.

111 CD-1 Demonstration Plan

Will the USG provide templates for the running estimate or Commander's Brief?

No, vendor format will be evaluated.

112 SOW 3.4.2 Reach back Support for Annual Sustainment (CLIN

0008)

Is this Help Desk meant to support End Users or the PM DCGS-A SIL/ CM or both?

Not End User Support

113 SOW 3.4.1 Monthly IA patches

Customer has specified a desire to receive monthly security patches, but for us to deliver them to CM. Is the plan for existing FSR’s to apply these patches, even though they are not at Battalion level?

Yes, remotely. If that cannot happen for whatever reason, the BN sys admin will install them.

114 Statement of Work Section 3.3.5, page 17

Does the Government mean that each CLIN should include 250 hours of support, for a total of 500 hours, or that the two CLINs together should include 250 hours of support?

Total hours of 250 should be priced on CLIN 0006.

See RFP Amendment #4.

115 Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors Section L.2, Table A, page 9

Is the FILENAME portion of the PCSUPP_FILENAME file meant to designate something specific? Also, does the Government have a preferred filename format for the main

Volume III Price Volume?

No and No.

116 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

0026 Amendment 2 L.2.2.3- Subfactor 3:

Technical Solution Narrative; Pg. 14

In the final SOW, the old paragraph 3.6 was deleted. In L.2.2.3, can the Government confirm if "...3.7, and 3.8" should be changed to read "...3.6, and 3.7" in sympathy with the deletion of the old paragraph 3.6?

As appropriate, please amend L.2.2.3 to include the correct mapping to the final SOW.

See RFP Amendment #4.

117 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

0026 Amendment 2 L.2.2.3- Subfactor 3:

Technical Solution Narrative; Pg. 14

The title of Paragraph 3.1.5 in the final SOW is "Army Interoperability Certification (AIC) (CLIN 0003)." Can the Government confirm that this is the correct mapping?

As appropriate, please amend the title of Paragraph 3.1.5 shown in L.2.2.3.

See RFP Amendment #4.

118 Attachment_0001- _Statement_of_Work_

CD-

1_26_September.pdf

3.4.1, Pg. 18

Please update the SOW reference in this sentence to say SOW 3.7, which is the

Configuration management requirement section.

Corrected. See RFP Amendment #4.

119 Attachment 0008- CD1 Demonstration Plan v10 28 Sept 2017.pdf Phase 2 – Product

Demonstration (Tentative dates are 27 November through 15

December 2017):; Pg. 3

Update the Demonstration Plan to change the Section M reference to M.3.1.1.

See RFP Amendment #3 and updated Attachment

120 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

0026, Amendment 2

Vol IV Past Performance Factor, Pg. 15: Section L.2.4.a)

The large dollar value of the commercial hardware and software required for this project causes companies who are doing significant work on the project to fall under the 20% TCV threshold required to be able to submit a past performance citation. Suggest the Government change the criterion for determining which companies qualify as major subcontractors from 20% of the TCV to 20% of the value of the services, which is a better measure of the subcontractor's contribution to the success of this project.

Requirement remains unchanged.

121 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

0026 Vol II Past

Performance Factor, Pg. 64: L.2.4.b).c

Paragraph L.1.h. is not provided in the solicitation. Please identify the name and contact information where the questionnaires should be submitted?

See RFP Amendment #3

122 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

0026, Schedule B;

Attachment 0012 Total Evaluated Price

Worksheet Schedule B CLIN 1001 through 1005 descriptions, pages 12 - 14, and

Attachment 0012 TEP Worksheet Year 6

What would trigger the exercise of the optional CLINs 1001 - 1005? Is it possible the

Government would exercise the IDIQ Option but purchase only CLINs 1006, 1007, and 1008?

If the government exercises the option to extend the ordering period through years 6-10, then the current intention is to exercise the option for all CLINs.

123 Attachment 0001, Statement of Work

SOW 3.1.10 Program Protection (CLIN 0001), subparagraph D, page

Can the Government confirm that the PPIP will be delivered during DO 0003? If so, under which CLIN?

The PPIP should be priced against CLIN 0001 as it will be initially delivered under

Delivery Order 0001.

CDRL A007 instructions the frequency of updates and deliveries and should be priced as such.

124 Attachment 0001, Statement of Work;

Attachment 0004 Post- Award Procedures;

Attachment 0012 Total Evaluated Price worksheet SOW para.

3.3.3 p. 17; Att. 0004, para. 5.0; TEP line 62

Please clarify the CLIN 0009 line in Attachment 00012. Is the total evaluated quantity meant to be the price of one course, or the price of 6 course deliveries per year for 5 years, for a total of 30 courses deliveries?

The price should be for one course. The government may order additional courses in a year not to exceed 6 courses in a year.

125 Attachment 0001, Statement of Work

SOW paragraphs 3.3.4 and 3.3.5

Statement of Work paragraphs include RMF / IA activities in CLINs 0006, 0007, and/or 0008.

Would the Government please clarify in which CLIN the RMF / IA, Configuration Management, Annual Training labor services should be bid?

Bid IAW SOW.

126 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

0026 Page 29

DFARS 252.204-7009 and 252.240-7012 were updated in DEC/2016.

The current version on file is OCT/2016.

127 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

Are offerors to complete the CLIN unit prices in Section B

Yes.

128 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

0026 Section L.2, page

Please clarify what sections of the solicitation the government wants offerors to complete for the Award Documents/Certifications/Representations.

Does this include completion of the SF1149 and pages 2 through 55?

Refer to FAR Clause 52.212-3

129 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

0026 Section L.2, page

Please provide a conformed version of the contract for execution and completion of the

Award Documents/Certification/Representations.

Government will consider releasing a conformed version of contract prior to proposal submission deadline.

130 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

0026 Section L.2, page

Are offerors required to sign and return the SF30 of the amendments as part of the Award documents/Certifications/Representation

Yes. See Box 11 of the SF 30.

131 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

0026 RFP, SF 1449,

Block 27.a

As permitted by FAR 12.302, the contracting officer may negotiate an addendum to the provisions of FAR 52.212-4 consistent with customary commercial practices. Will the Government accept offerors to propose modifications to FAR 52.212-4?

No.

132 Amendment 0002 - Attachment_0006-

_CD1_Relevant_Past_P erf_Information_Revise d page 3 of 6

Should this read “quality” instead of “quantity"?

Quantity is correct.

133 RFP: W56KGY-17-R-

0026, Amendment 2 and Attachment 0008 Product Demonstration

Plan Section M.3.1.1, Will the Government add an overarching requirement to the Product Demonstration Plan that the UI functionality be doctrinally aligned?

No. The army is interested in industry's best solution to meet all of the requirements in the PRD.

134 W56KGY-17-R-

0026_(0002).pdf Page

Section L.2.2.4

A new section, L.2.2.4 Commercial Item Assertion, was inserted into Section L on page

14 of 17 of Amendment 2. This was not identified as a changed in Block 14 of the

Amendment 2 SF30. Also, this duplicates the information in Section L.2.1(2) on Page 11 of 17 of Amendment 2. Is the Offeror required to duplicate the information in both Volume I and

Volume II?

No, Please provide in Volume I. See amended

RFP.

135 W56KGY-17-R-

0026_(0002).pdf Page

Section L. Introduction

Solicitation directs Offerors to submit digital copies of proposals through the Federal

Business Opportunities (FBO) web portal.

FedBizOpps registration is required to submit proposals. Once registered in FBO, please clarify how Offerors upload proposal documents?

Refer FBO questions to the POCs listed on FBO website.

136 W56KGY-17-R-

0026_(0002).pdf L.2.3

The paragraph regarding price competition states that "if at any time during this acquisition the Contracting Officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists; Offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the contracting officer to determine the reasonableness of price". It states "If" and

"may". However, the next paragraph states that "In order to determine the reasonableness of price, information such as the below is requested". Are Offerors required to submit this information at proposal submittal or must they simply be prepared to provide this information if requested? Please clarify.

Please provide this information in your proposal. See RFP Amendment #3.

137 Attachment 0008- CD1 Demonstration Plan v10 09-28.pdf Description

Attachment 1 limits the number of participants to 3 offeror personnel. Would the government consider changing the requirement to "no more than five (5)"?

No. The Government will not change to "no more than five".

138 Attachment 0008- CD1 Demonstration Plan v10 09-28.pdf Description

Will there be a DDS server available during the product demonstration event to which our system can interact?

There will be no DDS server available during

Product Demo.

139 Attachment 0012 Total Evaluated Price

Worksheet Amendment 2 CLIN

Pricing

Tab 2 CLIN Pricing: Evaluated Price in various Year columns are missing totals (formulas in the tab appears to have been corrupted with

Amendment 2), will those be updated in Amendment 3?

See RFP Amendment 3 and updated TEP

140 Attachment 0008- CD1 Demonstration Plan v10 28 Sept 2017.pdf Appendix C page 10

#4a

In the demonstration plan, Figure 1.2 states that this is an example of a Weather Forecast, Current Weather, and Weather Effects Display, but the images are only of a Weather Forecast and Current Weather. Would the Government please provide an explanation of what a Weather Effects Display includes and provide an example of a Weather Effects Display?

An example of a weather effects display is shown in figure 1.2 of the demonstration plan as a matrix.

141 Attachment 0008- CD1 Demonstration Plan v10 28 Sept 2017.pdf Appendix C

Will the provided .gdb be loaded into an ArcGIS server prior to the offeror's arrival for the demonstration event? Will loading of the .gdb be part of the demonstration portion of the demonstration event or will the offeror load the .gdb during the setup for the demonstration event?

There will be no server (TSI/IFS) as part of the product demo, thus no ArcGIS server. All of the geospatial data for the product demo is included as part of the GFI 1 TB hard drive. Refer to Page 2 Phase 1 of Product Demo

Plan.

142 W56KGY-17-R-0026.pdf

Section K

DFARS 252.227-7028 states, "The Offeror shall attach to its offer an identification of all documents or other media incorporating technical data or computer software it intends to deliver under this contract with other than unlimited rights that are identical or substantially similar to documents or other media that the Offeror has produced for, delivered to, or is obligated to deliver to the Government under any contract or subcontract." Where should the offeror include this information in the response

(Volume I? Volume II? Appendix?)

Please provide this document in Volume I- Executive Summary in

Award Documents/Certifications/

Representations.

143 W56KGY-17-R-0026.pdf General

Offerors have requested clarifications on the referenced Request for Proposal. In order to provide the Government sufficient time to respond to those clarifications and to provide offerors with sufficient time to incorporate the revised guidance/RFP amendments, would the Government consider extending the submittal due date?

Government is not considering extending submittal due date at this time. The DCGS-A

Battalion Solution, CD-1 supports an urgent operational requirement.

144 Section L.2.1 (2) Commercial Item

Assertions Page 11

At Industry Day, DCMA’s slide 41 stated that “A commercial item is any item … similar to items usually used by the public for commercial purposes and – the item or the similar item has been sold or offered for sale to the general public.” Can the government acknowledge that the DCMA language will apply under this Solicitation for commercial item determination purposes?

Refer to Solicitation L.2.1

(2) where the Government requires Vendor submit evidence their solution is a commercial item, IAW FAR

2.101.

145 Section L Section L. In the solicitation issued 29 Sept, Section L started with six FAR clauses prior to the Introduction. In Amendments 0001 and

0002 it appears that Section L was reissued in its entirety, but these FAR clauses were omitted. Please confirm that the six FAR clauses are no longer part of Section L.

Clauses are still part of the Solicitation Section L.

146 Solicitation General Due to the number of changes made to the solicitation since its initial release and the number of previously submitted questions still in government review, we request the

Government grant a 2-week extension to the due date for proposals.

Government is not considering extending submittal due date at this time. The DCGS-A

Battalion Solution, CD-1 supports an urgent operational requirement.

147 Section L Table A Per Section L Table A under Volume IV – Past Performance Factor, it states that the filename can be either PASTPERF.docx or PASTPERF.pdf.

Since this volume can be submitted as a .docx file, can we export the pdf to Word format and fill in the information in Word, assuming the amount of space for each question remains the same?

Yes, vendor can export PDF to Word format and vice versa.

148 Sections L.2.3.a & M.3.2.b

Please clarify how the definition of a major subcontractor applies to this commercial item acquisition. For example, hardware costs will be a significant part of the price. If the offeror is obtaining commercial hardware from a vendor and the cost is >20% of the TEP, is this vendor considered a major subcontractor? We recommend against this. Commercial vendors who sell through prime contractors do not generally have or provide the type of past performance information called for in the solicitation.

Requirement remains unchanged.

149 Sections L.2.3.a & M.3.2.b

Please clarify what is many by “perform” in the definition of a major subcontractor. Is a provider of a commercial items (hardware or software) considered to be performing, or does this apply only to providers of services?

Perform is based on 20% of the price as set forth in

Section L.2.4.a

150 SOW SOW 3.3.2. The SOW requires the contractor to provide NET trainer material. It is not clear if the contractor is also required to provide the hardware and software for hands on training portions. Please clarify whether the offeror is to provide the hardware and software, or if this will be GFE using systems from the initial fielding delivery (or subsequent deliveries).

The Government plans to provide hardware & software for NET either from assets used in OA or out of the initial procurement.

151 Total Evaluated Price Worksheet

The Total Evaluated Price on Tab 3 of Attachment 12, Total Evaluated Price

Worksheet, does not include a summation of the Total Evaluated Price rows on Tab 1 of Attachment 12. Rather, it appears that the

SUM formulas for Tab 1 for CLINs 0006, 0007, and 0008 are hard coded erroneously to “0”.

Please clarify whether Offerors may alter the hard coded formulas to account for what may be an apparent error or whether the Government intends to release a corrected version of Attachment 12 in which the Total Evaluated Price is the summation of all Total

Evaluated Price rows for all CLINs.

Government has fixed the formula on Tab 2. See RFP

Amendment #3

152 RFP, L.2.4.c L.2.4.c states: “The Offeror shall forward the Past Performance Questionnaire forms, solicitation Attachment 00007, directly to the Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) identified in the Relevant Experience Form. The Government requests TPOCs return the Past Performance Questionnaire forms prior to close of the solicitation date directly to Army Contracting Command - Aberdeen Proving

Ground (ACC-APG) Contracts via e-mailing the Procuring Contracting Specialist identified in

Para. L.1.h. The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or to obtain additional information.” We cannot locate paragraph L.1.h in the document. Could the Army please confirm the email of the

Procuring Contracting Specialist that should receive the emailed Past Performance

Questionnaire forms?

The email is prettina.j.biedenkapp.civ

@mail.mil. See RFP Amendment #3

153 Attachment 0005, Attachment 0003

In the most recent “Attachment 0005 – DCGS-A BN Solution Verification Cross Ref 04 Oct 17

Update,” sent by the Army on October 5, 2017, requirement 10.5 reads “The DCGS-A Capability

Drop 1 solution shall have an operational availability (Ao) of at least 90%. Ao is the minimum percentage of time over a 72 hour mission the system must be fully mission capable.” However, in the most recent “Attachment 0003- DCGS-A BN Solution

PRD_v14,” sent by the Army on October 10, 2017, requirement 10.5 reads “The DCGS-A

Capability Drop 1 solution shall have a Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) of at least 60 hours. A failure is described as any issue

See RFP Amendment #3 for Attachment 0005

(hardware or software) that may impact mission performance.” Which is the correct requirement for 10.5?

154 Attachment 0003, 11.4 Is the Offeror’s solution expected to provide user authentication at the OS level or at the application level

The solution will provide authentication at the OS level. Those same credentials will then be used for application level authentication/authorizati on decisions. See PRD requirement 11.3 & 11.4

155 Attachment 0003, 11.4 Does the Government expect the laptops provided by the Offeror to be joined to a Government managed Active Directory domain?

Yes

156 SOW, 3.7.2 Is the Offeror expected to provide Operating System (OS)-level patching or is this maintained by the Government?

The offeror is expected to provide OS level patching per SOW section 3.7.2

157 Attachment 12 Attachment 12, Tab 2 CLIN Pricing: The formulas for CLINs 0006, 0007, and 0008

Evaluated Price Range (light green cells) have been removed in Amendment 3. Will the

Government clarify how the Attachment 12, Tab 3: Total Evaluated Price for this solicitation is being calculated?

The Attachment 12 under Amendment 3 is correct and vendor has to enter data in all required cells which will populate accordingly on TAB 2 and

TAB 3.