W56KGY24R0001 RFP Questions_07 NOV 2023.pdf

Question/

Comment Page and Section Reference Questions Answers

1 Attachment 0007 ‐ TEP CLIN Pricing and 5 year ordering period Tabs

Column widths are locked and too narrow to read larger pricing numbers. Request either unlock spreadsheet for column width editing or widen columns to accommodate pricing numbers larger than 7 figures (+$20M).

Updated on Amendment 0001

2 Attachment 0007 ‐ TEP 5 year ordering period tab

“Per Unit” and “Per Vendor” column formulas are referencing the incorrect price columns on the

CLIN Pricing tab. The "Per Unit" and "Per

Vendor" column cell formulas are referencing the

"Evaluated Price" columns and should be referencing the “Unit Price" columns. We were able to edit and correct those formulas but recommend making those corrections to the

Final RFP TEP Worksheet template.

Please see updated Attachment 0003, dated 25

October 2023 release under Amendment 0001 for corrected formulas.

3 Attachment 0007 ‐ TEP CLIN Pricing tab

Optional CLINs 0021 and 0022 – “Range” and

“Evaluated Quantity” columns. Optional CLINs

0021 and 0022 are for pricing an Unlimited

Enterprise SW License and associated Annual

Sustainment Unlimited Enterprise Software

License. If these are truly “Unlimited” should not the Range and Evaluated Quantity only be one

(1) license? It is unclear why Range and Evaluated

Quantity values are more than one (1) for these optional CLINs. Recommend deleting the Range and the Evaluated Quantity to one (1) to eliminate further confusion (the same as CLINs

0001, 0002, 0003, 0004, 0005, 0006, 0007, 0008, 0009, 0010, 0011, 0015, and 0016)

Yes, unlimited license quantity should be 1.

4 Attachment 0009 page 1 ‐ Table 1. Requirements for Submission of Proposal

Materials

Can you please confirm that a) all of the components of Volume 1 need to be submitted as separate files, and b) they need to be

For table 1, a) all components of Volume 1 should be submitted in one file and 2) All volumes should be submitted as either a word or PDF version, not both.

5 Past Performance

A proposer has successfully delivered Statement of Work (SOW)‐relevant weather effects software publishing services under a contract, which meets the Past Performance and Project

Vista criteria. However, the contract was not labeled with NAICS 513210. Instead, the contract was assigned an alternate industry code that includes software delivery, such as Data Services.

Given this information, would the submission of the proposer's Past Performance be accepted, or would it be disqualified due to the "NAICS

513210" requirement?

In accordance with Section M(d)(3)(b) "Relevant efforts are defined as efforts that are essentially the same as or similar in scope and complexity to the requirements of the solicitation, with a minimum of one (1) year of completed performance, within the North American

Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 513210."

W56KGY24R0001

and

Attachment 0007 ‐ Totel

Evaluated Price (TEP)

Worksheet ‐ 10 October 2023

B. Basis for Award (Section M)

Offerors proposed prices within the Price Factor must be equal to or less than the Government affordability values for each

Delivery Order identified within the Total Evaluated Price (TEP)

Worksheet (Attachment 0007) to be considered eligible for award.

Please provide the Government affordability values and Delivery Order information referenced in this statement.

Please see Amendment 0002. Government

Affordability has been removed.

7 W56KGY24R0001 67 of 80

c. SAM.gov registration and

(active) System for Award

Management (SAM) account is required to submit proposals.

Please clarify whether Offerors should submit a

SAM report as part of the written proposal response, and if so, in which volume that report should be included.

SAM reports do not need to be in the written response, but are just required for submission.

8 W56KGY24R0001 67 of 80 All proposal submissions must be in Microsoft Office (MS) Office…

Please modify this to say, “All proposal submissions must be in Microsoft Office (MS)

Office or Adobe.” So that it aligns with the

Attachment 0009 Table 1 requirement for submissions in PDF format.

Updated to clarify.

KS ‐ RACHEL MORESI

IS&A Intel Apps WxOE

FINAL RFP

QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES

KO ‐ MEGHAN WHITMORE

9 W56KGY24R0001 68 of 80

Volumes I, II, IV and V of the proposal shall consist of a table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, summary section, and the narrative discussion.

Please modify this to say, “Volumes I, II, and IV of the proposal shall each include of a table of contents and glossary of abbreviations and acronyms. Volumes II and IV should contain a summary of the volume’s narrative.”

Changed to state "Volumes I, II, and IV of the proposal shall consist of a table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, summary section, and the narrative discussion."

10 W56KGY24R0001 68 of 80

Volumes I, II, IV and V of the proposal shall consist of a table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, summary section, and the narrative discussion.

Please confirm that, in all cases, the cover page, table of contents, and glossary are not part of any page count limitations.

Confirmed.

Attachment 0009 ‐ Solicitation

Tables ‐ 10 October 2023 page

Multiple entries in Table 1 have asterisks: X*

Please clarify to the meaning of the asterisks in this table.

The asterisks mean you are to select one of the multiple versions offered. Added a key to Attachment

0009, Solicitation Tables, to clarify this.

Attachment 0005 –

Government Furnished

Property – 10 October 2023

(READ ME FIRST) Text Document

No content or instructions appear upon opening the (READ ME FIRST) text file. Please confirm that this was intentional.

Please disregard that document.

13 W56KGY24R0001 77 of 80

D. Evaluation Approach, 2. Price

Factor

After Award, Awardees may downward adjust its prices during fair opportunity order competitions.

Please clarify the Fair Opportunity Order

Competition process for this acquisition and contract award.

Please see Amendment 0002 for removal of this language.

14 8W56KGY24R0001

Will PM IS&A’s WxOE procurement timeline be impacted by the current or potential/future

Continuing Resolution(s)?

We do not anticipate any impact to award for this contract due to the current Continuing Resolution (CR).

If there is any impact to contract award due to future or "Full Year" CR any revised schedule will be shared via

SAM/gov.

W56KGY24R0001 and

Attachment 0006 page 70 of

80/page 2

1. Product Demonstration

2. Table 1

What is the approximate timeline after proposal submission for bidders to be notified they have been selected to move to demonstration?

Vendors will be notified prior to 27 November 2023.

W56KGY24R0001 page 70 of

1. Product Demonstration

How much time between notification and the beginning of the two‐week integration/set‐up The 2 week integration will be from 27 NOV to 8 DEC.

W56KGY24R0001 page 77 of

Section M

b. Subfactor 2 – Project VISTA

Innovation Technology

An Offeror whose proposal includes one or more of the technologies identified in Project

VISTA Past Army SBIR Awards

(Attachment 0010) will receive a rating of "meets".

The evaluation approach reads as though offerors cannot receive a “meets” rating for small business awards not included in Project VISTA

Past Army SBIR Awards (Attachment 0010). We do not believe that is the intent.

It is stated: “The Project VISTA Past Army SBIR

Awards is not an all‐inclusive list, but a list to provide industry awareness and access to potential partnership of current and past

SBIR/STTR awards. The Government will validate any submission that proves the small business award exists, if utilizing an award not listed in

Project VISTA Past Army SBIR Awards

(Attachment 0010).”

Yet, the evaluation approach states that: “one or more of the technologies identified in Project

VISTA Past Army SBIR Awards (Attachment 0010) will receive a rating of "meets" – As written, it reads that getting a “meets” rating is limited to the technologies listed in Attachment 0010.

Recommend adding language to the evaluation approach that includes validated small business submissions are able to receive a “meets” rating.

The reference to attachemnt 0010 has been removed.

W56KGY24R0001 page 68 of

Volume I, Executive Summary, Proposal Synopsis

Given there are no requirements for a written or slide‐based Technical response in the proposal, can the Government please confirm that the 10 page Proposal Synopsis required with Volume I should only contain 1 ‐ assumptions and narrative explanation of Volume III ‐ Price; and 2 ‐ a synopsis of Volume IV ‐ Past Performance and

Volume V ‐ Small Business? Or should the offeror provide an overview of its Technical Solution?

1) Proposal Synopsis. The Offeror shall utilize this section of the Executive Summary to summarize pertinent information contained in all volumes of the proposal. The Offeror is free to submit this section of the Executive Summary in any format desired, subject to the limitations previously set forth above, and to include any and all information it believes will support its proposal. Offerors are reminded that the Executive

Summary is an introductory summation of the proposal; therefore, no information shall be in the

Executive Summary that does not appear elsewhere in the proposal.

There is no submission for Technical Subfactor 1, there is a submission for Technical Subfactor II

W56KGY24R0001 page 68 of

Volume I, Executive Summary, Proposal Synopsis

In the proposal synopsis, when summarizing our

Price/Volume III, should we include any cost information or simply summarize our methodology, etc.?

That is your determination. In accordance with Section

L(3)(c)(i)(1) Offerors are reminded that the Executive Summary is an introductory summation of the proposal; therefore, no information shall be in the Executive Summary that does not appear elsewhere in the proposal.

20 Attachment 0009 page 2 of 3

Table 2. Technical Adjectival

Rating

Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements, contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength. (for

Outstanding rating)

Please clarify how offerors score strengths according to Table 2.

Strength is an aspect of an offeror's proposal with merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the advantage of the Government during contract performance.

21 W56KGY24R0001 page 2 of 80

10. Performance: Performance will be assessed in accordance with the Quality Assurance

Surveillance Plan (QASP). The offeror is to propose the terms of the QASP.

Please indicate in which volume the Offeror is to include its proposed QASP.

Please see Amendment 0002 for removal of this language.

22 Attachment 0009 table 1 Award Documents/ Certifications/

Representations

Please confirm that the file format used for these items should be appropriate to the item being submitted (e.g. PDF for award documents, reps

Please see Table 1. Requirements for Submission of

Proposal Materials in Attachment 0009, Solicitation

Tables

23 Attachment 0009 table 1 Data Assertions

The table requires that this item be submitted as an Excel spreadsheet. May we submit this item in a Word Document or PDF instead?

No, this should be submitted as an MS excel version.

24 W56KGY24R0001 page 2 of 80

“1 0 . Performance: Performance will be assessed in accordance with the Quality Assurance

Surveillance Plan (QASP). The offeror is to propose the terms of the QASP. The final document will be incorporated into Section J at the time of award.”

When is the QASP due?

Please see Amendment 0002 for removal of this language.

W56KGY24R0001 page 76 of

“Offerors who successfully complete a higher number of steps will receive a higher rating;

conversely, an Offeror's solution that accomplishes less of the

Product Demonstration Event

Plan steps will be rated lower.”

Does this mean that the number of steps completed (out of 48 total) will be translated directly to an adjectival and risk rating? For example, something like:

•G+ steps = Outstanding, Low Risk •E‐F steps = Good, Low Risk •C‐D steps = Acceptable, Moderate Risk

•A‐B steps = Marginal, High Risk

•<A steps = Unacceptable If so, will that result in threads with more steps essentially having higher weights?

The steps within threads 1, 2, 6, 8 and 9 are more important than steps within threads 3, 4, 5 and 7. Each thread step will receive an adjectival and risk rating.

Offerors who successfully complete a higher number of steps within threads 1, 2, 6, 8 and 9 will receive a higher overall rating.

Product Demonstration Plan

1.1.3 Data Source

2.1 Host Environment

“Vendors will have a two (2) week set‐up time period to verify the application can utilize

Government‐provided sample data.”

“Vendor will enable their WxOE solution to reach resources hosted in the Paladin Lab that have been made publicly accessible”

Is the sample data that will be available in the set‐ up time period different than the

“WxOE_DataSamples” GFI file?

Will sample data be provided in the form of

“rehosted weather data” from Paladin OGC services?

Yes, it will be similar to the "WxOE_DataSamples" however, you may see additional data as well during the demo/set‐up. The sample data will be available on the Paladin services. It will be current real‐time data covering the area of operation for the demo.

Product Demonstration Plan

1.1.3 Data Source

2.1 Host Environment

“Government will provide the actual data sets on the day of product demonstration”

“Vendor will enable their WxOE solution to reach resources hosted in the Paladin Lab that have been made publicly accessible”

Will the data sets provided on the day of the demo be ‘updates’ to the “rehosted weather data” from Paladin OGC services?

No. The demo day files will cover the same operational area as the rehosted weather data but will be from a static and previous date/time.

Product Demonstration Plan

Figure 1. Product Demonstration

High‐Level Architecture

Figure 1 includes “Authentication Services”, but there are no demonstration threads/steps related to authentication. Can the Government confirm if/how authentication is to be demonstrated?

The Government will not test the "Authentication

Services" process.

Product Demonstration Plan

4. Data Sets

“The Government will provide the

Vendor with all input/stimulus data required to conduct a

Product Demonstration event”

If a vendor solution is able to retrieve some input data directly from the 557th WW, will that be acceptable to demonstrate corresponding threads/steps?

Demo events will require the use of the provided data on the day of the demo. The Vendor capability will be noted however, the Vendor will not be graded on this capability.

W56KGY24R0001 page 70 of

ii. Volume II Technical Factor

“The Offeror shall include the technology developer as part of their proposed subcontracting team.”

If the offeror is the technology developer, and therefore would not need a subcontract, does this requirement still apply?

Yes it still applies

W56KGY24R0001 page 72 of

Section 2, Performance “Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed in Section 1, Contract

Description, describing the objective achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirement of this solicitation”

Is there any page limit to this narrative explanation?

There is no page limit

Is there any issue with providing CUI information on the PROJECT VISTA portion ?

Please provide context to this question.

Does the Government anticipate overlapping issuance of deployment related CLINs? For example, should the bidder anticipate need to deploy teams of personnel to support concurrent exercises? We are considering the possibility of having to briefly increase project personnel to satisfy a race condition.

We do not anticipate overlapping major test events such as Technical Tests, STP, or Operational

Assessments however, there may be overlap in providing other administrative support while supporting major test events.

34 Volume III, Price Factor in preparing FFP costs for Exercise Support and other deployment related CLINs without a specified location, can the bidder assume field support location will be in CONUS, ground based and outside combat areas, or should the bidder price for other deployment scenarios?

All Technical Test, Soldier Touch Point, Operational

Assessment will likley be in the U.S.A. however, the

Vendors should BPT support exercises/tests where U.S.

forces are stationed such as Hawaii, Korea, Germany, etc or areas where U.S. Military conducts annual exercises to test software in concert with military exercises. All events will be outside of combat areas.

RFP Section L, (A)(3)(c)(ii)

Volume II – Technical Factor, Will the Government please confirm when the

Product Demonstrations are planned to occur, and if the demonstration day and the two week system integration and set up period is expected to occur after the November 15, 2023 proposal submission date?

The 2 week integration will be from 27 NOV to 8 DEC

23. The Product Demo will take place on 11‐22 DEC 23.

RFP Section L, (A)(3)(c)(ii)

Volume II – Technical Factor, Will the Government please confirm what proposal content requirements for the Product

Demonstration Subfactor are due on the

November 15, 2023 proposal submission date?

There are no submissions in relation to Technical

Subfactor 1 Product Demonstration.

Performance Requirements

Document (PRD), p. 11

For Requirements 14.1.7 and 14.1.8, will the

Government please clarify which web browser(s) will be used for the Product Demonstration and the later work after contract award?

The expectation is for the Soldiers to access it through commonly known/used browsers such as

Edge/Firefox/Chrome

Attachment 0006, Product

Demonstration Plan

Will the Government clarify what is meant by

“weather station data” in the thread for Current

Weather Conditions, step 5.3?

Standard weather parameters (temperature, dew point, winds, pressure, other data) from automated weather sensors in theater or from retransmission and retrieval of the data from Air Force sources (557 WW).

RFP Section (Executive

Summary and Atch 0001

Statement of Work), page 2 of

RFP states "Army Contracting Command ‐

Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC‐APG) has the need to acquire on behalf of Project Manager

(PM) Intelligence Systems & Analytics (IS&A), a commercial item that will provide a software‐ only solution to meet the Weather Operational

Effects (WxOE) interoperability, security, training, usability, and data management capabilities"

However, several requirements in the Statement of Work (SOW) require that the contractor provide support services, training, and Subject

Matter Experts (SMEs) that would not be normally considered as fitting the definition of a

"Commercial Item" in FAR 2.101. Will the

Government please clarify the commercial item requirement and its applicability to tasks 3.1 ‐

3.18 of the SOW?

The Government is seeking for a commercial product under 2.101 Commercial Product Means‐ (3) (ii) Minor modifications of a type not customarily available in the commercial marketplace made to meet Federal

Government requirements. “Minor modifications” means modifications that do not significantly alter the nongovernmental function or essential physical characteristics of an item or component, or change the purpose of a process. Factors to be considered in determining whether a modification is minor include the value and size of the modification and the comparative value and size of the final product. Dollar values and percentages may be used as guideposts, but are not conclusive evidence that a modification is minor;

RFP Section L, Subfactor 1, Product Demonstration, of 80

Will the Government please confirm if offerors will be required (for the demonstration) to use

Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) services to obtain data from 557th WW, or will data be provided in flat file format?

flat file format

RFP Section L., IV. Past

Performance 3) Section 3

Subcontracts, p. 71 of 80

The Offeror must define the dollar value of work that each Offeror/major subcontractor will accomplish. Will the Government please confirm that no dollar values for work proposed under this proposal should appear in the Past

Performance Volume and that all pricing information will only be in the Price Volume? If so, will the Government please clarify what dollar value information is required for subcontractor

Past Performance?

It is required in Attachment 0007 and not in the Past

Performance submission.

42 Section L.3.c., p. x of x

The RFP states “Volumes I, II, IV and V of the proposal shall consist of a table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, summary section, and the narrative discussion.”

Will the Government please clarify the reference to a Volume V, or whether this a typo?

Corrected in Amendment 0002.

L.3.c and Attachment 0009

Table 1

The RFP states “Volumes I, II, IV and V of the proposal shall consist of a table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, summary section, and the narrative discussion.”

However, Attachment 0009/Table 1 for Volume II asks only for “Project VISTA Innovative

Technology” and a maximum of 10 pages. There is no place for a “table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, summary section.”

Will the Government please clarify if these sections should be included in Volume II and

Volume IV, and if so, as part of the 10 pages

(Volume II) or are there any separate files as required for Volume I?

Corrected in Amendment 0002.

Section L.3.c.iii. Volume III

Price Factor and Attachment

0009 Table 1

Will the Government please confirm that only the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) Worksheet

(Attachment 0007) is required for submittal with the proposal, and if narrative and/or supporting documentation is needed, the Government will request it later?

Total Evaluated Price (TEP) Worksheet (Attachment

0007) is the only document required for submittal with the proposal. Should any further documents be required the Government will request them.

45 Attachment 0009 Table 1.

Will the Government please confirm that items on Table 1 with “X*” can be submitted in either program with an X*? For example, the proposal synopsis can be submitted as either a Word file or a searchable Adobe Acrobat (pdf) file.

That is correct, either version may be submitted.