One_on_One_Answers_Release_2_Final_for_Release.pdf

America’s Force of Decisive Action

Program Executive Office Simulation, Training and Instrumentation and Army Contracting Command - Orlando

ETSC Industry Day and

Presolicitation Conference

Answers to Questions – Release 2

12 July 2016

2America’s Force of Decisive Action

Approach

• Answers are provided with each question listed below it.

• Multiple questions submitted as a single question were kept together for record keeping purposes. The following convention was applied:

−Portions of questions in GREEN TEXT are applicable to the answer provided.

−Portions of questions in BLACK TEXT are answered elsewhere in the document. See slide 6 for cross reference.

• Questions are from industry day, one-on-one sessions, and formal submissions.

• All questions are contained in this briefing. Blue pages show updates for release 2. Green pages are unchanged from release 1. Red or Blue text in the left margin explains the changes made.

N e w

T e x t

A d d e d f o r R e le a s e

3America’s Force of Decisive Action

General Clarifications

• Small Business Set-Aside Lot and Full-and-Open Lot appear misunderstood by multiple parties

−Small Business Set-Aside Lot will only be competed within Small

Businesses under NAICS 541990. The scope is limited to PWS 3.1 non-Contingency tasks. The scope includes Austere environments.

−The Full-and-Open Lot consists of all of the other work not in the

Small Business Set Aside Lot. Full-and-Open Lot is not restricted and can be awarded to a Small or Large business under NAICS

541990. This is not restricted to Large Businesses.

Contingency

Environment

Austere

Environment

Non-Contingency

/ Non-Austere

Environment

PWS 3.1 Full and Open Lot Small Business

Set-Aside Lot

Small Business

Set-Aside Lot

PWS 3.2 Full and Open Lot Full and Open Lot Full and Open Lot

PWS 3.3 Full and Open Lot Full and Open Lot Full and Open Lot

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

America’s Force of Decisive Action

Individual Questions

Answers are provided at top of each page.

Questions with reference numbers provided in area below the answer.

Multiple questions submitted as a single question were kept together for record keeping purposes. The following convention was applied:

• Portions of questions in GREEN TEXT are applicable to the answer provided.

• Portions of questions in BLACK TEXT are answered elsewhere in the document. See slide 6 for cross reference.

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

5America’s Force of Decisive Action

Questions - Table of Contents Topic Page

Accounting System 7

AFRICOM 8

Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) 9

Award Pool 10

Base vs. Task Order Role 11

Bid Rate 15

Bringing Work to the Contract 17

CDRLS and CDRL Acceptance 18

Ceiling 19

Certification of Instructors 20

Classified Work 24

CLINs and CLIN Structures 26

Competitive Range 27

CONUS 28

Cost/Price - CAP 31

Cost/Price – Discounting Rates 32

Cost/Price for Sample Task Orders 36

Cost/Price - Labor Categories 40

Cost/Price - Labor Rates 44

Cost/Price - Pricing Volume 51

Cost/Price - Workbook 60

Cost/Price - Work Year 64

Cost Plus 65

DBA Insurance 68

Definitions - Army Directed Work 69

Definitions - Austere 70

Definitions - Civil 73

Definitions - Contingency 74

Definitions - Relevant 78

Definitions - Security Cooperations 80

Dormant Status and Penalties 81

ETSC Customer Interfaces 82

Exclusivity 83

Topic Page

FMS 86

Foreign Contractors 88

Future Task Orders 89

Future Task Orders - Prior Notice 106

Future Task Orders - Broad Scope 109

Historical Warfighter FOCUS Data 110

ITAR 116

Joint Ventures 117

Key Personnel 118

Lot Structure Clarification 119

LPTA/Trade Off/Oral Presentation 122

MA-IDIQ 124

Management Information System 125

Market Research (RFIs, SSN) 128

NAICS 129

Organizational Conflict of Interest 131

Overtime 132

Page Count 133

Past Performance Dollar Values 134

Past Performance Standards 135

Past Performance Suggestions 140

Past Performance Time Period 145

Past Performance Volume - Attachment 3b

List 146

Past Performance Volume Missing Pages 148

Past Performance for Prior Subcontractors 149

Past Performance for Subcontractors in

General 153

Period of Performance 154

Personnel Management Plan 155

Post Award Team Additions 156

Prime Contractor Responsibilities 157

Product / Solution 158

Topic Page

Project Management Office 159

Project Management Plan 161

Proposal Format Specifications 162

QAP or QCP? 164

Related Contracts 165

Relative Importance 166

Sample Task Orders 167

Sample Task Orders Awardability 170

Schedule 173

Scope 175

Security, Weapons, Arming, Self-Protection 179

Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP) -

Clause H.7.2? 181

SBPP - Compliance Calculation 183

SBPP - Evaluation Approach 190

SBPP - Language 192

SBPP - Rationale Questions 198

SBPP - Socioeconomic Categories 199

SBPP - Small vs. Large Evaluation

Questions 201

SOFA Agreements 202

Source Directed Work (FMS) 204

Source Selection Advisory Board (SSEB) 205

SPOT and/or CRC 206

Subcontracting Plan 208

Teaming 209

Travel / Shelter / Passports 216

Unstated Requirements Clarifications 218

WFF Transition 219

2-Phase Evaluation 221

TEACH Contract 222

Narrow Interest / One Each Questions 223

N e w

T e x t

A d d e d f o r R e le a s

6America’s Force of Decisive Action

Questions with Multiple Answers

• Numerous questions submitted by industry crossed multiple answer categories.

Many questions thus are answered in multiple locations.

• Including the receipt of questions regarding the Cost/Price Volume, the 213 (of the 908) questions which appear under multiple answer categories* are:

− 8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 20, 33, 42, 48, 51, 57, 58, 64, 77, 80, 85, 88, 89, 90, 92, 95, − 108, 122, 124, 125, 126, 127, 129, 131, 133, 134, 139, 141, 148, 151, 156, 157, 164, 167, 170, 173, 176, 177, 181, 182, 189, 192, 194, 195, 197, − 200, 203, 204, 205, 206, 208, 209, 212, 219, 227, 228, 233, 237, 242, 247, 248, 249, 254, 262, 286, 289, 296, 298, − 302, 305, 306, 312, 313, 316, 317, 331, 335, 360, 363, 365, 366, 377, 384, 392, 395, − 401, 405, 408, 412, 420, 422, 423, 426, 432, 436, 439, 441, 442, 444, 445, 446, 447, 448, 457, 459, 466, 468, 480, 481, 485, 486, 496, − 502, 521, 542, 545, 546, 547, 548, 549, 550, 551, 554, 557, 564, 565, 567, 571, 577, 578, 580, 583, 591, 592, 593, 595, 599, − 601, 605, 607, 608, 609, 610, 611, 615, 621, 622, 629, 631, 634, 635, 649, 650, 663, 668, 673, 676, 677, 680, 681, 684, 685, 686, 690, 692, 695, 699 , − 700, 710, 716, 731, 742, 746, 752, 770, 772, 776, 786, 789, 791, 793, − 801, 805, 811, 820, 822, 825, 826, 829, 834, 840, 844, 847, 850, 854, 863, 864, 865, 867, 871, 874, 878, 889, 898

− 901, 907, 911, 919

N e w

T e x t

A d d e d f o r R e le a s

Accounting System

Question # Question

267 Is a Certified Accounting System (CAS) approval required?– Will contractors need to get an independent audit?

531 Require DCAA pre-approval at time of submission. Managing COST contracts critical to performance, can't be subcontracted, and hard to establish approved accounting infrastructure if not already there. Current draft does not evaluate it, but at least make it preferred.

798 Will DCAA pre-approval be required at time of submission

Answer: A certified accounting system does reduce risk, and is an element typically considered in activities wherein performance risk is assessed. While the Government will not require an accounting system approval prior to award, it will assess performance risks and capabilities (strengths and weaknesses) as stated in solicitation sections L and M.

N e w

T e x t

A d d e d f o r R e le a s

AFRICOM

Answer: Section F includes the required clause for AFRICOM. This clause must be included in any contract for any Government entity doing business or anticipating doing business on the African

Continent. Contingency requirements may arise anywhere in the world during the course of the

ETSC. Once identified, the Government will include or reference any location-specific clauses/provision that pertain to operating in that location. Currently the Government can only include the location and COCOM-specific clauses/provisions that are relevant at this time.

NOTE: On 10 June 2016, Defense Policy and Procurement updated AFRICOM clause language. The new clause may be found online by searching for 252.225-7980 and is titled, “Contractor Personnel

Performance in the United States Africa Command Area of Responsibility.” The clause is also labeled

Class Deviation 2016-O0008.

Question # Question

173 Draft RFP Section F

The Draft proposal has pages 54-72 designated as AFRICOM. Is there a specific reason for this? Can PEO

STRI provide a detailed list of Countries considered austere?

674 The draft proposal has pages 54-72 designated as AFRICOM. Is there a specific reason for this?

S e c o n d

P a ra g ra p h A d d e d t o r e fl e c t

C h a n g e d

G u id a n c e f ro m

D P

A P

Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) Answer: The Government is updating its surveillance plan and has found similar issues to those represented below. However, the Government is not currently contemplating the release of the QASP with the final solicitation. The base and Task Order PWSs will have adequate information to develop QAPs.

Q # Question

11 3.1.3 – Translation services – what does “fluent refer to? Please define?

426 PWS paragraph 3.1.1

The Standard is to demonstrate performance in relevant environments with the AQL only consisting of "effective past performance". There appears to be very minimal past performance requirements at the Base or TO level (Section L), and there are no past performance requirements in the STO proposal(s) (L.4.2, page 98 of 119). Recommend the Government include a requirement in the STO/TO proposal to cover past performance and define "effective" past performance.

428 PWS Paragraph 3.1.1.1.2 a and b

This PWS section requires the Contractor to "develop and provide training". The first standard is to "ensure compatibility with existing hardware and software …" and the AQL states the Contractor shall basically just use MSOffice(TM). The second standard states that the "method and materials where appropriate" with no AQL. Who determines what is "acceptable", and recommend a more stringent set of standards for this very important requirement.

439 PWS Paragraph 3.2.3b

The AQL for live, virtual, and constructive training exercises states “Standard: Exercise support personnel are responsive to any in-scope updates, changes, or multi-tasking during event. AQL: Personnel responsiveness and level of completion of effort is deemed acceptable by the cognizant customer training representative.” Please provide additional detail on what is to be considered “responsive” and how the training representative will determine if the effort is “acceptable”.

545 Requirement States: RFP Section L.8.5

L.8.5 The Offeror shall provide a Quality Assurance Plan in accordance with ETSC PWS paragraph

4.6.1. The contractor shall provide their own Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) which augments the Government produced

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) to assure quality and proper oversight throughout the ETSC contract.

Question/Comment/Clarification:

The Governments QASP is missing from the list of Exhibits and Attachments. Does the Government plan to release the

QASP with the RFP documentation?

615 RFP Section L.8.5

“The Offeror shall provide a Quality Assurance Plan in accordance with ETSC PWS paragraph 4.6.1. The contractor shall provide their own Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) which augments the Government produced Quality Assurance Surveillance

Plan (QASP) to assure quality and proper oversight throughout the ETSC contract.”

Question: Will the Government provide their QASP so that Industry may develop their QAP to augment the QASP? 9

N e w T e x t A d d e d f o r R e le a s e

Q u e s ti o n a d d e d t o l is t o f a n s w e re d q u e s ti o n s

Award Pool

Answer: The range of anticipated awardees in each pool was established based upon market research, efficiency objectives and customer requirements. The objective award sizes are seen as best-fits to meet these criteria.

Question # Question

97 Clarify how the objective number of 3 to 5 was established?

653 Structure with 3 to 5 awardees makes it hard for mid-tier companies to compete against the true large companies.

683 The Small business Primes will all be very good with great partners including Larges; does the Gov’t really need ten Primes? This would be much less efficient for ACC-Orlando and inefficient for industry?

729 What is the government’s prediction on number of awardees?

872 With six awardees, why promote cross teaming in Small Business pool?

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Base vs. Task Order Role (page 1 of 4) Answer: The ETSC Draft RFP reflects the base contract. The role of the base contract is to provide the broad context that covers all possible tasks. ETSC requirements will be Army and Army-directed efforts stemming from outside sources and are not under the control of the issuing agency. There is no way to determine specific future Task Order requirements nor the percent of ceiling reachable.

Question # Question

6 3.1 - 3.3 is broad

56 Believe PWS 3.0 is too broad

73 Can more task-specific language be included?

122 Contract Size ($2.4B). How was this number determined and how confident you will reach this level?

123 Contractor required property?

124 Contractor shall facilitate and/or provide shipping for partner nation training related equipment…Will this be reimbursable and does it have to be priced into the prop either at the IDIQ or TO levels?

126 Contractor shall provide existing, modified and/or contractor-developed training tutorials, courseware, curricula and Programs of Instruction (POI) for Military and Civil related subjects…. Will the contractor have to provide a full POI and/or curricula for courses that already exists? Or does this apply to those course that have not been established? Will the TO specify the approval process/chain for the new course or courses?

173 Draft RFP Section F

The Draft proposal has pages 54-72 designated as AFRICOM. Is there a specific reason for this? Can PEO

STRI provide a detailed list of Countries considered austere?

302 Is there a requirement for CONUS base facilities in section 3?

306 Is this contract vehicle able to work with multi-country training?

432 PWS Paragraph 3.1.1.4

Ref: “Contractor shall provide existing, modified and/or contractor-developed training tutorials, courseware, curricula and Programs of Instruction (POI) for Military and Civil related subjects…”

Question: Will the contractor have to provide a full POI and/or curricula for courses that already exist? Or does this only apply to those courses that have not been established? Will the TO specify the approval process/chain for the new course or courses?

N e w T e x t A d d e d f o r R e le a s e

Q u e s ti o n a d d e d t o l is t o f a n s w e re d q u e s ti o

Base vs. Task Order Role (page 2 of 4)

433 PWS Paragraph 3.1.2

This requirement seems to be insufficiently specific and has no standards or AQLs. Please define "ancillary" supplies and equipment (or provide examples). Recommend the Government consider standards that call for procuring them within a time frame. What about delivery of the supplies and equipment to austere and contingency environments?

436 PWS Paragraph 3.2.1 b

AQL states that "cognizant customer training representatives approves that concept meets TTPs". Are all TTPs going to be made available with both the base and individual STOs/TOs? What is the "approval" mechanism for Partner Nations, if any?

441 PWS paragraph 3.3.0(f)

Ref: “Maintenance of data must be maintained, accurate and complete…”

Question: Are there any other standards and documents for records management other than DI-ILLS-80134A and DI-MISC-81392?

445 PWS Paragraph 4.0

Who will determine what level of training and who can provide the training? Will this be done at the company level?

456 PWS Section 3.1.2

The paragraph states, “The Contractor shall procure ancillary supplies and equipment for the support of the training.” There are no additional sub-paragraphs explaining the intent and level of supplies and equipment. In paragraph 4.2 Government Furnished Property (GFP) and Information (GFI), it states GFP/I will be negotiated in the TOs as needed. It also states that what is not previously negotiated is not the responsibility of the

Government for timeliness acquisition and the Government is not liable for cost/schedule/performance or delays.

Recommend the Government remove the paragraph in the final PWS and allow the TOs to handle this subject of GFE/I.

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Base vs. Task Order Role (page 3 of 4)

457 PWS Section 3.0, 3.1,3.2,3.3

FMS and BPC Scope.

The original ACC Orlando 21 September 2015 ETSC sources sought published by Federal Business

Opportunities included the following statements: “FMS and BPC (which includes contingency operations) will be performed in support of the U.S. Army and the U.S. Army Security Assistance Command on behalf of U.S.

allied and qualified foreign governments. Prospective FMS and BPC contractors could be required to perform additional unique training tasks which fall under the general auspices of the aforementioned Performance

Requirements found under Section 3 of the DRAFT PWS. These include:

c. Provide training and support in a variety of subjects to include but not limited to:

i. Counter Improvised Explosive Device (C-IED) training

ii. Special operations/counterinsurgency training

iii. Vehicle operation and maintenance training and/or support

iv. Weapons marksmanship training

v. Non-standard training device O&M support

vi. Partner nation and Allied operational and procedural training

d. Provide partner nation and multinational exercise support to include but not limited to:

i. Planning

ii. Facilitation

iii. After Action Review and analysis

iv. Role players”

The referenced, current ETSC DRFP and DPWS make little reference to Foreign Military Sales (FMS) /

Building Partner Capacity (BPC) and do not directly include the scope listed above.

Question: To ensure timely response to the final RFP, will FMS / BPC work (the above scope) be included in the final ETSC RFP? If so, will the Government consider restoring the above, or similar specific scope, to the

PWS to ensure bidder capabilities to deliver against these requirements is an appropriate consideration for award?

Question: Additionally, if FMS / BPC work will be included under ETSC, will the Government please provide an estimate of the percentage extent of that work relative to the overall contract ceiling?

525 Request synopsis/library for WFF work/TOs migrating to ETSC, “PWS is rather broad”

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Base vs. Task Order Role (page 4 of 4)

534 Requirement States: PWS 3.2.2

The contractor shall develop new and modify existing exercise scenarios.

Question/Comment/Clarification:

Will the government follow the standard Joint Event Life Cycle (JELC) in the exercise design process?

635 Section F.k indicates as follows, “Contractor personnel shall possess the required licenses to operate all vehicles or equipment necessary to perform the contract in the designated operational area.”

Clarification: Please provide a complete list of vehicles and equipment in each AOR that contractor personnel must be licensed to operate.

676 The draft RFP references "weapons" requirements. Specifically it indicates there will be some training/certification requirements and outlines the details of this. A) Who will determine what level of training and who can provide training? Will this be done at the company level? B) Will weapons be required for any of the small business lots in "austere locations" C) Will the company be required to issue the weapons or will these be GFE?

680 The Government provided definitions for the terms non-austere, austere, non-contingency, and contingency.

While the definitions provided give a thorough overview of the types of environments, the locations being covered could be interpreted differently between offerors.

Clarification: Please provide a list of countries that fall under each definition.

695 Under 3.1 will supplies procurement be for assisting with training?

809 Will more “shall” statements/directives be added to PWS scope?

823 Will Specific curricula requirements will be laid out at the task order level or at the base level for sample tasks

867 Will you allow for the introduction of innovative technologies and solutions in this IDIQ?

876 Would the government consider restoring the specific scope language provided in the Sources sought published under unique training tasks examples within Section 3

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Bid Rate (page 1 of 2)

48 Attachments 4a and 4b (20 April 2016)

Would the Government consider releasing a draft version of Pricing Attachments 4a and 4b so that offerors may familiarize themselves with customer formats and requirements prior to release of the RFP? If draft Rate

Books cannot be provided, can the Government provide anticipated labor category descriptions and qualifications?

Will the Government require each awarded prime to submit a proposal in response to all Task Order RFPs?

Does the Government have a preferred encryption method (such as PKI) for receipt of task order proposals submitted electronically, or will the Government be utilizing a portal or other shared Management Information

System (MIS) to receive task order proposals?

Does the government anticipate issuing Draft RTOR/RTOP's in order to reduce the turnaround time for a proposal and to allow the primes to recruit key personnel? Does the government anticipate issuing Draft Task

Order RFPs in order to reduce the turnaround time for a proposal and to allow the primes to recruit personnel?

150 Do you have to bid on all TOs?

195 Execution – What are the expected number /types of tasks (Length, value, customer, location – over the 5 year POP)?

a. Who/how will TO evaluation be performed?

b. How will Gov’t share upcoming TOs with IDIQ holders? What is the CONOPs for task order proposals, evaluation and award?

c. Will contractors have to bid on all TOs?

Answer: The Government has decided to not pursue bid rate requirements for this solicitation.

N e w

T e x t

A d d e d f o r R e le a s

Bid Rate (page 2 of 2)

244 If a company is an awardee in the Full and open, will they have to bid on contingency Task Orders?

265 In the Full and Open Lot, will awardees have to bid on every Task Order?

465 Question: In the general session it was stated that all Prime contractors must bid to all Task Orders, Please explain.

494 Recommends for a prime to bid on every task order in the large lot

a. As a No-bid reduces/limits competition

557 RFP Section B CLIN 0001

Will the Government require each awarded prime to submit a proposal in response to all or a specific percentage of Task Order RFPs? If the Government intends to require proposals for each Task Order or proposals for a minimum number of Task Orders, we recommend the Government fund the primes to staff and maintain a Program Management Office (PMO) to respond to these RFPs and to conduct the required IDIQ level tasking.

643 Section M - What are the Task Order Response metrics?

644 Section M – what are the TO response metrics? Will the Gov’t post any TOR response minimums in the contract?

658 Subject: Target Size

Question – Are there any expectations to make it a requirement to bid every Task Order?

Recommendation – Awardees have to bid on 100% of all TO, with the ability to request a waiver.

697 Wants to know/understand the “No-bid” options for both pre and post award

792 Will contractors be required to bid on every TO?

794 Will contractors have to bid on every TO?

815 Will prime contractors be required to bid on every task order issued in their Lot? Or will there be a percentage requirement?

824 Will the award winning large businesses be required to bid on all task orders, to include Non-Contingency work in area 3.1?

835 Will the Gov’t require a mandatory % of the TOs be Bid on? (50%, 100%, etc.)

856 Will there be a No-bid opportunity? Will there be a penalty for no-bids?

N e w

T e x t

A d d e d f o r R e le a s

Bringing Work to the Contract Answer: The ETSC contract is being established to execute Army Directed work (explained in detail elsewhere in this package). Government customers are intended to be the only source of new work.

ACC-Orlando does not typically “advertise” contracts beyond FedBizOps postings, PALT reviews, and explanations to stakeholders and does not perceive ETSC to require any special advertising. Any inquiries from Government customers regarding ETSC should be referred to the ETSC Procuring

Contracting Officer.

Question # Question

69 Can Contractors bring customers to the contract?

149 Do we have an expectation to “bring work” to the contract?

152 Does ACC-Orlando have a plan to advertise this contract?

303 Is there an expectation to “bring work” to the contract?

732 What is the potential for customers being brought to ETSC through the contractors?

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

CDRLs and CDRL Acceptance

188 ETSC CDRLS

Please confirm that on the CDRLs (A004, A006, A007, A008, A009,) that identify a Government review and acceptance/rejection requirement, if Government provides no comments or acceptance of the CDRL, the

CDRL will be deemed accepted. It is not reasonable for a Contractor to make assumptions on the acceptance of a CDRL submission or to correct CDRL issues identified by the Government at unspecified timeframe in the future.

Request the Government include language in the CDRLs that have a Government approval/rejection timeframe stating “CDRL is deemed accepted if Government does not provide acceptance or comments within the Government stated timeframe.”

773 Which CDRLs for processing people to go overseas will the gov’t use?

Answer: The Government will include approval/rejection timeframes at the TO level. There is no specific CDRL for processing people to go overseas.

N e w

T e x t

A d d e d f o r R e le a s

Ceiling Answer: The Government developed and validated an Independent Government Cost Estimate utilizing historical information and information gathered from potential customers. The contract ceiling is a result of this estimate, covers both lots, and represents the total contract value based upon educated assumptions of future requirements. The Government does not intend to publish any of the financial information from that estimate.

Question # Question

122 Contract Size ($2.4B). How was this number determined and how confident you will reach this level?

231 How was the 2.4B figure determined and how confident is the Gov’t that it will reach this level

363 Of the 2.4B how much will be going to Small Business (requests a $$ figure be put out vs %)

738 What makes up the 2.4B ceiling?

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Certification of Instructors (page 1 of 4) Answer: The Government recognizes that the breadth of ETSC exceeds the breadth of the TRADOC certification requirements. We are revising the ETSC RFP documentation to put all instructor qualification requirements and all acceptable quality level determinations at the Task Order level to enable the Government to broadly and fairly cover this issue during ETSC execution. Payment issues, types of instruction, certification renewal will be determined by each customer for each Task Order award.

Question # Question

92 Clarification on certification requirements of personnel and will the company be responsible or will the gov’t provide/cover the costs?

127 Contractor shall provide qualified instructors, SMEs and advisors to instruct and or advise in Military and Civilian related subjects… will the requirements and qualifications of the SMEs, etc be spelled out in the RFP or at TO level?

190 Evaluation criteria does not match instructions.

217 How are certifications handled for $ of Lot? (Upfront? Annually?)

307 Is TRADOC certification required for trainers and, if so, how often and who is the responsible party for payment of this certification?

413 PWS

To what degree does the Government anticipate in the ETSC Task Orders applying referenced document TRADOC

Pam 525-8-2, The US Army Learning Concept for 2015 sections to apply to ETSC for training services provided by contractors?

* Section 1-4.b. a more adaptive learning model?

* Section 1-4.c.1. Convert most classroom experiences into collaborative problem-solving events led by facilitators

(vice instructors)?

* Section 1-4.c.3. Dramatically reduce or eliminate instructor-led slide presentation lectures and begin using a blended learning approach that incorporates virtual and constructive simulations, gaming technology, or other technology-delivered instruction.?

* Section 2-3.b.(2). "electronic books" for use on mobile devices?

* Section 2-3.b.(2). "mobile computing"

* Section 3-5.b.(2), making it mobile

* Section 2-3.b.(2). "modern instructional design strategies"?

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Certification of Instructors (page 2 of 4)

416 PWS 3.1.1 and 3.1.3– Performance standard requires better explanation

a. Performance standards do not reflect the language of the tasks

b. Translation performance standards – 5 errors per page not reflected of requirement to put someone with translation in country.

c. Concern that we do not want to dictate how they identify who they will have to do the translation. (vetting the people he hires which is not an evaluation criteria in sections L & M)

d. No surge time for instructor tasks or support for OCONUS work

e. Performance standards inconsistent with complexity of work

417 PWS 3.1.1.1

Requirement States:

Performance Standards AQL: Per TRADOC Regulation (TR) 350-18 section 3-8 'Instructor qualification and certification', with certification documentation provided by the proponent upon request.

Question/Comment/Clarification:

This would seem to indicate that all instructors must be TRADOC certified. Many FMS requirements require instructors which by virtue of the type work will not or cannot possibly beTRADOC certified. This requirement is more applicable to CONUS based platform instruction.

418 PWS 3.1.1.1 (AQL) - “Qualified Instruction per TRADOC Regulation etc.” is limiting and costly; look at allowing for other than Per TRADOC certifications or at the TO level.

427 PWS Paragraph 3.1.1.1

Ref: “Contractor shall provide qualified instructors, SMEs and advisors to instruct and or advise in Military and

Civilian related subjects…”

Question: Will the requirements and qualifications of the SMEs, etc. be spelled out in the RFP or at Task Order

(TO) level? Can PEO STRI provide historical information regarding the locations where these Instructors, SMEs, advisors have been performing on contract?

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Certification of Instructors (page 3 of 4)

429 PWS paragraph 3.1.1.1a

The PWS states "shall provide qualified instructors". The AQL requires certified instructors. Who "certifies" instructors? Must they be certified prior to performing work? Section L (L.4.2, page 98 of 119) is silent on the requirement to describe required certifications. Are instructors required to be certified against Partner Nation standards or only TRADOC regulations? Does qualification denote certification and vice versa?

431 PWS Paragraph 3.1.1.3c

The AQL "provides opportunity for students to assess Instructor performance…" Suggest revising the AQL to state that end of total course student surveys be greater than XXX, i.e. a definitive and quantifiable number.

Recommend making requirements part of individual task orders.

450 PWS Pargraph 3.1.1.1c

This paragraph states that the standard level of instructor grade and experience is governed by AR 614‐200 section 6‐9 (Instructor Selection Criteria) among other TRADOC regulations. The referenced AR and section

6‐9 specifically apply to military personnel and not to contractors, e.g., section 6‐9 requires [soldier] “have 3 years’ time remaining in‐service upon arrival at assignment or be able to reenlist or extend to meet the requirement.” QUESTION/COMMENT: Please clarify the extent to which all such AQL’s that reference military regulations apply to contractor personnel. For example, was it the Government’s intent to require contractor personnel be previously certified instructors at the appropriate grade and experience, or was it instead the intent to require contractor personnel satisfy all requirements other than those specific to current military service?

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Certification of Instructors (page 4 of 4)

455 PWS Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3

Performance Standards for Para 3.1:

Comment: The performance standards for the instructor cadre are nearly impossible to achieve, as they cite specific requirements for Soldiers, Army Civilians, or other Service-members and their commands to allow deployment for extended periods of time as contractor-instructors. The cited regulations are aimed at the selection, certification, and recertification of active duty Service-members or Army Civilians. (See paragraph 7-

10 of TR 350-70).

Recommend softening this section by caveating the following AQL statements:

Examples:

a) Standard: Instructor Certification

AQL: Contractor-provided instructors / SMEs have documented previous experience as instructors or practitioners of the subjects being trained and advised upon.

b) Standard: Quality of training and advisory assistance

AQL: Contractor-provided instructors / SMEs have either current (within five years) successful operational / training experience with the intended subjects, or in the case of subject material related to emerging near-peer hybrid threats, documented successful performance in a previous decisive action operational / training environment era.

c) Standard: Level of instructor grade and experience

AQL: Contractor-provided instructors / SMEs comport closely with the metrics found in AR 614-200 section 6-

9 (Instructor Selection Criteria), TF 350-10 section 1-6 (Instructional Leader Training and Education Levels);

and course management plans (CMP) for their intended roles, other than those obviously related to being on active duty in the armed forces (e.g., AR 613-200 paras 6-9e, I, j, and l).

533 Requirement States:

Performance Standards AQL: Per TRADOC Regulation (TR) 350-18 section 3-8 'Instructor qualification and certification', with certification documentation provided by the proponent upon request.

Question/Comment/Clarification:

This would seem to indicate that all instructors must be TRADOC certified. Many FMS requirements require instructors which by virtue of the type work will not or cannot possibly be TRADOC certified. This requirement is more applicable to CONUS based platform instruction. Will the Government please change this to "MAY" be required?

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Classified Work (page 1 of 2) Answer: The ETSC Draft DD254 requires the ability for those personnel satisfying the Task Order execution to have and retain a SECRET clearance and does not require Offerors to have Top Secret, SCI, secret safeguarding or facility clearance capability at time of submission in order to propose. Security related updates to the Base contract and associated DD254 modifications will be driven by Task order specific requirements, as necessary, with such revisions being provided to awardees at the TO level and Base award as applicable.

Government security related sponsorship shall be provided if required. Requirements, in addition to that outlined in the Base contract for personnel security, operating in a contingency/austere environment, shall be depicted at the TO level. Proposals are handled as Source Selection sensitive, with no additional security classification being imposed upon submission. In the event proposals at the TO level were to require

"classified" submission, the government will communicate that requirement along with the mechanism of control to be utilized for handling of classified proposals. A requirement for OPSEC plans shall be invoked when applicable at the TO Level. The most up to date Cybersecurity Provisions and CDI clauses shall be incorporated at the time of Final RFP release. For the purpose of identifying for handling Controlled

Unclassified Information (CUI) or Technical Data pertaining to this contract for public disclosure or release, all

Task Order information or unpublished Contract information shall require prior review and approval from the government Public Affairs Officer (PAO), COR and cognizant Security Representative prior to release. The bulk of security issues will exist at the Task Order level, and not at the base contract level. Security issues will likely vary across this contract’s five years of execution, as ETSC Task Orders will vary based on the world security situation and military roles and funding that exist during that period.

Question # Question

35 Att 1 Section 4.1.1

In addition to classified information stored on-site, is there a requirement for classified information to be stored at the contractor’s site and/or home office? If yes, what type of material will need to be stored?

133 Cybersecurity provision (PCO to identify any compliant issues DFARS 252)

136 DD254 covers all but holding and storage

268 Is a secret clearance required by everyone?

269 Is a TS facility and secret safeguarding required at time of submission

278 Is OPSEC plan at IDIA or TO level (4.1.6)

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Classified Work (page 2 of 2)

Question # Question

281 Is SCI clearance required?

296 Is there a firewall system in place for compliance of OCI?

410 Provisions and CDI requirements are per Sep 2015 vs latest Dec 2015?

447 PWS Paragraph 4.1

Will the government sponsor companies that do not have a facility clearance? If not, recommend requiring offerors demonstrate proof of facility clearance at time of proposal submission

532 Required security clearances? Ref. DD254 (secret); then by TO requirement

559 RFP Section I

REFERENCE: DFARS Clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident

Reporting.

The interim rule issued by the US Department of Defense on 26 August 2015 expanded the 2013 amendment to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 252.204-7012, imposing heightened security safeguards and mandatory reporting requirements on DoD contractors handling Covered Defense Information

(CDI). The rule requires that contractors apply a minimum set of protective measures and security controls to safeguard CDI resident on or passing through their information systems and to ensure procedures are in place to promptly report and investigate cyber incidents.

CDI is defined as unclassified information that is generated by or provided to the contractor by the DoD in performance of the contract that falls into one of four categories. These categories include controlled technical information, critical information (for operations security), certain export control information, and any other information identified in the contract, marked or otherwise, as requiring safeguarding.

Will the Government please identify the Unclassified Technical Controlled Information and Controlled Defense

Information for ETSC that is or will be covered under this clause?

645 Security clearance - require a TS Facilty and Secret safeguarding at time of submission. Currently priming a

Special Operations exercise support requiring classified resumes and expecting 4 new Task Orders this week.

Impossible without proper clearance and DSS delays would disrupt competition if facility clearance isn't already established.

709 What are the security requirements for personnel security in a contingency environment?

747 What security clearances are required? (Answer - DD254 will be issued for each TO)

799 Will DD254 be released at TO level?

855 Will there be a need for classified proposals?

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

CLINs and CLIN Structures Answer: The Government will take industry comments into consideration when finalizing the base IDIQ contract CLIN structure to ensure they allow for usability and flexibility at the Task Order level. The

CLIN structure provided in the Sample Task Order Pricing Workbook(s) is an example of the CLIN structure to be employed in future Task Orders. Since the ETSC scope is based on future Task Orders based on external requirements and funding, there is no ability to price nor scope a CLIN structure within the Base Contract. The Government is considering the numbering recommendation in question

555. The information contained on Section B, page 38 is the standard language generated by the

ACC Orlando software, and plans to remove that language from the ETSC solicitation.

Question # Question

370 Page 38, Section B - Please could you clarify the CLIN structure for the IDIQ? Is this just an example of the

CLIN structure in subsequent Task Orders?

555 RFP Section B

The current CLIN structure includes a consecutively numbered structure for all 5 years of the program PoP.

Would the Government consider renumbering the CLINs in a more user-friendly manner, i.e., CLIN 0001 for

Year 1, CLIN 0X01 for Year 2, etc.?

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Competitive Range Answer: As stated in Sections L.1.6 through L.1.8 of the Draft RFP, the Government reserves the right to establish a competitive range. See FAR 15.306(c) for details on competitive range process. Regarding question 725, evaluation criteria for Task Orders will be identified by the Government as part of its FAR Part 16 fair opportunity process. Regarding questions 290 and 853, No formal down select process has been identified in the solicitation and the Government will establish a competitive range, if necessary, prior to the completion of its initial evaluation. Regarding question 251 All proposals that are in compliance with the solicitation will be evaluated in accordance with Sections L&M. Regarding questions about establishing a competitive range, see section M.1.3.

Question # Question

241 How will the government perform competitive range determination (L.1.6, M.1.1.7)?

251 If the PCO determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, then the PCO may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. Comment: What criteria would the government use to exclude compliant offerors without doing the full evaluation? Without evaluating the offer completely, it will be impossible to determine the most highly rated to then select from.

290 Is the Government going to set a competitive range and what is the value to the Government to do a down select based on the competitive range?

310 It appears from the attendance at the Industry Day that the number of proposals will be significant and as stated in

M.1.1.7, the "If the PCO determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds that which efficient competition can be conducted, the PCO may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range...." Question/Comment: What factors and/or criteria will be used to establish the limited number of proposals that make the competitive range?

318 L.1.1.7 Draft RFP; page 111 – What factors and/or criteria will be used to establish the limited number of proposals that make the competitive range?

406 Proposal requirements/Evaluation – How will the gov’t perform competitive range determination (L.1.6, M.1.1.7)?

725 What is the cut line in the evaluation criteria? Recommend gov’t to set critical evaluation criteria in TO in order to establish a cut line.

853 Will there be a down select period before final award?

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

CONUS (and OCONUS) (page 1 of 3) Answer: CONUS relates to the Contiguous United States, and thus establishes a geographical region.

Contingency relates to an operational environment and the conditions therein. There are no predictive measures to determine the CONUS/OCONUS future work percentages; however, historical information from

Warfighter FOCUS has been provided in the section of this document titled, “Historical Warfighter FOCUS

Data” and also in a 20 May FedBizOps posting. Industry is encouraged to review the information regarding

“CONUS,” “Definitions – Austere (and Non-Austere),” “Definitions – Contingency,” “Definitions – Security

Cooperations,” and “FMS” to fully understand the geographical and operational settings for ETSC execution.

Question # Question

129 CONUS & OCONUS vs. contingency & non-contingency.

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

CONUS (and OCONUS) (page 2 of 3)

Question # Question

457 PWS Section 3.0, 3.1,3.2,3.3

FMS and BPC Scope.

The original ACC Orlando 21 September 2015 ETSC sources sought published by Federal Business

Opportunities included the following statements: “FMS and BPC (which includes contingency operations) will be performed in support of the U.S. Army and the U.S. Army Security Assistance Command on behalf of U.S. allied and qualified foreign governments. Prospective FMS and BPC contractors could be required to perform additional unique training tasks which fall under the general auspices of the aforementioned Performance

Requirements found under Section 3 of the DRAFT PWS. These include:

c. Provide training and support in a variety of subjects to include but not limited to:

i. Counter Improvised Explosive Device (C-IED) training

ii. Special operations/counterinsurgency training

iii. Vehicle operation and maintenance training and/or support

iv. Weapons marksmanship training

v. Non-standard training device O&M support

vi. Partner nation and Allied operational and procedural training

d. Provide partner nation and multinational exercise support to include but not limited to:

i. Planning

ii. Facilitation

iii. After Action Review and analysis

iv. Role players”

The referenced, current ETSC DRFP and DPWS make little reference to Foreign Military Sales (FMS) / Building

Partner Capacity (BPC) and do not directly include the scope listed above.

Question: To ensure timely response to the final RFP, will FMS / BPC work (the above scope) be included in the final ETSC RFP? If so, will the Government consider restoring the above, or similar specific scope, to the

PWS to ensure bidder capabilities to deliver against these requirements is an appropriate consideration for award?

Question: Additionally, if FMS / BPC work will be included under ETSC, will the Government please provide an estimate of the percentage extent of that work relative to the overall contract ceiling?U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

CONUS (and OCONUS) (page 3 of 3)

Question # Question

686 This section states that "The Offeror and its major subcontractors shall...provide the base direct labor rates and the fully burdened ceiling labor rates for both the CONTINGENCY and NON‐CONTINGENCY pre‐populated labor categories...". QUESTION/COMMENT: Will the Government consider CONUS/OCONUS labor categories rather than contingency/non‐contingency labor categories? While contingency environments are defined, non‐contingency but austere OCONUS locations vary significantly based on infrastructure, remoteness, and other factors contributing to price. Differentiating labor categories by CONUS/OCONUS and allowing the contractor to capture location‐specific costs in ODCs will ensure the labor category ceiling rates can accommodate both contingency and noncontingency environments based on location.

734 What is the scope of CONUS/OCONUS?

811 Will OCONUS work be excluded by SB?

U n c h a n g e d f ro m R e le a s e

P o s te d t o

F e d B iz O p s o n

J u n

Cost/Price – Contractor Acquired Property Answer: Contractor Acquired Property (CAP) requirements will be specified at the Task Order level.

The Government will release information on the Sample Task Orders based on the plan stated in the

Draft RFP. There may be instances where CAP is required, but was not anticipated at the time of TO award. In such cases, the Government may employ a pricing strategy utilizing a separate line item and

CDRL to track CAP IAW FAR PGI 204.7105.

Question # Question

148 Do we anticipate property for sample tasks to be priced out? Clarify requirements to propose and price cap for three sample task orders.

448 PWS Paragraph 4.3

Contractor Acquired Property (CAP) is new with the latest PWS. In order for the Offeror to credibly quote prices (and delivery, installation, etc.) in the STO/TO proposal ("The Contractor shall ensure all CAP …. Is clearly defined in its proposal"), a complete set of GFE/GFP/GFI must be provided with each STO/TO RFP.

Please confirm that the Government will provide that with each STO/TO RFP.

505 Reference: Contractor Acquired Property

Discussion: The PWS indicates “The Contractor shall ensure all CAP necessary for successful completion of the TO requirement (s) is clearly defined in its' proposal”.

Clarification: Clarify if the Government requires offerors to propose and price CAP for the three sample task orders.

N e w T e x t A d d e d f o r R e le a s e

Q u e s ti o n a d d e d t o l is t o f a n s w e re d q u e s ti o

Cost/Price – Discounting Rates (page 1 of 4)

Answer: IAW Industry request for early release of data, even if incomplete, the Government released the

DRFP without the Cost/Price Volume, which was still being drafted. The majority of these questions focus on issues addressed in that document, which was released on 20 May 2016. The Cost/Price Volume and sections of the Solicitation (L.6 and M.4) have been updated.

Sample Task Orders (STOs) will not be awardable, however; they are representative of realistic work expected under the ETSC.