L1_RFP_Question_Answer_OneSAF.pdf

Question and Answer Form

W900KK-18-R-0010 One Semi-Automated Forces

Question/Comment Government Response

L.7.2 Sub-factor 2.2 states "The Offeror shall document these recommendations as improvements to the Government-provided

OneSAF Production and Support Quality Assurance Surveillance

Plan (QASP) (Section J, Attachment 4) and deliver as part of this proposal." Should our recommendations be included in Vol III

Management, or submitted as a redlined QASP in an attachment?

Recommendations shall included in the

Government provided QASP and shall be submitted as Appendix A to the Management

Volume of the proposal.

The Government requires that the recommendations made to the QASP are annotated in such a way that easily exposes the changes made.

Section L.7.2 will be updated to reflect this.

Management Appendix A will not count towards the page count.

For the Period of Performance dates for CLINs 0201, 0202, 0203, does the Government intend for them to start immediately after award? Please verify the PoP dates for CLINs 0201, 0202 and

0203?

It is the Goverment's intent to award CLINs

0201 and 0203 one business day after the award of Task Order 0001. Period of performance listed in Section F of the Basic

IDIQ is the ordering period for that respective

CLIN. The Period of Performance will be delineated in any resulting Task Order. It's not the Government's intent to award CLIN

0202 immediately after contract award. The

RFP will be updated to list CLIN 0202 as an

OPTION.

Please verify the PoP dates for CLINs 5801, 5802, 5803. Should the POP be 15 OCT-2023 TO 14-OCT-2024; or is it the

Government's intent to overlap the previous option year (Option 4)

CLINs 4701, 4702 and 4703?

It is the Government's intent to have CLINs

5801, 5802, and 5803 overlap with the previous option year by 4 months. Reference

Figure 1 in Section L.1.17, pg 110 and note overlap between Task Order 0007 and 0008

Question/Comment Government Response

When will the Government require submission of a Property

Management Plan?

The Property Management Plan is required with the submission of the proposal.

L.8.4 para 2 states "The offeror shall complete Part 1 of the Past

Performance Questionnaire and e-mail the questionnaire to both the

Government contracting activity and technical representative responsible for the past/current contract:…." We have been informed by our PCO that they are not responsible for completing past performance questionnaire due to their lack of involvement with the technical performance of the program. Will the Government contact the PCO to discuss any contractual past performance measures if they do not complete the PP questionnaire? If not, will this count as a negative factor for the Offeror? Or is it sufficient for the just the COR/TPOC to submit and not the PCO?

The government may contact the PCO if necessary for further information. The COR would be the cognizant technical representative. This will not count as a negative.

The Cost Price Workbook appears to be missing CLIN values for

1103, 2103, 3503, 4503, and 5503. These values were all included in Section B on pages 9, 14, 19, 24 and 29.

The CPW has been corrected and updated.

We believe the Government intended to state the Cost/Price data for

TO#1 & #2 should be included in Attachment L3, tab "Attachment

2a"; however no tab exists for the individual task orders.

The CPW has been corrected and updated.

L.9 para 2 states "Offerors shall submit the basis of estimates and include other than cost or pricing data (CLIN-by-CLIN) in support of all CLINs. In addition, Offerors shall submit a summary of the proposed cost for each CLIN, as well as the total price including profit or fee...." Will the Government's provide additional information on the technical requirements beyond TO #0001 and TO# 0002 as stated in the PWS? If not, will the Government still require pricing for all CLINs?

Reference Section M3.5.2, pg 144 - "TOs 01 and 05 have the same scope and shall be priced as such. TO 02 shares similar scope with TOs: 03, 04, 06, 07 and 08 and shall be priced accordingly."

Question/Comment Government Response

M.3.4.2 para 4 states "Major Sub-contractor, means a subcontractor that is awarded a subcontract that equals or exceed 15 percent of the total value of the OneSAF effort." Would the Government please clarify the meaning of total value? Is it total value of the bid ceiling, the TEP, the IDIQ or another computation?

The Government considers a Major Sub-contractor one whose awarded value is 15% the ID/IQ maximum value. This has been updated in the RFP

CLIN 5509-Trainsition Out is not listed as an "Option", should the

Offeror assume that this cost should be proposed within the cost proposal which will result in this CLIN being a part of the final contract award?

The cost for CLIN 5509 shall be included in the cost proposal. The Government will update the RFP to reflect CLIN 5509 listed as an OPTION.

Section L.6.1 requires Offerors to, “provide a complete description of their technical solution and approach to conducting requirements analysis, conceptual modeling, engineering design, development, production, test, and integration of the v9.0 capabilities.” (RFP, p

116) In 6_OneSAF_9__Memo.pdf, the Government provides the

Memorandum for Record. Within that Memorandum, two (2) enclosures are listed, but not provided: “9.0 Final Priority

Requirements List, 25 May 16” and “9.0 RPD Slides, 23 May 2016.”

Those enclosures would seem to describe the v9.0 capabilities that

Offerors are required to understand. Additionally, the contents of the

Technical Data Package do not contain those enclosures. If Offerors are to build responses to the approved v9.0 RIB list of items, a description of those items is required. Will the Government release in a timely manner those descriptions (enclosures), the RIB list, and any other information that will allow for a more detailed response in the proposal?

The use cases description of the v9.0 requirements are provided in attachment

7_OneSAF_V9.0_UseCases.

The 2 enclosures referenced in the

OneSAF_9_Memo ( 9.0 Final Priority

Requirements List, 25 May 16 and 9.0 RPD

Slides, 23 May 2016) do not provide any additional description of the v9.0 capabilities.

Enclosures will not be provided.

Question/Comment Government Response

We respectfully request that the Government provide a year's worth of travel requirements to allow Integrated Master Schedule development.

The travel requirements are unknown to the

Government at this point. Mission travel will be identified and approved during the execution of the contract. The Government does not expect any travel requirements to be identified in the IMS.

RFP will be updated to reflect the exclusion of the travel requirement within the IMS.

PWS Section 3.1.6 of both the IDIQ and TO0001 state that, "The

Contractor shall maintain accountability of all major end-items provided by the Government (Government Furnished Equipment) or purchased for use under this contract (Contractor-Acquired

Property). The Contractor shall maintain and update a property spreadsheet as needed with newly purchased items and remove items that have been properly returned to Government accountability. Inventories shall be conducted by the Contractor and the Government at the beginning of the contract period, once annually thereafter, and once at the conclusion of the contract unless the most recent inventory has been completed within 45 days of the end of the contracted period of performance. The Contractor shall submit the results of the inventory through contracts in accordance with AR 735-5. The Contractor's property spreadsheet shall be provided to the Government for use during the inventory no later than 5 business days before the inventory is scheduled to begin." Is there currently an RFID system in-place to manage GFE?

There is no RFID system currently in-place to manage GFE.

Question/Comment Government Response

The IDIQ PWS Section 3.1.10.2 states, "IAW DODD 8140.01

"Cyberspace Workforce Management" (11 Aug 2015), and DoD

8570.01-M "Information Assurance Workforce Improvement

Program" (10 Nov 2015), personnel whose required duties include government information assurance/cybersecurity requirements will have at least one approved security-related certification." This requirement is identical in TO0002 PWS, Section 3.1.10.1. Will the

Government please clarify which IAT and/or IAM levels will be required for the referenced position types?

The requirement in IDIQ PWS, Section

3.1.10.2 is identical to TO0001 PWS, Section

3.1.10.1. Section 3.1.10.1 "Cyberspace

Workforce Management" in TO0001 was mis-numbered and should have reflected the same section number as in the IDIQ PWS.

The RFP PWS for TO0001 will be updated accordingly.

The Government is unable to provide further clarification on the levels and position types as these are dependent on the Offeror's approach to satisfy the totality of the OneSAF

Cyber requirements. DoD 8570.01-M defines the position requirements and functions per certification level.

Section L.9.5 (p 124, paragraph 4) informs Offerors that "Section B also provides the NTE costs for Development and Customer

Support CLINs (0103, 1103, 2103, 3503, 4503, and 5503)." Should

Offerors use these "NTE costs" numbers for Section B vice developing actual cost estimates for these CLINS (0103, 1103, 2103, 3503, 4503, and 5503)? Are Offerors also required to put these "NTE costs" in the CLINS in the Attachment L3 Cost

Workbook Excel Spreadsheet Tab Attachment 2a?

The Offerors should use the NTE Costs. The

NTE Costs have already been populated in the L3 CPW for your convenience.

Question/Comment Government Response

Section L.1.16 instructs Offerors that, "the cost/price information for

Task Order 0001 and Task Order 0002 must be included in the appropriate TAB within the designated CLIN structure for Basic

ID/IQ-TO1-TO2 Cost Price Workbook (Section L Attachment L3) located in Section B, in the Cost-Price Workbook within the TAB for

Task Order 0001 and the TAB for Task Order 0002 provided as

Attachment L3 located in Section L..." A review of Section L, Attachment 3, Cost Workbook does not have these tabs. Will the

Government please clarify if Offerors should create these Tabs specifically for Task Order 0001 and 0002? If so, are Offerors also required to create Cost Workbook Tabs for Task Orders 0003 through 0008?

We refer to Cost/price information because cost type clins should reflect costs and fixed price clins should reflect prices. These should be input into attachment tabs 3 and 3a. The contractor is still required to complete a FAR compliant proposal in addition to the CPW.

The PWS reference for CLIN 0102 is Section 3.1. In PWS 3.1.10.1, all key personnel are listed (see below).

The Contractor shall provide staff to support the OneSAF requirements. The following personnel employed under this contract be subjected to approval by the Contracting Officer and shall be dedicated at 100% to the program throughout the length of the contract.

a. Program Manager

b. Lead Software Engineer

c. Lead Systems Engineer

d. Lead Integration and Test

e. Lead Architect

Is it the intent of the Government that all the key personnel are priced under CLIN 0102 (Program Management)?

Yes, CLIN 0102 "..shall provide for services described in section 3.1 of the PWS."

(Reference section C.5.2, pg 37 RFP)

Question/Comment Government Response

In which CLIN is the scope described in TO 01 PWS 3.15 (OneSAF

Integrated Development Environment (IDE)) intended to be priced?

Scope for TO 01 PWS 3.15 is covered under

CLINs 0101, 1101, 2101, 3501, 4501, 5501.

Section B will be updated to reflect PWS section 3.15 for the aforementioned CLINs.

TO 02 PWS 3.10.2.2 does not exist, but it is referenced in the solicitation for TO2 CLIN 0201. Did the government intend to use

PWS 3.10.2.1?

The Government intended to use 3.10.2.1.

Section B for CLIN 0201 will updated to reflect the correct PWS section number.

PWS 3.9.1 is referenced in CLIN 0103 and 0202; however, in the

TO 0001 PWS all of section 3.9 is noted as “reserved”. Is the solicitation reference of PWS3.9.1 for CLIN 0103 correct?

No, the reference to PWS Section 3.9.1 for

CLIN 0103 is not correct. Section B will be updated to reflect the correct PWS reference section 3.11 for CLINs 0103, 1103, 2103, 3503, 4503, and 5503.

On page 5 of RFP, why is 3.17 (Transition) shown under CLIN 0106

(Travel/ODC)?

Reference to section 3.17 for CLIN 0106 is a typographical error. PWS reference should reflect section 3.1.7 instead. Section B will be updated to reflect the correct PWS reference for CLINs 0106, 1106, 2106, 3506, 4506, and

5506.

The Schedule illustration on Page 110 shows CLIN 0004 going out

16 months, but on page 44 CLIN 0204 is only four months. Are these the same CLINs and which PoP is correct?

Figure 1. on pg 110 has been updated with the correct CLIN structure for TO 02. The

PoP for CLIN 0204 is 4 months and is correct on pg. 44.

Figure 1. will be updated and posted as part the amended RFP.

Pricing worksheet OY4, TO7, the $614k is in the total but the Total field should be $0 until the table is completed and priced. Is that correct?

The Cost Price Workbook has been updated to correct this issue.

Question/Comment Government Response

Section L.3.5 states: Illustrations, such as graphics, figures, graphs, embedded screen shots (or graphics) and tables shall be a minimum

12–point using Arial or Times New Roman font. Pages containing illustrations may be oriented in landscape format and shall use a font size of no less than 12-point font.

The response to questions (7/26/2017) during the draft, the

Government stated the plan to update the Final RFP to reflect allowing for the use of 10 point font.

The requirements of providing data for the EPG and QASP recommendations are not formatting well into tables for readability using a 12 point font style within page count. Will the RFP be updated to allow the use of 10 point font in graphics and tables?

As per the response provided on 7/26/2017, the Government will update the RFP to allow for the use of 10 point font for illustrations, such as graphics, figures, graphs, embedded screen shots (or graphics). However, all tables will remain at 12 pt.

The RFP states: "The Offeror shall provide a Contract Price

Workbook – Section L, Attachment L3 (editable and executable with formulas for all subtotals and totals) that contains all labor broken out by labor category and all remaining direct costs elements, with all appropriate burdens and fee applied to base costs for all CPFF and CPIF CLINs as shown below for the prime and all proposed subcontractors as Appendix B to the Cost/Price Volume of the

Offeror’s proposal for each WBS element listed by CLIN."

Does the Government intend that we include labor categories that are differentiated by company (Prime and subcontractors) in

Attachment L3: Tab - Attachment 2b?

Yes, they should identify if the labor category is being performed by a subcontractor, or at the prime level. We have updated our instruction in the CPW Attachment 3c

Question/Comment Government Response

The 3rd paragraph indicates that Attachment L3 is to be provided as

Appendix B to the Cost Volume (both the prime and all proposed subcontractors). However, Attachment L3 does not encompass the

WBS element listed by CLIN format, nor does the worksheets provide for hour entry by labor categories as required and in accordance with the instructions in FAR 15.408 Table 15-2.

Is it a correct assumption that the prime and each subcontractor shall also be required to provide a separate attachment file to

Appendix B to provide pricing by WBS element by CLIN?

We did not provide a spreadsheet in the workbook due to varying burden structures associated with individual offerors. Each contractor shall build their 15-2s in their proposal. Therefore, IAW FAR the Table 15-

2 should provide a summary of the total

CLINs by cost element, plus a 15-2 (cost by cost element) by CLIN. The CPW is not intended to substitute for 15-2, it allows input by total cost by CLIN.

The RFP references Attachment L3 to be provided as Appendix B.

What does the Government intend for us to submit as Appendix A?

Appendix A is the cost proposal adequacy checklist, identified in Section L.9.4. The

Government will update Section L.9.4 to identify the cost proposal adequacy checklist as Appendix A and will post as part of an amended RFP.

The 2nd paragraph indicates the various cost element details required to be included in the cost proposal (including subcontract costs). Is this level of cost element detailed pricing required for firm fixed price CLINs or just cost reimbursable type CLINs?

The contractor is only required to input total amounts in Tab, Attachment 3 of the CPW for

FFP CLINs. With that, Tab, Attachment 3a will automatically update.

Attachment L3 Workbook Tab Attachment 2c Cell A12 indicates

Proposed Fee – T&M however there are no T&M CLINs identified within this solicitation – is it correct that the T&M reference is an error and should be disregarded?

The Cost Price Workbook has been updated to correct this issue.

Attachment L3 Workbook – is it a correct assumption that the workbook will be updated/revised under a future amendment as when opening it the file references a link to “Att7-Priciing Workbook-

SR3-Amd4.xls” as well as identified a circular reference error?

The Cost Price Workbook has been updated to correct this issue.

Question/Comment Government Response

Section L.7.2 states:

"...The Offeror shall propose recommendations to improve the

OneSAF EPG monitoring artifacts, metrics and related data to allow better Government oversight of the Software development process.

The Offeror shall document these recommendations as improvements to the Government-provided OneSAF Production and Support Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

(Section J, Attachment 4) and deliver as part of this proposal."

Is it the Government's intent that we provide change bars to the

Government provided QASP document (Section J, Attachment 4) and include the file as an Appendix to the Management Volume III?

Also, will the Government mark the QASP recommendations

Appendix document (Section J, Attachment 4_Mark-up) as being outside of page count for the volume?

Recommendations shall included in the

Government provided QASP and shall be submitted as Appendix A to the Management

Volume of the proposal.

The Government requires that the recommendations made to the QASP are annotated in such a way that easily exposes the changes made.

Section L.7.2 will be updated to reflect this.

Management Appendix A will not count towards the page count.

If it is the Government's intent that we provide a marked up QASP as part of our proposal, will the Government mark the QASP recommendations Appendix document (Section J, Attachment

4_Mark-up) as being outside of page count for the volume and provide instructions for submittal?

Recommendations shall included in the

Government provided QASP and shall be submitted as Appendix A to the Management

Volume of the proposal.

The Government requires that the recommendations made to the QASP are annotated in such a way that easily exposes the changes made.

Section L.7.2 will be updated to reflect this.

Management Appendix A will not count towards the page count.