20201030 Responses to Industry Questions.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 61 KB Posted Oct 30, 2020

Attached to: DRAFT RFP: Gunnery Training Systems
Solicitation number: W900KK21R0055
Issued by: Department of the Army Materiel Command Contracting Command Orlando Contracting Center

About this file

Written by GovTribe AI · Dec 30, 2023

This is a draft request for proposal for the Gunnery Training Systems indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. The contract aims to implement technical refresh upgrades, current system production, concurrency upgrades, and risk management framework recertification for Army and Marine Corps gunnery trainer programs. The contract ceiling is $104.5 million over five years of ordering through final deliveries two years post-ordering period. The anticipated award date is fourth quarter FY2021. Products and services required include technical refresh of existing trainers, production of current systems, concurrency upgrades, and risk management framework recertification. The draft RFP includes questions and answers to clarify requirements, appendices defining contract line items and deliverables, and a pricing template for offerors.

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
20210114 Updated Responses to Industry Questions.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 14, 2021
20210112 Updated Responses to Industry Questions.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 12, 2021
20201030 Question 12 Response.zip	ZIP file	Oct 30, 2020
Attch 04 QASP_07012020.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 12 DO 01 US Army M1A1 C-AGTS SS Rev F (80D-CAM1A1-E001).docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 11 DO 01 US Army M1A2 SEP PIDS Rev P (139053-3).docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 16 DO 02 PIDS Stryker MGS AGTS Rev K (74D-STMGS-B001).docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 06 Performance Assessment Questionnaire.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 22 DO 04 CDRLs_LAV-25_20200715.pdf	PDF	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 17 DO 03 SOW_Bradley_202000817.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 01_IQID SOW_20200817.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 09 DO 01 CDRLs_Abrams_20200709.pdf	PDF	Sep 16, 2020
Exhibits A-C CDRLs_IDIQ_20200901.pdf	PDF	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 07 Solicitation Question and Comment Form.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 10 DO 01 Section F_ Abrams_20200702.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 24 DO 04 USMC LAV-25 PIDS Rev F (23D-MCLAV25-A007).docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 23 DO 04 Section F_LAV-25_20200728.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 15 DO 02 Section F_Stryker_20200616.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 03 GFP List_20200709.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 19 DO 03 Section F_Bradley_20200702.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 14 DO 02 CDRLs_Stryker_20200709.pdf	PDF	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 20 DO 03 Bradley-COFT System Spec Rev J (PRF-PT-00514).docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 18 DO 03 CDRLs_Bradley_20200709.pdf	PDF	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 13 DO 02 SOW_Stryker_20200817.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 02 DD 254.pdf	PDF	Sep 16, 2020
GTS Draft RFP_W900KK-21-R-0055_20200915.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 21 DO 04 SOW_LAV-25_2020017.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 08 DO 01 SOW_Abrams_20200817.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attch 05 Proposed Prices Spreadsheet 20200911.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Sep 16, 2020

Show all 29

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Sheet1

No.	Location	Industry Comment/Question	Government Response
1	ATCHs 08, 3,17,21 (Abrams, Stryker, Bradley and other SOWS.

Section 1.2.c .

Pages Abrams page (8), Stryker and Bradley page (7), LAV-25 page (11)	Does “Update software” just refer to Operating Systems, SAGE and Cyber, or is there other software that requires updates?	Also includes concurrency updates and host software changes as identified in the specific SOWS paragraph 3.9.
	2	Atch 01 IDIQ SOW , Page 14	Atch 01 IDIQ SOW Tech Refresh requires the contractor to perform an analysis to determine which components should be refreshed, refurbished, redesigned, and/or replaced.

Does the government require the contractor to perform actions based on this analysis or just provide the results of this analysis?

If the requirements to refresh or refurbish exceed the requirements in the SOWs how does the government intend to modify the contract to account for the additional scope? Anything that is considered supplemental work will be executed via ECP after award.

The contractor is to provide results of the analysis IAW SOW paragraph 3.

3 ATCHs 08, 3,17,21 Abrams and other SOWs paragraph 3.1.5.12

Pages Abrams (18); Stryker (17) Bradley (18) Is the “common product data model” a specific document or existing model? Can the customer elaborate on what constitutes the common product data model? The PIDS/SS for Abrams AGTS, Stryker MGS AGTS, and LAV-25 AGTS are the documents that provide system level document-based information exchange for those GTS devices.

The Bradley COFT System Specification provides the system level document-based information exchange for Bradley COFT.

Updates to these documents shall be submitted to the LT2 repository for the GTS program.

4 ATCHs 08, 3,17,21: Abrams and other SOWs paragraph 3.1.5.12

Pages Abrams (18); Stryker (17) Bradley (18) For the capture and notification of information, is there a specific tool or technique (e.g., SysML, DoDAF, etc.) that the customer is expecting? The tool that the winning offeror selects is sufficient as long as it meets the requirement specified in SOW 3.15.12 and follows the LT2 Configuration Management Guide for configuration management of end items.

5 ATCHs 08, 3,17,21: Abrams and other SOWs paragraph 3.1.8.4

Pages Abrams (23);Stryker (23); Bradley (22) LAV-25 (26) Are the TIMs, which are discussed in references, referring to the meetings described in 3.2.7 (SRR, IIPR, & FIPR) or another type of meetings? TIMs are intended to address implementation and potential risks in a meeting outside of SRR/IIPR/FIPR milestone meetings. The government intends to hold a TIM for the Abrams and USMC concurrency upgrades and the Stryker production option. The TIM requirement will be removed from the Bradley SOW.

6 ATCHs 08, 3,17,21: Abrams and other SOWs paragraph 3.1.13

Pages Abrams (24);Stryker (23);Bradley (23); LAV-25 (27) What is meant by “The Contractor shall secure alternate data collection or generation methods if the Government does not provide the technical data”?

Does this mean that the Government will fund the activities and effort required to obtain the technical data that is not provided by the Government after contract award?

Is this referring to data that the Government is planning to provide but subsequently may be unsuccessful in providing?	The Government will fund data collection activities for concurrency upgrades. In addition, the Government is providing PDSS systems as GFE that can be used for the generation of technical data.
	7	ATCHs 08, 3,17,21 Abrams and other SOWs paragraph 3.9.1

Pages Abrams (56);Stryker (53);Bradley (55) LAV-25 (60) In reference to the statement “The tech refresh upgrade shall replace all parts identified as obsolete, to include (but not limited to) computers, monitors, mice, keyboards, joysticks, headsets, IOS chairs, printers, KVM switches, video cables, Ethernet cables, and PAAR linking cables”:

Will the Government provide a comprehensive list of all part numbers, quantities, supplier CAGE Codes, etc. for this equipment, by system, for what is expected to be refreshed?

If not, will the Government provide a way to identify this information, such as site inspections, during the proposal period? DO SOW Paragraph 3.9 was updated to delienate the list of obsolete parts.

Industry day provided opportunity to perform site inspections.

The list is part of GFI which will be released at final RFP.

8 ATCHs 08, 3,17,21: Abrams and all SOWs paragraph 3.1.14

Pages Abrams (24);Stryker (23);Bradley (23) LAV-25 (22)	Will the government identify the intended disposition of GFE at the end of the period of performance?	Yes, the in plant GFE disposition will be provided at the end of the POP.
	9	ATCHs 08, 3,17,21: Abrams and all SOWs paragraph 3.5.1

Pages Abrams (49);Stryker (47);Bradley (49) LAV-25 (55) At what level do we need TRRs: one per device type, one per site, or per delivered device? One TRR per IPAT IAW with SOW paragraph 3.5.1.

10 ATCHs 08, 3,17,21 :Abrams and Stryker SOWs paragraph 3.9.1

Pages Abrams (53); Stryker (57)	Is the Display Electronic Unit Assembly DEUA in the Stryker the same part as on the Abrams?	Yes, the DEUA is the same part in the Stryker and the Abrams
	11	NA General Question	Will the full set of GFI documents and TDP information be provided prior to the release of the RFP or earlier? This information is extensive and is required to provide the offerors an opportunity to fully develop the technical approach for each system and identify risks to the program.
	No it will be supplied at RFP release.
	12	General Question 17-18 SEP 2019 Industry Day at Camp Pendleton (USMC Systems)	Will the Government provide detailed pictures of all devices, as stated during the Camp Pendleton Industry Day, prior to the RFP?	Yes. Pictures will be posted with the responses to the draft RFP questions.
	13	General Question 17-18 SEP 2019 Industry Day at Camp Pendleton (USMC Systems)
	Will the government clarify which version of Red Hat and Windows are on each device?	The current systems have the following:

Bradley - RHEL 6.5, no Windows OS Abrams - RHEL 6.2 & 7.2 Windows 7/10 Stryker - RHEL 6.2, Windows 7 LAV-25 - RHEL 6.2, Windows 7

14	ATCH 01 IDIQ SOW SEC 1,1 page 8,and Govt response to previous Draft SOW questions Line 31
The response states that "the current version of SAGE meets all of the requirements in the specifications."

Does the latest version of the SAGE IG support a Windows 10 Operating System?

If not, will source code be provided? The SAGE IG is installed on Linux computers in GTS devices. The only computers that use Windows are the sound computers in the Abrams, Stryker, and USMC systems.

SAGE is a licensed commercial product and does not include source code.

15	ATCH 01 IDIQ SOW SEC 2.1 page 11
For those documents not publicly available, will the Government be providing them with the prior to the release of the final RFP or provide another method to obtain these documents?	The GFI will be made available with the release of the final RFP.

For the LAV-25 SOW, the Government will provide the method to obtain the documents not publicly available.

16	ATCH 01 IDIQ SOW SEC 3 page 14
Please clarify the expected level of refurbishment required for each system as part of the tech refresh.	See individual DO SOWs
17	Atch 20 Bradley Systems Spec, page 6	Which version of OneSAF will be required (v8.9 latest or v9.0 April 2020)	OneSAF 4.0 (Modified) provided as part of the source code to the successful offeror.
18	Attach 5, DO 02 SLIN 0001AA	Please define MAOE in Attachment 05?

If this means Months After Option Exercise when, in MACA, will the government provide notice of option exercise ?

Months After Option Exercise (MAOE)

Yes the government will provide written notice typically 30 days prior to a unilateral exercise of option.

19 Attach 5, DO 04 Will a LAV PAAR be made available to bring to the contractor site for development? No, a LAV PAAR will not be provided. However, an ABRAMS PAAR will be provided.

20	Attach 5, DO 04	Does the government intend to provide a PAGTS LAV-25 as GFE for development after contract award?
No, the Government will be providing a LAV-25 RAGTS.
21	Abrams and other SOWs paragraph 1.2.c, Abrams pg 8 , Stryker page 7, Bradley page 7, LAV-25 Page 11
Which version of Redhat will be the required version?	The Government will require the latest RMF-approved version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux at the time of RFP release. The latest approved version at the time of this response is RHEL 7.6.

	22	Abrams and other SOWs paragraph 1.2.c, Abrams page 8 , Stryker page 7, Bradley page 7, LAV-25 Page 11	Are the current architectures 32-bit or 64 bit?	The current systems are a mix of 32 bit and 64 bit architectures.
	23	IDIQ Base SOW, paragraph 1.1.f page 8	Are the system compilers open source, such as gcc, or are they licensed compilers?
Which ones?	Both open source and licensed compilers are used. The licensed compiler is Powerada.
	24	Attach 5, DO 2 Worksheet, Line 3	Which version of the Stryker GTS is to be refreshed at 12 MACA at origin? Only Qty 1 is shown. Is it expected that both a Full Fidelity and a TAGTS will be refreshed at origin at 12 MACA?	The GFE Permanent (full-fidelity) Stryker MGS AGTS will be tech refreshed at origin 12 MACA IAW with Section F.
	25	Attach 5, DO 3 Worksheet, Line 65
	If Technical Data and Information are not separately priced should this location not be highlighted for the offeror to add a price in Line 65?	Concur. They should not be highlighted and will be corrected with the final RFP.
	26	Attach 5, DO 4 Worksheet, Line 47
	If Technical Data and Information are not separately priced should this location not be highlighted for the offeror to add a price in Line 47?	Concur. They should not be highlighted and will be corrected with the final RFP.
	27	Attach 12, Abrams SS 3.7.4.2.1 page 146
	What computer languages are being used on each training system?	The current systems use the following:

Bradley - Java, Ada, C, C++ Abrams - Java, Ada, C/C++ Stryker - Java, Ada, C/C++ LAV-25 - Java, Ada, C/C++

28	IDIQ SOW, paragraph 3.2.3.2, page 37
Will the customer be providing a Software Version Document (SVD)/Software Design Document (SDD)/Software Data Design Table for each system prior to final RFP release or with the RFP?	Only Bradley has an SVD. It will be provided with the GFI at release of the final RFP.
29	IDIQ SOW, paragraph 3.2. page 37	Will the customer provide the current Data Rights Table for each system prior to final RFP release, or as part of the RFP?	The Government will provide the current data rights table for each system at final RFP release.

30	IDIQ SOW, paragraph 1.1. page 8
What are the licensing restrictions of or on the current software being provided per software package?	All current software has Government Purpose Rights except for the Operating Systems and SAGE IG software.

CGF software has restricted rights.

31	IDIQ SOW, paragraph 3.2.3.2. page 37
Will source code will be provided before or with the final RFP, if not, when will it be provided?	Source code will be provided at contract award.
32	IDIQ SOW, paragraph 1.1.c page 9
Are the current SAGE Software licenses upgradeable to the latest versions, or will the vendor be required to purchase new full cost licenses?	The SAGE licenses are upgradeable. New licenses will have to be purchased for any new production systems built under this effort.
33	IDIQ SOW, paragraph 1.1.c page 8
Are there any other software licenses that will need to be upgraded? If so, please provide the list by system?	Depending on the Offeror's technical approach, operating system licenses and Virtual machine software licenses may need to be upgraded as part of the tech refresh SOW paragraph 3.9.

34	IDIQ SOW, paragraph 1.1.h page 9
Will the government provide the secure Windows 10 or Red Hat Operating Systems (OS) or will the vendor be responsible to purchase?	The Government will not be providing the OS software for the systems.
35	Abrams and other System Specs paragraph 3.7.4.1, Abrams page 145 , Stryker page 221 , Bradley page 28, . LAV-25 page 256	How many computers are currently used on each system? And what functional processes are running on each?	See the SMM, TSUH/IUH for each system.
36	Abrams and other System Specs paragraph 3.7.6.2, Abrams page 150 , Stryker page 225 , Bradley page 28, . LAV-25 page 259
What is the computational environment architecture including network components for each system?	For Abrams see Attch 11 DO 01 US Army M1A2 SEP PIDS Rev P (139053-3).pdf Figure 3.1.3.2-1 AGTS Functional Configuration and Figure 3.7.6.2.3-1 AGTS Top Level Platoon Architecture.

For Stryker MGS AGTS see Attch 16 DO 02 PIDS Stryker MGS AGTS REv K (74D-STMGS-B001).docx Figure 3.1.3.2-1 AGTS Functional Configuration, and Figure 3.7.6.2.3-1 AGTS Top Level Platoon Architecture.

For Bradley COFT In the PDD - 209931_1.PDF is the INTERCONNECT DIAGRAM, BRADLEY TRAINER which shows all connections and network interfaces.

For LAV-25 see Attch 24 DO 04 USMC LAV-25 PIDS Rev F (23D-MCLAV25-A007).docx Figure 3.1.3.2-1 Functional Configuration and Figure 3.7.6.2.3-1 AGTS Top Level Platoon Architecture.

37	IDIQ SOW, paragraph 3.2.1.1 pages 32,33	When will the customer provide the Architecture Design Document (ADD) or the System Subsystem Design Document (SSDD) for each system?	The ADD and SSDD are not available on existing systems.
38	Abrams and other SOWs paragraph 3.9.1.1, Abrams page 56, Stryker page 57 , Bradley page 55, LAV-25 page 60
Other than computational environment, displays and peripherals, what are the tech refresh requirements on the visual systems for each vehicle Delivery Order SOW?	There are no other tech refresh requirements for the visual system other than those spelled out in the DO SOWs.
39	Abrams SOW paragraph 3.9.1.1 a, page 56
Will the government provide the Mechanical, Optical, and Projection schematics and drawings for each of the displays to be upgraded for the Abrams tech refresh prior to or with the final RFP?	The Government will provide the drawings available at release of the final RFP.
40	Stryker SOW paragraph 3.9.1.1 a, page 57 ,
Will the government provide the Mechanical, Optical, and Projection schematics and drawings for each of the displays to be upgraded for the Stryker tech refresh prior to or with the final RFP?	The Government will provide the drawings available at release of the final RFP.
41	Bradley SOW paragraph 3.9.1.1 a, page 55,
Will the government please provide the Mechanical, Optical, and Projection schematics and drawings for each of the displays to be upgraded for the Bradley tech refresh?	The Government will provide the available drawings at release of the final RFP.
42	LAV SOW paragraph 3.9.1.1 a, page 60
Will the government please provide the Mechanical, Optical, and Projection schematics and drawings for each of the displays to be upgraded for the LAV tech refresh prior to or with the final RFP?	The Government will provide the available drawings at release of the final RFP.
43	Attch+05
DO 01 CLIN 0005 RMF Certification (Lot), Is this the price of a one time Non recurring RMF certification program resulting in a Type accreditation applicable to all Abrams devices? Does this also apply to the Bradley, Stryker and LAV-25 delivery orders?
Yes, this will result in a type accreditation for each applicable platform DO.
44	IDIQ SOW
Do all of the current systems meet all of the requirements that are in their respective specification documents, other than specified concurrency upgrades identified in each DO SOW?	The Government has successfully tested each existing system against the requirements of their specifications prior to fielding.
45	General RFP
In order to properly bid the program effort, contractors need to know what device documentation is available for the existing devices and when will it be made available to the contractor. Please confirm what CDRL Items such as Product Drawings/Models and Associated Lists (PDMAL), Logistics Product Data (LPD), Computer Resources Integrated Support Documents (CRISD), System Maintenance Manual (SMM), and other documentation for the existing devices are available and identify if they will be available prior to or with the final RFP?	The GFI will be made available with the release of the final RFP.

46	IDIQ SOW paragraph 3.5 page 56
Will copies of all ATP's be provided prior to the RFP release or with the final RFP?	Copies of the ATPs will not be provided.
47	IDIQ SOW paragraph 1.1.c page 8
What will be the expected SAGE Version and OS Type/Version that the updated SAGE software needs to operate on?	The SAGE Version required is the currently fielded version.

The OS Type is RHEL. The Government will require the latest RMF-approved version of Redhat Linux at the time of RFP release. The latest approved version at the time of this response is RHEL 7.6.

48	Atch 05
Please explain the requirement and CLIN for pricing any required changes to the RMF certification established in the PDSS baseline if new STIGs come out during deployment.	After RMF certification, no changes to the security posture of the PDSS baseline will be required until RMF recertification 3 years later due to the stand-alone nature of these systems.
49	ATCH 05 DO 2 CLIN 0003, CLIN 1001, CLIN 2001, SOW ATCH 13 SEC 3.9.2.1 and 3.9.2.2 page 54
Please clarify the number of Stryker MGS TAGTS for Production. ATCH 05 DO 2 CLINS 0003,1001, and 2001 total 8, Atch 13 Stryker SOW SECs 3.9.2.1 and 3.9.2.2 page 54 total 5.	There are 5. There are 3 systems being purchased as options for a total of 5 TAGTS.

ATCH 05 will be updated with the final RFP.

50	N/A	Will a detailed Bill of Materials (BOM) for each platform be provided with the final RFP?	A BOM will not be provided.
51	N/A	Are CAD drawings and/or models available for any or all of the GTS platforms?

If so, what level are these (i.e. maintenance level or detailed fabrication and assembly) and will these be provided with the final RFP or with contract award?	Maintenance level drawings are available and will be provided at final RFP.
	52	Section #L.4.3.6.1. Page #115	What does a contractor do if they don’t have three relevant contracts that had a requirement for attainment of Small Business Participation as a percentage of Total Contract Value? All large businesses have the ability to track whether or not they are complying with their Small Business Subcontracting Plans (i.e., SB percentage of subcontracted dollars), however, having a contract that requires the Contractor to meet specific Small Business Participation percentages or to be in compliance with a Small Business Participation Plan is rare and not often available. Alternatively, can a contractor provide the SB dollars incurred and the work allocated to each SB for the contract’s duration (greater than 3 years), and then calculate the actual participation percentages (SB$/Total Contract$) to show past utilization of SBs	L.4.3.6.1 will be updated to include “Offerors that do not have three past relevant contracts that had a requirement for attainment of Small Business Participation requirements as a percentage of Total Contract Value/Price shall so state.”

M.3.3.5 has been updated to state" Offerors who state in their proposal that they do not have three past relevant contracts with a requirement for attainment of Small Business Participation requirements as a percentage of Total Contract Value/Price will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably."

	53	Section # RFP L.4.1.2.b
Page #109	FAR clause 52.211-8 does not appear in Section F or elsewhere in the solicitation documents. Should this FAR reference be added to Section F?	Yes 52.211-8, Time of Delivery, ALT III will be added to the RFP.
	54	Section #RFP L.4 Table 1, RFP L.4.1.2.b

Page #108-109 Table 1 excludes Vol I Technical elements IMS, IMP, and Proposed Delivery Schedule from the page count. Can the Government confirm that these elements should be provided as attachments to Volume I? Those items are excluded from page count. They can be included as attachments or addendums to the volume.

L.4 Table 1 NOTES not states : NOTE *The IMS, IMP, NDAs, Proposed Delivery Schedule, DFARS Subpart 252.227-7017, Letters of Consent and Commitment, Cure Notices, Performance Assessment Questionnaires, and Show Cause Letters are excluded from the page count. One page at the beginning of each Volume is reserved for a Title Page and will be excluded from the page count.

	55	Section # RFP L.4.2.2
Page #110-111	L.4.2.2 instructions are to provide Section 1 Contract Descriptions items (1) through (11) in "the following format". The format provided in the RFP is in size 10 font. Volume II is limited to 20 pages (and includes details on up to 10 contracts and a full description of prime and subcontractor work scope, company information, and joint work history), and text font size must be 12 point (IAW L.3.1). Would the Government consider allowing Offerors to provide Section 1 Contract Descriptions items (1) through (11) in a table format and/or provide additional volume page count?	L.4.4.2 Shall be completed in the Section 1 (1)-(11) format in 12-point font, not in a table format. The page limitation of this volume will be changed to 25 pages at final RFP release to accommodate any page limitation concerns.
	56	Section #RFP L.4.2.2, RFP L4.2.3(1)

Page #111-112

In some instances, subcontractors have performed directly for prime contractors who are competing on this solicitation. Would the Government consider waiving this requirement where the POC works for a prime Contractor expected to be competing for this solicitation?	The Government will not waive this requirement.
57	Section #RFP L.4 Table 1, RFP L.4.2.2 Section 2(2) and Section 3

Page #108, 111-112

Table 1 excludes Vol II Past Performance elements Letters of Consent and Commitment, Cure Notices, and Show Cause Letters from the page count. Can the Government confirm that these elements should be provided as attachments to Volume II? Those items are excluded from page count. They can be included as attachments or addendums to the volume.

	58	Section # RFP L.4.5 2.b
Page #118	Can the Government confirm that a cross-reference matrix tracing Section L and Attachment 1 ID/IQ SOW requirements to the proposal meets this requirement?	No. Offeror needs to trace to the DO SOW requirements.
	59	RFP; Attch 01 IDIQ SOW para 3.1.3.1, Attch 08 DO 01 SOW Abrams. Attch 14 DO 02 SOW Stryker, Attch 17 DO 03 SOW Bradley, and Attch 21 DO 04 DOW LAV-25 para 3.1.3.1 FRP all page, Attch 01 pg 17 Attch 08 pg 14, Attch 13 pg 12, Attch 17 pg 13, Attch 21 pg 16	Can the Government clarify the EVMS requirement at the IDIQ level? Is the Contractor required to submit EVMS information in the IPMR for the four DOs, even though they have no EVM requirement and are FFP? Or is the IDIQ EVMS requirement only to be invoked if a CPFF DO is issued under the contract?	EVMS requirement is only to be invoked if a CPFF DO is issued.
	60	Section #Attch 22 A00D
Page # 13 of 38	CDRL A00D cells 1, 2, and 4 are unclear and appear to repeat the Safety Assessment Report required in CDRL A00C. Can the Government clarify the LAV-25 CDRL A00D requirement? Should CDRL A00D be the LAV-25 Health Hazard Assessment Report?	CDRL A00D has been fixed and will be released with the final RFP.
	61	Section # Attch 08 DO 01 SOW Abrams 3.2.7.3.3

Page #45

Can the Government confirm that a CDR is required for DO 01 or should this language be revised to refer to the FIPR?	The Abrams SOW will be corrected to the FIPR and will be released with the final RFP.
62	Section # Attch 13 DO 02 SOW Stryker 3.2.7.3.

Page #45

Can the Government confirm that a CDR is required for DO 02 or should this language be revised to refer to the FIPR? The Stryker SOW will be corrected to the FIPR and will be released with the final RFP.

63 Section # Attch 21 DO 04 SOW LAV-25 3.2.1.4 Page #35

FCAs are not cited elsewhere in the LAV-25 SOW and the SOW 3.2.1.4 is not cited in the Configuration Audit Summary Report and Certification CDRL A004 block 5. Can the Government clarify whether FCAs are required and if the results should be documented IAW CDRL A004? FCAs are cited in paragraph 3.2.1.4 and LAV-25 SOW will be released with the final RFP.

The results of the FCAs should be documented IAW CDRL A004.

64 Section # Attch 21 DO 04 SOW LAV-25 Appendix A Page #63

	In Attch 22 DO 04 CDRLs LAV-25, CDRL C003 references DI No. DI-TMSS-80527C Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Manuals and Associated Supplemental Data. Can the Government confirm that DI-TMSS-80527C is the correct reference for LAV-25 CDRL C003?	DI-TMSS-80527C is the correct reference.
	65	Section # Attch 21 DO 04 SOW LAV-25 Appendix A
Page # 63	Appendix A CDRL C005 and C006 and their respective SOWs cite DI-ADMIN-80925A. Attch 22 DO 04 CDRLs LAV-25 C005 and C006 cite DI-PSSS-81523C. Can the Government correct the discrepancy?	DID for both CDRLS C005 and C006 is DI-ADMIN-80925A (Revision of Existing Documents).

The applicable CDRLs in attachment 22 will be updated and released with the final RFP.

	66	Section # Attch 21 DO 04 SOW LAV-25 3.2.7.2.1.b
Page #46	Can the Government clarify: is an IIPR required in the LAV-25 SOW, or should this reference to IIPR be corrected to PDR?	The SOW has been updated to reference a PDR and will be released with the final RFP.
	67	Section # Attch 21 DO 04 SOW LAV-25 3.2.7.2.1.o
Page # 47	Can the Government clarify: is an IIPR required in the LAV-25 SOW, or should this reference to IIPR be corrected to PDR?	The LAV-25 SOW has been updated to reference a PDR and will be released with the final RFP.
	68	Section # Attch+05+Proposed+Prices+Spreadsheet+20200911

Page # DO 01 Abrams AGTS tab

	Cell H74, should that be a non yellow cell (No input)	Concur. They should not be highlighted and will be corrected in the final RFP.
	69	Section # Attch+05+Proposed+Prices+Spreadsheet+20200911
Page # DO 01 Abrams AGTS tab	Should the formula in Cell H77 be referencing the sum of column I (Amount), rather than the column H (Unit Price)	Concur. The formula will be updated in the final RFP.
	70	Section # Attch+05+Proposed+Prices+Spreadsheet+20200911

Page # DO 02 Stryker MGS

Should the formula in Cell H42 be referencing the sum of column I (Amount), rather than the column H (Unit Price)	Concur. The formula will be updated in the final RFP.
71	Section # Attch+05+Proposed+Prices+Spreadsheet+20200911

Page # DO 03 Bradley COFT

Should the formula in Cell H66 be referencing the sum of column I (Amount), rather than the column H (Unit Price)	Concur. The formula will be updated in the final RFP.
72	Section # Attch+05+Proposed+Prices+Spreadsheet+20200911___ Page # DO 04 USMC LAV AGTS
Cell H47, should that be a non yellow cell (No Input)	Yes. This cell should be non-yellow and will be corrected in the final RFP.
73	Section # Attch+05+Proposed+Prices+Spreadsheet+20200911

Page # DO 04 USMC LAV AGTS

Should the formula in Cell H59 be referencing the sum of column I (Amount), rather than the column H (Unit Price)	Concur. The formula will be updated in the final RFP.
74	Section # Attch+05+Proposed+Prices+Spreadsheet+20200911

Page # Read Me tab vs Rate Build-Up tabs

Can the Government please reconcile the conflicting statements regarding fee. The read Me tab in row 10 states the fully burdened Labor Rates, exclusive of fee, whereas the Rate Build-Up tabs instructions state fully burdened rate through fee for each category.	The "read me" tab is correct, exclusive of fee. The Rate Build up by year tabs will be updated at final RFP release.
75	Section # Attch+05+Proposed+Prices+Spreadsheet+20200911

Page # spreadsheet

Can offerors add additional tabs to the Attch+5+Proposed +Prices+Spreadsheet+20200911	The question in not specific enough for a "yes" or " no" response. L.4.4.2 states the following "The Proposed Prices Spreadsheet shall not be changed, reformatted, or otherwise altered, except as noted in the “Instructions” contained in the Proposed Prices Spreadsheet, to allow for data input by the Offeror."
76	Section # Attch+05+Proposed+Prices+Spreadsheet+20200911

Page # spreadsheet

For estimating purposes, what should offerors use as the ID/IQ start date and each DO start date?	For estimating purposes, the IDIQ will be awarded concurrently with the first 4 DOs in first in the quarter of FY22.
77	Section # Attch+05+Proposed+Prices+Spreadsheet+20200911

Page # spreadsheet Can offerors insert a Location column in the Rate Build-Up tabs to delineate differences in rates based on location? i.e. CONUS vs OCONUS. Yes. L.4.4.2 states the following "The Proposed Prices Spreadsheet shall not be changed, reformatted, or otherwise altered, except as noted in the “Instructions” contained in the Proposed Prices Spreadsheet, to allow for data input by the Offeror."

Offerors can propose separate CONUS and OCONUS rates if applicable.

78 Section # General, SOW Page #NA

Can the government provide failure data, field reports on system downtime, or legacy test reports on the GTS? This data can help indicate the current system weakness that can upgraded/replaced for a more sustainable, less risky system upgrade.	No
79	Section # General SOW

Page #

We understand the Government's desire to use the SAGE Image Generator for Lockheed Martin and will support that in our offering. Q1) What are the minimum computer hardware specifications for the Image Generator host that will allow the SAGE Image Generator software to provide two requirements-compliant immersive views for a single Image Generator host?

Below is the computer hardware specifications, however it should be noted that these systems were purchased over 5 years ago. With advances in technology, the offerors should do the research to determine the optimal computer hardware solution.

Rave Systems 2U Rackmount Chassis (19" Depth) with:

- 2x2.5in Removable Hard Drive Bays

- 1x5.25in Peripheral Bay

- 550W Power Supply Unit To also include:

(1) Supermicro mATX C226 Embedded Motherboard LGA1150 (MBD-X10SLH-F)

(1) Intel Xeon E3-1225 v3 (8M Cache, 3.20-3.60 GHz) 4C/4T CPU

(2) 4GB DDR3-1600 ECC CL11 DRx8 1.5V (8GB Total)

(1) Kingston SSDNow KC300 120 GB 2.5" Solid State Removable Hard Drive

(1) PNY GeForce GTX 960 4GB 128-Bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 Video Card

(1) DisplayPort to VGA Video Adapter Converter - Active

(1) DVI-I MALE TO HD15F ADAPTER

(1) Liteon 24X SATA BLACK DVDRW

(1) DB9 PORT - CROSSED Header to PCI

(1) Rave Integration Procedures for Added Stability

AGTS P93 HARDWARE CONFIGURATION:

- Intel i7 990 Extreme Edition 3.6GHZ, 6 Core Processor

- SuperMicro PCI-Express 2.0 Motherboard with 12 GB of Memory

- Quad Gigabit Ethernet ports

- LITEON 24X DVD+/-RW DL Drive

- Hard drive Wester Digital 500 GB SATA

- NVidia GeForce GTX 580 PCI Express 2.0 Graphics with 1536 MB memory

- 2U Rack-mount chassis

80 Section # General, SOW Page #

SAGE Image Generator Q2) What are the minimum computer hardware specifications for the Image Generator host that will allow the SAGE Image Generator software to provide four requirements-compliant immersive views for a single Image Generator host?	The Government does not have the computer hardware specifications for four requirements-compliant immersive views for a single Image Generator host. The offerors should do the research to determine the optimal computer hardware solution.
81	Section # General, SOW

Page #

SAGE Image Generator Q3) What are the minimum computer operating system specifications for the Image Generator host that will allow the SAGE Image Generator software to meet GTS cybersecurity and performance requirements for the use cases identified in questions 1 and 2?
SAGE is a commercial product. Offerors need to make this determination based upon their design.
82	Section # General, SOW

Page #

SAGE Image Generator Q4) Does the SAGE Image Generator require special processing or attribution of visual data to support all of the sensor views required for this RFP, or will the standard OpenFlight 15.7 outputs of the SE Core program suffice for the SAGE IG to correctly render sensor views without any additional attribution or processing?
Standard Open Flight can be ingested into SAGE for the real-time executables.
83	Section # General, SOW

Page #

SAGE Image Generator Q5) Will the required SAGE Image Generator software include all symbology required for the GTS opportunity? If not, what format is required for gunnery reticles, overlays, and other symbology?	All symbology is included in the SAGE IG software.
84	Section # General, SOW

Page #

SAGE Image Generator Q6) Will the ICD for the GTS-required version of CIGI that the required SAGE software supports be provided prior to PAC?	CIGI is an open standard. The offeror can obtain it.
85	Section # dRFP, Section # L.2.3.

Page # 104

Can the Government please provide an estimated day/month/year for release of the Final RFP for planning purposes?	Late November or early December.
86	Section # dRFP, Section # L.2.3.

Page # 104 How many days will be allocated between the release of the Final RFP and the proposal due date?

We conservatively estimate a minimum of 45 business days are required after release of the complete bidder’s library to fully assess technical documents that are not projected for release until fRFP.

There are currently 55 calendar days built into the schedule for proposal preparation.
87	Section # Draft RFP Section H.6(5); Page # Section H p.19,

Section #: Attch+01_IQID+SOW_20200817_Section 3, 3.1.13 Pages#: 14, 28 Please provide a complete list of GTS units and identify which units the Government can provide technical data for and which ones Government cannot provide technical data for.

For example, if technical data for the required software is not made available to all the Offerors, the Offerors cannot propose a viable, cost-efficient solution for systems technical refresh which would give an unfair technical advantage for the companies who have IP rights.

The GFI will be made available with the release of the final RFP.
88	Section # _dRFP Attch+03+GFP+List_20200709__ Page # “Serially Managed Items” Tab
The GFP list does not specify a Stryker TAGTS. Will the Government provide a Stryker TAGTS trainer for contractor use?	The Government will have to loan a TAGTS to the winning contractor from a Unit. The location will be determined at Contract Award based on Unit deployments and utilization.
89	Section # _dRFP Attch+03+GFP+List_20200709__ Page # Serially Managed Items Tab
The GFP list does not specify a delivery date, will the Government specify an anticipated date for delivery after award of contract?	It is winning offeror's responsibility to coordinate pickup and transport the systems to their plant. See SOW 3.1.14.
90	Section # _dRFP Attch+01_IQID+SOW_20200817 Section 3.1.14 Page # 29
In regards to GFE, does the statement “maintain the equipment in the same functional and physical state…” apply to the GFP trainers to be provided to the contractor? Can the GFP trainers be modified for tech refresh?	Yes, the GFE shall be maintained by the offeror before and after upgrades. The GFP trainers will be modified for tech refresh.
91	Section # dRFP Attch+08+DO+01+SOW_Abrams_20200817 Section 3.9.1 Pages: 56

Section # dRFP Attch+13+DO+02+SOW_Stryker_20200817 Section 3.9.1 Pages: 53 Section # dRFP Attch+17+DO+03+SOW_Bradley_202000817 Section 3.9.1 Pages: 55

Section # Attch+21+DO+04+SOW_LAV-25_2020017 Section 3.9.1 Pages: 58	Is the specific analog DEUA specified by the Government identified by part number or assembly number in the GFI documents to be provided?	Yes, it is in the SMM.
	92	Section # dRFP Attch+08+_Abrams_20200817 Section 3.9.2.1 Page # 57
	Can the Government specify the site for the survey and timeframe for FM3 Data Collection Trip?	Data collection within the first quarter after contract award. The site will be within CONUS.
	93	Section # dRFP Attch+01_IDIQ+SOW_20200817 Section 3 Page # 14
	The SOW states: “The Contractor shall perform the analysis to determine which components should be refreshed, refurbished, redesigned, and/or replaced.”

Previous correspondence from the Government in Industry_Day_Q_A Question 74 stated “PdM Field OPS and PM TRASYS CLS have provided a list of obsolete parts. The SOW will address parts that need to be replaced.”

The list of obsolete parts is not identified in the list of GFI to be provided. Please clarify status and intent of the GFI obsolete parts list.

The intent of the obsolete parts list was for the Government to determine which parts need to be tech refreshed and was used to delineate the requirements for tech refresh in SOW 3.9.

94	Section #: dRFP Attch+01_IQID+SOW_20200817 Section 1.1 Page # 9
Are the existing training environment and exercise artifacts (e.g. terrain databases, visual databases, models, animations, scenario files, etc.) separate integration products from SAGE?

Are the existing training environment and exercise artifacts (e.g. terrain databases, visual databases, models, animations, scenario files, etc.) known to be compatible with the target version of SAGE?

The existing training environment and exercise artifacts are SAGE based.

Yes it is compatible.

95	Section #: dRFP Attch+01_IQID+SOW_20200817 Section # 1.1 Page # 9
Do existing licenses apply to the requested upgrades, or must the contractor procure new licenses for any OS that is upgraded?

To provide a baseline during the proposal, what are the “latest approved versions” requested?

May we have access to existing cold-start procedures as GFI to understand scope and process of installation?

Are Windows SHB/LTSC systems currently built using the Windows SHB/LTSC Framework, and if so may we have access to Microsoft Deployment Toolkit images as GFI?

The SAGE license applies, offerors only have to upgrade the license. The offeror will have to procure new licenses for new operating systems.

The Government will require the latest RMF-approved versions of Windows and Red Hat Enterprise Linux at the time of contract award. The latest approved versions at the time of this response are Windows 10 and RHEL 7.6.

There are no cold-start procedures. However disaster recovery procedures will be provided as GFI.

There are no Microsoft Deployment Toolkit images as GFI. The offeror is required to acquire the Windows SHB/LTSC from DISA to implement.

96	Section #: dRFP Attch+01_IQID+SOW_20200817 Section # 1.1 Page # 9
When do the current ATOs expire?

Does the First Article Test rely on successfully passing the RMF C&A or fully obtaining an ATO?

Does fielding of the approved systems past their First Article Test rely on successfully passing the RMF C&A or fully obtaining an ATO?

The Army systems do not currently have an ATO, but have been granted a waiver until the RMF certification under this effort.

USMC ATOs expire until April 2021. USMC will obtain an extension to obtain a RMF certificaiton under this effort.

97	Section #: dRFP Attch+01_IQID+SOW_20200817 Section # 3 Page # 14
Is there a definitive list of legacy system software?

If newer versions of legacy system software are required than those that are presently installed in the system, will the newer versions be provided as GFI/GFE?

If newer versions are provided as GFI/GFE will they be provided with zero-cost licensing?

Are latest versions of legacy system software expected to be updated by the contractor to accommodate the SAGE upgrade or compliance with CIGI 3.3.3?

The list of legacy systems software is located in the CSPEI (AGTS) and SVD (Bradley COFT).

The latest version of ACSL for the Abrams FM3 concurrency upgrade will be provided as GFI/GFE.

There is no license cost associated with ACSL.

Yes. The latest versions of legacy system software is expected to be updated by the contractor to accommodate the SAGE upgrade.

Yes. The legacy system software is expected to be upgraded to accommodate the SAGE upgrade.

98	Section # Attch+08+DO+01+SOW_Abrams_20200817 Section # 3.9.1.1 Page # 56
Are the integrated AGTS lifeform models and their animations and interactions a separate GFI/GFE product?

Are the integrated AGTS lifeform models and their animations and interactions known to work with the target version of SAGE?

Is the target version of SAGE compliant with CIGI 3.3.3 or later?

No, The AGTS lifeform models and their animations are part of SAGE.

Yes, the lifeform models and animations work on the real-time SAGE software.

It is compliant with CIGI 3.2 and 3.3.

99 Section # Attch+08+DO+01+SOW_Abrams_20200817 Section # 3.9.2.2.2 Page # 58 There is no mention of visual system integrations for new munition models, animations, or entity interactions, but this upgrade will likely result in the integration of a new 3-D model in addition to the requested capabilities.

Would a new model be provided as GFE/GFI?

Will the Government provide a SAGE ICD as GFE/GFI?

The existing visual effects for HEAT, CAN, and MPAT rounds will be used for the AMP round implementation.

No new model will be provided as GFE/GFI.

SAGE is a commercial product. An ICD will not be provided as GFE/GFI.

100 Section # DRFP Attch+01_IQID+SOW_20200817 Section # 1.1 Page # 9 Section # Attch+08+DO+01+SOW_Abrams_20200817 Section # 3.9.2.2.6 Page # 58 Is new MFOCS hardware an expected part upgrading from JCR to JBC-P?

Is new MFOCS hardware GFE from PM MC?

Is JBC-P expected to run on non-MFOCS hardware?

MFOCS is only simulated as a space constraint in the existing systems. The FBCB2 JCR currently runs off of a COTS computer. MFOCS hardware will not be provided as GFE.

101	Section # dRFP Attachment 13 DO 02 Stryker Section # 3.9.3 Page # 54
RE: “with the same capabilities as the system IGs”

If the capabilities of the system IGs are to receive CIGI traffic from a host machine and display entities in a 3D environment, is this just another IG channel? What host would send the CIGI traffic?

Is the intent to run software in Windows at the same time as running the IG software in Linux? Dual-booted systems cannot run both OSes simultaneously, they simply have the capability to boot into either OS at startup.

RE: “The software applications shall include the same versions used on the Stryker MGS AGTS and shall allow reviewing of databases, model special effects, and animations.”

Is this a request to run the Stryker MGS AGTS on this system?

Is this more of a request for a single-channel IG that acts as a standalone AAR or Stealth View system?

This hardware is to review databases, models, special effects and animations. Purpose is to review all state transitions of the models (e.g. healthy to destroyed). Need to see the training environment in IR.

The intent is not to run Windows at the same time as LINUX.

The intent is to not run a Stryker MGS AGTS on this hardware.

This is a single channel IG to review Visual products.

102 Section #:

RFP Attachment 09 – DO 01 CDRLs Abrams RFP Attachment 14 – DO 02 CDRLs Stryker RFP Attachment 18 – DO 03 CDRLs Bradley RFP Attachment 22 – DO 04 CDRLs LAV Page # All

Due dates are stated in days, but do not specify calendar days or working days which could affect schedules in a proposed IMS. Please clarify whether Offerors shall use calendar days or working days.	Calendar days.
103	Section # DRFP Section L.1 Page # 103
Total contract value is stated not-to-exceed $104,500,000. With the intended scope of creating a modernized product line for virtual simulators, and this being potentially the only FAR-Based contract with scope to support modernization of virtual simulators for the next 5 years, what is the possibility that this vehicle could be modified to add ceiling necessary for delivery orders recently removed from the government cost estimate?
The full scope of the requirement that is known at this time has been included in the IDIQ.
104	Section # _dRFP Section

Page # 4 Section B of the DRFP delineates CONTRACT MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND CONTRACT VALUE and refers to a following table that calls for minimum and maximum quantities, however table values were left blank.

Will the Government populate the respective tables in the FRFP?

The purpose of this table is to communicate the minimum IDIQ guarantee and will be filled out at final RFP release.
105	Section # dRFP Section F.2

Page #8 Regarding Section F.2 of DRFP "Technical Data", how will proprietary data for COTS equipment be handled by the Government? The contractor is required to assert data rights for any proprietary data as specified in SOW 3.1.12 and Section L.4.1.2.c.

106 Section # dRFP paragraph M.3.1, M.4.4; Page # 121 and 127, Section # Attch+01_IQID+SOW_20200817 Section 1.2 Pages # 9

1) SOW 1.2 has a stated goal of “It is the objective of the contract to develop a hardware and software solution for GTS that maximizes standardization, commonality, and core asset reuse of current products and system components across platforms”.

2) The definition of strength in M.4.4 is limited to advantages to the Government “during contract performance” limiting Government advantages for sustainable solution after GTS contract closure.

3) SubFactor 1.3 Product Line Support is the least important Subfactor in Factor 1, minimizing the incentive for the Offerors to propose significant standardization and commonality

How will the Government incentivize the solution offering significant standardization, commonality and core asset reuse given the evaluation criteria do not match the stated goals and objectives?

Maximizing standardization, commonality and core asset reuse will provide advantages to the Government during contract performance, especially in areas of concurrency upgrades and sustainment.

Standardization, commonality, and core asset reuse will be evaulated for suitable analysis and realistic technical approach as part of subfactor 1.1, Technical Elements, in addition to subfactor 1.3, to meet the requirements of the SOWs which include the stated goals and objectives.

107 Section # L.3.2.ii, L.3.2.iii Page #107 Please confirm that graphics in proposal documents and any pre-existing documents (Offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Teaming Agreements, Systems Approval Letters, FPRR/FPRP) can be submitted as “images”. Per L.3.2 iii "Do NOT submit any documents in PDF format that are copied as ‘images’

If the native format of the documents you mention are in pdf format, do not copy/paste/embed them as images. You can choose to include them as attachments or embedded within the volume as long as the text within the PDF is searchable.

L.3.2 iii has been updated to state" All submitted files (MS Office and PDF) shall be created with textual search and copy functions enabled. Non-searchable signature pages are acceptable, but other submitted materials that are not searchable may not be evaluated, and the Offeror may be determined non-compliant, at the sole discretion of the PCO."

	108	Section # L.3.1-L.3.2, L.4.5
Page #106-107, 117	Please confirm that requirements of L.3.2 for inclusion of a document’s control copy in a native format do not apply to RFP documents per L.3.1 (signed SF 33, Sections A-K), to any signed documents (Consent and Commitment Letters, Offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Teaming Agreements, Systems Approval Letters) or to any pre-existing documentation (Offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Teaming Agreements, Systems Approval Letters, FPRR/FPRP) and all those can be submitted only in Adobe.PDF.
	This does not apply to the SF 33

L.4.5 states "An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 33 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission."

L.3.2 ii means to submit a a copy in Word and a PDF copy of all proposal volumes.

109 Section # dRFP L.3.1, L.4.5 Page #106-107

Please confirm that L.3.1 requirement for numbering pages and marking them with company name, date and solicitation number does not apply to pre-existing documents (Offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Teaming Agreements, Systems Approval Letters, FPRR/FPRP) and to required RFP documents (Sections A-K) as they already have different markings (and per L.4.5 Offerors shall not modify the RFP files)
Concur.
110	Section # dRFP L.3.1

Page #107

Please clarify which tables and graphics can use 8 point font vs 10 point.	The final RFP will be updated to reduce confusion. Offerors can use a smaller text size (10-point) in tables, charts, graphs and illustrations. The page limitation of this volume will be changed to 25 pages at final RFP release to accommodate any page limitation concerns.
111	Section # L, L.4

Page #99-100, 108 Please confirm that volumes’ cover/title pages are excluded from the page count One page at the beginning of each Volume is reserved for a Title Page and will be excluded from the page count. This will be reflected in the final RFP.

112 Section # L.4.1, L.4.1.1, L.4.1.2, L.4.1.3 Page #109-110 To allow industry to respond fully and adequately to Government requirements, please confirm that the Offeror shall address the requirements only at the level of SOW Section # listed in Sections L.4.1.1, L.4.1.2, L.4.1.3. As stated in Section L, The Offeror shall clearly demonstrate their competency and technical understanding to successfully accomplish the requirements set forth in the SOWs and specifications.

The Note under L4.1.b has been updated to include the subparagraphs in the referenced SOW paragraphs and will be provided at RFP release.

113 Section # L.4.2.1, M.3.2.2 Page # _110, 123

This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Oct 30, 2020.