Attachment L9 LVC-IA Questions_Answers (Final) 26October2021.pdf

Relates To: (RFP or Attachment #/Section #/Page #

Question/Comment Government Response

PWS 4.1.12, p. 19 and Government Response to Draft RFP Questions/Comments

In response to a question regarding Secret security clearances for individuals in the DRFP questions, Government stated: "The Government will not be evaluating the status of individual security clearances.

Personnel requiring access to LVC‐IA software and technical data or access to the Joint Digital Integration Facility and/or contractor's facility requiring a security clearance must have the appropriate clearance level per the DD 254. All Offerors that submit a proposal will be vetted by Security Office to verify they have a Level of Facility Security Clearance of Secret PER the DD254 prior to start of proposal evaluations. The PWS will be updated accordingly." It appears that PWS 4.1.12 has not been updated from the draft, will the Government provide the updated requirement in the PWS?

Updated PWS paragraph 4.1.12 wording to "Contractor personnel requiring access to LVC‐IA software, technical data or to DoD Government or DoD vendor/contractor's facilities shall have a SECRET clearance at time of the contract award and must maintain the level of security required for the life of the contract, per the DD Form 254, DoD Contract Security Classification Specification."

L.2.6. Regarding the statement whereby "The Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) (submitted in Volume I‐Program Management) shall be submitted using the Microsoft Project 2016 (may use the default font size of the application) and Adobe Acrobat Reader (PDF)." would the Government please clarify if it requires the IMS be submitted as an MS Project file, a PDF file or both?

Both. IMS should be submitted as an MS Project file and a PDF file.

L.2.6. Would the Government please confirm that the 20 page limit on the IMS applies to a PDF export and specify the page and font size requirement?

Paragraph L.2.6 is updated to reflect "The Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) (submitted in Volume I‐ Program Management) shall be submitted using the Microsoft Project 2016 (may use the default font size of the application, Calibri font size 11, or Arial font size 12) and Adobe Acrobat Reader (PDF) export (maximum page size is 11 inches x 17 inches, in landscape view)."

Paragraph L.2.7 is updated to reflect PDF version (20 pages, maximum page size is 11 inches x 17 inches, in landscape view).

Section L.3.8/Volume IV Our company is submitting a response as a Prime Applicant. However, our company is also the Managing Member of a JV under the ASMPP program, executing a recent and relevant contract. Per ASMPP rules, as Managing Member, we are responsible for execution of the overall contract, and this contract reflects our performance history. Regulations allow the Government to permit evaluation of past performance gained as the managing member of a JV. Would the Govt allow citation of the Contract awarded to our JV entity as a Past Performance program?

Yes the Government will allow citation of the Contract awarded to a JV entity as a Past Performance program. See Section L.3.8 for all Past Performance requirements

Section L.4.6 In reviewing Section L.4.6. the Government has indicated “The fully burdened labor rates presented in the Labor Rates tab of Attachment L5 will be incorporated into the contract as not‐to‐exceed caps for each labor category throughout the contract term and reflected for each year to include all Option periods" and further within that same section, it is also stated that "All rates (Indirect, Labor, Fee, etc.) will be incorporated into the ID/IQ contract”.

Since typically the capping of rates of any kind is more in line with a fixed price or fixed rate (T&M) type of contract meant to transfers risk and burden to the offeror while also knowing the longer the period the higher the risk. In light that this is a small business set aside solicitation and a small business is much more likely to experience rate fluctuates from year to year the incorporation of capped rates contributes significantly to the risk to the offeror in forecasting what future revenue and costs are anticipated to be over the full 10 year period. In an effort to clearly understand the government’s intent as it relates to the incorporation of these stated attachments and the capping of rates and how it relates to cost reimbursable CLINs, the below questions are presented for Government clarification:

•Is it the Government’s intent that the capped rates are only applicable to Fixed Price CLINs?

•Is it the Government’s intent that the capped rates are only applicable as it relates to bidding on future task orders? If so, for Fixed Price or all CLIN contract types?

•Is it the Government’s intent that the capped rates are not applicable to invoicing requirements? Invoicing requirements are derived by the FAR based on contract type which provides that for cost reimbursable types of contracts all allowable and allocable costs are reimbursable up to the funding thresholds and fixed labor rates are applicable to fixed level of effort type of contracts.

Ceiling rates are applicable to both FFP and CPFF CLINs. Attachment L5 has been modified to include separate tabs for FFP and CPFF rates. The Governments intent is that the capped rates are applicable for base period and all option periods and Task Orders. See Section L.4. for Cap Rate instructions.

Section L.2.6 Would the government please allow a smaller font size in Figures and Tables. We are struggling to fit the necessary detail to fully describe our approach in our graphics with Arial size 12.

No changes to the Font size in Figures and Tables will be permitted. Section L.2.6 remains the same.

Section L.3.7.c RFP section L.3.7.c. references PWS 4.8 (Integrated Test and Evaluation). Please confirm that PWS 4.8 should be addressed in Factor 3 ‐ Subfactor 3 (Help Desk and Site Support), as it is already addressed in Factor 3 ‐ Subfactor 1 (PDSS).

Deleted PWS 4.8 from Sections L & M paragraphs L.3.7.c and M.3.5.c and Attachment L3

Attachment L3 For Attachment L3, please explain the expected values in Column I. How should the values in Column I (Offeror's Specific PWS References) differ from the values in Column E (IDIQ PWS Requirements) and Column F (TO1 PWS Requirements)?

Column titled "Offeror's Specific PWS References" has been deleted from Attachment L3

Section A.1.3 Section A.1.3 of the LVC‐IA Solicitation states the following: “Attachments 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14 and 15 require a signed Distribution Agreement (DA) before these documents can be provided.” It also states the following: “Attachment 13, Technical Data Package, is too large to email, therefore it requires a representative from the Contractor to hand receive it at the Joint Development Integration Facility (JDIF) at 12000 Research Parkway, Orlando, FL 32826.” Based on these details, will the government consider extending the proposal due date by 30 days since it took 1 week to get these critical documents, and plug numbers for the materials wasn't provided? This extension will give sufficient time to vendors to coordinate pick up of Attachment 13 and review all documentation/attachments received after the DA is signed and sent.

Attachments 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 14 and 15 were emailed within 24 hours or less from when each vendor submitted their respective Distribution Agreement (DA) and approval.

The TDP was ready for issuance on 6 Oct 2021, immediately following release of the RFP. Each vendor was immediately contacted the same day as they submitted their respective DA, to schedule the TDP (Attachment 13) pickup. Dates and times for TDP pick up were determined by the vendor. Pick up date and time were dependent upon when each Vendor submitted their respective DA and what date/time each vendor requested for pickup. The Government honored all requested pickup dates and times per RFP section A.1.3 states "It is the Contractor’s responsibility to coordinate pick up date and time with Ms. Constance Perry and Ms. Terri Harvey". All DAs were vetted and approved within 24 hours of receipt. All TDPs were picked up within 48 hours of receipt of DA.

Plug numbers will not be provided. Per RFP section L.4.7.1.d "The Offeror shall provide a Bill of Materials, by element that includes cost, and extended cost and shall include sources of price information. Material costs shall be delineated by part number and CLIN for the Offeror and each sub‐ contractor." Vendor proposals will have varying solutions based on how each vendor proposes to meet the requirements, which will impact material costs. Plug in numbers are not being provided due to the potential for varying costs between proposed solutions. Pricing is based on each vendor's proposed solution. The proposal due date will be extended until 15 November 2021.

Section L.4.1, page 132 Section L.4.1 states that "if the subcontractor's proposal contains company proprietary data, the subcontractor can elect to provide a "redacted" proposal copy to the Offeror and submit their FAR 15.404 compliant proposal directly to the POCs identified in L.1.1.d of the solicitation." Will the Government allow subcontractor's to email their proprietary proposal directly to the Government rather than on a CD submission?

No the Government will not allow the subcontractors or any Offerors to email their proprietary proposal directly to the Government rather than on a CD submission. All proposal submissions shall be in accordance with Section L.4.1.

All RFP Documents If the Government releases conformed RFP documents, could the Government provide copies with changes tracked?

Where feasible, change bars will be provided. Its incumbent upon all Offeror(s) to review the entire solicitation and attachments to ensure they are in compliance with all requirements in the RFP to include all changes and amendments.

W900KK22R0006 Sections A ‐ J of the solicitation do not provide for page numbers. Will the Government add page numbers to the entire solicitation document?

Page numbers will be added to Section A‐J.

W900KK22R0006 Section L.1.1a (1) and (2)/Page 114 of 157

This section requires Offerors and Subcontractors to include non‐disclosure agreements from non‐ Government advisors in proposals. Please specify where offerors should include these agreements

Please include the agreements in Volume VI of the solicitation.

W900KK22R0006 Section L.3.8 e ‐ Section 5 Past Performance Questionnaire/Page 130 of 157

This section of the RFP provides the process in completing and submitting Past Performance Questionnaires. For those contracts that have CPARS, may those be submitted instead of submitting LVC‐IA PP Questionnaires?

All requirements of Past Performance in Section L.3.8 e should be followed. No further changes will be made.

W900KK22R0006 Section L.4.6 ‐ Price Workbook/Page 133 of 157

Would the Government confirm that references to fully burdened Cap Rates are inclusive of fee. Yes fully burdened labor rates are inclusive of fee. Additionally, L5 has been modified and now has separate tabs for FFP and CPFF rates.

W900KK22R0006 Section L.4.6 ‐ Price Workbook/Page 133 of 157

This section says: "The Offeror must clearly show the fully burdened hourly rate for each proposed labor category." Please specify where/how offerors should include the separation of contractor site and client site rates? Please specify where/how offerors are to include the separation of fully burdened Cap Rates for CPFF CLINs and FFP CLINs

Offerors are allowed to add rows as needed to L5 to identify and propose contractor site and client site rates. Please ensure the information provided is in compliance with the instructions in Section L.4 of the solicitation. L5 has been modified and now has separate tabs for FFP and CPFF rates.

W900KK22R0006 Section L.4.6 ‐ Price Workbook/Page 133 of 157

Will the fully burdened Cap rate requirement incorporate separate labor rates for the Prime and each subcontractor/team member?

See Section L.4.7, "Each major subcontractor, defined as members of an offeror’s overall team whose contribution will account for more than (15) percent or more of the Total Proposed Cost/Price, shall provide a separate cost/price volume, which follows the same format as described in these instructions."

W900KK22R0006 Section L.4.14 ‐ Professional Compensation Plan/ Page

The RFP states, “Offerors shall submit a single, comprehensive Total Compensation Plan, in MS Word and/or Excel format, setting forth base salaries separated by fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.222‐46. The Total Compensation Plan shall include details regarding the prime contractor, sub‐ contractors, and joint venture partners as applicable.” 1) Please confirm that Total Compensation Plans are required for only the prime and major subcontractors.

2) Due to the proprietary nature of salary and fringe benefit data, pleae confirm submittal of Subcontractors' Total Compensation Plan in subcontractors' sealed packages or direct submissions to the Government will satisfy this requirement

1) Please see Section L.4.14. of the solicitation for instructions on the submittal of the Professional Compensation Plan. Section L.4.14 has been changed to read, "Offerors shall submit a comprehensive Total Compensation Plan, in MS Word and/or Excel format, setting forth base salaries separated by fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.222‐46. The Total Compensation Plan shall include details regarding the prime contractor, sub‐contractors, and joint venture partners as applicable. Total Compensation Plans are required for the prime and major subcontractors." 2) The Government confirms that due to the proprietary nature of salary and fringe benefit data, the submittal of Subcontractors Total Compensation Plan in subcontractors' sealed packages or direct submissions to the Government is acceptable. Please follow instructions In accordance with Section L.4.14 of the solicitation.

Pricing workbook To ensure fair competition can the government consider making CLINS X006, X007, X008, X009, X010, X013, X018 on the IDIQ Tab and the TO 01 Tab plug numbers or reserved?

The Government will not provide plug in numbers. For CLIN X006, Travel, offerors should refer to Attachment L10 Section B Crosswalk. Offeror may include any expense(s) deemed necessary for the Offeror's approach. For CLIN X007, Material, & CLIN X008, Spares, recommend offerors review CDRL C008, Logistics Product Data information. CLIN X010, Technical Data and Information and CLIN X018, Contractor Acquired Property, plug in information will not be provided as it is dependent on the Offeror's approach. CLIN X009, Technical Data Package, and CLIN X013, One World Terrain and Model Conversion, will be based on the Offeror's approach.

RFP, Section L.3.6.a (and multiple places in the PWS)

The Government requires offerors to provide a solution to integrate One World Terrain (OWT).

(The Offeror shall describe their technical approach to meet the LVC‐IA requirement to be Interoperable with the STE. This approach shall include OWT. The Offeror shall discuss any Application Programming Interface(s) development, OWT terrain database/model integration and conversions into LVC‐IA formats, and integration & test approach.).

There is only one current (and viable) vendor (MAXAR) to work with offerors on OWT. This vendor needs to be available to all offerors. Recommend the Government make MAXAR a "Directed Subcontractor" to all offerors in order to provide a level playing field for all offerors wishing to provide an integrated solution.

Alternatively, if the Government does not direct MAXAR as a subcontractor to all teams, will the Government provide access to all OWT artifacts, tools, APIs, and relevant databases / master databases for LVC‐IA as part of the bidders library?

The Government will not mandate MAXAR be a "directed subcontractor".

Currently the OWT design is not complete regarding external programs like LVC‐IA; therefore only limited technical data has been provided to LVC‐IA that may or may not be the final solution. The available information is the following:

1) Form: Terrain Mesh; LVC‐IA System: ExCon and EAAR 3D Viewer (WebVeritas); LVC‐IA Format: 3D Tiles (OGC standard, glTF file content). Conversion comment: The 3D terrain data will be in the OWT Well Formed Format (WFF). The WFF is primarily composed of 3D Tiles which are an Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) standard. The 3D Tiles contain data in glTF (GL Transmission Format) which is a Kronos Standards Group geometry standard. The LVC‐IA EAAR 3D Viewer (WebVeritas) is based on the Cesium platform and is thus compatible with the 3D Tile standard of the OWT WFF. Significant effort to ingest OWT WFF 3D Tile content into the EAAR 3D Viewer is not anticipated.

2) Form: Maps TLM 25k, 50k, 100k, JOG 250k; LVC‐IA System: ExCon 2D Viewer; LVC‐IA Format: CADRG.

Conversion comment: LVC‐IA makes use of Compressed ARC Digitized Raster Graphics (CADRG) for 2D map displays. The CADRG source will be from Army Geospatial Center (AGC)/National Geospatial‐ Intelligence Agency (NGA). Significant effort to ingest CADRG content into the ExCon 2D Viewer is not anticipated; however, there is some specializing of the CADRG required before it can be ingested by the ExCon 2D Viewer.

(continued below)

RFP, Section L.3.6.a (and multiple places in the PWS)

[continuation of response]

3) Form: 3D Moving Models; LVC‐IA System: ExCon and EAAR 3D Viewer (WebVeritas); LVC‐IA Format:

glTF. Conversion comment: OWT format is FilmBox (FBX) for ~325 models. LVC‐IA already has an extensive library of 3D moving models that have been used, and are still used to support training events between Live, Virtual, Constructive and Games for Training (GFT) systems. Approximately 325 3D moving models will also be provided by OWT in the FilmBox (FBX) 3D model format. These 3D moving models will include: BLUFOR models, OPFOR models, Weapon models and Non‐military models. All models supplied by OWT will support Level of Detail (LOD), articulation, animations, health states, and state‐based damage. The LVC‐IA EAAR 3D Viewer does not ingest FBX format models directly. The LVC‐IA EAAR 3D Viewer is compatible with glTF format for 3D moving models. 3D moving models used in the LVC‐IA EAAR 3D Viewer will be capable of displaying visual and simulation state information such as LOD, articulations, animations, health states and state‐based damage. Some effort to convert some or all of the OWT FBX models to glTF format is anticipated. In the interim, existing LVC‐IA SE Core 3D moving models can be utilized.

Documentation to provide: The OWT Well Formed Format 1.2 specification will be provided.

Informational Links for Industry Standards utilized by OWT:

3D Tiles, Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC): https://www.ogc.org/standards/3DTiles glTF (GL Transmission Format), Kronos Standards Group:

https://github.com/KhronosGroup/glTF/tree/main/specification/2.0 Cesium: https://cesium.com FilmBox (FBX) format: https://www.autodesk.com/products/fbx/overview

Attachment L2, Part IV The Government requires responses from KOs / CORs in the Past Performance Questionnaire in four areas:

Development and Integration, Fielding and Installation, Project Management, and Cloud Computing. Cloud Computing experience is not normally on the same contracts as training software development and fielding. Will the Government consider changing "Cloud Computing" to instead say "Fielding and Support for Distributed Operations (such as Hub and Spoke solutions)"?

Will change "Cloud Computing" to Enterprise Management and Services". Sections L.3.8 and M.3.7 changed to read, "Complexity (for example: experience with integration of complex standalone systems into an integrated‐type training/operational environment through a common and open architecture and infrastructure; Enterprise Management and Services; related Cybersecurity and Risk Management Framework (RMF) experience.)"

RFP, Section A.2 (page 3) Section A.2 indicates that the proposals are due on November 5th but Attachment L6 indicates that the proposal is due on November 1st. Please clarify.

The proposal due date in Attachment L6 will be updated.

RFP, Section L.2.6 (page 120) Section L.2.6 indicates that the IMS should be submitted in Microsoft Project while Section L.2.7 indicates that the IMS has a maximum page count of 20 pages. Will the Government clarify how the page count applies to MS Project for the IMS,due to the level of detail required to effectively deomonstrate the requirements and Arial 12 font limitation. Would the Governemnt consider not including the IMS in MS Project as part of the page count for Volume I? Offerors would still provide the written portion of the IMS in Volume?I

Paragraph L.2.6 is updated to reflect "The Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) (submitted in Volume I‐ Program Management) shall be submitted using the Microsoft Project 2016 (may use the default font size of the application, Calibri font size 11, or Arial font size 12) and Adobe Acrobat Reader (PDF) export (maximum page size is 11 inches x 17 inches, in landscape view)."

Paragraph L.2.7 is updated to reflect PDF version (20 pages, maximum page size is 11 inches x 17 inches, in landscape view).

RFP,Secton L.4.1 (page 132) Section L.4.1 states that "For all major subcontractors (Reference L.1.11) proposals, shall be submitted in the same level of detail as the prime proposal". Can the Government confirm that you are looking for the Labor Description & Rates tab, Indirect Rates tab, and Rate Buildup tab to be completed by the major subcontractors but not the Basic IDIQ and TO 0001 tabs since these would not include any overhead and fee that the prime contractor places on the subcontractor costs?

Major subcontractors (as defined in L.1.11) are to submit proposals in the same level of detail as the prime. The Government understands the prime will be adding its overhead and profit/fees to the base subcontractor costs. The Government expects the base subcontractors' costs to tie back to the subcontractors' proposed costs.

Attachment L5 Can the Government clarify the difference between the Labor Description & Rates tab and the Rate Buildup and Schedule tab? They both appear to be asking for Fully Burdened Labor rates plus fee.

Attachment L5 has been modified for clarity.

Attachment L5 Many contractors have different overhead rates in different years. Can the Government confirm that additional rows in the Rate Buildup & Schedule tab can be added to reflect different years with different overhead rates?

Yes, offerors are free to add rows and/or columns to reflect different years and fully describe how the cap rates were developed, which may include composite rates or averages, making sure any formulas used are shown.

RFP, Section L.1.2 (page 116) and L.2 ‐ L.2.3 (page 119‐120)

Conflicting information within Section L.1.2 states digital submission yet L.2 states hard copy submission with CDs. Can the Government please confirm that submission should be hard copy and CDs only and not emailed?

As clearly stated in Section L.2 Proposal Submission Instructions, all proposal submissions shall be submitted via CD/DVD. No hard copies or email proposal submissions will be accepted.

RFP, Section L.2.6 (page 120) Font requirement for graphics, tables (12‐point Arial) would the Government consider changing this requirement to Arial 10 or smaller font just for tables and graphics?

No changes to the Font size in Figures and Tables will be permitted. Section L.2.6 remains the same.

RFP, Section L.2.8 ( page 121) and L.3.3 (page 122) In Section L.2.8 states "we are to provide CD/DVC for each volume and L.3.3 all files shall be compressed (zipped) into one file…. Can the government confirm we are to provide a CD/DVD for each Volume separately in the Original volume (total of 6 DC/DVDs) or are we to provide one (1) CD/DVD for the entire bid response with folders for each volume?

Section L.2.8 states, "Each proposal volume (I‐ Program Management, II‐ Technical, III‐Supportability, IV‐Past Performance, V‐Cost/Price, VI‐ Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certification/Representations) shall be submitted as a separate volume and disc (CD or DVD)."

RFP, Section L.3.8 (page 127) Note: The letters of consent and commitment are excluded from the past performance page count. Can the letter be one addressing both consent and commitment or does the Government want two letters?

Letter of Commitment requirement has been removed from Section L.3.8.c and L.3.8.d. Section L.3.8 removes the Letters of Commitment and Consent requirement. Section L.2.7 and L.3.8 now reads, "*Table of Contents, Title Pages, Glossary, Divider/Blank Pages, Teaming Arrangements, and PWS References (Section L, Attachment L3) are excluded from the page count."

RFP, Section L.5.a (page 138) The RFP states we are to provide Attachment L5 ‐ Cost Pricing Workbook and L8 Section B with Volume VI.

Normally pricing is not provided outside of the Cost/Price volume. Should this be removed from Volume VI?

Please follow the instructions in Section L.5 of the solicitation. No changes will be made to Section L.5.

RFP, Section L.4.1 (page 132), Section L.4.14 (page 137‐ 138)

According to L.4.1 major subs are to provide the same level of detail for their pricing. However, Section L.4.14 Professional Compensation Plan appears to be required only from the Prime. Can the Government confirm that the Professional Compensation Plan is only from the prime?

Total Compensation Plans are required for the prime and major subcontractors. Section L.4.14 has been changed to read, "Offerors shall submit a comprehensive Total Compensation Plan, in MS Word and/or Excel format, setting forth base salaries separated by fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.222‐46. The Total Compensation Plan shall include details regarding the prime contractor, sub‐contractors, and joint venture partners as applicable. Total Compensation Plans are required for the prime and major subcontractors".

RFP, Section B.1.3 ‐ B.1.4 (page 4 ‐ 37), Section L.4.11 (page 137), Attachment L8

Section B.1.3 and L.4.11 talks to the Offeror filling out B.1.4 and submitting. However, Attachment L8 is a excel file with the same data. Is it the Governments intent that we provide L8 with our bid and that we do not need to also provide a filled out B.1.4?

Section B has been reorganized. The Offeror shall complete both Attachment L8 and Section B ‐Supplies or Services and Prices. Please follow all instructions in Section B.1.3 and B.1.4

RFP, Section L.4.7.1 bullet C (Page 134) Other Direct Costs – Travel, subsistence and local transportation shall be supported with a breakdown which includes: number of trips anticipated, cost‐per‐trip‐ per‐person, destination(s) proposed, and number of person scheduled for travel, mode of transportation, and mileage allowances if privately‐owned vehicles will be used. The Government will used the current Joint Travel Regulations (JTR) as the standard for cost reasonableness. This is going to create a large range of prices for travel and other direct costs, and creates an unfair advantage for the incumbent team, who has more information to accurately propose based on historical requirements. To allow for an easier evaluation of all offerors' proposals, will the Government provide plug numbers for cost reimbursable Travel/ODCs?

Plug numbers will not be provided for cost reimbursable Travel/ODCs. See Attachment L10 Section B PWS Crosswalk. This crosswalk has been updated to provide more specific data for travel, where appropriate, e.g. site support and major version upgrades. Additional travel is dependent upon the Offeror’s proposal, e.g. concurrency and

PDSS.

RFP, Section L.4.7.1 bullet D (Page 143) Materials – The offeror shall identify and price all material and material burdens. Provide the basis of estimates to include vendor quotations and historical actuals as applicable. The Offeror shall provide a Bill of Materials, by element that includes cost, and extended cost and shall include sources of price information.

Material costs shall be delineated by part number and CLIN for the Offeror and each sub‐contractor. For consistencies in evaluation of all offerors' proposals and to prevent an unfair advantage to the incumbent team, who has historical knowledge, will the Government provide a plug number for cost reimbursable materials or a Bill of Materials template that includes the materials to price?

Section L.4.7.1d has been changed to read , "d) Materials – The offeror shall identify and price all material and material burdens. Provide the basis of estimates to include vendor quotations and any relevant information as applicable. The Offeror shall provide a Bill of Materials, by element that includes cost, and extended cost and shall include sources of price information. Material costs shall be delineated by part number and CLIN for the Offeror and each sub‐ contractor." Each Offeror(s) proposal will have varying solutions based on how each Offeror proposes to meet the requirements, which will impact material costs. Plug in numbers are not being provided due to the potential for varying costs between each Offeror(s) proposed solution. Recommend offerors review CDRL C008, Logistics Product Data for Material Component List information.

RPF, Section L.4.1 (Page xx) The Offeror shall ensure that all Major Subcontractors Cost/Price Volumes are also appropriately marked with the Prime Offeror’s name and address, volume identification, solicitation number, and distribution restrictions. For all major subcontractors (Reference L.1.11) proposals, shall be submitted in the same level of detail as the prime proposal, to include labor build‐up, indirect rate information and material/other direct costs compositions, when required. If the subcontractor's proposal contains company proprietary data, the subcontractor can elect to provide a "redacted" proposal copy to the Offeror and submit their FAR 15.404 compliant proposal directly to the POCs identified in L.1.1.d of this solicitation. Can the Government please clarify should the Major Subcontractor provide their submission through email (redacted) or should we provide it as a sealed package to the Government? If by email what is the Governments requirements for "redacted"?

Section L.4.1 has been changed to read, "The Offeror shall ensure that all Major Subcontractors Cost/Price Volumes are also appropriately marked with the Prime Offeror’s name and address, volume identification, solicitation number, and distribution restrictions. For all major subcontractors (Reference L.1.11 & L.1.12) proposals, shall be submitted in the same level of detail as the prime proposal, to include labor build‐up, indirect rate information and material/other direct costs compositions, when required." No hard copies or email proposal submissions will be accepted.

RFP / L3.8 / 127 & 130 Will the Government clarify what is expected in the Letter of Consent and Letter of Commitment?

Letter of Commitment requirement has been removed from Section L.3.8.c and L.3.8.d. Section L.2.7 now reads, "*Table of Contents, Title Pages, Glossary, Divider/Blank Pages, Teaming Arrangements, and PWS References (Section L, Attachment L3) are excluded from the page count."

Section L.3.8 removes the Letters of Commitment and Consent requirement.

RFP / L2.6 & L3.5.c /120 & 124 Does the Government intend for the 10 page RMP to be a separate stand alone document?

As stated in RFP section L.2.7, Volume 1 (Program Management) is a total of 60 pages, with 10 of those 60 pages allotted to the Risk Management Plan (RMP).

Is there network connectivity from the JDIF to all the sites hosting LVC‐IA systems? If so, what is the available bandwidth?

Currently, there is no network connectivity to any of the LVC‐IA sites. The Government is currently researching and collecting information on available networks, such as GSC Net, JTEN, etc. for remote access to all sites.

Does the Government intend to issue an SF30 for Amendment 01?

The Government will provide a complete and updated (with all changes) amendment 0001. The offeror is reminded to acknowledge and accept all amendments to the solicitation within their proposal.

RFP / L.2.1 Would the Government consider moving the due date for proposal submission to Dec 5 to allow industry time to review the large Technical Data Package?

Potential Offeror(s) requested if the Government could provide the TDP package. The request/question was asked during the Q&As of the draft solicitation.

The Government reviewed the request/question and agreed to provide the TDP package with release of the Final solicitation. The proposal due date has been extended to 15 November 2021.

RFP Exhibit A‐1 and A‐2 Exhibit A‐1 and A‐2 do not seem to be attached to the RFP document. Please provide.

The Government posted Exhibit A‐1 and A‐2 to the Sam.gov on 12 October 2021. Amendment 0001 will include the Exhibits.

We would like to request a four (4) week extension for bid responses due to 4,984 files provided as additional information. This would allow Offerors time to review and address in their bid responses since these documents were not provided with the draft documents.

The proposal due date will be extended until 15 November 2021.

Change to Solicitation N/A Due to funding uncertainty for the One World Terrain and Model conversion effort, these CLINs will be OPTION CLINs (CLINs 0013, 1013, 2013, 3013, 4013, 5013 and 6013).