W9124J18R00080001_TE-B_Question_Response_Listing_01_Mar_18.pdf

TECHNICAL EXHIBIT B

W9124J-18-R-0008, OACSIM Installation Status Report Services

Solicitation Questions/Answers Matrix

QUESTION

NO.

SOLICITATION

PAGE NO.

RFP REFERENCE

QUESTION

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

1. 14

66 and 67

6, CLIN 0010, Phase-

In

Ordering Period 1 through 5 tabs

1.5 Period of Performance

Delivery Information, Delivery Date

W9124J-18-R-0008,_TE_A_-

_Pricing_Spreadsheet,_13_Feb_18.xlsx

(a) Do the delivery dates 28-Jun-

2018 to 27-Apr-2023 include a three month Phase In of 28-Apr-2018 to

27-Jun-2018 to align to the 60-month Period of Performance as displayed in the Pricing Spreadsheet

(28-Apr-2018 to 27-Apr-2023) and to align to the POP for CLIN 0010 on page 66 (28-Apr-2018 to 27-Jun-

2018)?

(b) The Phase in quantity for CLIN

0010 on Page 6 shows a unit of 2 months. Should this be 3 months?

(a) The Phase-In Period (CLIN

0010) consists of a 60 day (2-month) period of performance from

28 Apr 2018 through 27 Jun 2018.

Performance Work Statement paragraph 1.6.24.2. has been updated to reflect a 60-day Phase-

In Period. Language has also been added to CLIN 0010, which reflects a two-month (28 Apr 18 through 27 Jun 2018) period of performance.

(b) No, see response above.

2. 120 Instructions to Offerors, Volume IV, Para. D

W9124J-18-R-0008,_TE_A_-

_Pricing_Spreadsheet,_13_Feb_18.xlsx

Is the “CLIN Summary” mentioned in the Instructions to Offerors, Volume IV, Para. D, a sum of the data by CLIN that we should include on a tab named “CLIN

Summary” in the existing Pricing

Spreadsheet?

Technical Exhibit A, Pricing

Spreadsheet has been updated to change the last tab previously named “Totals, to “CLIN

Summary/Total Eval Price” which will satisfy the CLIN Summary requirement, as outlined in

Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, paragraph D.4. Please note that in addition to completing the CLIN

Summary, the offeror is also responsible for addressing the remaining portions of paragraph

D.4., in regards to price.

3. 120

Instructions to Offerors, Volume IV, Para. D

Section M, Factor 3-Price

Should the “CLIN Summary” mentioned in the Instructions to

Offerors, Volume IV, Para. D align to the total proposed pricing as

The CLIN Summary mentioned in the Instruction to Offerors, Volume

IV, Para D should align to the total proposed pricing as described in described in Section M, Factor 3-

Price or to the Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices?

Section M, Factor 3-Price.

Section B (CLINs 0001-0006, and

0009) have been updated with the following language: “The amount for this CLIN shall be the total for the entire five-year ordering period.” In addition, language has been added to CLIN 0019 which states: “This CLIN shall reflect the proposed price/cost for

ORDERING PERIOD FIVE

ONLY".

4. 120 Instructions to Offerors, Volume IV, Para. D

W9124J-18-R-0008,_TE_A_-

_Pricing_Spreadsheet,_13_Feb_18.xlsx

(a) For the “Labor Categories and

Rates”, is the government seeking a table in Excel of the Labor

Categories and Rates for the IDIQ?

(b) Can this be completed as an added tab to the Pricing Spreadsheet in Excel named “Labor Categories and Rates” to the right of the

“Totals” tab?

(a) The Government is not dictating the format for submission of this information, but please note that the offeror shall submit all required information in accordance with Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, paragraph D.4.

(b) Yes, this can be completed as an added tab to Technical Exhibit

A, Pricing Spreadsheet, named

Labor Categories and Rates.

5. 5 and 6

CLIN 0007 and 0008

Tab C, Section B Travel/Other Direct

Costs Contract Line Items (CLINs)

Should the contractor insert the NTE amounts in the Unit Price, Amount and Net Amount for CLINs 0007 and 0008 in the Volume I, Tab C

Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices? Or should these be left blank?

In Section B of the original solicitation, language indicates the offeror shall not propose (DO NOT

PROPOSE) amounts for CLINs

0007 and 0008. The offeror shall leave these CLINs blank.

6. 5 and 6

CLIN 0007 and 0008

Tab C, Section B CLINs 0011 through

Should the contractor insert TBD in the Unit Price, Amount and Net

Amount for CLINs 0011 through

0019 Volume I, Tab C Section B –

Supplies or Services and Prices? Or should these be left blank?

Section B of the solicitation

(W9124J-18-R-0008) has been amended and language has been added to CLINs 0011 through 0018 which clarifies that the offeror shall not propose pricing on these

CLINs. However, the offeror is responsible for pricing CLIN 0019.

As outlined in Section B, CLIN

0019 states “This CLIN shall reflect the proposed price/cost for

ORDERING PERIOD FIVE

ONLY".

7. Totals tab W9124J-18-R-0008,_TE_A_-

_Pricing_Spreadsheet,_13_Feb_18.xlsx

Should the Contract Total on the

Totals tab equal the sum of the Total

Ordering Periods for Ordering

Period 1 through 5? Or should it equal the Total ISR Core Tasks for all Operating Periods plus the

Sample RDT&E Task for Option

Period 5?

Technical Exhibit A, Pricing

Spreadsheet has been updated and the previously named “Totals” tab has been revised to “CLIN

Summary/Total Eval Price”. As outlined in Addendum to FAR

52.212-2, Factor 3-Price: “For evaluation purposes the

Government will utilize Offeror’s total proposed pricing for ISR Core

Support Tasks (Attachment 5) for each ordering period and the sample RDT&E task entitled “Web

Services Enterprise Sustainment

Management Task” (Attachment 6) for ordering period five. NOTE:

While the Government will utilize the Offerors proposed pricing for ordering period five for the

RDT&E task, the Offeror is still required to price this task for all ordering periods. The Government may choose to award this RDT&E task during any ordering period, utilizing the proposed amount for that ordering period. The offeror’s total proposed price (to include the

6 month extension of services) will be evaluated for reasonableness, realism, and balance.”

8. 52 Attachment 1 Is the current incumbent meeting all of the performance thresholds identified in the PRS?

The incumbent is meeting all of the performance thresholds identified in the current ISR Support Services

Contract (W9124J-15-C-0033)

9. 36 5.2.1.1 / 5.2.1.14 Are the OACSIM Systems currently tenants in good standing on the network? Do the OACSIM systems

The TigS for ACSIM HEN expired on 27 May 17. The OACSIM systems are currently under review currently have a current/valid IATO or ATO?

for an Assessment Authorization

Memo which would replace the

TigS and are operating under a waiver until the Risk Management

Framework process is complete.

The OACSIM systems currently have current/valid IATOs/ATOs.

10. 3 & 111 Section B – Supplies or Services and

Prices

Addendum to 52.212-1, D. Proposal Content,

4. Volume I – General (TAB C)

Would the Government please clarify how offerors are to populate

Section B with proposed prices for each/all CLINs given that there are five ordering periods, each of which may include all of the 19 CLINs identified? Should Section B be prepared for each ordering period, using the same 19 CLIN numbers?

Section B has been updated at the

CLIN level for CLINs 0001-0019, to include pricing instructions.

11. 119 Addendum to 52.212-1, D. Proposal Content,

4. Volume IV – Price (Factor 3)

In order to comply with the data requirements for (a) Base Labor

Rates, (b) Indirect Rates, and (c)

Profit, will the Government allow subcontractors to submit the necessary supporting data directly to the Government via electronic mail submission?

Yes, sub-contractors can submit their supporting data directly to the

Government via electronic e-mail.

NOTE: Prime contractors are responsible for ensuring sub-contractor’s data is submitted to the Government within the established time-frame identified in the solicitation.

12. 119 Addendum to 52.212-1, D. Proposal Content,

4. Volume IV – Price (Factor 3)

Will the Government confirm that they will accept, as support for the

Base Labor Rates of each proposed

Labor Category, source data other than actual hourly/salary rates for specific individuals? Examples would be those identified in the RFP

(Bureau of Labor Statistics, Payscale, etc.), or standard commercial or government pricing practices, along with a narrative of how those standard pricing rates were derived (typically from composite/historical employee actual compensation rates).

Yes, as delineated in Addendum to

FAR 52.212-1, paragraph D.4.(a)., “Base Labor Rates: The proposal shall show base labor rates associated with each labor category. Base rates are the hourly rates that the employees will actually be paid for performance under the contract. Explain the basis for the proposed labor rates.

Some common basis for proposed rates is the actual rate the employee is currently being paid, Bureau of

Labor Statistics, Payscale, etc. The method used to escalate rates for additional periods will need to be explained, to include the basis for the escalation factors used and the date that pay increases are effective.”

13. 127-128 Section M, Factor 2 – Past

Performance (vi)

Given the requirements for eligible past performance (i.e. within three

(3) years, and similar in nature of work, size, and complexity), would the Government reconsider its position that offerors without a record of relevant past performance, or with unknown past performance, are to be considered “acceptable” for this evaluation criteria?

As delineated in FAR 52.212-2, Factor 2, paragraph iv., and FAR

15.305(a)(2)(iv): “In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance”

14. Page 15 of 129 1.6.5, Place of Performance Issue/Background: RFP states, “The work to be performed under this contract will be performed as follows: the Government shall provide one space at the Pentagon and four spaces at the Installation

Management Command (IMCOM), Fort Sam Houston, Texas.”

Question: Which key personnel position is required at the Pentagon;

and which four key personnel positions are required at Fort Sam

Houston, Texas?

As this is a performance-based requirement the Government will not specify a staffing approach. It is at the contractor’s discretion to determine staffing based on individual technical approach.

Note PWS Paragraph 1.6.5 has been updated to include the following: “the Government shall provide one space (two spaces if the Option at 5.6 is executed) at the

Pentagon and four spaces at the

Installation Management

Command (IMCOM), Fort Sam

Houston, Texas”.

15 Page 125 of 129 D, Proposal Content, Volume II, Subfactor 4: Staffing

Plan/Qualifications of Key Personnel

Does a Master's Degree in

Construction Management with a

Professional Engineering License satisfy Certification requirements for the ISR Contract Manager &

Alternate Key Personnel position?

As delineated in the addendum to

52.212.1 and 52.212-2, the certification requirements for the

ISR Contract Manager & Alternate are Project Management Institute

(PMI) Project Management

Professional (PMP) or a Master of

Business Administration Degree.

16. 3-7 Section B Will Section B be changed to remove CLINS 0010-0018? Will

Section B of the solicitation

(W9124J-18-R-0008) has been the Government confirm CLINS

0010-0018 will not be priced on the

Section B.

amended and language has been added to CLINs 0011 through 0018 which clarifies that the offeror shall not propose pricing on these

CLINs.

17 3-7 Section B Section B contains CLINS for what would appear to be ordering period

1. Are offerors only to price ordering period 1 in Section B or is the Government’s intent to price all five ordering periods in each Section

B CLIN?

See Government’s response to questions 3, 6 and 7.

18. 20 1.6.19.1 Key Personnel. The ISR Mission

Capacity Component Lead and

Alternate ISR Mission Capacity

Component Lead are not listed in the beginning of the paragraph when listing the original list of Key

Personnel. Instead, ISR Mission

Support Component Lead or

Alternate ISR Mission Support

Component Lead are listed. Should these two Key Personnel read as

ISR Mission Capacity Component

Lead and alternate ISR Mission

Capacity Component Lead?

PWS Paragraph 1.6.19.1 has been updated to reflect the correct terminology for both the ISR

Mission Capacity Lead and the

Alternate.

19. 22 1.6.19. Key Personnel Would the Government consider the

System Lead and Alternate have either CISSP or Security+ certifications instead of requiring both?

PWS Paragraph 1.6.19 as well as the addendum to 52.212-1 and

52.212-2 have been updated to reflect the following certification requirements for the System Lead and Alternate: Certified

Information Systems Security

Professional (CISSP) or Security + or Global Information Assurance

Certification (GIAC)

20. 36 5.2.1.1 What is the current compliance status of the system? Are there any outstanding vulnerabilities or

All OACSIM systems are in the process of migrating to server accreditation using the OSD Risk

Management Framework and

POAMs that will need to be addressed in a new contract?

working through identified vulnerabilities and POA&M development. As part of the

OACSIM migration to the

Microsoft Azure cloud, it is possible there could be additional requirements on top of those currently required by the Joint

Service Provider.

36 5.2.1.4 What application components are hosted in Citrix/Xen server?

There are no current ISR application components hosted on a Citrix/Xen Server. Soliciation

PWS Paragraphs 5.2.1.2 and

5.2.1.4 have been updated to remove Citrix/Xen reference.

22. 37 5.2.1.5 Are there any outstanding vulnerabilities or POAMs that will need to be addressed in a new contract?

All OACSIM systems are in the process of migrating to server accreditation using the OSD Risk

Management Framework and working through identified vulnerabilities and POA&M development. As part of the

OACSIM migration to the

Microsoft Azure cloud, it is possible there could be additional requirements on top of those currently required by the Joint

Service Provider.

23 37 5.2.1.9 What ISR application components need to be upgraded to meet the compliance?

The IAVM patches on the ISR staging and productions servers are current. The most recent Microsoft security patches were applied to the ISR production servers on

February 28th, 2018. All

OACSIM systems are active in the process of migrating from the

Certification and Accreditation

(C&A) server accreditation to using the new OSD Risk

Management Framework. We are working on identified vulnerabilities and POA&M development. It is highly likely that this process will still be in motion under the new contract. As part of the OACSIM migration to the

Microsoft Azure cloud, it is possible there could be additional requirements on top of those currently required by the Joint

Service Provider. It is not anticipated that significant upgrades will be necessary to migrate to the Microsoft Azure cloud environment. As part of the routine database and operating system modifications/upgrades, the

ISR system is also currently undergoing a Windows Server

2008R2 update to Windows Server

2012. The government will provide a list of application components that will require modifications or upgrades as they exist at the time of transition.

24. 37 5.2.1.14 What is the current ATO status? ISR falls under an ATO with

Conditions that covers HQDA

Enterprise Network that was authorized on 30 Nov 2017 and has an Authorization Termination Date of 31 Jan 2019.

25.

38 5.2.1.16 Does a complete set of technical and system documentation currently exist?

The incumbent is required to keep a complete set of program SOPs to include technical/system documentation. The incumbent will produce the annual revision to these documents prior to completion of the current contract option.

26. 39 5.2.10 What system is currently used to track changes?

ISR users input and track CMPIs on the ISR SIMS website

(https://sims.syncadd.com). The

CMPIs are then backed up onto an

Access database where they are stored and tracked.

27. 39 5.2.10 Will the Government provide historical and pending change requests and resolutions?

Yes, these will be provided to the awardee.

28. 40 5.2.22 What ISR application components need to be upgraded before migrating to the cloud?

It is not anticipated that significant upgrades will be required to migrate to the Microsoft Azure cloud environment.

29. 40 5.2.22.1 Is there a specific Commercial

Cloud Service Provider being considered for this migration

The Government has already determined that ISR and all

OACSIM systems will migrate to the Microsoft Azure Cloud.

30. 40 5.2.22.4. Are any other environments besides testing and production migrating to the cloud (ex., training or development)?

All environments (training, development, and testing and production) will move to the cloud.

31. 40 5.3.4. Installation Support. What level of technical support is required for the filming of an updated IRS training video? Who will bear responsibility for actual video production, OACSIM or the Contractor? Also, how many training videos are anticipated?

Support for the filming of the ISR video would include support developing the script, and support by the ISR-I component lead while filming the ISR-I inspection video, to include potentially appearing in the video. The actual filming / video production would be completed by the Army Multi-media & Visual Information

Directorate. I am anticipating that we would film no more than 5 training videos to include the ISR-I inspection video. In all cases the role of the contractor would be to review and provide input to the script, potentially being present for filming (for the ISR-I component lead only for the ISR-I training video), and reviewing drafts of the training video prior to finalization.

32. 45 5.3.17 Will separate Working Group meetings be required for individual

Components (Land Holding

Commands) i.e., IMCOM, AMC, ARNG and USAR?

This task is referring to ISR components (i.e. Infrastructure, Services, Mission Capacity), as opposed to Army components. It’s a general placeholder for a meeting related to each of the ISR components, if required. The meeting would be above and beyond CoP sessions for a particular component, for example to go over quarterly data with stakeholders. The meetings could also be the opportunity to brief quarterly or annual trends

(referencing the annual trends brief which is mentioned in the same comment).

33. 45 5.4.1. What are the current versions of

.NET framework and Crystal

Reports being used in ISR?

The current .net frame work version is 2.0. The current Crystal reports version is 11.5.9708.826.

(The current plan is to upgrade the

.net platform from 2.0 to 4.5 during the Windows Server 2008R2 update to Windows Server 2012.

34. 46 5.4.4. Enterprise SMS Integration. The task requirement suggests that there may be instances whereupon there are SMS and User Evaluations for the same facility. Who will be responsible for determining which facilities will require this, OACSIM or the Contractor?

The intent of this paragraph was to state that when creating a complex

(i.e. an airfield at Fort Hood, for example), the FCI (or Q-rating) for the facilities making up the complex might be generated from different systems. For example, the FCI for the air traffic control tower at the Fort Hood airfield might be being generated from a

BUILDER inspection, but the Q rating/FCI for lighting in the airfield complex might be generated from ISR-I. The task is to develop a methodology to come up with an overall rating for the entire complex, i.e. roll up an overall Q-rating or FCI for the entire complex that factors in the ratings of all of the facilities that make up the complex, regardless of whether the Q-rating/FCI for individual facilities was generated by BUILDER, an ISR-I inspection, or a ISR-I generated business rule rating. There should not be a case where there is a FCI generated both by an inspection and by Builder.

We plan to use the Builder FCI as opposed to the ISR Q rating whenever it is available. If there were ever two ratings available, we will use the Builder FCI by default, as soon as we have the capability to integrate the Builder ratings in

ISR.

35. 118 Section L. 3.3.(3)(i) We interpret Past Performance guidance to be: 3 past performance examples, no older than 3 years, no longer than 3 pages each. Is this interpretation correct?

Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, paragraph 3. Volume III-Past

Performance, (1)1, states “The offeror shall include documentation regarding their relevant past performance as it directly relates to the work being procured under this solicitation.

The offeror SHALL NOT go back any farther than 3 years for services for the submitted data.

The past performance data shall document a successful history of past contract performance.

Additionally, Addendum to FAR

52.212-1, paragraph 3, Volume 3, Past Performance, (1)3, Specific

Relevant Contracts Format states:

Sheets in accordance with

Attachment 4 and are limited to 3 pages per reference.”

36. What is the Government’s estimated hours (or FTE) level of effort for the

Core Support Tasks and the Sample

RDT&E Task?

As this is a performance-based requirement the Government will not specify a staffing approach. It is at the contractor’s discretion to determine staffing based on individual technical approach.

37. Technical Exhibit A, Note 3: In the note 3 the procedures are unclear: CLIN 0019 (Sample

RDT&E Task) ordering period 5 price will be included in the evaluation. The note continues on to say that CLIN 0019 is still required to be priced in all ordering periods.

We read this to mean Government requires the entire CLIN 0019 price be replicated in all five ordering periods with ordering period 5 being the price that will be included in evaluated price. Is our understanding correct?

As delineated in Addendum to

FAR 52.212-2, Factor 3-Price: For evaluation purposes the

Government will utilize Offeror’s total proposed pricing for ISR Core

Support Tasks (Attachment 5) for each ordering period and the sample RDT&E task entitled “Web

Services Enterprise Sustainment

Management Task” (Attachment 6) for ordering period five. NOTE:

While the Government will utilize the Offerors proposed pricing for ordering period five for the

RDT&E task, the Offeror is still required to price this task for all ordering periods. The Government may choose to award this RDT&E task during any ordering period, utilizing the proposed amount for that ordering period. The offeror’s total proposed price (to include the

6 month extension of services) will be evaluated for reasonableness, realism, and balance. Technical

Exhibit A, Pricing Spreadsheet, Note 3 has been updated to include this language.