MARKET INTEL |DOCUMENT
ATCH 3 - EC2 Industry Day QAs Post ESIS (26 Aug 2021).pdf
Date Originally Posted
Aug. 27, 2021, 10:26 a.m.
Questions and Answers, post ESIS--26 Aug 2012 Q1: Will you be making the slides that you are briefing and answers provided to todays questions available? A: Yes, the Draft RFI Q&A responses have been posted to SAM.gov. ; a final consolidated list of responses will be posted within 2 weeks. Q2: Would you be willing to post the Industry Day Vendor List? A: The interested vendor list is included in SAM.gov Q3: How is this being synchronized with EITaaS A: We are not coordinating directly with EITaaS, as this is a different requirements set. Q4: Can you host the pre--proposal conference before the RFP is released? A: Acknowledged, we will take this into consideration. Q5: Why is the award set for November 2022? Is there any context that can be provided around the timing? A: This date is notional; we would like to make this available to our mission partners as soon as possible. Q6: Any On Ramp Periods post award? A: We are reviewing the requirements for on--ramps however we currently anticipate that they will be included in the IDIQ. Q7: Any idea yet of how many awards might be made? A: The Government is in the early stage of the acquisition process, at this time this is unknown. Q8: Will this be a self-scoring environment for Industry? A: The Government is in the early stage of the acquisition process however, this approach may be considered for evaluation of this requirement. Q9: Would you consider a NAICS that accommodates small businesses larger than $30M? A: The Government has received multiple inputs on NAICS codes—all suggestions will be evaluated. Q10: Has the value for this been determined? A: The Government anticipates the overall ceiling to be in the $5B range. Q11: Is the Government considering a Full and Open Pool and a Small Business set--aside pool? How many awards in each are projected? A: The Government anticipates multiple pools, however the number of awards still remains to be determined. Q12: In response to RFI Questions #26...How is this possible since you will be setting the bar for Pricing at the IDIQ level? A: Although early in the acquisition process, the Government is considering methods that doesn’t require pricing at the IDIQ level. Q13: Will the attendee list be posted to betaSAM.gov? A: The interested vendor list is included in SAM.gov Q14: Can the slides be posted from the industry day ASAP and follow up with Q&A at a later time? A: Posted to SAM.gov during industry day and edited with questions live during the Q&A session at the closure of the aforementioned industry day session. Q15: Does the EC2 procurement subsume the AFMC Lifecycle Management Command (AFLCMC) C3 Directorate Management Command (AFLCMC) C3 Directorate --Joint Cyber Joint Cyber Command and Control (JCC2) Opportunity? The betasam entry for this JCC2 looks like it has gone away? A: The EC2 procurement is not associated with the referenced opportunity listed above. Q16: No ISR in scope? So all cyber except Cyber—enabled ISR? A: There are no traditional ISR requirements envisioned for EC2 orders. However, the Government realizes the fusion between ISR and cyber yet, how they transpire will be defined in the resulting task orders. Q17: With the emphasis on classified requirements, need for TS level staff and solutions, etc., will the Government consider a classified Sample Task Order? Will classified proposals or addenda be accepted? A: Unless the IDIQ RFP specifically request a classified submission, which we do not envision at this time, do not submit any classified information. Q18: Does the Government plan on using a self-scoring card for EC2? A: Although early in the acquisition process, the Government will consider various evaluation strategies and methodologies, including potential self-scoring. Q19: Is there an expectation that awardees have a SCIF? Is there an expectation that awardees have a SCIF? A: Although early in the acquisition process, this is not a requirement for an award of the IDIQ, however this could become a requirement at the task order level. Q20: What do you expect the typical turnaround time for TOs? A: The intent of the EC2 is to expedite cyber requirements onto subsequent TOs. The turnaround time on TO will be dependent on the value and scope of the requirement with the goal being approximately 90 days. Q21: As the government is allowing for remote work and the government is allowing for remote work and contractor facilities, will the government consider a Cost--Plus type acquisition to reimburse SBs for the investment in facilities that are classified material capable? A: The Government is in the early stage of the acquisition process, yet this would be something discussed at the task order level. Q22: Would the government consider setting a lower bar for IDIQ award and a high bar for task order awards similar to Navy's approach for SeaPort Nextgen? The rationale being even the largest companies are not great at all elements of a broad statement of work particularly for the rapidly evolving cyber technologies; it would also help build a more robust cyber technologies; it would also help build a more robust industrial base preventing any contractor teams from becoming complacent in technology innovation offering stale solutions to support AMIC mission partners A: Noted. Will review and consider this input in the acquisition strategy development. Q23: Will this IDIQ be mandatory use for the 16th AF for any cyber requirement within scope? A: The intent of the EC2 is to expedite placing cyber requirements onto subsequent TOs by all AMIC operating locations. However, individual acquisition strategies will be determined for each requirement and EC2 will be a significant consideration each time. Q24: What was the intent of keeping this limited to cyber requirements only and not including the 16th AF ISR mission requirements in the scope? A: Currently the government has determined that a cyber-related IDIQ is needed. As the 16 AF achieves full operational capability, AMIC will continue to evaluate the best vehicles to achieve this critical mission. Q25: Contractor Facility Expectations? A: The Government does not anticipate a contractor facility being a requirement for the award of the IDIQ. However due to the Government being in the early stage of the acquisition process, this could be required at the task order level. Q26: With all the Cyber requirements in San Antonio, is there thoughts on allowing a percentage of contractors to be new entries with no clearances so we can increase the labor pool in San Antonio? Recent grads from UTSA and others is my thought. A: Noted. The Government considers all potential strategies and approaches that may achieve our requirements. Q27: Will the Government off-ramp any initially awarded contractors during option years for any reason (e.g. failure to bid or failure to win task orders?)? A: The Government is anticipating both on- and off-ramps will be included in the IDIQ. Q28: Will the Draft RFP define the Task Orders planned for the IDIQ, at a level that can be bid and evaluated for entrance onto the IDIQ Vehicle? A: The Government does not anticipate the IDIQ RFP will use notional/projected workload for evaluation. Q29: Could the Govt please describe any intersections and/or subsuming of the various cyber/C2 opportunities out there such as JADC2, Black Label, JCC2, etc. A: EC2 is not intended to be a consolidation of contracts. EC2 is contemplated to provide enterprise-level cyber capabilities. Q30: What criterion (FTEs, topic areas, other) is envisioned to be used by Contracting to deem a given TO as a SBSA, versus being open to all IDIQ contract holders? A: Too early in the IDIQ acquisition process but anticipate the Government will consider various criterion, including that previously used, to determine an acquisition strategy. Q31: Does the government anticipate any CMMC? A: The Government is evaluating the future implementation of the DFARS interim final rules (DFARS 252.204-7019, 7020, 7021) and has not yet determined the level (specific to the IDIQ and/or at the task order level). Future guidance will be provided in the draft RFP. Q32: The AF had released multiple cyber contracts supporting EC2 customers as standalone contracts or on various vehicles. Is it the intent of the AF to consolidate those contracts into EC2? A: EC2 is not intended to be a consolidation of contracts. EC2 is contemplated to provide enterprise-level cyber capabilities. Q33: What is the relationship between EC2 and Rome AF Lab BAA on Cyber requirements? A: There is no anticipated relationship. Q34: The Q&A said hardware solutions would be entertained. In that regard, do you expect any task orders to be solely hardware or hardware with install task orders or will it be service-only TOs and up to the bidders to propose a hardware solution in lieu of manpower? A: Predominate nature of the requirement is based on services, however, the PWS (and future orders) may include equipment, supplies, and commodities, integral to the requirement although none are expected to be solely hardware. Q36: If multiple pools are used, will the set-asides be defined on a TO basis in the Draft RFP? A: Although early in the acquisition process, the Government expects the anticipated pools to be defined at the IDIQ RFP stage Q37: Several times the Government said the acquisition was “in the early phases of Market Research” and Mr. Applegate “indicated an Acquisition Strategy has not been developed or approved. How confident are you in your estimate that the RFP will be released in 2021? This is important for a number of “large--ish” small businesses as we will be closing our books” in Jan/Feb 2022, and won’t know our post--2021 size standard with certainty until then. We would not want to waste valuable bid and proposal effort on a contract we would be disqualified for. Can you estimate the… Show All