RFIs 25 May 21.pdf

FA282321QA019 – GPS GNSS Simulator Consolidated Requests for Information As of 25 May 2021

Question 1): Is the government amenable to providing contract financing in the form of milestone payments? Is it possible to receive a milestone payment upon delivery of the system that is not fully TRD compliant and then receive a final payment upon delivery of hardware meeting the full contract requirement? Specifically, we would like to receive a milestone payment upon delivery of the initial hardware, which includes all requirements except the GPS Y/M code module, and then receive a final payment when upon delivery of the GPS Y/M code module.

Response 1): No, the Government has no use for the equipment without the Y/M code module and would prefer to not pay for it beforehand.

Question 2): Will the government accept alternate proposals for this requirement, i.e., one proposal for a system meeting the basic requirements and a separate proposal for a system that meets the basic requirements and includes some or all of the “contemplative” (C) or desired features contained in the TRD? If so, how will the evaluation be accomplished using the Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable (LPTA) approach, since the offer with the enhanced capability would be more expensive than the basic offer? If alternate proposals are not permitted, how does the government plan to consider “contemplative” (C) or desired features or are they of no benefit in the evaluation?

Response 2): We will accept alternate/multiple quotes, but it is still LPTA and the bare minimum are the requirements and lowest priced will be awarded. The customer did not make the contemplatives an actual requirement because they thought it would make it a brand name requirement and wanted to keep competition open.

If your company can provide the contemplatives it would be more like market research for any future requirements unless it happens to be the lowest priced, technically acceptable option.

Question 3): Section 1 of the TRD states in part, “The integrating company shall be: a United States (US) owned company, pre-approved by the GPS directorate (SMC), an active participant with the GPS Satellite Simulation Working Group (SSWG), and shall adhere to the latest technical requirements documentation for implementing Y-code on GPS simulators as directed by the GPS directorate.” Do the requirements to be pre-approved by the GPS directorate and to be an active participant with the SSWG apply pre-award or only post-award once the contract is awarded?

Response 3): Vendors need to be active and participants pre-award

Question 4): Does the government require the contractor to provide a Vector Network Analyzer (VNA) to support system calibration or does the government plan to use an existing government-owned VNA to perform calibration?

Response 4): This is up to the vendor. Some allow for auto-calibration while others don’t so we don’t want to stipulate that a VNA is required when some units have it built in. Short answer, we will need a means to calibrate the simulator and instructions on how to do so. So whether the vendor uses the auto-cal option, or supplies us with a VNA as part of the purchase, or just provides instructions on how to calibrate and expects us to get a VNA on our own is acceptable.

Question 5): What are the specific spoofing signal requirements in Section 24 of the TRD?

Response 5): Can’t go into specifics here without broaching sensitive information, however if they can handle multipath then it will meet our needs.

Question 6): Reference your prior answer to question #3. For clarification , Section 1 of the TRD states in part, “The integrating company shall be: a United States (US) owned company, pre-approved by the GPS directorate (SMC), an active participant with the GPS Satellite Simulation Working Group (SSWG), and shall adhere to the latest technical requirements documentation for implementing Y-code on GPS simulators as directed by the GPS directorate.” Does the requirement to be “pre-approved by the GPS directorate” refer to the company or to the hardware to be provided under the resultant contract? In either case, what documentation is required to evidence such pre-approval in order to demonstrate compliance with the TRD?

Response 6): The intent of the company stipulations is to ensure us that the company can do what they say they can

do. The GNSS will require encrypted keys in order to utilize Y-Code signals as well as M-Code signals. These keys are controlled by the GPS directorate. Having the prime company enrolled in the working groups as well as the other requirements affords us more confidence that the prime companys’ claims to complete the contract are valid.

Here is what we intended when we wrote that excerpt. There may be some company who has the hardware for the GNSS, but is not pre-approved by the directorate. Ergo they would solicit the business of another company who was pre-approved and met the other conditions for the integrating company to handle the Y-code and M-code side of the GNSS while the prime company would handle the hardware and the rest of the requirements within the TRD.

So to answer your question more directly “the pre-approved by the GPS directorate” refers to the company who is handling the Y-code and M-code implementation of the GNSS, which COULD consist of simply handling the documentation and some software while the primary company handles the hardware/FPGA. I am not sure how these two groups would divvy the work, but the intent was the pre-approval was just to handle the encryption side with the Y-code & M-code. What we are looking to avoid is having a company who is not pre-approved, we select their GNSS, and then we are stuck in a hold pattern waiting for them to get approved by the GPS directorate as well as complete the fabrication/development of including Y-code and M-code features into the GNSS.