PWS.pdf

PWS Questions

Q: Is the executive summary page limit going to change or stay the same?

A: The Executive Summary will be limited to a maximum of three (3) pages.

Q: In the PWS you talked about the executive summary - I was confused with the 58 page overall count and the 3 pages.

A: The USAMS III RFP Section L table 2.0 will be updated to clarify the page count. The

Executive Summary will be limited to a maximum of three (3) pages.

Q: The Performance Work Statement is broken into four primary support areas but these areas are not tied in any way to the Mission Area requirements of Section L and M within the Draft RFP. Please clarify how the Government expects bidders to ensure PWS requirements fulfillment across all nine mission areas with no clear mapping of requirements to mission.

A: The technical criteria in section L and M are the key areas the evaluation team will review to distinguish between offerors. Not all PWS elements are included in the technical criteria, only those the government desires to review are to be included in the technical criteria.

Q: PWS 1.5 – Task requirements are not categorized by the mission area in accordance with the sub-factors specified in RFP Sections L and M. How does the Government intend to specify which task requirements are associated with which mission area sub-factors?

A: Actual task requirements in the mission areas will be specified in specific task orders after award. For evaluation purposes of the subfactors the technical evaluation team will review offers ability to perform in the tasks in the mission areas (subfactors), but the government does not expect offerors cover every task in every mission area in the page limits.

Q: PWS 1.5.1.3 – The PWS requires the Contractor to “provide access to any and all program information and data prepared as part of this contract,” and to “return to the

Government or dispose of this material at contract termination…” Will this include proprietary data or intellectual property previously developed and adapted to this contract, or developed for this contract?

A: The intent of this paragraph is that the government has the rights to data and intellectual property developed through performance of this contract and resulting task orders.

Q: PWS 1.5.2.8 (and several other sections) – Requires contractor to “develop a methodology to assess and rank survivability enhancement options for space systems.” Is the methodology or tool to be prescribed by the Government, or is the Government open to use of proprietary MS&A tools and/or methodologies?

A: The specific requirements will be identified in task orders awarded after the award of the basic contract. The purpose of an A&AS contract is to get support for the government to develop innovative solutions.

Q: PWS 1.5.2.9 (and several other sections) – Requires contractor to “remain cognizant of and current in USSTRATCOM Global Ballistic Missile Defense-related missions….” Will the Government provide criteria for assessing the degree to which the contractor remains cognizant? Other similar examples: 1.5.2.12 – “understand the implications….

understand aspects of joint and combined operations.” How will this “understanding” be measured?

A: The government will evaluate the contractor’s cognizance and understanding of all mission areas through subjectively evaluating the proposals of the technical subfactors.

Q: Information Operations (IO) is no longer a USSTRATCOM Unified Command Plan

(UCP) specific responsibility. Will the reference to IO be removed from paragraph 1.5.2.12 and updated to Targeting and Analysis to reflect the current UCP mission areas?

A: Yes, we will make the change.

Q: PWS addresses ISPAN in detail (1.5.3.4.1 – 1.5.3.4.6), does this mean that ISPAN will now fall under USAMS contracting and that the current ISPAN contract will be reduced in scope?

A: There will be no change to ISPAN, but USAMS does provide various tasks in support of

ISPAN.

Q: PWS 1.5.3.7 – Requires contractor to “advise, design, assemble, install, integrate, and test changes to military systems as a result of a Government sustainment engineering task.

Given the scope and magnitude of the USAMS III contract, does the Government mean to require generic capability to cover this task, or will they identify the specific weapons systems affected?

A: Task orders solicited after award of the basic contract will identify specific weapon systems.

The technical evaluation will focus on the generic capability as related to the technical subfactors.

Q: PWS 1.5.3.43 – Requires contractor to “provide support in managing the user and

Commander expectations…” Does this include all echelons of command, or does the

Government mean the CDRUSTRATCOM? How will the Government measure success in

“managing the Commander’s expectations?”

A: The government requires A&AS services to help set expectation at all echelons of command.

Specific task orders will detail the level of command applicable to the work required. The government does not have specific technical criteria to evaluate this area.

Q: PWS 1.5.3.51 – Requires the contractor to “logically assimilate and de-conflict collected

Global Strike data…” Will the Government define its expectation on what constitutes logical assimilation? Further, will the Government define “effectively work with” in

1.5.3.58; a “working understanding” in 1.5.3.77?

A: The intent of the technical tasks in the PWS is to provide a potential scope of the work on the task orders. Expectations for each of the areas discussed will be unique to task orders.

Q: PWS Para 1.5.3.68 will the support for the SLA prohibit Bidders from competing on

TIF or USSTRATCOM New Building C4 work?

A: Based on the nature of the work of the task order supporting the TIF, a USAMS III contractor performing the work could be excluded from additional work for the TIF or the new

STRATCOM C4 facility.

Q: The draft PWS lists tasks under 1.5.4 – Operations and Maintenance Services (Tele), but there is no indication of how these tasks will be evaluated in Section M.

A: The specific areas the government will evaluate are listed in Section L and the evaluation criteria are in Section M of the RFP.

Q: PWS Para 1.5.4 - With the inclusion of this work under USAMS III, does this prohibit bidders from competing on the follow on contract to ITCC?

A: If a task order is awarded for A&AS services to assist in developing IT requirements to be executed on the ITCC contract, the USAMS III contractor would be excluded from competition based on the conflict of interest.

Q: PWS Para 1.5.7 - Does the work listed under this paragraph eliminate the current work being performed under the Current ITCC contract and its recompete?

A: Yes, the government does not intend to award task orders under USAMS III for routine IT requirements.

Q: PWS 1.5.9.6 – Requires data input to a .mil web address. Will the Government help facilitate access to the address from non-.mil accounts?

A: The Office of the Secretary of Defense has a help desk to assist contractors available to all at http://www.ecrma.mil.

Q: DRFP PWS Para 1.5.10.4 states: “Qualification Summaries. Qualification summaries may be required on individual task orders.” Question: Under both USAMS I & II, qualifications summaries (resumes) and subsequent approval by the customer were required for all task order personnel prior to beginning work to ensure that experience and skill set minimums were met.

http://www.ecrma.mil/

Para 1.5.10.4 seems to indicate that Qualification summaries may be required – does this indicate that some task orders could be bid and staffed without review and approval of supporting resumes to confirm minimum skills/experience?

A: At prime contract level, if it continues to say may, that would not cripple the task order process. We will consider changing the PWS wording to use the language “always.” TOPR process would rule.

Q: PWS 1.7.1 – Requires the contractor to “maintain the currency of all required publications.” Will the Government establish a bidder’s library to give offerors access to the current required publications?

A: Specific publications will be identified on task orders. The government does not intend to establish a bidder’s library as the publications are available on-line.

Q: PWS 5.2: Forward pricing agreements. If the Offeror does not have forward pricing rate agreements will that disqualify the entire response? Section L 5.3

A: Not a discriminator.