GSSC_Questions_ _Answers_Combined.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 27 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Modification of Equipment Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8214-14-R-0005
About this file
GSSC RFP Questions and Answers Combined
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
Modification of Equipment has more files on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Number | Document | Page # | Para # | Line # | Background | Issue | Suggested Resolution | Government Resolution |
| 1 | PWS | 21 | 1.6.3.2.3.1 | 629 | The Government is asking for a risk "ranking" to be provided, which is not consistent with the ICBMSD OI for Risk management. The definition of risk "ranking" is unclear. | Per the ICBMSD Risk OI, risks are assigned a "level", related to likelihood of occurrence and potential consequences. A risk "ranking" implies a prioritized 1-n list of risks, which can be subjectively ranked against each based on their risk level. | Suggest that the Government change the word "rank" to "level" in this paragraph to be consistent with the OI, or provide additional clarification on the meaning of risk "ranking". For example, does the Government require an ordering of risks from most critical to least critical in a 1-n order? | Changed "ranking" to "level". |
| 2 | GSSC Cross Reference Matrix | 7 of 8 | PWS 1.6.3.2.3 (excel file cell 22C) | Tasks and Responsibility Transfer | The paragraph identified in the Work Requirement section includes paragraphs 1.6.3.2.3.1 and 1.6.3.2.3.2, but does not include 1.6.3.2.3., which contains the requirement to submit the Transition Plan. | RFP is unclear as to whether or not a transition plan is to be submitted with the RFP or if we are to comply with the instructions in CDRL A003 and submit | Add at the beginning of the Cross Reference Matrix, cell 22C, "1.6.3.2.3 The contractor shall submit a Transition Plan for approval by the Government [CDRL A003, DI-MGMT-80790/T, Transition Plan]" or change the PWS reference paragraphs in section M to 1.6.3.2.3.1-2 | The Transition Plan CDRL is after contract award. 1.6.3.2.3 is not required per Section L and Section M. Section M updated with correct references in Amendment 1. |
| 3 | PWS | 21 | 1.6.3.2.3.1 | 628-629 | The Government is instructing offerors to identify and address (mitigate) risks for transitioning Ground subsystem "tasks". | How does the word "tasks" correlate to the requirements of the full scope of the PWS or the WBS ? Can the AF clarify which specific tasks or activities they want addressed in our proposal? | Identify to what level of the PWS the AF desires offerors to address risk, in detail, in our proposal. | The word tasks pertains to the Level IV WBS as identified in the WBS in the PWS. |
| GFP Lists | Attachment 18, GFP list, does not match GFP lists in the Ground Bidder's Library. | Need clarification as to which GFP list is correct and supposed to be used during proposal development. | Please clarify which GFP list is correct. | The list in the solicitation should be used during proposal development. | ||||
| 4 | GFP List | Attachment 18, GFP list, includes GFP not needed for completion certain tasks included in the PWS (Raytheon, Sechan, Millitech). In addition, it does not include GFP for other locations necessary to meet PWS requirements (Codes lab, AVE lab, HAC/RMPE lab, MOTP lab and MPE lab). | Need clarification as to which GFP list is correct and supposed to be used during proposal development. | Please clarify/complete GFP applicability | The list in the solicitation should be used during proposal development. The Bidder's Library contains additional lists (F900) of encumbered GFP IAW Section M Paragraph 1.5. | |||
| 5 | RFP | 7 | CLIN 0007 | All | CLIN 0007 appears to be mislabeled as a HAC/RMPE Message Generator Replacement Program (MGRP) Higher Authority Communications Test Station (HACTS) Production effort. | It references para 1.6.4.2.4.1 which is the HAC/RMPE description, not a production program. | Please clarify the PWS citation for CLIN 0007. | CLIN 0007 is mislabeled. PWS 1.6.4.2.4.1 is correct. CLIN 0007 will be updated in Amendment 2. |
| 6 | Section L | 15 | 4.2.3.3.1 | 6-Mar | The wording in Section L, paragraph 4.2.3.3.1, repeats the wording found in PWS paragraph 1.6.3.2.3.3 with respect to software code, etc. However PWS para 1.6.3.2.3.3 is identified to be addressed in Section L, 4.2.3.3.2. | The RFP documents appear to direct offeros to address the same information in two different places in Section L. | Provide clarification where the AF wants offerors to address the requirements for GFP, software code, associated compilers, etc. Should it be in Section L, Section 4.2.3.3.1 OR 4.2.3.3.2? Based on Section M, it appears the requirements should be addressed in Section L, 4.2.3.3.2. | PWS requirement 1.6.3.2.3.3 is covered in Section L 4.2.3.3.1 and Section M 2.1.1.3.1. Section L and Section M will be updated in Amendment 2. |
| 7 | RFP | 9 | The stated ordering period of Mar 2015 through September 2015 for Transition CLINs 0010 represents a 7 month performance period which does not corrolate to the quantity of 6 and 6 MO period of performance. Please clarify the correct period of performance and quantity. | Required to be compliant with pricing requirements. | The period of performance for Transition will be 6 months. Exact dates are dependent upon contract award date. | |||
| 8 | RFP | 25-38 | The stated ordering period of March 2020 through September 2020 for option CLINs 1001 through 1009 and 1011 through 1022 represent a 7 month performance period which does not corrolate to the quantities of 6 and 6 MO periods of performances. Please clarify the correct period of performance and quantities. | Required to be compliant with pricing requirements. | The period of performance for Transition will be 6 months. Exact dates are dependent upon contract award date. | |||
| 9 | RFP | 23 | CLINs 0023 and 0030 | Inspection: Destination Source | Clarification between SELM/GMLEC SOO paragraph 1.2.2.1.1 and CLINs | Will be corrected to “source” when the task order is issued. | ||
| Acceptance: Destination Source | ||||||||
| 10 | CDRL | 13 | A001 Integrated Program Management Report | Block 16 Remarks | Block 4 Tailoring instructions on the SF1423 require Formats 1, 4, 5, and 7 of the IPMR. BLOCKS 10, 11, 12 & 13: Initial Submittal: Contractor shall submit initial Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR) (Formats 1-6) NLT the 12 business days after the end of the second full accounting period following Authorization to Proceed (ATP). | Consistency | Will be correct in RFP Amendment 2 | |
| 11 | CDRL | 49 | A036, Spare Parts Usage Report | Block 5 Contract Reference | SELM/GMLEC SOO | The CDRL refers to the SELM/GMLEC SOO but there is no requirement for contractor support that would generate this kind of data. Recommend that this CDRL be deleted. | A036 will be deleted | |
| 12 | CDRL | 73 | A060, Product Drawings/Models and Associated List | Block 16 Remarks | 10. Drawing deliveries: Draft/preliminary drawings shall be delivered 30 working calendar days prior to the Preliminary Design Review, Critical Design Review and Physical Configuration Audit in PDF format on CD ROM. The Government shall provide comments to the drawings 10 working days prior to each review/audit. Agreed to comments shall be incorporated into the drawing prior to the next review/audit. | Delivery 30 calendar days before the reviews/audit provides more mature documentation. | No change | |
| 13 | CDRL | 64 | A051, System/ Subsystem Specification (SSS) | Block 16 Remarks | BLOCKS 10, 11, 12 & 13: ... Contractor shall submit final SSS (Prime Item Requirements Specification) NLT 30 days prior to FCA CDR. Government will be allowed 15 30 days, after receipt from contractor, to review for approval/disapproval/comments. Contractor shall submit revised final SSS (Prime Item Requirements Specification) incorporating Government comments, if applicable, at FCA NLT 10 prior to CDR. | Final submittal at FCA enables incorporating any requirements changes that occur during detail design, code and checkout, and formal testing. | A051 will be updated in Amendment 2. Change CDR to FCA, but retain 30 days. | |
| 14 | CDRL | 98 | A077, Software Requirements Specification | Block 16 Remarks | A077, Software Requirements Specification BLOCKS 10, 11, 12 & 13: Contractor shall submit draft Software Requirements Specification (SRS) NLT 30 days prior to PDR. Government will be allowed 15 days, after receipt from contractor, to review for comments. Contractor shall submit revised draft SRS incorporating Government comments, if applicable, at NLT 30 days after PDR. Contractor shall submit final SRS NLT 30 days prior to FCA CDR. Government will be allowed 15 days, after receipt from contractor, to review for approval/disapproval/comments. Contractor shall submit revised final SRS incorporating Government comments, if applicable, at FCA CDR | Delivering the SRS on the same schedule as the SSS-PIRS provides a fully integrated requirements baseline. Final submittal at FCA enables incorporating any requirements changes that occur during detail design, code and checkout, and formal testing. | A077 will be updated in Amendment 2. Changed as recommended. | |
| 15 | CDRL | 103 | A082, Software Test Description | Block 16 Remarks | BLOCKS 10, 11, 12 & 13: Contractor shall submit draft Software Test Description (STD) NLT 30 days prior to CDR, Government will be allowed 15 days, after receipt from contractor, to review for comments. Contractor shall submit revised draft STD incorporating Government comments, if applicable, at CDR. Contractor shall submit updated STD 30 days prior to qualification TRR. Contractor shall submit final STD NLT 30 days after prior to FCA CDR. Government will be allowed 15 days, after receipt from contractor, to review for approval/disapproval/comments. Contractor shall submit revised final STD incorporating Government comments, if applicable, NLT 15 days after receipt from Government. | Final STD in the CDR timeframe would not include any corrections made during testing. Final submittal prior to FCA will be more complete and correct. | A082 will be updated in Amendment 2. Changed as recommended. | |
| 16 | CDRL | 104 | A083, Software Test Report (STR) | Block 16 Remarks | Contractor shall submit draft Software Test Report (STR) NLT 30 days prior to PDR. Government will be allowed 15 days, after receipt from contractor, to review for comments. Contractor shall submit revised draft STR incorporating Government comments, if applicable, at PDR. Contractor shall submit final STR NLT 30 days prior to CDR. FCA. Government will be allowed 15 days, after receipt from contractor, to review for comments. Contractor shall submit final STR incorporating Government comments, if applicable, at CDR. FCA. | STR cannot be generated until after software testing has been completed. | Will be correct in RFP Amendment 2 | |
| 17 | SELM/GMLEC SOO | 6 | 8 | A TMCR TM-86-01N needs to be included with the SELM SOO to define Technical Order (TO) requirements associated with the awardable task. The form 1423 for CDRL A113 within Attachment J03 states: BLOCKS 10, 11, 12 & 13: TMCR 86-01N will be delivered with each request for TOs, as requested by the Government. TMCR TM-86-01N will have specific instructions for each request. BLOCK 14: SEE TMCR TM-86-01N | Specific instructions referenced within CDRL A113 form 1423 covering TO development and delivery requirements for the awardable task were are not provided and are required to scope the effort. | This reference document will be added to the bidder’s library. | ||
| 18 | SELM/GMLEC SOO | 3 | 1.2.2.1.2 | There is no I clause for a warranty, Recommend delete this requirement. |
Each unit will have a 1 year warranty from the date that the SELM/GMLEC unit is delivered to HAFB Depot.
If not deleted, provide a warranty clause (52.246-19, Alt I) in Section "I".
| Consistency. A special warranty provision is in addition to the rights the Governent already has, e.g. protection from latent defects. Warranties have not been included on recent ICBM or other large missile contracts such as GMD. If the Government determines the additional warranty costs are worthwhile, then a warranty clause in Section "H" or "I" should be added to identify the period of time the Government has to identify any defects, the obligations of the parties, and the remedies available to the Government. | Requirement 1.2.2.1.2 will be deleted in SELM/GMLEC SOO in Amendment 2. | ||||||
| 19 | Software SOO | 5 | 6 Deliverables | A TMCR TM-86-01N needs to be included with the Software SOO to define Technical Order (TO) requirements associated with the awardable task. The form 1423 for CDRL A113 within Attachment J03 states: BLOCKS 10, 11, 12 & 13: TMCR 86-01N will be delivered with each request for TOs, as requested by the Government. TMCR TM-86-01N will have specific instructions for each request. BLOCK 14: SEE TMCR TM-86-01N | Specific instructions referenced within CDRL A113 form 1423 covering TO development and delivery requirements for the awardable task were not provided and are required to scope the effort. | This reference document will be added to the bidder’s library. | |
| 20 | Pricing Matrix | The Pricing Matrix for the 6 Month Option Amount identifies the Ordering Period as March 2020 - September 2020. This ordering period is 7 months in duration, not six. Please clarify the correct period for pricing. | Required to be compliant with pricing requirements. | The period of performance for Transition will be 6 months. Exact dates are dependent upon contract award date. | |||
| 21 | DD254 | Blocks 13 and 14 | DD254 blocks 13 and 14 reference Attachment 2. Attachment 1 provides Government approval signatures. Please provide Attachment 2 in a solicitation amendment. | Attachment 1 identifies additional security requirements that offerors may require to support their proposal. | Attachments 1 and 2 are embedded in the DD254 PDF file. | ||
| 22 | Ground GFP | Only the Ground-Mechanical GFP is identified. Please include the Ground-Electrical GFP list, including SACCS. | The Ground Electrical and SACCS GFP lists are missing. | The GFP spreadsheet was mislabled (Ground -Mech).The GFP list includes both Mechanical and Electrical GFP. The SACCS GFP has been added to the GFP list which will be provided in RFP amendment 2. SACCS GFP has also been added to Bidder's Library. | |||
| 23 | Section L | 31 | 7.3.4.5.3 | Strict compliance with this requirement would require bidders to submit thousands of pages of documents for every offeror, industry, commercial, tailored Government standards, specifications, processes, and/or practices deamed to be a possible compliance document. It is recommended that this requirement be revised as follows: "7.3.4.5.3 Applicable Documents" A list of Applicable Documents has been provided to the offerors as an annex to the PWS/SOO attachment in the solicitation. The offeror shall provide a list of any offeror, industry, commercial, and tailored Government standards, specifications, processes, and/or practices that the offeror considers to be compliance documents and that are needed to understand your proposal selected as compliance documents. The offeror shall also provide a list of all Government compliance documents intended to be used as compliance documents during the course of this contract. The offeror shall submit a list of these documents, including any tailoring instructions, as an annex to the proposed PWS. The offeror shall submit these the completed Proposed Compliance Documents as a separately bound document." | Re-worded to be consistent with the direction the PCO provided via email on December 23, 2013. | Will be correct in RFP Amendment 2 | |
| 24 | PWS | Appendix B | 1.5 | PWS Paragraph 1.5, Applicable Documents states “Applicable documents related to specifications, standards, handbooks, regulations, instructions, and applicable to the work required in the performance of this contract are listed in Appendix B: Applicable Documents. The documents in Appendix B form a part of this PWS to the extent specified. In the event of conflict between the document referenced and contents of this PWS, the PWS shall be considered a superseding requirement. If vendors are knowledgeable of critical documents or requirements not listed in this PWS, it is expected they inform the Government to ensure adequate coverage. The contractor shall comply with the current versions of applicable documents unless specifically exempted by the Government.” PWS, Appendix B, Applicable Documents, contains 123 different documents, but there no distinction between which documents are compliance vs. guidance vs. informational etc. In addition, there are other documents cited in the PWS that are not listed in Appendix B. For example, PWS paragraph 1.6.4.2.6.1 references AFI 21-302 and ICBMSD OI 23-01, which are not included in Appendix B. | 1. Please clarify Appendix B to inform offerors which documents are compliance and which are reference/guidance? 2. Please clarify how offerors handle regulations, instructions, manuals, etc. that are cited in the PWS but are not listed in Appendix B (e.g 1.6.4.2.6.1 and 1.6.4.2.6.3)? 3. Can the AF provide the latest version of the documents the offerors should use for compliance/reference? | 1. The PWS will be updated in Amendment 2 to specify which documents are compliance documents. 2. The PWS will be updated in Amendment 2 to include these documents. 3. Many of these documents (i.e., AFIs and DODIs) are available in the public domain. Any documents that are not available in the public domain have been posted in the Bidder’s Library. | |
| 25 | Section L | Paragraph 7.3.4.5.3 | Section L paragraph 7.3.4.5.3, Applicable Documents states “A list of Applicable Documents has been provided to the offerors as an annex to the PWS/SOO attachment in the solicitation. The offeror shall provide a list of any offeror, industry, commercial, and tailored Government standards, specifications, processes, and/or practices selected as compliance documents. The offeror shall also provide a list of all Government compliance documents intended to be used as compliance documents during the course of this contract. The offeror shall submit a list of these documents, including any tailoring instructions, as an annex to the proposed PWS. The offeror shall submit the completed Proposed Compliance Documents as a separately bound document.” | 1. Please clarify if the proposal shall include a list of Proposed Compliance Documents or complete copies of the Proposed Compliance Documents. 2. The second sentence in the above paragraph directs offerors to submit a list of any offeror, industry, commercial, and tailored Government standards, specifications, processes, and/or practices selected as compliance documents, and the third sentence directs offerors to submit a list of all Government compliance documents intended to be used as compliance documents during the course of this contract. Please clarify the difference between these two lists. |
| 1. The Section L language will be updated in Amendment 2. A list is required along with a separately bound document including the complete copies. 2. The Section L language will be updated in Amendment 2 to remove this duplication. | |||||
| 26 | PWS | 38 | 1.6.4.1.13.1.5, 1.6.4.1.13.1.6 | 1192 - 1206 | Request clarification on the contents of paragraph 1.6.4.1.13.1 for GMATS. The PWS currently reads as follows: 1.6.4.1.13.1.5 The contractor shall provide all maintenance for the GMATS equipment located at Hill AFB. Depot user sites are defined as follows: • Organic repair users |
• Technology Repair Center (TRC), Hill AFB UT
• Support users
• SMIC, Hill AFB UT
• Software Support Center (SSC), Hill AFB UT
• CLS Contract Users
1.6.4.1.13.1.6 The contractor shall provide all maintenance for the GMATS equipment located at the contract user sites. The contract user site is defined as follows: • Vandenberg AFB CA
• Hill AFB UT
• Malmstrom AFB MT
• Minot AFB ND
• FE Warren AFB WY The Wing Users are defined as follows: • Malmstrom AFB, WY
• Minot AFB, ND
• FE Warren AFB, WY
• 576th Vandenberg AFB, CA
• Offutt AFB, NE The Hill Users are defined as follows: • Depot repair users.
o Technology Repair Center (TRC) Hill AFB, UT
• Support users.
o Strategic Missile Integration Complex (SMIC) Hill AFB, UT o Software Support Center (SSC) Hill AFB, UT The CLS Contract Users are defined as follows: • 532nd Vandenberg AFB, CA
• Subcontractor at Hill AFB, UT
Suggested Resolution accepted. PWS updated (Pg 40-41). Will be correct in RFP Amendment 2
Sheet2
Sheet3
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .