QA_Revision 2 FINAL 22Nov2022.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 25 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Pocket - J CLS Support Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8574-22-R-0003
About this file
This document contains questions and responses related to a solicitation for Pocket-J CLS support services. The solicitation seeks proposals to provide program management, maintenance support including help desk, scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, repair of line replaceable units, travel, data deliverables, cybersecurity support, block cycle and software upgrades, and training for the Pocket-J system. Services will be acquired on a hybrid contract structure with both fixed price and cost reimbursement contract line items. The basic period of performance is five years through June 2028 with four separate ordering periods. This is a 100% small business set-aside solicitation conducted by the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center following FAR Part 15 procedures. The basis for award will be lowest price technically acceptable.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 37
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
RFP Questions-Responses
| AFLCMC/WNY PNT - WNKF | |||||
| Solicitation- FA8574-22-R-0003 | |||||
| Questions and Answers | |||||
| No. | Date | Reference | Vendor Question | Government Response | |
| 97 | 11/16/22 | PWS Par 4.7.2 still references the Major/Minor CLINS, will the Government be amending the PWS? | Please see amended PWS Paragraph 4.7.2. The Government response to Question # 67 is accurate, "The Government only has one Repair CLIN which is X005. There will not be a breakout between Major and Minor repairs." | ||
| 98 | 11/16/22 | The Government answer to question 32 on 9/20/2022 states that Non-CCI GFE is stored in a 24 X 24 ft space. Does the 576 sq ft warehouse storage space take into consideration of the height of the storage racks? | The 24 ft X 24 ft space is solely the floor space estimate. The estimated height of the storage racks is 15-20 ft. | ||
| 99 | 11/16/22 | In the Cross Reference Matrix, the last column refers to the IMP, implying the IMP needs to be drafted prior to contract award. Does the column in the Cross Reference Matrix need to be populated for inclusion into Volume one of the proposal? CDRL A00U does not have a date of first submission in block 12 or 16 of the DD Form 1423-1. Will the Government provide the first submission date for the IMP? | Please see amended Attachment 01 Cross Reference Matrix. The Government has removed the IMP column from this document. Please refer to the amended CDRL package for the updated CDRL A00U. | ||
| 100 | 11/16/22 | PWS 6.14, 6.15.1 States the security level for this effort will range from CUI to potentially TOP SECRET. Does the Government expect Pocket J to become TOP SECRET? The PJ DD254 identifies SECRET only and different personnel and facilities may be required to work with and host TOP SECRET data. Request the PWS be updated to replace TOP SECRET with SECRET or provide an updated DD254 identifying TOP SECRET. | Please refer to the amended PWS Paragraphs 6.14, and 6.15.1. Pocket J will remain SECRET. | ||
| 101 | 11/16/22 | PWS 6.14.2 States the Contractor shall develop and implement Anti-Tamper (AT) protection measures to protect (by deterring, preventing, and/or reacting to anti-tamper attacks) the Government approved, Critical Program Information (CPI) per the DoD CPI Horizontal Protection Guidance (HPG), Anti-Tamper Technical Implementation Guide (TIG), and Anti-Tamper Desk Reference, and document in an AT Plan formatted IAW DoD ATEA Annex: Anti-Tamper Plan Template. Will the 16.14.2 effort will be completed under a separate delivery order as PWS information is not sufficient to provide a fixed cost against. One of the actions in 14.2 is to participate in a SSWG meeting to identify what is CPI in PJ and to determine what will be protected. An AT strategy cannot be developed until we determine with the Government what CPI is for the PJ program. | Please refer to the amended PWS. PWS paragraph 6.14.2 Critical Program Information (CPI) / Anti-Tamper (AT) has been removed from the PWS and will be addressed under a separate task order. | ||
| 102 | 11/16/22 | PWS 6.6.1 States the contractor shall conduct Assured Compliance Assessment Solution (ACAS) and Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP) security scans on all scannable system components monthly. Is the network bandwidth able to support ACAS and SCAP scans? | Yes, software scans can be done on the software in the lab and not required on each individual system | ||
| 103 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 3. | The Subcontractor will directly submit their cost proposal to the Government via PIEEE. The Prime Contractor’s Attachment 3, Tab “Major Subk Burdened Rates”, will not be filled. Please confirm that this is correct. | Please refer to the revised Attachment 09, Section L, paragraph D.4.b. "...Prime Offerors shall also fill in the "Prime CLIN X007, X008 and CLIN X010 CPFF Rates" worksheet with its own rates, as well as a separate "Major Sub CLIN X007, X008 and CLIN X010 CPFF Rates" worksheet for each major subcontractor." | |
| 104 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 8. PWS 4.3.6 Transition Plan, Phase in | What is the duration of Transition-in. PWS 4.3.6 does not specify the number of transition days for the incoming contractor. Do we assume 60 days? | Please refer to the Government response to Question # 29 - Please refer to PWS Paragraph 4.3.6, "The Contractor shall provide a comprehensive transition plan to the PMO with-in 15 calendar days of contract award using best commercial practice such as Microsoft Project or equivalent" | |
| 105 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 8. PWS 10.0. Interoperability Systems Management and Requirements Transformation (I-Smart) and Enhanced I-Smart (E-Smart) | To what CLIN should the costs associated with completing PWS 10.0 be included? | Costs related PWS paragraph 10.0 will be associated with CLIN X001 - Program Management. | |
| 106 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 9. L-900. Instructions to Offerors (page 2). A. (2). | Can tables be developed using font size of 8? | Please refer to the Government Response to Question # 30 - Please refer to Attachment 9, L-900. Instructions to Offerors, Page 2, Paragraph A. Section (2). | |
| 107 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 9. Section B. Cross Reference Matrix | To complete the CRM, please confirm that the Government intends for offeror to develop and submit an IMP as part of the proposal submission? If so, please specify the contents that the Government expects in the IMP. | Please see amended Attachment 01 Cross Reference Matrix. The Government has removed the IMP column from this document. | |
| 108 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 9. | |||
| L-900. Instructions To Offerors (page 9-10) Volume IV -Past Performance | Even if the offeror has relevant past performance, will the offeror be compliant and be evaluated “neutral” if the offeror chose not to submit a past performance? | Please refer to the Government's response to Question # 37 - Reference RFP Amendment 2, Attachment 9, Section M-900, paragraph 2, subsection c. Past Performance. | |||
| 109 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 9. Subfactor One: Technical Requirements | For Subfactor One a), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 4.3.5. |
For Subfactor One b), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 4.5.1.
For Subfactor One c), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 4.5.2.
For Subfactor One d), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 4.5.3.
For Subfactor One e), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 4.7.
| For Subfactor One f), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 4.10. | Please refer to Section M-900 Evaluation Basis for Award, Section 2 - Evaluation Factors and Subfactors: "Each offeror’s written proposal shall be evaluated, based on the factors below, to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the PWS, and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. The technical proposal addresses each of the following subfactors in sufficient detail." Offerors shall be responsive to all the terms and conditions of the RFP. | |||
| 110 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 9. Subfactor Two: Cybersecurity Requirements | For Subfactor Two a), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 6.1. |
For Subfactor Two b), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 6.7.
For Subfactor Two c), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 6.13.
For Subfactor Two d), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 6.13.2.
| For Subfactor Two e), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 6.14. | Please refer to Section M-900 Evaluation Basis for Award, Section 2 - Evaluation Factors and Subfactors: "Each offeror’s written proposal shall be evaluated, based on the factors below, to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the PWS, and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. The technical proposal addresses each of the following subfactors in sufficient detail." Offerors shall be responsive to all the terms and conditions of the RFP. | |||
| 111 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 9. Block Cycle Upgrade Requirements | For Subfactor Three a), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 8.1. |
For Subfactor Three b), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 8.1.3.
For Subfactor Three c), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 8.1.6.
| For Subfactor Three d), please confirm that the Offeror is only to address PWS 8.1.8. | Please refer to Section M-900 Evaluation Basis for Award, Section 2 - Evaluation Factors and Subfactors: "Each offeror’s written proposal shall be evaluated, based on the factors below, to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the PWS, and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. The technical proposal addresses each of the following subfactors in sufficient detail." Offerors shall be responsive to all the terms and conditions of the RFP. | |||
| 112 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 10. | How does the Government define CCI? We don’t understand how the CCI can fit the allocated 5 ft x 5 ft space. For example, | |
| - | PRC-117F- Radio. Size is 3.2”H x 10.5” wide x 9.6” deep and weighs about 10lbs without batteries, 16lbs with batteries. There are 24 of these on the list. What makes it CCI is the face plate which is removable. So does the Government only consider the faceplate (instead of the whole radio) as CCI? | |||
| - | KG 250s- 5” x 2” x 9”, 3lbs- There are 23 of these. | The Government is increasing the estimate for CCI to be 12 ft x 12 ft. While the PRC117Fs are currently on the GFP inventory sheet, they are no longer a part of the Pocket J system and are expected to be turned into supply before the follow-on contract awards. This response will therefore affect the Government's initial response to Question # 32 & Question # 96. The amended response is as follows: "Attachment 10 represents the contract's complete spares inventory. CCI (Cryptographic Controlled Item) GFE will fit in an approximate 12 ft x 12 ft space. Non-CCI GFE is stored in an approximate 24 ft x 24 ft space. The lab space is also estimated to need a 24 ft x 24 ft space." | ||
| 113 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 10. | Please confirm that the Pocket J contract does NOT require storage of classified equipment. |
| If there are classified equipment, please specify storage space required. | The SKL once keyed with crypto test key may be classified and any subsequent keyed radio would be too. The lab space is estimated to need a 24 ft x 24 ft space. | |||
| 114 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 16. | Please confirm that the Attachment 16 maintenance tickets are tickets resulting from help desk calls, unscheduled maintenance, and scheduled maintenance during the last 12 months—and does not reflect any hardware repair. |
| During scheduled/unscheduled maintenance, in the event that a repair is required, the repair, overhaul, restoration, and inspection are executed under a separate CLIN (TT&E). Please confirm. | Attachment 16 are all maintenance tickets resulting from help desk calls which encompasses both unscheduled and scheduled maintenance issues during the last 12 months. Some of these tickets require repairs to the hardware but not all instances require hardware repair. | |||
| 115 | 11/16/22 | Q&A 6 and Q&A 92 | There is an inconsistency between Q&A 6 (allowing Contractors to locate anywhere) and Q&A 92 (requiring Contractors to use Georgia WD thereby locating facility in GA). |
| Would the Government confirm that the Contractor can use the WD for the location of the facility that the Contractor selected? | The Government response to the original Q&A # 6 stands as follows "The USG is not able to share incumbent contractor's FTE information as doing so may constitute disclosure of contractor proprietary data. The USG will not dictate FTEs home location." The following changes are provided to clarify the Government's requirement: Amendment 3 to RFP FA8574-22-R-0003 is issued to remove the Georgia Wage Determination and remove FAR Clause 52.222-46, Evaluation Compensation for Professional Employees. | |||
| 116 | 11/16/22 | When does the Government plan to provide responses to the questions? Several of these questions have impact on the offeror’s solution and pricing. | The Government plans to post the responses to SAM.gov by 1700 est on 22 Nov 2022 | |
| 117 | 10/21/22 | RFP ATTACH01 Cross Reference Matrix includes a column for IMP, which is only discussed in PWS 8.1.1 Without a BCU Task Description and approved BCU change request, what is the Government requiring or expecting in this column? | Please see amended Attachment 01 Cross Reference Matrix. The Government has removed the IMP column from this document. | |
| 118 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 1 - Cross Reference Matrix: In various line in the "PWS" Column, there are multiple Paragraph references. Similarly, in the "CLIN" Colum, there are multiple CLINs. What is the Government's intent for allocating the requirements in the Paragraph references to the CLIN (i.e. is there a correlation between the Paragraphs reference and the CLINs referenced or are all Paragraphs allocated to all CLINs in a given line)? | The Cross-Reference Matrix is set up to show the offerors the respective location where the specfic CDRL can be addressed throughout the acquisition documents. For example, the first line shows CDRL A001 refers to PWS paragraph 4.3.2 and CLIN X001. | |
| 119 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 1 - Cross Reference Matrix and Attachment 9 - Section LM: |
1) In several cases, Attachment 1 indicates that a PWS paragrah is part of the Subfactor evaluation (i.e. Pars 4.2.2; 4.3.2; 4.4; 4.5; 4.6; 4.7.2; 4.7.2.6; 4.8.1; 4.11; 6.2; 6.6; 6.10; 6.11; 7.1.1; 8.1.10.1; 8.1.10.2) yet, that paragrah is not cited in Attachment 9 (both L&M).
| 2) Also, there are several cases where Attachmen 9 (both L & M) indicates a requirement is part of a Subfactor evaluation but, it is not listed in Attachment 1 (i.e. Pars 4.5.2; 4.5.3; 6.7; 6.13.2; 6.14; 8.1.3; and 8.1.8) | Please refer to Attachment 1 - Cross Reference Matrix: "If the matrix conflicts with any other requirement, direction, or provision of this solicitation, the other reference shall take precedence over the matrix. Section M-900 references in the matrix are for informational purposes only, and the Government shall be obligated to evaluate proposals solely in conformance with Section M-900 of the solicitation." The Cross-Reference Matrix is set up to show the offerors the respective location where the specfic CDRL can be addressed throughout the acquisition documents. For example, the first line shows CDRL A001 refers to PWS paragraph 4.3.2 and CLIN X001. Please refer to Section M-900 Evaluation Basis for Award, Section 2 - Evaluation Factors and Subfactors: "Each offeror’s written proposal shall be evaluated, based on the factors below, to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the PWS, and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. The technical proposal addresses each of the following subfactors in sufficient detail." Offerors shall be responsive to all the terms and conditions of the RFP. | |||
| 120 | 11/16/22 | Given Attachment 1 states "…if the matrix conflicts with any other requirement, direction, or provision of this solicitation, the other reference shall take precedence over the matrix. Section M-900 references in the matrix are for informational purposes only, and the Government shall be obligated to evaluate proposals solely in conformance with Section M-900 of the solicitation...", 1) Is it correct to interpret that the requirements of Section M-900 shall take precedence? 2) What is the Government's direction to the contractors in dealing with these descrepancies when filling out Attachment 1? | Please refer to Attachment 1 - Cross Reference Matrix: "If the matrix conflicts with any other requirement, direction, or provision of this solicitation, the other reference shall take precedence over the matrix. Section M-900 references in the matrix are for informational purposes only, and the Government shall be obligated to evaluate proposals solely in conformance with Section M-900 of the solicitation." The Cross-Reference Matrix is set up to show the offerors the respective location where the specfic CDRL can be addressed throughout the acquisition documents. For example, the first line shows CDRL A001 refers to PWS paragraph 4.3.2 and CLIN X001. Please refer to Section M-900 Evaluation Basis for Award, Section 2 - Evaluation Factors and Subfactors: "Each offeror’s written proposal shall be evaluated, based on the factors below, to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the PWS, and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. The technical proposal addresses each of the following subfactors in sufficient detail." Offerors shall be responsive to all the terms and conditions of the RFP. | |
| 121 | 10/21/22 | Does the Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Form go in Volume 1, as indivcated by the Table in L-900 paragraph A, or Volume IV, as indicated in L-900 paragraph E.f.? | Please refer to the amended Attachment 09_SectionL&M. The Subcontractor/Teaming Partner consent Form should be submitted in Volume IV per Section L, Section E, paragraph f. | |
| 122 | 11/16/22 | Can past performance be used for Subcontractors with signed Teamed Agreements? | Please see Section L Paragraph E. Section c. | |
| 123 | 11/16/22 | Attachment 9 - Section LM: There are cases where a major Paragraph (e.g. 4.7; 8.1; 6.13; 6.14) is identified as Subfactor evaluation item in Attachment 9 (both L&M). In some cases, subparagraphs are also cited (i.e. 8.1.3; 8.1.6; 8.1.8) but in other cases subparagraphs are not cited. Are all subparagrahs under a cited major paragragh a part of the Subfactor evaluation or is it only the specific paragraphs cited in Attachment 9 (Section M) that is a part of the Subfactor evaluation? | Please refer to Section M-900 Evaluation Basis for Award, Section 2 - Evaluation Factors and Subfactors: "Each offeror’s written proposal shall be evaluated, based on the factors below, to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the PWS, and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. The technical proposal addresses each of the following subfactors in sufficient detail." Offerors shall be responsive to all the terms and conditions of the RFP. The Government will be evaluating the specific PWS paragraph references called out in Attachment 09. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .