QA_Solicitation FA8574-22-R-0003_10Nov2022.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 49 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Pocket - J CLS Support
- Solicitation number
- FA8574-22-R-0003
About this file
This solicitation requests proposals to provide sustainment services for the Pocket J System. Key details include the services required such as program management, maintenance support including a help desk, scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, repair of line replaceable units, completion of block cycle and software upgrades, and training. The contract structure will include firm fixed price, cost plus fixed fee, and cost reimbursable contract line items. The period of performance encompasses a basic period and four option periods through June 2028. This competitive small business set-aside will utilize lowest price technically acceptable procedures and be awarded by the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center to provide sustainment for the Pocket J program.
View the file
Other files
Show all 37
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- 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 | |
| 1 | 9/9/22 | Is there a suspense for potential offers to submit questions to you or your representative related to the Pocket J solicitation? | RFP Questions may be submitted through 1700 EST, 16 Oct 2022. | ||
| 2 | 9/18/22 | We have questions to submit on Solicitation Number FA8574-22-R-0003. I do not see a place in the RFP that states how questions should be submitted and when is the due date for submission. Do we email those directly to you or is there another method for submission? | RFP Questions may be emailed to jacqueline.threat-williams.1@us.af.mil and kevin.hinman.2@us.af.mil. RFP Questions may be submitted through 1700 EST, 16 Oct 2022. | ||
| 3 | 9/13/22 | Will the Government have an Industry Day? | No. | ||
| 4 | 9/13/22 | In order to bid the Block Cycle Upgrade CLIN please provide a Task Description and the current deployed state of all sites (i.e. a TDP). | Please refer to RFP, Section M, Subfactor 3, Block Cycle Upgrade. to instruction on Volume III Cost Price Proposal Spreadsheet. Task order's will be negotiated for hours to accomplish the task and shall utilize the negotiated labor rates from the basic contract. | ||
| 5 | 9/13/22 | In order to bid the Repair Cost CLINs please provide historical failures of each LRU and their predicted Reliability. | The Pocket J systems don't currently have any high failure LRUs. The only LRU that has had a high failure rate was the GPS Antenna and those are expected to be replaced with a reliable GPS Antenna during the current PoP. | ||
| 6 | 9/13/22 | Will you provide historical information such as the number of FTEs on the current contract? Do you intend to provide/dictate locations for FTEs? | 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. | ||
| 7 | 9/13/22 | Will teleworking be allowed? | Company decision, the Government will not dictate one way or another. | ||
| 8 | 9/13/22 | Re: PWS 4.2.i Product Engineering Design Data and Associated Lists, will we get a copy of the existing documents? | No. The Provisioning - Logistics Product Data shall be generated by the successful contract awardee of this instant acquisition. | ||
| 9 | 9/13/22 | Re: PWS 4.2.j Provisioning - Logistics Product Data, will we get a copy of the existing documents? | The Government hasn’t done a full provisioning recently so we don't have a current PPL (Provisioning Parts List). Therefore, the Government will not be providing the IPB (Illustrated Parts Breakdown). | ||
| 10 | 9/13/22 | Re: PWS 4.6.1 KG-250X Integration, is this to be bid or is it a future ECP? We would need a TDP and existing deployment configurations to bid. Also, what Govt testing is required? | PWS pararaph 4.6.1 KG-250X Integration will be an ECP shortly after contract award. | ||
| 11 | 9/13/22 | Re: PWS 4.7.2.6 Final Acceptance Testing, will we get a copy of the existing documents? | No. The current Final Acceptance Testing is Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI.) However, the Awardee shall be provided a copy of the previous Acceptance, but Awardee shall be required to create their own Final Acceptance Testing, IAW PWS 4.7.2.6. | ||
| 12 | 9/13/22 | Re: PWS 8.0 Block Cycle Upgrade / Tech Refresh Work Requirements and all subsections, we will need a task description and TDP to accurately bid. Will those documents be forthcoming? | Software changes are addresed under CLIN X007-BLOCK CYCLE UPGRADES. Offerors shall propose on the Cost Price Proposal Spreadsheet, ATTACHMENT 3. | ||
| 13 | 9/13/22 | Re: PWS 9.0 User Familiarization Training, will we get a copy of the existing documents? | The winning offeror will receive any existing training material at the time of contracct award. | ||
| 14 | 9/13/22 | Is there an existing SSP / ATO for the system? | Yes, the Pocket J System has achieved and maintains the ATO. The Pocket J system currently has an ATO that expires on 20 Oct 2023. | ||
| 15 | 9/13/22 | What Continuous Monitoring / SIEM capabilities exist currently? | No SIEM/Continuous Monitoring capabilities currently exist other than what is being monitored by REMS. | ||
| 16 | 9/13/22 | What is the historical rate of Unscheduled Maintenance trips? | PMO will provide Attachment 16 which will show the last 12 months of maintenance tickets. The PMO is not able to provide repair actions since the Government does not own that data. The RFP will be amended to include maintenance location history for scope definition. (SEE ATTACHMENT 16 TO THE RFP AMENDMENT 2 | ||
| 17 | 9/13/22 | Paragraph 2.c. of Section M states: “…While the evaluation of an offeror’s past performance will consider performance managed by the offeror but performed by another team member on that effort, past performance information for subcontractors, vendors, or suppliers proposed for this effort will not be considered separately…” Because Past Performance is both an indicator of future performance as well as a potential indicator of cost realism and future risk, does it not make sense for the Government to require the Past Performance of both the Prime and its major Subcontractor(s)? Given this is a Small Business Set Aside where there is a high likelihood that non-small business subcontractors will play a significant role in the success of the program, would it not serve the Government’s interests to understand the total Past Performance of each Small Businesses team as opposed to only the lead organization? | Please see Section L Paragraph E. Section c. | ||
| 18 | 9/13/22 | Re: Attachment 09 Pg 5 Section 4b, Instructions request Major Subcontractor Rates entered on the provided spreadsheets that also require elemental indirect and escalation. Indirect rate information is proprietary information, as such can Major Subcontractors provide fully burdened rates to Prime and provide indirect data in separate correspondence during submission. As this is a total small business set aside, please confirm that under “48 CFR § 9903.201-1 - CAS applicability” this contract is exempt from CAS? | Reference updated verbiage in RFP Amendment 2, Attachment 9, L&M Section D, paragraph 4, Cost/Price Proposal Spreadsheet Instructions, subsection b. This acquisition has been set aside for Small Business and is therefore exempt from CAS. | ||
| 19 | 9/20/22 | Which CLIN should the offeror incorporate the transition costs? | Transition Plan, Phase In Costs shall be proposed in CLIN 0001 IAW the RFP | ||
| 20 | 9/20/22 | Which CLIN should the offeror incorporate the buildout of facility and operational costs for the facility (e.g., lease, maintenance)? | Transition Plan, Phase In Costs shall be proposed in CLIN 0001 IAW the RFP | ||
| 21 | 9/20/22 | Please confirm the link provided: http://www.ismart.us. We are unable to locate the site. | Please reference amended PWS paragraph 10.1. The i-SMART process is now available via the following web site: ACC/A5JI eSMART Support Site - Home (intelink.gov) | ||
| 22 | 7/12/22 | Appendices D, E, F, and G list the spares, tools, consumables, LRUs, and software applications. Under the CLS contract, if the Government is not provisioning the GFEs, we request updated lists and historical records of usage (consumption) and on-hand inventory (stock level of parts) to effectively price | The Government Furnished Property (GFP) list attached to the solicitation is the only GFP to be provided. The GFP list attached to the solicitation is recent (as of March 2022). All offerors will propose to the GFP list that was included on with the solicitation. | ||
| 23 | 7/12/22 | Does the Government intend for the CLS contractor to use Government-owned Warehouse Management System (WMS) or use the contractor’s system? | The Government does not have, nor will direct the use of, a specific Warehouse Management System. | ||
| 24 | 7/12/22 | Can the Government provide logs of reported maintenance issues and repair actions from start to finish? | PMO will provide Attachment 16 which will show the last 12 months of maintenance tickets. The PMO is not able to provide repair actions since the Government does not own that data. The RFP will be amended to include maintenance location history for scope definition. (SEE ATTACHMENT 16 TO THE RFP AMENDMENT 2) | ||
| 25 | 7/12/22 | Can the Government provide workload data or the current level of effort (LOE) for the maintenance work being performed (i.e., help desk, scheduled/unscheduled maintenance)? Without this information, only the incumbent would be able to propose a staffing complement that satisfies the requirements of the PWS, thus eliminating other competition. | PMO will provide Attachment 16 which will show the last 12 months of maintenance tickets. The PMO is not able to provide repair actions since the Government does not own that data. The RFP will be amended to include maintenance location history for scope definition. (SEE ATTACHMENT 16 TO THE RFP AMENDMENT 2) | ||
| 26 | 7/12/22 | What is the schedule for software updates and patches (e.g., quarterly)? In a year, how many software builds (in response to trouble reports/urgent needs) are completed outside of the routine software updates/patch schedule? What is the delivery method for software updates/patches (e.g., CDs/DVDs)? | In regards to the schedule for software updates and patches, please refer to the PWS Revision 1, paragraph 6.13.1 - Remote Software and Configuration Updates. In regards to outside of the routine software updates/patch schedule, please refer to PWS Revision 1, paragraph 6.7 Out-of-Cycle Security Patching/Mitigation. In regards to the delivery method for software updates/patches, please refer to PWS paragraph 8.1.8.1 Computer Software Configuration Items (CSCIs). | ||
| 27 | 7/12/22 | Given the unpredictability of trouble report fixes, software changes, and security-related updates, we recommend the cost-plus pricing model to allow for flexibility and cost transparency demanded in software development and integration type of work | PMO will provide Attachment 16 which will show the last 12 months of maintenance tickets. The PMO is not able to provide repair actions since the Government does not own that data. The RFP will be amended to include maintenance location history for scope definition. (SEE ATTACHMENT 16 TO THE RFP AMENDMENT 2). Software changes are addressed under CLIN X007-BLOCK CYCLE UPGRADES. Offerors shall propose on the Cost Price Proposal Spreadsheet, Attachment 3. Security-Related updates are addressed under CLIN X006-CYBERSECURITY. | ||
| 28 | 7/12/22 | Can the Government provide workload data or the current level of effort (LOE) for the software sustainment work being performed (i.e., development, testing, integration)? Without this information, only the incumbent would be able to propose a staffing complement that satisfies the requirements of the PWS, thus eliminating other competition. | Please refer to Revision 1 of the PWS paragraph 6.13.1 Remote Software and Configuration Updates to determine the patching schedule. | ||
| 29 | 9/20/22 | PWS 4.3.6 Transition Plan, Phase in | What is the duration of Transition – 60 days? | Please refer to PWS Paragraph 4.3.6 and 4.3.7 | |
| 30 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 9. L-900. Instructions to Offerors (page 2). A. (2). | Can charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, and supporting illustrations be developed using font size of 8? | Please refer to Attachment 9, L-900. Instructions to Offerors, Page 2, Paragraph A. Section (2). | |
| 31 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 9. L-900. Instructions to Offerors (page 6). D. Volume III - Cost Price Proposal. 3. Rounding a. FFP CLINs X001- CLINs X007, and CLINs X009; Offerors shall propose a firm-fixed unit price for all CLINs. | CLIN 0002 Maintenance Support, the solicitation does not provide (1) historical data on maintenance issues and repair actions to effectively determine the optimal qualification and number of resources for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance; (2) annual maintenance totals to include number of help desk calls, trouble tickets, repair action, LRUs, location, and response/repair time to effectively determine the optimal qualification and number of resources for help desk support; and (3) shipping costs (to ship out/return spares and failed equipment). | PMO will provide Attachment 16 which will show the last 12 months of maintenance tickets. The PMO is not able to provide repair actions since the Government does not own that data. The RFP will be amended to include maintenance location history for scope definition. (SEE ATTACHMENT 16 TO THE RFP AMENDMENT 2) | |
| 32 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 9. L-900 Instructions to Offerors (page 6). D. Volume III - Cost Price Proposal. 3. Rounding. A. FFP CLINs X001-CLINs X007, and CLINs X009: Offerors shall propose a firm-fixed unit price for all CLINs. | CLIN 0003 GFE/GFP Management, the solicitation does not provide data (e.g., spares inventory, laboratory space, etc.) to determine the storage space requirement for the facility. Does Attachment 10 represent the contract’s complete spares inventory (type and quantity)? How much space do RE and FE Pocket J systems occupy when completely disassembled? | Attachment 10 represents the contract's complete spares inventory. CCI (Cryptographic Controlled Item) GFE will fit in an approximate 5 ft x 5 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. | |
| 33 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 9. L-900 Instructions to Offerors (page 6). D. Volume III - Cost Price Proposal. 3. Rounding. A. FFP CLINs X001-CLINs X007, and CLINs X009: Offerors shall propose a firm-fixed unit price for all CLINs. | CLIN 0004 Teardown, Test, and Evaluation, the solicitation does not provide historical information on how long it takes to teardown, test, and evaluate RE and FE Pocket J systems | Government does not know amount of time it takes to teardown, test, and evaluate RE and FE Pocket J Systems. | |
| 34 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 9. L-900 Instructions to Offerors (page 6). D. Volume III - Cost Price Proposal. 3. Rounding. A. FFP CLINs X001-CLINs X007, and CLINs X009: Offerors shall propose a firm-fixed unit price for all CLINs. | CLIN 0005 Repair, the solicitation does not provide historical information on how long it takes to repair RE and FE Pocket J system | Government does not know amount of time it takes to teardown, test, and evaluate RE and FE Pocket J Systems. | |
| 35 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 9. L-900. Instructions to offerors (page 6). D. Volume III - Cost Price Proposal. 3. Rounding a. FFP CLINs X001- CLINs X007, and CLINs X009; Offerors shall propose a firm-fixed unit price for all CLINs. | Work on CLINs 0006 and 0007 involve indeterminate factors (and yet-to-be defined solutions) that do not allow firm fixed pricing. Both CLINs involve ad hoc changes and IAVMs that introduce contingencies that are unplanned because of their variability in complexity and scope. For example, we cannot anticipate how much glue-ware (e.g., scripting) needs to be done until we start integration. For the testing activities, we don’t know how long to plan for Government’s approval time and we don’t know if there may be actions needed to resolve a defect or troubleshoot a problem.We use CPFF on our CLS work with the USAF and the Navy, allowing our clients to respond to constantly changing requirements. | CLIN X006 is Firm Fixed Price. RFP Amendment 02 has changed CLIN X007 to Cost Plus Fixed Fee. | |
| 36 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 9. L-900. Instructions to Offerors (page 6-7). D. Volume III - Cost Price Proposal. 3. Rounding b. CPFF CLINs X008 and X010. 5. FPRR/FPRA e. All information submitted in support of items a. - c. | Given that indirect rates are proprietary data, we recommend that subcontractors submit the (1) cost breakout in the “Major Sub CLIN X008 and CLIN X010 CPFF Rates” worksheet, and (2) cost and pricing data with accompanying narratives directly to the Government. If allowed, please provide specific instructions as to how subcontractors can submit this information. | Subcontractors shall submit their cost information through PIEE utilizing the instructions defined in Section L paragraph A. Subcontractors shall be required to follow all deadlines outlined in the RFP. | |
| 37 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 9. | |||
| L-900. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS (page 9-10) Volume IV -Past Performance | We have relevant past performance. We elect not to submit a past performance. In this situation, please confirm that our Past Performance is rated “neutral”. | Reference RFP Amendment 2, Attachment 9, Section M-900, paragraph 2, subsection c. Past Performance. | |||
| 38 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 9. L-900. Instructions to Offerors (page 11) | Instructions for Subfactors 1, 2, 3 provided specific PWS for offerors to address. Please confirm that offerors are not required to address PWS sections that are not listed in the Sections L and M, Subfactors 1, 2, 3 | Offerors shall be responsive to all the terms and conditions of the RFP. | |
| 39 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 9. M-900. Evaluation Basis for Award (page 13), Subfactor Two: Cybersecurity Requirements | Please confirm that the Pocket J System has achieved and maintains the ATO | Yes, the Pocket J System has achieved and maintains the ATO. The Pocket J system currently has an ATO that expires on 20 Oct 2023. | |
| 40 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 9. M-900. Evaluation Basis for Award (page 15), | |||
| c. Past Performance | This section is cut off. Can the Government provide the remaining sections? | This section was inadvertently cut off during forms upload. Amendment 2 to the RFP will update as follows: ( IN THE CONTEXT OF ACCEPTABILITY/UNACCEPTABILITY, A NEUTRAL RATING SHALL BE CONSIDERED "ACCEPTABLE.") | |||
| 41 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 1 | |||
| Cross Reference Matrix | Last column (right side), please define “IMP”. | Please refer to the amended Attachment 01 Cross Reference Matrix to view the definition of "IMP" - Integrated Management / Maintenance Plan. This is essentially the contractor’s plans of how they are going to put together the schedule. | |||
| 42 | 9/20/22 | Attachment 14 Transportation Requirements | Did the Government intend to attach a different form? | Yes. The correct form (DD 1653, Transportation ) Attahment 14 will be included with Amendment 2 to the RFP. | |
| 43 | 9/27/22 | Attachment 8 PWS PocketJ_08042022_Rev00 |
| 6.0 Cybersecurity | To develop a FFP for CLIN 0006 Cybersecurity, please provide the required data: | ||
| • | Has Pocket J system obtained ATO/ATC? If yes, is this type authorization? | ||
| • | If not, please provide the number of systems that require RMF package creation; and the number of systems that require ATO maintenance. | ||
| • | What is the Government’s schedule (frequency) for conducting security control assessments in a given year. | ||
| • | What tasks are associated with the “support to the Pocket J ISSM”. What is the Government expecting? | Yes. Pocket J has a valid ATO Authorization that is current through 20 Oct 2023. Please refer to the amended PWS paragraph 6.2 Cybersecurity Vulnerability Management for the remainder of the questions. | |
| 44 | 9/27/22 | Attachment 8 PWS PocketJ_08042022_Rev00 |
| 6.11.1 | The software applications in the Pocket J system have been approved by DoD. In a CLS contract, we understand block cycle upgrades, technical refresh, software updates, and patching to involve scripting to install patches and software builds to existing DOD approved COTs and GOTs products—not software coding. Please detail tasks that involve software coding? | Software Coding may be required to support a Block Cycle Upgrade. REMS is the only software program the offeror would need to update per the task description and the Software Source Code will be provided by the government. | |
| 45 | 9/27/22 | Attachment 9. | |
| L-900. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS (page 5) | PWS 8.1.8 Software Maintenance and Updates is a subsection of PWS 8.1 BCU/Tech Refresh/Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) Requirements. |
| What does the Government want offerors to address in “PWS 8.1.8 Software Maintenance and Updates” that is already covered in responding to PWS 8.1? The approach discussed in PWS 8.1 already covers those in PWS 8.1.8. | Please refer to Revision 1 of the PWS, paragraph 8.1.8, items 1 through 5. | ||||
| 46 | 10/3/22 | RFP 252.215-7009; ATTACH09_SectionLM_FINAL Proposal Adequacy Checklist Item 2. Cost or Pricing Data Requirements | |||
| In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), data other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support a determination of price reasonableness. | Since Cost or Pricing data is not required for the proposal, do prime contractors still need to complete the Proposal Adequacy Checklist? Are subcontractors also required to complete and submit the checklist? | Yes, the proposal adequacy checklist is required. Respective offerors shall place N/A on items of the checklist that do not apply to this acquisition. | |||
| 47 | 10/3/22 | ATTACH03_Cost Price Proposal Spreadsheet_FINAL_8Aug2022 Tab: Labor Cat & Rate Description, Labor Category: Engineer, Electrical/ Electronics, Software Education: Bachelor of Science in Electrical/Electronics Engineering. | Software Engineers are not generally graduates of BS in Electrical/ Electronics Engineering. Many complete BS degrees in Computer Science, Computer Engineering, Software Engineering, or in computer-focused or technical bachelor’s degrees. We suggest that the Government expand the fields of studies to reflect the market. | Please refer to the RFP Amendment 2, Attachment 3, Cost Price Proposal Spreadsheet amending relevant labor categories. | |
| 48 | 10/3/22 | ATTACH08 PWS PocketJ_08042022_Rev00 4.4 Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) Management | What warehousing management system will the contractor be using? Is this provided by the Government? | The Government does not have a specific Warehouse Management System. | |
| 49 | 10/3/22 | ATTACH08 PWS PocketJ_08042022_Rev00 4.5.1 Help Desk | How large is the code base (e.g., 1 million lines of code)? What languages is it coded in? What is the current repository (e.g., GitHub) of the data and codes? | REMS (Remote Equipment Management System) code base is estimated to include approximately 10,000 lines of code. The language of the code is C#. The current repository of the data and codes is in GitHub. | |
| 50 | 10/3/22 | ATTACH08 PWS PocketJ_08042022_Rev00 8.1.8 Software Maintenance and Updates | What ticketing system will the contractor be using? Is this provided by the Government? | No, the Government does not have a ticketing system regarding maintenance/help desk calls. | |
| 51 | 10/3/22 | ATTACH09_SectionLM_FINAL Volume I, Format: Microsoft Word | We request the Government allow offerors to submit the following in PDF: Cover Letter with signature, Completed RFP, Attachment 15 with signature | Please submit the requested documents as defined in Section L. | |
| 52 | 10/3/22 | ATTACH09_SectionLM_FINAL Paragraph A. Completed RFP (excluding Section B of the Schedule) | Please confirm if the Government wants RFP Section B to be filled with proposed prices or not. | Per the Section L, Section B of the Schedule is not required to be completed due to pricing information is requested on Attachment 03 - Cost Price Proposal Spreadsheet | |
| 53 | 10/3/22 | ATTACH09_SectionLM_FINAL Paragraph 5. FPRR/FPRA section e. | Please provide detailed instruction as to how major subcontractors submit their cost information directly to the Government. | Subcontractors shall submit their cost information through PIEE utilizing the instructions defined in Section L paragraph A. Subcontractors shall be required to follow all deadlines outlined in the RFP. | |
| 54 | 10/3/22 | CLIN 0007 and Option CLINS 1007, 2007, 3007, and 4007 are firm fixed price for 12 months of Block Cycle Upgrades. PWS paragraph 8.1.1 states that “upon receipt of an approved block cycle change request from a user…or ECP from the Contractor, the program office will submit a request for quote through Contracting Officer to Contractor through a contract modification” indicating that the requirements for Block Cycle Upgrades are not presently defined. Should the quantity, unit of measure, and price be “To Be Determined” on a Task Order basis CLINs 0007, 1007, 2007, 3007, and 4007 instead of a monthly FFP? | The offeror shall submit their proposal based on labor rates/categories provided in Attachment 3 Cost Price Proposal Spreadsheet. During the evaluation of the task order, the Government will evaluate the number of hours for each category. The offeror won’t be proposing to a specific Block Cycle Upgrade and rather the labor rate/categories that would be used under a BCU task order. | ||
| 55 | 10/3/22 | CLINs 0004 and 0005 and the subsequent Option CLINS are firm fixed price for a quantity of 20 ea “Teardown, Test and Evaluation (TT&E)” and Repairs. PWS paragraph 4.7.1 states that a separate task order will be issued via the TT&E CLIN and that a request for proposal will be provided for the repair and once negotiated processed under the Repair CLIN. Not knowing effort of the evaluation efforts required or the magnitude of the required repairs should the price be “To Be Determined” on a Task Order basis instead of a quantity 20 Each? | Please refer to the updated PWS paragraph 4.7.1. | ||
| 56 | 10/3/22 | The Labor Categories identified by the Government in the Cost Price Proposal spreadsheet list Labor Categories in tabs CLINs x008 and x010 that do not seem appropriate for the work identified in the PWS for maintenance, site visits and relocations. Request the Government allow the contractor to propose the appropriate labor categories to ensure reasonableness, balance, and cost realism. | The Government is requiring the offerors to solely propose the Labor Categories that the Government has requested. In accordance with the wage grade determination provided at the solicitation. | ||
| 57 | 10/3/22 | Section L-900.A (2) states “Print shall be no smaller than a font size of 12 and should be on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper, excluding any charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, or spreadsheets, etc. Charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc. shall not be greater than 11” x 17”. Please confirm that 10-point font is acceptable in charts and graphics. | Please reference Section L-900. Instructions to offerors (Page 2). A. (2). | ||
| 58 | 10/3/22 | Instructions for CPFF CLINS X008 and X010 in Section L-900.D.4.b require that offerors fill in a “separate ‘Major Sub CLIN X008 and CLIN X010 CPFF Rates’ worksheet for each major subcontractor.” Given that the “Major SubK Burdened Rates” tab of the Attachment 3 Cost Price Proposal Spreadsheet includes information that a subcontractor will consider proprietary (Fringe, Overhead, G&A, and COM), is it correct to assume major subcontractors should follow the instructions to submit in the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) as described on page one of Section L-900.A. | Reference updated verbiage in RFP Amendment 2, Attachment 9, L&M Section D, paragraph 4, Cost/Price Proposal Spreadsheet Instructions, subsection b. Subcontractors shall submit their cost information through PIEE utilizing the instructions defined in Section L paragraph A. | ||
| 59 | 10/3/22 | Section L-900.E.c. states that “the evaluation of present/past performance WILL NOT include the present/past performance of any subcontractor(s)” however Section L-900.E.f. requires a consent letter executed by “team member(s) authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the prime offeror” indicating that a “Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Form” is RFP Attachment 2. Is it correct to assume that the consent letter from subcontractors is required in case the government finds negative past performance for a named subcontractor given that subcontractor past performance is not allowed? | Per the Section L., Section E., sub-bullet c. The offeror shall submit Present and Past Performance Information for itself and any joint venture member in accordance with the following paragraphs. A distinction is made between PP submission for a Joint Venture Teaming Arrangement versus subcontractors, vendors, and/or suppliers. Offerors may include PPI for Subcontractor, vendors, suppliers only if the Prime has established a Teaming/Joint Venture arrangement with the subcontractor, vendor, supplier. | ||
| 60 | 10/3/22 | Section L-900.E.d states that each “offeror/joint venture member shall submit no more than three (3) active or completed contracts.” Given that FA8574-22-R-0002 is a small business set aside, is it correct to assume that at least one (1) past performance must be submitted by the joint venture itself or the small business member of the joint venture? | Per the Section L, Section E - Volume IV, Past Performance, Sub-bullet d: "Each offeror/joint venture member shall submit no more than three (3) active or completed contracts (with preferably at least one year of performance history) in the past five (5) years from the issuance date of the RFP, that the offeror/joint venture member considers relevant in demonstrating its ability to perform the proposed effort." Offeror/Joint venture member collectively submit no more than three (3) active or completed contracts. Section L, Paragraph E, sub-bullet a. The relevant and recent past performance information shall pertain to the products and/or services outlined in the solicitation requirements. |
| 61 | 10/3/22 | Given that block cycle upgrades and over-and-above requirements will not be known at the time of the initial proposal for FA8574-22-R-0002 and will be negotiated, will the contractor be allowed to bid and add labor categories on a Task Order basis? | No, the contractor will not be allowed to add labor categories. Task order's will be negotiated for hours to accomplish the task and shall utilize the negotiated labor rates from the basic contract. |
| 62 | 10/3/22 | Is it correct to assume that the Section K, Representations and Certifications, should be included in Volume I? | Yes, please refer to Section L, Volume I where it states the "Completed RFP" shall be submitted by the offeror. Therefore, Section K, Represenations and Certifications should be included in Volume I as part of the "Completed RFP". See page 62 of 104, FAR 52.204-19. |
| 63 | 10/3/22 | In reference to Paragraph 6.1 of the PWS: As some of the documents in the RMF package are Government documents that cannot be generated by the Contractor, is the Government expecting the Contractor to deliver an entire RMF package, or instead, deliver Contractor related source data for the RMF package? | Please see updated CDRL A00V DOD Risk Management Framework (RMF) Package Deliverables for the items that the Government is requesting the contractor to provide. |
| 64 | 10/3/22 | Paragraph 6.2 of the PWS states that the “contractor shall satisfy ALL Cybersecurity and Information Assurance requirements for the Pocket J effort”. Can the Government specify a realistic measurable set of RMF requirements or specify in the TRD which specific requirements should be met? | The realistic measurable set of RMF requirements are defined in the amended PWS (Revision 1), paragraph 6.2 - Cybersecurity Vulnerability Management. |
| 65 | 10/3/22 | In reference to paragraph 6.3 of the PWS, will the Government provide the ITAC information to the Contractor? | The Government will provide the ITAC information to the Contractor as indicated in paragraph 6.3 of the PWS Revision 1 . |
| 66 | 10/3/22 | In reference to PWS sections 6.6-6.6.1, please confirm that the Contractor is not responsible for vulnerability management compliance. | Yes, the offeror is responsible per PWS Paragraph 6.6 Baseline Vulnerability Management Plan (VMP) Compliance, "The Contractor shall ensure that existing and/or upgraded Pocket-J configuration baselines are cybersecurity hardened, to include, applicable DISA STIGs and IA Vulnerability Management compliance." |
| 67 | 10/3/22 | Will the Government include separate CLINs for Major and Minor repairs, and if so, will Major and Minor repairs be defined? What are the percentages of each? | The Government only has one Repair CLIN which is X005. There will not be a breakout between Major and Minor repairs. |
| 68 | 10/3/22 | In relation to PWS section 10.1, i-SMART/e-SMART, please confirm that this is only for Contractor developed software. | The contractor shall develop each implementation standard/msgs according to the MIL-STDs. Once those have been completed and the implementation files have been setup, the Government is asking to receive a copy of those implementations for our repository. The Government uses those implementations for comparison purposes with other platforms that may need interoperability analysis as well. |
| 69 | 10/3/22 | In reference to PWS section 6.11.1, please confirm that the code scanning is for Contractor developed and maintained code only. | In reference to PWS section 6.11.1, the code scanning is for Contractor developed and maintained code only. |
| 70 | 10/3/22 | Paragraph 4.5.1 of the PWS requires a turn around of one business hour. This means that support will not be provided on weekends or holidays. For sites that operate 24/7/365 will the Help Desk support only be required during normal business hours or is support to be provided 24 hours a day 365 days a year? | Please reference the amended PWS section 4.5.1. Help Desk support is required 24 hours a day 365 days a year. |
| 71 | 10/3/22 | For maintenance trips, does the Government want 150 trips priced, based on 78 scheduled and 72 unscheduled? | Per PWS paragraph 4.5.3, the Government is estimating 72 unscheduled maintenance visits annually. Therefore, the offeror shall propose to 72 unscheduled site visits. The offeror can also use Attachment 16 as a history of maintenance tickets that have been generated over the last 12 months. |
| 72 | 10/3/22 | PWS 6.2 states that “This process shall include continuous monitoring and assessment of vulnerabilities, as well as testing and application of corrective measures such as patches, software and signature updates as applicable.” The frequency and development of Cybersecurity Patch updates to the Pocket J system is not explicitly identified in the PWS, nor a mechanism to develop, test and then obtain Government approval on the Patch updates with approval to field. Does the Government intend to continue the Quarterly Cybersecurity Patch schedule and activities associated with it? To include creation of a Cybersecurity Disk that can be distributed to the Pocket J sites and installed by the SMEs until a SIEM system is in place and then used by the SIEM? To include Evaluation and validation of the configuration and extensive internal testing against the current hardware configurations in the Pocket J lab? To include Creation of a Cybersecurity Disk that can be distributed to the Pocket J sites, provided to SMEs or installed via a SIEM? To include A complete VMP Quarterly Package report with the specific IAVA, IAVB and STIG updates, internal functional test reports and special notes and instructions relating to the installation of the Patch? | Please refer to the amended PWS (Revision 1) paragraph 6.13.1, Remote Software and Configuration Updates to determine the patching schedule. |
| 73 | 10/3/22 | SIEM Question. PWS 6.13 provides a framework for the contractor to design and implement a Security Information and Event Monitoring system (SIEM) that provide auditing, configuration management and control. This capability currently doesn’t exist in the PJ system and there are no Government requirements in the PWS of what the SIEM should monitor, audit or control. Additionally there are no test requirements for a SIEM and the current PJ infrastructure that the Government controls will not support a SIEM at this time. Is it the Government intention that the entirety of PWS 6.13.1 through 6.13.3 is to not be priced under Cyber for this proposal but will be awarded as a Block Cycle Upgrade once Government requirements are defined for a SIEM and the Governments portion of the PJ infrastructure is upgraded to support a SIEM? | The Government has amended the PWS to revise 6.13.1 Security Information and Event Monitoring; 6.13.2 Auditing; and 6.13.3 Configuration Management and Control. Please review PWS (Revision 1) in RFP Amendment 2, amending 6.13 through 6.15. |
| 74 | 10/3/22 | Which CLIN should the cost of the lab be assigned to? | Costs related to lab facilities will be associate with CLIN X001 - Program Management. |
| 75 | 10/3/22 | Paragraph 7.1.2 of the PWS states “The Contractor will submit Class 1 ECP, as required, for all changes to the baseline configurations within 24 hours during the work week and 72 hours during the weekend”. Since a Class 1 change is an unknown major change that affects any physical or functional requirement in approved functional or allocated configuration documentation that requires research & development, it is not feasible to submit an ECP within the timeframes noted. Will the Government consider removing the timelines outlined in the PWS? | Please refer to amended PWS (Revision 1), paragraph 7.1.2. |
| 76 | 10/3/22 | PWS, paragraph 8.1 stated “changes, upgrades and enhancements to Pocket J software shall be in compliance with the approved Technical Requirements Document”. Since an approved TRD exists, clearly there is at least one contractor that has it. Can the government provide that document for the rest of the offerors? | The v3.0 Technical Requirements Document (TRD) has a Distribution Statement D. Therefore, the Government is only allowed to release the TRD to the current prime/sub-prime Pocket J contractor. The TRD will be provided to the winning offeror. |
| 77 | 10/3/22 | PWS paragraph 4.7.2 Repair states “The Contractor shall furnish, repair, replace, or provide new components, equipment, and materials that shall conform to Government-approved baseline specifications.” Is there an existing Government-approved baseline specification(s)? If so, can the government please provide these specifications? | Applicable Technical Orders (T.Os) are available to all offerors upon email request to the PCO/CS. T.Os will be provided via DoD SAFE for the sole purpose of developing a proposal and shall not distribute or disclose to any other party. (Distribution Statement E) |
| 78 | 10/3/22 | For CLIN X004, the RFP/Model Contract calls for Quantity of 12 TT&E Units but the TEP worksheet calls for Quantity 20. Can the government please clarify? | This was an error in the original RFP solicitation. The RFP Amendment 2 reflects a Quantity of 20 TT&E Units. |
| 79 | 10/3/22 | In the CRM, the lines cross-referenced to CDRL A002 and CDRL A006 show PWS paragraph 8.1.10.2-IPR of the Technical Data Package cross-referenced to CLIN X013-Data, which is not separately priced (NSP). There is substantial cost/execution labor required to execute this IPR. How or where do you want offerors to represent the labor & associated cost for preparations, execution and after actions/meeting minutes in a NSP CLIN? | PWS paragraph 8.1.10.2 falls under CLIN X001 - Program Management. |
| 80 | 10/3/22 | In the CRM, the line cross-referenced to CDRL A005 shows PWS paragraph 4.4-GFE Management cross-referenced to CLIN X002-Manitenance Support. The RFP has PWS paragraph 4.4 cross-referenced to the GFE/GFP Management CLIN-X003. Can the government please deconflict this discrepancy? | According to Section L-900 Instructions to Offerors, "Cross Reference Matrix: The offeror shall fill out the Cross Reference Matrix at RFP Attachment 1 indicating where in its proposal the information can be found as it relates to the RFP. The Cross Reference Matrix will be utilized as a tool to show critical interrelationships and dependencies among the technical requirements document [Performance Work Statement, the Contract Line Item Number (CLIN), the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), Section L-900 (Instructions to Offerors), and Section M-900 (Evaluation Basis for Award)]. The Cross Reference Matrix will help an offeror ensure it has responded to all the evaluation criteria and proposal submittal requirements identified in the solicitation. If the matrix conflicts with any other requirement, direction, or provision of this solicitation, the other reference shall take precedence over the matrix. CDRL A005 refers to the Status Report deliverable. 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. Therefore, CDRL A005 Status Report relates to the references located in the CRM. |
| 81 | 10/3/22 | In the CRM, the line cross-referenced to CDRL A005 shows PWS paragraph 4.5-Maintenance Support cross-referenced to CLIN X004 TT&E. The RFP has PWS paragraph 4.5 cross-referenced to the Maintenance Support CLIN X002. Can the government please deconflict this discrepancy? | According to Section L-900 Instructions to Offerors, "Cross Reference Matrix: The offeror shall fill out the Cross Reference Matrix at RFP Attachment 1 indicating where in its proposal the information can be found as it relates to the RFP. The Cross Reference Matrix will be utilized as a tool to show critical interrelationships and dependencies among the technical requirements document [Performance Work Statement, the Contract Line Item Number (CLIN), the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), Section L-900 (Instructions to Offerors), and Section M-900 (Evaluation Basis for Award)]. The Cross Reference Matrix will help an offeror ensure it has responded to all the evaluation criteria and proposal submittal requirements identified in the solicitation. If the matrix conflicts with any other requirement, direction, or provision of this solicitation, the other reference shall take precedence over the matrix. CDRL A005 refers to the Status Report deliverable. 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. Therefore, CDRL A005 Status Report relates to the references located in the CRM. |
| 82 | 10/3/22 | In the CRM, the line cross-referenced to CDRL A009 shows PWS paragraph 4.6-Engineering Support Services cross-referenced to CLIN X007-BCU/TRR. Engineering Support Services are cross-referenced to PWS paragraph 4.6 in the RFP. Can the government please deconflict this discrepancy? | According to Section L-900 Instructions to Offerors, "Cross Reference Matrix: The offeror shall fill out the Cross Reference Matrix at RFP Attachment 1 indicating where in its proposal the information can be found as it relates to the RFP. The Cross Reference Matrix will be utilized as a tool to show critical interrelationships and dependencies among the technical requirements document [Performance Work Statement, the Contract Line Item Number (CLIN), the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), Section L-900 (Instructions to Offerors), and Section M-900 (Evaluation Basis for Award)]. The Cross Reference Matrix will help an offeror ensure it has responded to all the evaluation criteria and proposal submittal requirements identified in the solicitation. If the matrix conflicts with any other requirement, direction, or provision of this solicitation, the other reference shall take precedence over the matrix. CDRL A009 refers to the Product Engineering Design Data and Associated Lists deliverable. 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. Therefore, CDRL A009 Product Engineering Design Data and Associated Lists relates to the references located in the CRM. |
| 83 | 10/3/22 | In the CRM, the lines cross-referenced to CDRL A009 show PWS paragraph 8.1.10.1-BCU/TRR-Technical Data cross-referenced to CLIN X013-Data, which is not separately priced (NSP). There is substantial cost/execution labor required to execute the develop/produce/maintain and deliver a Technical Data Package that accurately depicts the final product. There are no less than 8 Shalls in this paragraph. This paragraph also includes CDRL A009. How or where do you want offerors to represent the labor & associated cost for preparations, execution and after actions/meeting minutes in a NSP CLIN? | PWS Paragraph 8.1.10.1 - Engineering Data Labor and associated costs for preprations, execution, and after actions / meeting minutes will fall under CLIN X001 - Program Management. |
| 84 | 10/3/22 | In accordance with the RFP/Model Contract, the following PWS paragraphs are called out as being associated with CLINs X001 - X012: 4.3, 4.4, 4.4.1, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.7.1, 4.8, 4.9, 6.0, 8.1, 9.0. Accordingly, the PWS paragraphs in the table below are not associated with any CLINs, but each one has at least one Shall, several have CDRLs, and all have some amount of required labor to execute. In light of the Section L statement that the CRM is provided for informational purposes only, how are the offerors supposed to account for the costs associated with these paragraphs in the PWS? | Offerors shall be responsive to all the terms and conditions of the RFP. |
| 85 | 10/3/22 | Authorization for SIPRNet access appears to be required for execution of the Pocket-J CLS scope, will the Government provide access to and/or sponsorship for SIPRNet? | SIPRNet is not required for this contract. Per the DD254, a secret security clearance is required. |
| 86 | 10/3/22 | Will subcontractors require PIEE accounts for any reason? | Subcontractors/JointVenture members shall submit their cost information through PIEE utilizing the instructions defined in Section L paragraph A. Subcontractors/Joint Venture mbembers shall be required to follow all deadlines outlined in the RFP. |
| 87 | 10/3/22 | Can the government please confirm we should estimate 1 training event, 5 days duration, that will then be plugged into the TEP worksheet. Accordingly, the offeror may be required to conduct a total of Five 5-day training events every year. Is it possible for that number to go higher than 5? | The Government is expecting one training event which will last 5 days. |
| 88 | 10/3/22 | Can the government please confirm the training shall be conducted in the Test Environment called out in PWS para 8.1.6. If no, where is the training to be conducted? | Training location is offeror discretion. |
| 89 | 10/3/22 | PWS para 9.0 states CLIN 9 is an Option CLIN, to be exercised at the CO's discretion. The RFP/Model contract does not reflect this. Can you please clarify the requirement? | The Amended PWS (Revision 1), paragraph 9.0 User Familiarization Training has been updated. CLIN X009 is not an Option CLIN. |
| 90 | 10/3/22 | Is it necessary for bidders to provide rates for all Labor Categories for CLINs X008 and X010, or can a subset of Labor Categories be provided? | Offerors shall propose to EACH/ALL Labor Categories provided by the Government in the Volume III, Cost Price Proposal Spreadsheet.. |
| 91 | 9/27/22 | What CLINs are considered mandatory and which are considered optional for execution upon contract award. | Per the terms and conditions of the solicitation, every CLIN is mandatory to submit a proposal on. |
| 92 | 9/27/22 | Are respondents required to provide Prime Contractor rates for all Labor Categories (LCATs) provided in attachment 3 tab 2 or only LCATs utilized within their proposals? | The Government is requiring the offerors to solely propose the Labor Categories that the Government has requested. In accordance with the wage grade determination provided at the solicitation. |
| 93 | 9/27/22 | This RFP was published on 1 Sep 2022 with a response date of 31 Oct 22; however, Question and Answer (Q&A) instructions were not provided until 22 Sep 2022 and answers will not be provided until at least 3 Oct 22 (post Q&A cutoff date). Since Q&A data is usually issued with the initial RFP, request that the RFP response date be adjusted to accommodate proposal adjustments. | Government responses to Q&A (Questions&Answers) were posted on SAM.gov on 10 Nov 2022. Therefore, proposals are now due no later than Mon, 12 Dec 2022 @ 1700 EST. Any new questions as a result of FA8574-22-R-0003 Amendment 2, shall be provided via email to the Contracting Office and the Contract Specialist NLT 16 Nov 2022, 1700 EST. |
| 94 | 9/27/22 | Due to the level of technical detail required, request the technical volume be increased to 50 pages. | Per the Section L, Volume II - Written Technical Proposal is limited to 30 pages. |
| 95 | 9/28/22 | In PWS 6.13.3, it states "The contractor shall design and implement a Configuration Management and Configuration Control system to enable baseline configuration awareness and control of all Pocket J locations from a Fixed Element (FE)." - What is the existing capability and what is the level of effort / objective expected for this system? | The Government has amended the PWS to revise 6.13.1 Security Information and Event Monitoring; 6.13.2 Auditing; and 6.13.3 Configuration Management and Control. Please review PWS (Revision 1) in RFP Amendment 2, amending 6.13 through 6.15. |
| 96 | 10/2/22 | Can the Government provide an estimated amount of square footage required to store spare parts? | Attachment 10 represents the contract's complete spares inventory. CCI (Cryptographic Controlled Item) GFE will fit in an approximate 5 ft x 5 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. |
ATTACH 16 - Maintenance Log
| AFLCMC/WNY PNT - WNKF | ||
| Solicitation- FA8574-22-R-0003 | ||
| Maintenance Log | ||
| Date | Title | Location |
| 10/8/22 | New Orlenas - SADL not accepting Crypto | New Orleans |
| 9/23/22 | Portland - GPS Antenna Fail | Portland |
| 9/16/22 | Portland - GPS Antenna Bad | Portland |
| 9/16/22 | Atlantic City - Raritan | Atlantic City |
| 9/15/22 | Jacksonville - Circuit Down | Jacksonville |
| 9/13/22 | Fresno - Circuit Down | Fresno |
| 9/6/22 | Portland JTRS Low Battery Indicator | Portland |
| 9/6/22 | Kingsley SADL will not connect to JRE | Kingsley |
| 9/6/22 | Kingsley PDU greyed out in REMS | Kingsley |
| 8/22/22 | Channel Islands SADL not connecting | Channel Islands |
| 8/19/22 | Andrews Raritan | Andrews |
| 8/19/22 | Toledo Raritan | Toledo |
| 8/19/22 | Atlantic City not connected to EADS on TDLWAN | Atlantic City |
| 8/19/22 | New Orleans - JTRS TDMA fails | New Orleans |
| 8/15/22 | Riverside Client has no Java Script | Riverside |
| 8/15/22 | EADS called about unable to get into top JRE Client | EADS |
| 8/13/22 | New Orleans - Circuit Down | New Orleans |
| 8/3/22 | EADS - reported issue with Toledo | EADS |
| 8/3/22 | CONR - Raritan issues | CONR |
| 7/29/22 | Langley - No REMS access | Langley |
| 7/29/22 | Langley - JRE client not responding | Langley |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .