GEARSS_RFP_-_Industry_Questions_-_Government_Response.pdf

GEARSS Final RFP – Amendment #0001 Industry Questions & Government Responses

Page 1 of 13 22 September 2015

Model Contract

1. Page 6 (ITEM 1003, Descriptive Text): Should “OY 1 PoP …” text includes “and CLIN 1002” like the other CLIN x003 descriptions?

Yes, that is correct and is inconsistent. This will be corrected prior to award or in an amended RFP.

2. Page 7 (ITEM 2002, Descriptive Text): Should “OY 2 PoP: Concurrent with CLIN 1001” reference 2001?

Yes, that is correct and is inconsistent. This will be corrected prior to award or in an amended RFP.

3. Page 9 (ITEM 3001, Other Pricing Details): The narrative states “These prices may be adjusted only as a result of revision to prevailing labor rates as provided by the Secretary of Labor.” Can you clarify if the Government is requesting pricing to match option year 2 (at the monthly breakdown) or if this only applies to SCA role and pricing may be escalated for non-SCA roles?

This only applies to SCA covered roles.

4. RFP, Section B, CLIN x001 Sustainment Services description, pages 2-8: Does the government anticipate the costs associated for personnel transfer to the remote sites at the start of the program to be included in the proposed price, along with contingent travel to/from the site during the length of the POP or are all the non-labor costs for transfer to and from the Remote Sites considered part of the Materials & ODC CLIN?

These non-labor costs for transfer to and from the Remote Sites are considered part of the Materials & ODC CLIN.

5. RFP, Section I, FAR Clause 52.222-42, page 29: Will the government provide the Potential SCA Confirming Employee Class definition for the GS and “Misc Support Role” positions listed and how they correspond to the required positions/locations in the

PWS?

The Government is unaware of the labor categories offerors may propose as part of this solicitation. It is the potential offerors responsibility to conform the actual work performed to the SCA labor categories.

6. DFAR 252.209-7009, Organizational Conflict of Interest—Major Defense Acquisition Program has been included in the RFP. It our understanding that the inclusion of this DFAR clause is applicable for contracts for the performance of systems engineering and technical assistance for a major defense acquisition program or a pre-major defense acquisition program? The scope of effort on GEARSS entails sustainment of the systems, not systems engineering and technical assistance, therefore we do not see this as an applicable clause and request it be removed.

GPS is a major defense acquisition program so this clause is applicable.

Page 2 of 13 22 September 2015

7. With regards to DFAR 252.209-7009, Organizational Conflict of Interest—Major Defense Acquisition Program, please elaborate how this effort relates to a major defense acquisition program or a pre-major defense acquisition program as defined in 10 U.S.

Code § 2430

The Government will remove DFAR clauses 252.209-7008 & 7009; however, if an OCI exists the potential Offeror is required to provide an adequate mitigation plan as instructed in Section L-5.

8. With regards to the inclusion of DFAR 252.209-7009, Organizational Conflict of Interest—Major Defense Acquisition Program, does the Government foresee any issues or concerns with OEM acting as a subcontractor. Is there any prohibition to OEMs acting as a subcontractor to a small business prime on GEARSS?

The Government will remove DFAR clauses 252.209-7008 & 7009; however, if an OCI exists the potential Offeror is required to provide an adequate mitigation plan as instructed in Section L-5.

Page 3 of 13 22 September 2015

PWS

1. Section 2.7 references FAR 32.205-46. Is this supposed to be FAR 31.205-46 (Travel Costs)?

Yes, that is correct and was a typographical error. Amendment 0001 corrects this error.

Note that the reference to FAR 31.205-46 in PWS 2.7 was correct.

2. Section 3.4 identifies broad-based support to the GPS ground system. Can the Government provide historical metrics or workload information to identify the level of support anticipated (number of test events, root causes analyses, etc.)?

Added the following for clarity: “NOTE: Potential Offerors can expect approximately 3 space vehicle launches annually, 12 root cause analyses annually, 12 system test events annually, quarterly operations procedures reviews and updates, daily external monitoring, and recurring training and simulation support.”

3. Section 3.4.1 identifies 12 hours per day, five days per week with 24 hour on-call support at both the MCS and AMCS. Please verify that AMCS support is only required while backup operations are conducted at that site (with same frequency/duration as identified in PWS section 3.2.3, STD #2) or if this support is required beyond these periods.

That is correct. The Government has added the following to PWS 3.4.1: “NOTE: The AMCS support is only required when operations have transferred from the MCS.”

4. Section 3.4.1, STD #8 appears to be a duplicate of requirements for the GPSOC contractor. Please confirm requirement for GEARSS contractors and how this would be reported within 15 minutes of discovery when support is only requested for 12 hours per day?

The analyst task that used to be part of the GPSOC contract is now a part of the GEARSS contract. PWS 3.4.1, STD #8 is a GEARSS responsibility. The GPSOC operators would report any EMI/RFI problems in the absences of a GEARSS analyst.

5. Will there be an anticipated ACA to be in place with the current GPSOC contractor to share EMI and NAVWAR issues?

PWS 2.8 states “The contractor shall use ACAs with other contractors as required to fulfill GEARSS requirements.” The Offeror must determine which ACAs are required; if an Offeror enters into an ACA, they shall follow the PWS.

6. Section 3.4.3 identifies “offsite training facilities”. Will this facilities need to be a contractor’s facility? If so, what size and clearance requirements are required? If not, please identify the location of these facilities and access requirements.

PWS 3.4.3, STD #3 references the PTE lab located in the Centralized Integration Support Facility (CISF), 1050 E. Stewart Avenue, Building 2025, Peterson AFB, CO. In the rare instance this training and simulation would take place at the CISF, STD #3 would be invoked. The Government has revised PWS 3.4.3, STD #3 to read “The Contractor shall

Page 4 of 13 22 September 2015 perform simulations at SAFB and at the PTE lab located in the Centralized Integration Support Facility (CISF) at Peterson AFB.”

7. Section 3.4.4, STD #5 identifies a 10 minute period to notify the Government. Does this requirement only apply to the hours of 0600-1800 (Mon-Fri)? If not, does this require 24/7/365 support at either the MCS or AMCS?

Yes. Typically those checks would occur during normal duty hours.

8. Section 3.4.4 and 3.4.5 identify checks and reviews, but does not identify the frequency.

Is once per day (Mon-Fri) adequate for Section 3.4.4 and once per year adequate for Section 3.4.5, STDs #2 and 3?

PWS 3.4.4 currently states “The Contractor shall provide daily external connectivity monitoring.” Daily monitoring is determined by need not frequency.

PWS 3.4.5 is for technical advisory tasks and the frequency is determined by need not frequency.

9. PWS 3.4.4 states that STD #1 (GPS HANU Compliance) is supported at the TS/SCI level and PWS 4.1 lists the MCS and AMCS SCIF area for the GIN as TS/SCI. Can the Government please state how many SCI-billets are being provided on this program in order for all bidders to fully understand classification requirements?

The Government will provide the requisite number of SCI billets necessary for the successful GEARSS Offeror.

10. PWS 3.4.1 states that operations support and analysis must be provided for a minimum of 12 hours per day, five days per week (0600 – 1800) “…at the MCS and AMCS…”. It is our understanding that the GCS contract held by Lockheed Martin is supporting full-time, on-site sustainment staffing at the AMCS and that GEARSS should only support MOX activities at the AMCS. Can the Government clarify if the full-time, on-site 12-hour support requirement includes the AMCS meaning that GEARSS must have full-time, on-site personnel at the AMCS every day, all year?

That is correct. The Government has added the following to PWS 3.4.1: “NOTE: The AMCS support is only required when operations have transferred from the MCS.”

11. PWS 3.4.2 STD #5 states the need for “non-nominal Orbit Analyst (OA) support”. It is our understanding that all OA support for 2 SOPS is being consolidated by 50th Space Wing onto a GSA OASIS OA contract and that GEARSS should not be providing OA support. Can the Government clarify the intent of this PWS paragraph?

The OASIS OA contract will provide nominal support. The GEARSS requirement is for instances when anomalous situations occur and requires next-level OA support.

12. The support of GIN macros and MCS scripting were removed from the Draft PWS. Can the Government verify that these requirements are staying on GCS and are NOT included in the scope of GEARSS?

That is correct.

Page 5 of 13 22 September 2015

13. PWS: p. 26, Section 3.6.2: Performance Standards: STD #2 - NAO Training & Certification Plan, STD#3 - RST Readiness Plan, STD#4 Operations Support Readiness Plan. Question: As part of Phase-In, the Government lists performance standards that include the Contractor providing three separate plans; yet identifies "Deliverables as N/A." Are these deliverables? Are these products part of the contract transition; and if so, when are they due?

The plans listed are requirements for technical acceptability and must be included in potential Offerors proposals. These plans are not CDRLs.

14. PWS Section 3.4.2 STD #8: Wording could be misleading. Change within 15 minutes of discovery to within 15 minutes after corroboration of the event.

The Government does not believe the wording is misleading and will not make a change.

Additionally, the Government believes this comment is directed against PWS 3.4.1, STD #8 vice PWS 3.4.2, which has no STD #8.

15. Reference Section PWS Sections 1.3 and 3.3.3 - The GEARSS PWS includes scope for Next Generation Control Segment (OCX): - Section 1.3 (8) Assist in transition to Next Generation Control Segment (OCX) and – Section 3.3.3 Performance Standard STD #5:

The RST shall provide maintenance to support integration of OCX assets only upon coordination through SMC/GPL for OCX GPS equipment. Are bidders expected to estimate and bid the FTE associated with these requirements?

Yes. Potential Offerors should account for the possibility of infrequent minor maintenance to support OCX installed equipment prior to OCX deployment. This support must be coordinated through GPL.

Page 6 of 13 22 September 2015

Section L & M

1. Page 5 (Section 3.1) – The instructions for the cross reference matrix (while allowing contractor flexibility with format) is not clear. Does this matrix need to include all the items identified in the header row? Also, there is an offer cover letter identified in Volume I, Tab C1 and it does not call out this detail. Please verify the format and location that this matrix should be included in offeror’s proposals?

The last sentence in Section L, 3.1 is modified to read: “Complete a table using a comparable format as shown below and include one specific to each Volume (I, II and III):” and no separate cover letter is required for this matrix. It is up to the Offeror to provide as much or as little detail necessary to meet the intent of the Cross Reference Matrix requirement.

2. Section 3.5 identifies stand alone volumes, but Table L-1 (page 6) appears to combine Volume I and II, as well as Volume III with its attachments. Do the Government want any Volumes to be combined in a single binder/CD or attachments included with Volume III content?

All volumes (I, II & III) are considered separate and should stand alone. Each volume should be delivered in a separate binder.

3. Table L-1 (RFP/FPR Proposal Organization/Number of Copies/Limitations/Restrictions) identifies Completed Section J Atch 3 as a technical volume attachment. Please verify that this should be included in both Volume I and in this location in Volume III attachments or if only one instance is required.

That is correct. The Government also will update Section M, 4.2.3.2 to include Volume III requirement.

4. Section 3.6.5 states that font shall be no smaller than 11 point font, while text embedded in graphics can vary from the size requirement. Does this variation include tables? If so, is there a minimum size restriction for tables and/or graphics?

The Government changed the last sentence of Section L-3.6.5 to read: “Text embedded in table and graphics can vary from the font style and size requirement but must be legible.”

5. The Pricing Volume Contract Schedule Table is asked for two times in Volume I, plus included in Volume II. Does the Government want this table in three places in the proposal and in two places in Volume I (Section B and F)?

The Government expects Offerors to provide the Contract Schedule Table in Volume I, Section B, Section F and Volume II of the proposal.

6. Instructions for Volume I, Section J is for the completed Attachment 3 (GEARSS Rights in Data). Does the Government want the entire attachments included in Volume I?

Yes.

Page 7 of 13 22 September 2015

7. Per the SCA compliance instructions in Section J (Volume I), can the Government confirm that no Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) is in place on the existing contract?

Yes. The Government can confirm there is no CBA on the GCS contract.

8. The Professional Employee Compensation (page 14) identifies detail specific to individual salaries. And there are extra numbers identified in the Total Compensation Plan instructions. Will a generic compensation plan be sufficient to identify offeror and subcontractor’s fringe benefits?

A generic compensation plan for each location will be sufficient.

The extra numbers were removed.

9. Section 4.3.3.1 identifies a subset of PWS sections for job requisitions and includes management staff. Does the Government want job requisitions to encompass PWS section 3.1 (Program Management) and other PWS 3.x.x sections?

The Government specifically chose PWS sections 3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.3.9, 3.3.10, 3.4.1, 3.4.2,

3.4.3 and 3.4.5 as key areas to evaluate potential Offeror’s technical understanding of those critical tasks. The Government only wants job requisitions for the tasks specified.

10. Section 4.3.4.1 identifies only PWS sections 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4, but the Solicitation Cross Reference Matrix identified in Section 3.1 indicates that all PWS sections should be covered. Please clarify where the Government intends offerors to address the other PWS sections, in particular sections 3.1, 3.5, and 3.6?

The Cross Reference Matrix is for potential Offerors to highlight where they meet the requirements of this solicitation. Section L, 4.3.4.1 are the key GEARSS tasks and potential Offerors should be very specific in how they show their understanding of the technical requirements of the NAO, Remote Site Technicians and Operations Support functions.

11. Section 4.3.4.2 seems to cover data already provided in Volume I (GEARSS Rights in Data) and references only the NAO Training CDRLs. Please clarify what is requested of offeror in this section.

The completed Attachment 3, GEARSS Rights in Data, is to be included in both Volumes as instructed. As indicated by Section L-4.3.4.2.2, section L-4.3.4.2 references all CDRLs, not just CDRL A003 (NAO Training).

12. Section L.4.2.6 states the need for “Other than Cost and Pricing Information Requirements”. Can the Government clarify if this is a requirement for only the Prime bidder or for all subcontractors and teammates as well?

“Other than Cost and Pricing Information Requirements” is a flow down requirement for subcontractors and teammates/partners.

Page 8 of 13 22 September 2015

13. Reference Section L.4.1.5.8.4: Will the government identify specific WD’s for the other work locations than what was already provided in the RFP (El Paso County, CO), such as Vandenberg AFB, CA and Cape Canaveral, FL?

No. The primary location for Wage Determination purposes is El Paso County, CO.

Work conducted at other locations is temporary in nature.

14. Reference Section L.4.1.5.9, Professional Employee Compensation “The Total Compensation Plan is not to include the labor categories and rates that are a part of Wage Determinations and Collective Bargaining Agreements.”: If non-exempt/hourly personnel, such as Remote Site Technicians (RST’s), are not covered by SCA or CBA, do we have to include them in the Total Compensation Plan for Professional Employees?

Yes.

15. Reference Section L.4.2.2.2 ODC CLIN’s: Please describe what is included in the government’s ODC estimate of $250,000?

Government approved travel, tools, office supplies and other allowable or reasonable direct costs not associated with labor. The estimate is for proposal purposes only and actual ODC costs may be more or less in execution. The successful Offeror will not be funded this amount at contract award.

16. L.3.5.6: Can font size for tables be smaller than 11 point?

The Government changed the last sentence of Section L-3.6.5 to read: “Text embedded in table and graphics can vary from the font style and size requirement but must be legible.”

17. L.3.1: Can the Solicitation Cross Reference Matrix be provided on its own page that comes directly after the cover page? All of the information may not fit on the cover page/one page.

The last sentence in Section L, 3.1 is modified to read: “Complete a table using a comparable format as shown below and include one specific to each Volume (I, II and III):” and no separate cover letter is required for this matrix.

18. Does the Government want the Offeror to provide an additional column to provide the proposal section the requirements map to in our response? (i.e., Proposal Response section - 1.2.1.1 Section Heading Title)

It is up to the Offeror to provide as much or as little detail necessary to meet the intent of the Cross Reference Matrix requirement.

Page 9 of 13 22 September 2015

19. L.1.0 & M.1.1: M.1.1 states "proposal meets ALL the requirements of the solicitation is found..." & L.1.0 states" ...be compliant with requirements as stated in the RFP (solicitation) and shall describe how the offer will satisfy the requirements stated in the PWS & CDRL..." However, Subfactor 3 under both Section L&M states to only provide a response for PWS 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4. Are we considered not compliant if we do not address PWS 3.1, 3.5 and 3.6? If so, where should we address them?

The Cross Reference Matrix is for potential Offerors to highlight where they meet the requirements of this solicitation. Section L, 4.3.4.1 are the key GEARSS tasks and potential Offerors should be very specific in how they show their understanding of the technical requirements of the NAO, Remote Site Technicians and Operations Support functions.

Potential Offerors must still propose hours and BOEs for all tasks of the PWS which is call out in Section L, 4.3.3

20. L.4.3.3: Where should Table L-2: Staffing Plan Matrix Expandable Format be provided in our response? Our assumption is in Technical Volume Attachments: Staffing Matrix, is this correct?

Correct.

21. M.4.2.2.3 states org structure with skill mixes and hours. Our assumption is that this is referencing Table L-2/ Technical Volume Attachments: Staffing Matrix, could you please confirm?

Confirmed.

22. L.4.3.3 states "the plan shall present and explain the details of required operational- and troubleshooting-level experience, qualifications, security clearances, and expertise with systems." Our assumption is that these should be addressed in L.4.3.3.1 (job requisitions)/make up the categories for the job requisitions, could you please confirm?

Confirmed. The Government expects potential Offerors to provide job requisitions for PWS tasks listed in 4.3.3.1. However, potential Offerors are required to provide a staffing plan for all tasks of the PWS. If potential Offerors need to elaborate on “…details of required operational- and troubleshooting-level experience, qualifications, security clearances, and expertise with systems” within their staffing plan they may do so.

23. L.4.3.3.3 (M.4.3.3.3) is not referenced in Table L-1. Where in our response/Table L-1 should this information be addressed?

This is clearly part of Critical Staffing in Section L, 4.3.3 and should be included Volume

III.

24. It is our assumption that the criteria listed in L.4.3.3 (Table L-2 & experience/quals/clearance/system expertise) should be mapped and responded to in the appropriate Technical Volume Attachment section, and that our response to Subfactor 2

Page 10 of 13 22 September 2015 should provide an introduction to our staffing plan methodology. Could you please confirm if this assumption is correct?

Confirmed.

25. L.4.1.5.1 (last sentence): states the original SF forms should be provided under a separate section. Please clarify where these should be provided/what separate section?

All original SF forms should be included in a separate section of Section A of Volume I.

26. L.1.5.8.2.3: Are there currently proprietary system(s) in use to support the PWS requirements? If so, are they COTS or GOTS? Can you provide the vendors for the system(s)?

No, there are no proprietary systems.

27. Atch 8: Section L-III, p. 14, para 2: Number of Professional Employees: "…the number of meaningful professional employees is defined as the contract or any subcontract having more than eight (8) full-time equivalent employees classifed as 'professional employees…" Question: If a subcontractor has less than 8 employees as part of their contribution to the overall contract, are they still required to submit a Total Compensation Plan?

Potential Offerors subcontractors/partners are required to submit a total compensation plan for a minimum of one employee.

28. Attch 8: Section L-III, p. 14, (1): Total Compensation Plan. Question: Paragraph describes some format, i.e. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,9. Is there a corresponding Government provided template to use for this?

No. There is no template; this should be delivered in contractor format.

29. Section L 3.1 and Table L-1: Section L 3.1 and Table L-1. Section 3.1 calls for a Solicitation cross reference matrix. It does not state if it is included in page count. Add a sentence stating, "Solicitation cross reference matrix will be placed behind the cover page and will not be included in page count."

The last sentence in Section L, 3.1 is modified to read: “Complete a table using a comparable format as shown below and include one specific to each Volume (I, II and III):” and no separate cover letter is required for this matrix.

The Technical Volume is the only volume that has a page limit so this will not count against the page limitation.

30. Section L 4.1.5.8.2, Section L 4.3.4.2. Section M 4.2.3.2: There appears to be a duplication of requirements. Does the customer want the Data Rights inputs in two separate volumes or just in one?

The completed Attachment 3, GEARSS Rights in Data, is to be included as an attachment to both volumes as instructed.

Page 11 of 13 22 September 2015

31. Reference Section L 4.3.3.3 - Last sentence states, "Include evidence the other contracting and program authorities accept the Offerors technical approach". Issue:

Sentence not clear on the requirements, appears that there are some words missing.

There are no words missing. The Government requires potential Offerors to provide proof from other contracting and program authorities that any shared resources, agreements, etc. are acceptable.

32. Please confirm whether or not a Collective Bargaining Agreement(s) are in place on the incumbent contract work, and if so please provide a copy(ies) of these documents, if any.

Yes. The Government can confirm there is no CBA on the GCS contract.

Page 12 of 13 22 September 2015

DD254

1. Box 1b identifies Top Secret safeguarding requirement. Please verify this level of safeguarding is required for the contract?

Verified.

2. Box 11a is identified as No. Please clarify requirement to assess classified information outside of Government facility, as well as need for defense courier services authorization (box 11k)?

Box 11A will be changed to “Yes” at contract award.

If ever required, the Government authorizes the use of the Defense Courier Service.

3. For your consideration, please provide clarification regarding the clearance and safeguarding information as represented on the DD 254. Please confirm if the facility clearance required is "Secret" and the level of safeguarding is "Top Secret". Does the Government intent to issue a modification to revise the DD 254?

There should not be an instance where potential Offerors would require classified processing in their facility. There is a requirement for safeguarding data up to Top Secret/SCI. All classified processing and handling of data will occur in Government facilities.

The DD 254 will be updated, as necessary, upon selection of the successful Offeror.

GFP List

1. The GFP List (Attachment 4) included in the GEARSS solicitation is not readable in current format. Can the Government re-deliver this information in a format that allows viewing all the fields and identifies the GFP by site/location?

Potential Offerors must “Enable all Features” within the PDF file to make it readable.

There are Excel spreadsheets in the Bidder’s Library separated by location for ease of reading and use by potential Offerors.

Page 13 of 13 22 September 2015

MISCELLANEOUS

1. Please advise if there are SOFA or other bilateral agreements between the US and the OCONUS country (Kwajalein, Diego Garcia or Ascension Island) that are applicable to Contractor personnel working in these OCONUS locations. If so, please provide these agreements.

SOFA agreements do not cover contractors. The Government will include the relevant attachments to the existing SOFA agreements for each site to the Bidder’s Library.

Please visit the following website for additional information:

http://www.state.gov/s/l/treaty/.

2. If there are no SOFA or other bilateral agreements applicable, please advise how offeror should bid any taxes applicable to employees working in these countries? Should these costs be assumed as part of the Government provided ODC plug number?

If required, all costs associated with employee taxes are not included in the ODC plug number.

3. If Contractor personnel are required to obtain visas or work permits to perform contract effort OCONUS, are Contractors to bid these costs or are these costs also included in the government provided ODC plug number?

If required, all costs associated with work visas are not included in the ODC plug number.

4. Will housing and in country transportation be provided by the Government at the OCONUS location or is this to be bid by the Contractor?

Housing is available and those costs should be bid by the contractor. In-country transportation is available at all locations and is available at no cost for use by the contractor.

5. Are contractor employees performing OCONUS required to comply with local labor laws?

No.

6. Will the Contractor be required to obtain export licenses during the contract POP?

No.

7. Will the Contractor be interacting with foreign nationals during OCONUS performance, if so, will a TAA be required?

No. There will not be foreign nationals at the GPS sites on the OCONUS locations.

8. If the Contractor is required to obtain export licenses and/or TAAs will the Government assist in expediting these documents?

N/A