GEARSS_II_Government_Responses_to_CRM_20180226.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 18 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Industry Comments/Review of Draft GPS Engineering, Analysis & Remote Site Sustainment II (GEARSS II)
- Solicitation number
- FA882318R0007
About this file
Comment Resolution Matrix
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| GEARSS_II,_Gov_Responses_to_Draft_RFP_CRM.pdf | ||
| 04_GEARSS_II_DRAFT_RFP_CRM.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 00_FA8823-18-R-0007,_GEARSS_II_Draft_RFP_20180321.pdf | ||
| 01_DD_Form_2345,_Militarily_Critical_Technical_Data_Agreement.pdf | ||
| 03_GEARSS_II,_QASP_(DRAFT).pdf | ||
| 02_SMC_OCI_Mitigation_Plan_Checklist.pdf | ||
| GEARSS_II_CRM.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| SECTION_M_20180212.docx | DOCX document | |
| SECTION_L_20180212.docx | DOCX document | |
| GEARSS_II__PWS_20180212.docx | DOCX document |
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
Comments
| GEARSS Document: GEARSS II PWS, Section L, and Section M | |||||
| # | Page #, Section #, Paragraph # | Was (Original Language) | ACTION (Suggested Change) | Rationale | Government Response |
| 1 | PWS 1.3 | Section 1.3 of the draft PWS provides 8 high-level scope areas. Section 3 of the draft PWS then provides additional detail and performance standards for #1-3 and #8 of those high-level scope areas. However, there are no paragraphs in Section 3 that provide additional detail for high-level scope areas #4-7. Would the Government provide sub tasks and performance standards for high-level requirements #4-7 listed in Section 1.3? | #4-#7 are defined in PWS 3.3.11 |
| 2 | PWS 1.3, Para. 5 and 6 | … all on-site GCS contractors. | … all on-site GEARSS contractors. | Site Safety and Emergency Management requirements will be performed for GEARSS contractor personnel. | Concur. The Government will update the PWS as suggested. |
| 3 | PWS 2.7 | Will non-contractual travel to/from GPS Remote Sites be reimbursable? When military aircraft is required for travel, are discounted Government rates available? | Provide clarification | Ensure full scope is understood | If the contractor believes the Government will pay for vacation travel for on-site employees, that is incorrect. The Government will only pay for official travel. |
Yes, the Government signs letters of authorization for contractor employees allowing the use of Government travel and rates.
| 4 | PWS 3.2 | What is the total FTE allocation for each contract? Does the Government anticipate any efficiencies in combining the two contracts? | The Government expects the contractor to meet all requirements of the PWS. The Government will not dictate a solution; it is up to the potental offeror to provide a technically acceptable solution for requirements of this solicitation. | |||
| 5 | PWS 3.2.3 | During Mission Operations Transfer to the MCS Back-up location, does offeror need to provide 24/7 support at both locations? | Provide clarification | Ensure full scope is understood | The Government expects the contractor to meet all requirements of the PWS. Each situation for a MOX is different. The verbiage in PWS 3.2.3 does not reliquish the contractor from the requirements in the rest of PWS 3.2. | |
| 6 | PWS 3.2.1, 3.2.6, 3.4.1, 3.6.1 | How many contractor personnel are currently being used to meet the NAO crew member, DCO SME, and technical support mission requirements? | The Government expects the contractor to meet all requirements of the PWS. The Government will not dictate a solution; it is up to the potental offeror to provide a technically acceptable solution for requirements of this solicitation. | |||
| 7 | PWS 3.3 | Will the government provide mil-air flights for contractor maintenance personnel to the remote antenna sites? | Yes. However, the contractor shall pay for those flights and be reimbursed under CLIN XXX2. | |||
| 8 | PWS 3.3 | Does the government expect facility modernization for the GSU sites within the time of the contract? | ||||
| - If yes, will the facility modernization be considered surge in order to perform scheduled maintenance and emergent requirements? | The Government does not anticipate facility modernization efforts at the GSUs at this time during the period of performance for the GEARSS II contract. |
If the Government determines facility modernization efforts need to occur, this will not be considered surge.
| 9 | PWS 3.3 | Please provided the past GSU O&M preventive maintenance schedules for all sites? | The Government will provide that information in a very inclusive Bidder's Library at the time of RFP release. NOTE: PDMs are conducted by another contractor and the GEARSS II contractor is only required to support those visits. | ||
| 10 | PWS 3.3.1 | STD #3 identifies a minimum of two RSTs at each remote site location at all times when conducting maintenance activities that require two persons for safety and security situations. | Will the Gov’t accept the risk of only two personnel at each GPS remote site, while knowing there will be unexpected sickness and any other unexpected travel back to the U.S.? | Ensure full scope is understood | The Government expects the contractor to meet all requirements of the PWS. The Government will not accept the risk transfer from the contractor. The contractor is required to conduct regularly scheduled maintenance actions, emergency response, etc. and those requirements will not be waived under circumstances where the contractor mismanaged staffing at the remote sites. |
| 11 | PWS 3.3.1, 3.2, 3.3, | How many contractor personnel are currently at each of the antenna site to provide O&M support? If not continually manned, what is the response time requirement for each site? | The Government expects the contractor to meet all requirements of the PWS. The Government will not dictate a solution; it is up to the potental offeror to provide a technically acceptable solution for requirements of this solicitation. |
The response time requirement PWS 3.3.2.
| 12 | PWS 3.3.10 | Does the government customer require a separate COMSEC Responsible Officer (CRO) or can these duties be performed as an additional duty? | The Government expects the contractor to meet all requirements of the PWS. The Government will not dictate a solution; it is up to the potental offeror to provide a technically acceptable solution for requirements of this solicitation. | ||
| 13 | PWS 3.4.3, 3.4 | In Section M, under Evaluation Factors, Sub-factor 2 – Critical staffing. It states that the offeror must: Demonstrate a clear understanding of its ability to provide staffing sufficient to perform paragraphs 3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.3.10, 3.4.1, 3.4.3, 3.4.5, 3.5.1, and 3.6.1 of the PWS. There is no 3.4.5 in the Draft PWS. Please clarify this requirement. | The Government recognizes this paragraph does not exist and will update Section M accordingly. | ||
| 14 | PWS 3.5 | Is the government customer satisfied with the number of contractors currently supporting the NAO crew member, DCO SME, technical support, and O&M missions, if not how many contractors does the government customer believe is required to properly support the missions? | The Government expects the contractor to meet all requirements of the PWS. The Government will not dictate a solution; it is up to the potental offeror to provide a technically acceptable solution for requirements of this solicitation. | ||
| 15 | PWS 3.4 | Will Operations Support have to provide support to GPSOC initiatives? | Provide clarification | Ensure full scope is understood | Yes. The GPSOC is considered to be part of the MCS and AMCS architectures. |
| 16 | Section L, Page 11, Section 4.2.2.1 | The instructions for CLIN 7001 says "DO NOT PROPOSE", but Table L-3 asks for the TEP to include this value | Provide more guidance on completing Table L-3 to complete all Offeror Fill-in cells. Does the Government want a value of zero entered here or the price for the final option period, i.e. CLIN 6001, and prorate it to a six-month value? | Clarification needed for compliance and accurance pricing | As stated in Para 4.2.2.1, offerors shall not propose CLIN 7001: FAR 52.217-8 Sustainment Services. "...the Government will take the price for the final option period, i.e. CLIN 6001, and prorate it to a six-month value." |
| 17 | Section M, Page 1, Section 1 | This acquisition will utilize the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection procedure … | Recommend the government change the source selection methodology to Best Value based upon the assessment of the Technical and Cost/Price Volumes. Where Technical is approximately equal to Cost/Price. | Mission critical nature of GEARSS II and the unique skill sets required to properly support the GPS mission and the integral Cybersecurity requirements. This provide the government the ability to secure a better technical approach within budget. | The Government does not agree with the suggestion. The Government fully understands the requirements for GEARSS II and is not requesting a "better technical approach" for any of the requirements of the PWS. The Government expects the contractor to propose the requirements as stated in the solicitation. |
| 18 | Section M, Page 1, Section 1 | All proposals will be first evaluated based on the Total Evaluated Price (TEP). | Recommend the government change to evaluate proposals first based on being Technically Acceptable and then on TEP. | Mission critical nature of GEARSS II and the unique skill sets required to properly support the GPS mission and the integral Cybersecurity requirements. | The Government does not agree with the suggestion. The Government will evaluate proposals as stated in the solicitation. |
| 19 | Section M, page 2, section 2.2 | The proposed price for the Phase-In Transition Services CLIN 0004 and Phase-In Transition ODCs CLIN 0005 will not be included in the TEP calculation but shall be included in the offeror's price proposal | Most often the Government evaluates the cost of phase-in to compare offerors side-by-side and due to duplicate costs associated with incumbent contractor performing the duties prior to the base period. Will the Government accept phase in costs and is there a ceiling for those costs? | Need to ensure compliance and evaluate our phase-in staffing plan | The Government will award the contract to the offeror based on TEP. The Phase-In price will be considered a cost of doing business and will be paid to the contractor that is awarded the contract. The Government will evaluate the Phase-In aspect of the offeror's proposal to ensure technical acceptability. |
| 20 | General Question | What was the winning price for the previous awarded contracts? | FA8823-16-C-0001 GEARSS, $7,541,724 |
FA8823-17-F-0005 DCO Cybersecurity, $7,210,697
| 21 | General Question | Given the complexity and scope of this effort, would the Government consider adding a requirement that a SB prime have a minimum of CMMI Level II for Services as a risk reduction to delivering the technical services listed in the draft PWS? This also helps demonstrate a SB prime's service delivery maturity, capability and applies an industry best practice to the overall management and execution of the effort. | The Government does not agree with this suggestion. The Government expects offerors to provide a technically acceptable proposal and the Government will not dictate required certifications, education levels, skills, etc. | |
| 22 | General Question | What does the government customer believe are the shortfalls are with the support currently being provided? | Disclosure of contractor performance to any contractor or other entities outside the Government is strictly prohibited. | |
| 23 | General Question | During the contract transition, what is the expected overlap time between the current incumbent and the new Prime to have joint access to operation floor, DCO ticket historical records, and GSU maintenance records to ensure a seamless transition. | The Government will evaluate each offeror's proposal to determine technical acceptability of Phase-In activities. The successful offeror will be afforded whatever time required as proposed in their Phase-In plan. The Government will not dictate a specific overlap period. | |
| 24 | General Question | Does the government expect new software or upgrade testing to the current ops systems from operations team within the length of the contract? | ||
| - If yes, will the upgrade be considered surge for test and simulation? | The Government anticipates approximately 15 software releases across various baselines annually. |
These releases are part of normal sustainment software maintenance and system modification and is not considered surge.
| 25 | General Question | Is the current FTE adequate to fully support emergent requirement (i.e. natural disasters, etc…)? | |
| - If no, will the government put into place a contingency surge award to the contract to cover requirements that exceed the standard contract support? | The Government expects the contractor to meet all requirements of the PWS. The Government will not dictate a solution; it is up to the potental offeror to provide a technically acceptable solution for requirements of this solicitation. |
N/A 26 General Question Does the government furnish all materials, supplies, and repair / replacement parts for all O&M requirements?
- If no, what are the annual maintenance costs for each location? The Government provides a "bogey" for all Cost Reimbursable expenses each year of the contract.
N/A 27 General Question Will the government conduct an Industry Day prior to the FINAL RFP being published?
- If yes, what is the expected date of the Industry Day? The Government does not intend to conduct an Industry Day or entertain one-on-one discussions.
N/A 28 General Question Will the government still publish a DRAFT RFP prior to the FINAL RFP being published?
- If yes, what is the expected date of the DRFP? The Government will incorporate updates to the PWS and Sections L&M based on the results of questions submitted by industry as part of this review. The Government will pubish a draft RFP for industry review.
The Government tentatively plans to release a draft RFP for industry review via FBO in the mid-April timeframe.
Instructions
| GENERAL: | |
| Following are the instructions for the GEARSS Comment Resolution Matrix (CRM) | |
| INSTRUCTION: | |
| During the review process, comments, questions, concerns regarding the document under review is to be documented and communicated using the CRM. The CRM, sheet 1 of this workbook, is initiated by the Reviewer and provided to the Project Officer as directed in the timeline associated with the assigned task. Following are instructions for completing the CRM form: | |
| Project Officer & Reviewer completes: | |
| Document Line # | Enter the line # if the document is prepared with the line #. |
| Page | Enter the page number your comment relates to. |
| Paragraph | Enter the paragraph number your comment relates to. i.e., 3., 3.0, 3.1.1, 3.1.1.1, etc. |
| Original Reviewed (WAS) | Enter the original text from the document reviewed |
| Suggested Change - New Text (IS) | Enter the change that you, as a reviewer, recommends. |
| Rationale for Change | Enter your rationale for change comments. |
File details come from the government source that posted it.