AMD01 - RFP QA .pdf

RFP Page RFP Section/ Paragraph CLIN/ Clause/Appendix/ Attachment/Other Questions/Comments/Recommendations Government Responses

163 L2.2.2.1 Section L

Reference: L2.2.2.1 states “Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts.”

Question: Certain response elements such as graphics for maps and management schedules are better displayed in 11x17 foldouts. Will the Government please confirm that 11x17 foldouts are permitted for better representation of essential information?

Foldouts are well definded in section L2.2.2.2 - They are permitted but - will be counted as two separate pages and only applicable with certain documents, not pages of text.

162 L2.2 Section L Reference: Technical/Management Volume Page Limit - 50 pages

Question: Would the government consider extending the page limit to 60 pages?

No - Page count will not be increased.

PWS 6.1.1.1 and Sections L and M - Letters of Supply

Would the government consider requiring Offerors to submit interconnect agreements, subcontractor agreements, letters of supply, or other contractual agreements that require a space segment supplier to provide the identified services proposed prior to awarding a single-award IDIQ contract?

This requirement would ensure offerors can provide the space segment they are proposing.

No. The Government will not require any contractual agreements that require a space segment supplier to provide the identified services proposed prior to awarding a single-award IDIQ contract.

PWS 6.1.1.1 and Sections L and M - Letters of Supply

Will the government please provide a detailed descriptiong of what qualifies as a Frequency Bandwidth Supply Chain/Agreement?

Will the government please provide an explanation of the intended purpose of a Frequency Bandwidth Supply Chain/Agreements?

The government will not provide a detailed description of what qualifies as a Frequency Bandwidth Supply Chain/Agreement. Frequency Bandwidth Supply Chain/Agreements may be submitted as part of the Management Plan to describe "a comprehensive management approach that provides a complete, and adequate plan with the least risk based on the demonstrated approach...." per Section M.

PWS 6.1.1.1 and Sections L and M - Letters of Supply

Will the government consider adding the requirement for letters of supply for all bandwidth that an offeror includes in their solution for the proposal response. It is essential that these letters of supply identify a commitment to provide bandwidth on specific satellites and transponders for the SBS0022 RFP. A simple MSA or subcontractor agreement serves the purpose of two companies agreeing to certain T&C's when conducting business, but it does not gurantee support on any one particular contract. For this reason, traditional Letters of supply are essential to ensure an offeror can actually deliver their proposed solution.

The Government will not require letters of supply for all bandwidth that an offeror includes in their solution for establishment of the ordering vehicle. Letters of supply are handled at the task order level. Letters of supply at the establishment of the ordering vehicle will not guarentee support through the life of the ordering period. And all levels of ordering are subject to change through the ordering period, which makes getting guarentees at the establishment of the vehicle unnecessary and unduly restrictive.

PWS 6.1.1.1 and Sections L and M - Letters of Supply

The Federal Acquisition Regulation establishes that, “the contracting officer shall require acceptable evidence of the prospective contractor’s ability to obtain required resources… Acceptable evidence normally consists of a commitment or explicit arrangement, that will be in existence at the time of contract award, to rent, purchase, or otherwise acquire the needed facilities, equipment, other resources, or personnel.” (FAR 9.104-3).

As satellite bandwidth is a key component of submitting a compliant bid for CSSC II, it is essential that letters of supply be required upon proposal submission, in addition to the task order level. Our recommendation is that letters of supply be required with each offeror's initial proposal submission in addition to the task order level.

Would the Government add letters of supply as a requirement to offerors' CSSC II proposal submissions?

Letters of supply will be required at the order level. Offerors should submit any interconnect agreements, subcontractor agreements, letters of supply, or other contractual agreements they believe will best demonstrate the ability to meet the Navy's ever evolving needs over the life of the contract as part of their proposal.

Sections L and M - Past Performance

We strongly recommend that Past Performance be included as a part of the evaluation criteria in section M. In an effort as complex as CSSC it is essential that any potential awardee show proof of performance on efforts of this size and complexity. The lack of past performance in the evaluation criteria could result in an inexperienced awardee which will ultimately adversely impact the end user.

Past Performance will not be evaluated as it's own Past Performance Factor

Attachment 3 - DD254 The DD254 attached to the RFP file shows HC101320R0001 as the Solicitation or Other Number in Field 2c. The number on the solicitation RFP is HC101321R0015.

Will the Government confirm that the DD254 is accurate or revise as needed?

Acknowledge - Fixed on RFP Amend

166 L5.1.1

Is the Government looking for a pricing narrative that discusses why the offerors proposal is reasonable and complete?

"Price submissions should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness and be adequate enough to support and sustain a DCAA audit."

The pricing provided on the Section B Price Worksheet will be evaluated for reasonableness. If further details are requred to support pricing as fair and reasonable and by default, to sustain an audit, this information will be requested.

167 L5.2

The Government requires the price proposal to use 12 point font.

"There is no page limitation for the price proposal. However, each text page shall use 12 point Ariel, Times New Roman, or Courier New font, single-spaced, single-side, 8½ x 11 inches (no exceptions allowed)."

The Government release Attachment 1 – Section B has all the text at 10 point font and the cells are locked. Can the Government unlock the spreadsheet or submit a new one with all text at 12 point in order for the offeror to be in compliance with the 12 point requirement.

The Government locked fields are not subject to size limitations.

178 M 2.4 (1)

The Government states that the Offeror must provide pricing for the base period, all options, and the 6 month FAR options. Within the pricing model, the only place that includes a cell for the FAR 6 month option is the Scenario.

This cell is locked and cannot accept an input from the Offeror. We can assume there is an auto calculating formula for this input, but Offerors cannot tell as the cells are locked and formula cannot be seen.

Will the Government remove the requirement that Offerors “must” provide pricing for the 6 month period, as there has no ability to do so in the current format?

No - See Attachment 1 - Section B Pricing Worksheet / Instruction sheet Item 2 - and item 3 - will autopopulate

Attachment 1 – Section B pricing Worksheet

Attachment 1 – Section B pricing Worksheet

Tab: Non-Bandwidth CLINs x392AB

Reference: The Government has provided one CLIN for Commercial Teleport Operations and Support/MRC.

Commercial teleport requirements and pricing differ by region, especially for monthly recurring pricing.

Question: Will the Government allow Offerors to modify the CLIN structure to propose a separate MRC for each commercial teleport proposed with an estimated quantity of 1 (i.e. CLIN x0392AC, x0392AD, etc.)?

X392 is not a CLIN. CLIN X292AC is for pricing of an additional Government Connection at CT not otherwise stated - will be requested by the government if needed.

45 12.1.3 Additional GFE

Will the Government open the new technology option to more than CT products and services?

This section states: The contractor shall be prepared to accommodate future GFE at CT facilities and on the web tool should newer technologies become available to the Government during the life of the contract. This includes but is not limited to NetVue servers, VMS suites, new/additional satellite modems, servers or test equipment.

Recommendation: The contractor shall be prepared to accommodate new technologies and future GFE as they become available to the Government during the life of the contract. This includes but is not limited to NetVue servers, VMS suites, new/additional satellite modems, servers or test equipment.

The recommended language opens up technology enhancements/refresh to more than teleport products and services and gives Navy an avenue to request new technologies in any component or segment of the network.

PWS language will remain as written.

24 6.2.3.2.3

Paragraph reads "Modem and radio frequency (RF) link status and performance information shall be refreshed at least once every 5 minutes" and includes:

- Access to spectrum analysis of all leased bandwidth on a near-real time basis."

Will the Govt consider a solution for display of or access to near real-time spectrum analysis data via tools and GUIs other than the Web Tool to be acceptable? If so, it is recommended that the requirement change to allow this flexibility. For example, unassociated with the Web Tool requirements, “Display of or access to spectrum analysis data for all leased bandwidth on a near-real time basis shall be provided to Government."

The Government will not accept tools and GUIs that are not integrated into the proposed Web Tool. The Government's requirement's remain as stated.

Q&A