Question_From_Industry_SMCS_11272019.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 29 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- HC104719R0010
- Issued by
-
Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
This solicitation seeks proposals to develop and operate the Advanced Wireless Services-3 (AWS-3) 2025-2110 Megahertz (MHz) Spectrum Management/Coordination System (SMCS). The SMCS will automate spectrum coordination between Department of Defense system operations and incumbent Electronic News Gathering operations in the specified frequency band. The contractor will apply agile development methodologies to deliver an initial operational release of the SMCS software, then continually enhance it. The contractor must manage the software lifecycle, deploy and maintain the system, and enhance it over the five-year period of performance comprising a one-year base period and four one-year options. The Defense Information Systems Agency will award a best value contract on behalf of the National Capital Region. Proposals are due by the date specified on Federal Business Opportunities, where the solicitation will be posted in October 2019 as a full and open competition. The contractor must provide facilities within thirty miles of the DSO Annex in Annapolis for meetings.
View the file
Other files
Show all 39
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
Sheet1
| Question # | Question / Comment | RFP Reference | Government Response | RFQ Change Required (Y/N) | Location of Change |
| 1 | What is the assumed start date for this PoP? | N4143_Hybrid_Price_Template | The PoP start date is anticipated to be between late January 2020 and early February 2020. | N | N/A |
| 2 | Can this this section include 'DCAA Approved Provisional Billing Rates (APBR) as sufficient documentation to validate the proposed direct labor rates and indirect expense rates? | Section L 16. Part B - Cost/ Price Narrative |
"In support of proposed direct labor and indirect expense rates, offerors and any subcontractor(s) shall provide documentation to include at least one of the following: 1) a copy of the most recent Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (FPRA), 2) Forward Pricing Rate Recommendation (FPRR), 3) a DCAA or DCMA report or memorandum containing the most recent finalized DCAA/DCMA audit or review, or 4) Forward Pricing Rate
| Proposal (FPRP) or other statement of current rates to include documentation to validate the proposed direct labor rates and indirect expense rates." PG 121 | Provisional Billing Rates are considered to be sufficient documentation if a FPRA or FPRR does not exist | N | N/A |
| 3 | Will subcontractors be held up to the same level of detail as the offeror (Prime) in providing an introduction when submitting a fully disclosed proposal to the Government? | Section L 16. Volume IV- COST/Price | |
| "Part A – Introduction. The offeror shall provide a table of Contents; summary descriptions of estimating, purchasing, and accounting systems; changes to estimating, accounting practices, or Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Disclosure Statement." Pg 120 | Yes |
4.) If the offeror identifies subcontractors in their cost (or technical) proposals regardless of assigned workshare, in accordance with FAR 15.404-3(b), the prime contractor shall conduct appropriate cost or price analyses to establish the reasonableness of proposed subcontract prices and include the results of these Subcontractor analyses in the price proposal. The offeror shall identify the subcontractor relationship between the prime and subcontractor, and ensure subcontractor(s) provide the following information:
a.) Unsanitized Subcontractor cost proposal, to include a cost build-up identifying direct labor rates, all applicable indirect rates, and profit/fee. Subcontractor costs shall also be substantiated in accordance with the requirements detailed for prime contractor costs. If needed, the subcontractor may submit its cost breakout directly to the Contract Specialist identified in the request for proposal (RFP).
b.) The Subcontractor shall also provide a DCAA-approved letter of an approved accounting system (if relationship is predicated on a cost-reimbursable basis)
| c.) The Subcontractor shall provide their Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) cognizant points of contact . | N | N/A | |
| 4 | Will subcontractors be held up to the same level of detail as the offeror (Prime) when submitting a fully disclosed proposal to the Government? | Section L 16. Volume IV - Cost/Price | |
| "Part C – Cost/Price Summary Spreadsheet. Offerors are required to use the Government-provided Microsoft Excel Workbooks (Pricing Worksheet) to submit the cost and pricing data supporting its proposed price." pg 121 | Yes |
4.) If the offeror identifies subcontractors in their cost (or technical) proposals regardless of assigned workshare, in accordance with FAR 15.404-3(b), the prime contractor shall conduct appropriate cost or price analyses to establish the reasonableness of proposed subcontract prices and include the results of these Subcontractor analyses in the price proposal. The offeror shall identify the subcontractor relationship between the prime and subcontractor, and ensure subcontractor(s) provide the following information:
a.) Unsanitized Subcontractor cost proposal, to include a cost build-up identifying direct labor rates, all applicable indirect rates, and profit/fee. Subcontractor costs shall also be substantiated in accordance with the requirements detailed for prime contractor costs. If needed, the subcontractor may submit its cost breakout directly to the Contract Specialist identified in the request for proposal (RFP).
b.) The Subcontractor shall also provide a DCAA-approved letter of an approved accounting system (if relationship is predicated on a cost-reimbursable basis)
| c.) The Subcontractor shall provide their Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) cognizant points of contact . | N | N/A |
| 5 | The GFI “SMCS Future Objectives List” has not, to |
our knowledge, been provided. Is this a document
| that is created during the Base-Year project effort? | Sections 6.2, 6.2.1, 12. | The November 5, 2019 revision to the RFP included the file 5-_SMCS_Future_Objectives_List.pdf | N | N/A | ||
| 6 | Please confirm that proposals should be submitted electronically vs. submitting original and 1 copy requested in Block #9 of the Standard Form 33 | Standard Form 33 Block #9 and Section L - Instructions, Paragraph 11 Electronic Offers | Electronic submissions only. Refer to section L paragraph 11. | Y | SF33 Block 9 | |
| 7 | Request extension to proposal due date to Wednesday, December 4th, 5:00pm (EST) | Standard Form 33 Block #9 and Section L - Due Date/Time | The proposal due date has been extended to Monday, December 9th 2019 at 2pm EST | Y | SF33 Block 9 & Section L paragraph 12 | |
| 8 | Section H, Key Personnel, lists no Key Personnel. PWS 6.1.1 lists two, but states that the key personnel are to be defined in the PMP which is due after award. Please confirm that Key Personnel are required in the proposal. | Section H, page 59 and PWS 6.1.1 | Key Personnel are required per PWS 6.1.1 Subtask 1.1. The offeror shall include a minimum of two Key Personnel in the proposal, a Program Manager (PM) and a Technical Lead (TL). Key Personnel resumes shall be provided in accordance with Section L. Additional Key Personnel identified by the offeror, if any, may be included in the proposal or identified in the PMP. | N | N/A | |
| 9 | Please confirm that the qualifications and experience of the Key Personnel per the PWS are evaluated. | Section M A.1, page 124 and PWS 6.1.1 | Key Personnel qualifications and experience will be evaluated in the context of Technical/ Management Approach subfactors 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 as written. | N | N/A | |
| 10 | PWS 6.2 page 27 requires the contractor to develop a "SMCS development roadmap". Is this a deliverable? If so, what is the required form and delivery schedule? | PWS 6.2, page 27 | This is not a deliverable, but it is needed as part of the proposal. However, the offeror should conduct roadmap planning as applicable for their agile development process. | N | N/A | |
| 11 | PWS 6.2, page 27 requires the contractor to create a System Security Plan. Is this a deliverable? If so, what is the required form and delivery schedule? | PWS 6.2, page 28 | Yes this is a deliverable as required by CDRL A013, SMCS System Security Plan | |||
| N | N/A | |||||
| 12 | PWS 6.2.3, E, page 30 requires that virtual images be delivered including the Development Environment (e.g. Integrated Development Environment, Collaboration Tools, Defect Tracking Tools, Configuration Management Tools, Build Automation Tools, Test Orchestration Tools, Vulnerability Scanners, etc.). It is unlikely that a full development environment can be delivered within the constraints of the plug numbers provided for ODCs. Please confirm that the Government will provide sufficient funds for all licensed products in the delivered virtual image of the development environment and that the plug numbers are for proposal purposes only. | PWS 6.2.3, E, page 30 | Licensing for commercial software is addressed in Section 6.3.2 of the PWS. OCDs will be adjusted as required. | N | N/A | |
| 13 | Section L.11, page 119 limits proposal files to 10 MB each. Since the Technical/Management volume includes a draft SDP and draft O&M plan, it could be larger than 10 MB. Please confirm that it is acceptable to deliver the SDP and O&M Plans in file(s) separate from the body of the Technical/Management Volume if necessary to meet the 10 MB requirement. | Section L.11, page 119 | Yes. Offerors may submit multiple emails to encompass their | |||
| whole proposal if the package exceeds 10MBs. | N | N/A | ||||
| 14 | RFP Section M, page 124 does not mention the Volume I: Executive Summary. Please confirm that the Executive Summary volume is evaluated and does contribute to the selection of the contractor. | Section M, page 124 | No the Executive Summary will not be evaluated. Any topics mentioned in the Executive Summary should be addressed in the technical/ management approach | N | N/A | |
| 15 | Section K appears on page 115 of the RFP. There are three (3) clauses incorporated by reference that are listed on this page. Per Section L, page 123, offerors are required to complete additional representations, certifications, acknowledgments and statements reflected in Section K of the solicitation. Is Section K on page 115 all that the Government intends the bidder to use? | Section K, page 115 and Section L, page 123 | Confirmed | N | N/A | |
| 16 | PWS 6.1.1, page 23 requires reporting of labor hours charged by task in invoices. This is not appropriate for FFP tasks. Please confirm that this requirement applies to CPFF and COST CLINs only and does not apply to FFP CLINs. | PWS 6.1.1, page 23 | Confirmed | N | N/A | |
| 17 | PWS 13g2 refers to Transition Out being done under Task 6 of the PWS. Please confirm that 13g2 should refer to Task 5. | PWS 13g2, page 48 | Confirmed, Transition Out occurs under Task 5 | Y | PWS Section 13g2 | |
| 18 | Please confirm that all text within tables, charts, graphs, and figures must be no smaller than 10-point font. | Section L.9, page 118 | Confirmed | N | N/A | |
| 19 | Please confirm that Task 5 - Transition Out should be bid only in Option Year 4. | PWS 6.5, page 37 | Transition Out should be bid in all years. The Transition Out CLIN in the Base Year is Optional. | N | N/A | |
| 20 | Should PWS section 6.1.4 be titled 'Subtask 1.4 Equipment Management' vs 'Equipment Management' to be consistent with the rest of the PWS? | PWS 6.1.4 (page 25 of 127) | Yes it should be titled Subtask 1.4: Equipment Management | Y | PWS Section 6.1.4 | |
| 21 | Section M.1 References "Subfactor 1.2: Applied Spectrum Knowledge responding to PWS Task 1, Par 6.1". However, this PWS section doesn't seem to be related to Applied Spectrum Knowledge but is related to Program Management. After doing a word search in the RFP was only able to find reference to Applied Spectrum Knowledge in Section M. |
| Can the government please clarify what PWS section we should be responding to for Applied Spectrum Knowledge? | Section M.1, Subfactor 1.2: Applied Spectrum Knowledge (PWS Task 1, Paragraph 6.1) (page 125 of 127) and PWS 6.1 Task 1 - Program Management O&M (page 22 of 127) | Applied Spectrum Knowledge is a summary term used in section M to describe the Task 1 requirement, as stated in the PWS: The contractor shall provide personnel with the capabilities to develop and maintain SMCS, and possess experience and working knowledge of spectrum engineering and requirements, including at a minimum: EMC Coexistence Algorithms, Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) interactions, EMI between and related to spectrum-dependent systems, Electromagnetic Propagation, Electromagnetic Environmental Effects, and DoD and SBE spectrum management concepts and principals to include frequency allocation and assignment/licensing. |
| N | N/A | |
| 22 | Section L.15: Each offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past/present performance information in accordance with the format contained in the Past Performance Worksheet. Offerors shall submit no more than three (3) total recent past/present performances efforts for evaluation.. Past Performance Work sheet references 4 references to provide with our bid response. |
| Can the Government please clarify if we should submit 3 or 4 references? | Section L.15 Volume II Past Performance (page 119 of 127) and Past Performance Worksheet | The Offeror shall submit no more than three (3) past performance efforts. Disregard the fourth entry in the Past Performance Worksheet Template. | N | N/A | ||
| 23 | The numbering of sections appears to be missing for Volume V - Contract Documentation. Recommend making this section number 17 to be consistent with rest of Section L numbering. | Section L Volume V - Contract Documentation (page 122 of 127) | Confirmed | Y | Section L Volume V - Contract Documentation (page 122 of 127) | |
| 24 | The numbering of sections appears to be missing for Section M Cost/Price Factor. Recommend making this section numbered 3 to be consistent with the rest of Section M numbering. | Section M Cost/Price Factor (page 125 of 127) | Confirmed | Y | Section M Cost/Price Factor (page 125 of 127) | |
| 25 | In the General Instructions section it states."The offer shall address all requirements as stated in the Performance Work State (PWS)." However under Section L (14. Volume II - Technical/Management Approach) and Section M (1. Factor (1) Technical Management Approach) specifically calls out only PWS Paragraphs 6.1, 6.2-6.3. |
| Can the government please clarify if we are to respond to all PWS sections or just the ones called out in Section L and M (PWS 6.1, 6.2 - 6.3)? If we are to responded to all would the government consider increase page limitation to 40? | Section L (1. General Instructions) (page 116 of 127), Section L (14. Volume II - Technical/Management ) (page 119 of 127) and Section M ( 1. Factor (1) Technical and Management Approach (pages 124 - 125 of 127) | Tasks 4 and 5 were excluded because these are relatively common tasks that we would expect to be similar across all offers. The offerors should respond to all PWS sections, but the Best Value determination will be made per the criteria as outlined in Section M. There will be no changes to the page limitations. | N | N/A |
| 26 | "Completed DD254's must be submitted with proposals and shall be included in Volume V." |
| The PDF can not be saved in a way to incorporate into Volume V word doc. Can the DD254 be submitted as a separate document with our submission? | Section L (8. DD For 254) (page 117 of 127) | The DD254 can be submitted as a separate PDF document as part of Volume V | N | N/A |
| 27 | Could the Government please provide the file “4-_SMCS_Reference_Architecture-v1.0.mdzip” from AMD01 in another format such as PDF or as an image? | |||
| 4-_SMCS_Reference_Architecture-v1.0.mdzip from AMD01 | MDZIP files are specifically for cameo EA software. The |
relevant information from the cameo file has been provided in other formats within that zip file.
| N | N/A | |||||
| 28 | Proposals are due at 2PM on 2 December 2019, the Monday after Thanksgiving. Many of our personnel have made plans to spend time with friends and family during the holiday. Would the Government consider extending the proposal period by at least 3 days in order to enable offerors to provide a high quality proposal? | SF33 | See Question 7 | Y | See Question 7 | |
| 29 | The SMCS_User_Procedures_Guide (Attachment 7) is dated 26 July 2018 and the ORD (Attachment 2) is dated June 2019. Both contain process flow diagrams for procedures The diagrams look very similar, but there might be differences. Which document takes precedence over the other in the event there are any discrepancies? | Attachments 2 and 7 | If there is a discrepancy between the User Procedures Guide and the | |||
| Operational Requirements Document (ORD), the ORD takes precedence. | N | N/A | ||||
| 30 | Please provide additional details about the timeline dates shown in Slide 10 of Attachment 6 (Background Info) and in Figure 2 of Attachment 2 (ORD). For example, for Tactical Radio Relay, Attachment 6 shows a timeline date of 2016, but Figure 2 of Attachment 2 shows a 2018 date. Section 2 of Attachment 2 states that "the dates on the figure are estimates only, and should not be interpreted as indicating definitive plans with hard milestones". Can the Government please explain these dates and why they may be different? For Figure 2 of Attachment 2, can it be assumed that the estimated dates for each system (e.g., TRR, SUAS) are the shown year plus 2 years (e.g., TRR date is 2020, SUAS date is 2021, etc.)? | Attachments 2 and 6 | The two documents depict two different aspects. The Background Info (attachment 6) provides a general description of sharing of 2025-2110 MHz The Operational Requirements Document (attachment 2) shows the operation of a new business process for 2025-2110 MHz sharing which will provide the foundation for SMCS requirements. Attachment 6 shows the initiation of TRR sharing 2025-2110 MHz in 2016. The 2016 process for this sharing is the existing frequency assignment process. |
| In attachment 2, the 2018 initiation of TRR sharing of 2025-2110 MHz coveys use of the new process where an email from DoD to the broadcasters with 24 hours notice is sufficient. This 24 hour notice is for "notification" only. The notification process is described in the ORD. Please note that SMCS will replace this email process. | N | N/A | ||||
| 31 | Paragraph 4.4 of the Software Requirements Specification (Attachment 3) states that the contractor "shall propose two architecture options: one where administrators access the SMCS via the same internet interface as regular users, and another where administrators access the SMCS via a separate internet interface." Section C, paragraph 6.2 of the RFP states that "SMCS shall be compliant with the Government's SMCS Reference Architecture...and meet the software requirements of the SMCS Initial Software Requirements Specification (SRS)". Are offerors to propose two architecture options in their SMCS proposals or have the two architecture options cited already been incorporated into the SMCS Reference Architecture? | Attachment 3, Para 4.4 and Section C, Para 6.2 | The offeror shall propose regular user and administrator access within a single architecture. | N | N/A | |
| 32 | Would the Government consider removing FAR Clause 52.211-11 Liquidated Damages or set the amount at $0? If not please explain the applicability to the Fixed Price Tasking of this solicitation and specify the appropriate amount. | RFP Pages 61 and 72 | Concur. FAR Clause 52.211-11 Liquidated Damages will be removed as it does not apply to the requirement. | Y | SF33 Section I | |
| 33 | Can the Government please confirm that any contractor staff working on the SMCS effort must possess, at a minimum, an interim Secret security clearance? | RFP Page 43, Section 11.2 | An interim or final Secret Security Clearance is required for Key Personnel. The contractor shall have plan to protect classified information and a response plan should additional clearances be required. | Y | Section, PWS Section 11.2 | |
| 34 | Section C, Page 31, CDRL A010, Software Development Plan - Due Date column indicates that a draft SDP is due at time of proposal. However, Section L of the RFP does not include instructions on where to include this draft. Is a draft SDP required with offeror's proposals? If so, can the Government please indicate where this draft should be included? | Section C, Page 31, CDRL A010, Software Development Plan | A draft SDP is not required with offeror proposals | Y | Section C, PWS CDRL A010 | |
| 35 | Section L, Page 122, outlines Sections that are to be included in Volume V. The instructions skip over Sections D through F. Is this intentional or are these sections missing and will be provided in a future amendment? | RFP Section L, Page 122 | Section D is not applicable to this requirement. Section E and F will be completed by the Contracting Officer at the time of contract award. | N | N/A | |
| 36 | Section C, Section 6.4 Task 4 states that the contractor shall plan, execute and manage data backup for SMCS and shall perform Disaster Mitigation planning for SMCS. It then states that disaster recovery will occur within the confines of Tasks 1, 2 and 3. Because Task 4 is a FFP task, please confirm (or clarify) that it is the Government's intent for offerors to include labor and costs for DM planning and creation/delivery of the Disaster Mitigation Plan (CDRL A034) within Task 4, but to include labor and cost associated with actual disaster recovery activities under Tasks 1, 2 and 3? Do the DM activities that are to occur within the confines of Tasks 1, 2 and 3 include scheduled backups? | RFP Section C, Section 6.4 Task 4 | Correct with one exception. Any regular maintenance required to effectively execute disaster mitigation planning occur within Task 4. Regular backups occur within Task 4. | N | N/A | |
| 37 | Section C, Page 25, CDRL A006, Due Date column states that Kickoff Meeting must be held within 30 days of PoP start. Page 38, AQL for Tasks 6.1 through 6.5 states that the contractor must conduct a Kickoff Meeting within 45 days of starting the PoP. Is the Kickoff Meeting to be within 30 or 45 days of starting the PoP? | RFP Section C, Page 25, CDRL A006 and Page 38, AQL for Tasks 6.1 through 6.5 | The task order kickoff meeting shall occur within 30 days. The SMCS development kickoff shall occur within 45 days. | Y | Section C, PWS CDRL A006 | |
| 38 | In Section C Page 38, AQL table and in the QASP there are multiple rows containing an entry for Cost Requirement for CPFF CLINs that state "AQL is achieved when the cost charged to the TO for the deliverables is equal to or less than the target cost." Please explain the use of this criteria for AQL as it appears to be associated with earned value cost accounting. Is EVM a requirement for this RFP? | RFP Section C Page 38, AQL table and QASP | EVM is not required | N | N/A | |
| 39 | RFP Page 46, Section12 lists 26 items of GFI but did not include all listed GFI items with the solicitation package. In order to cost the development of SMCS, please provide item 22: DISA Computing Services Directorate (CSD) Security Handbook. | RFP Page 46, Section12 | The GFI list will be updated to remove item 22. | Y | Section C, PWS Section 12 | |
| 40 | RFP Page 48, para 13.g.2 states that Transition-Out shall occur in accordance with Task 6 of the PWS. Should this be Task 5? Also, please identify the acronym MP. | RFP Page 48, para 13.g.2 | Confirmed, Transition Out occurs under Task 5 | |||
| Y | Section C, PWS Section 13g2 | |||||
| 41 | RFP Page 47, paragraph 13.a states "Not Applicable" to the topic of identification of possible follow-on work. RFP Page 37 states that "The contractor shall transfer all hardware, software, and technical data to the successor contractor, participate in that contractor's initial transition-in activities..." Also, the paragraph concludes that "A failure to successfully transition without a gap in service is 10% withholding of final payment until completed". |
a. Should Page 47, section 13.a be updated to reflect a successor contractor?
b. Could the Government please explain why Task 5 is listed as optional? Independent of whether there is a successor contractor or not, will the Government not want a Transition-Out Plan to transfer the cited materials to the Government?
| c. Given that this contract is a base year with four one-year option periods, are offerors to include transition-out costs in each contract year? | RFP Page 37 and Page 47, paragraph 13 | Government will have access to all those Transition Out items as part of subtask 1.3.Transition Out should be included in all contract years. See Question 19. | ||||
| N | N/A | |||||
| 42 | The background briefing (Attachment 6, undated) states that coordination procedures "minimize the amount of touch labor by broadcast coordinators" and that the level of coordination required will be based on the results of test and compatibility analysis between broadcaster operations and proposed DoD operations. Have these analyses already been done and documented - and if so, will they be made available to offerors during the proposal preparation phase? If they have not been completed and documented, are offerors to cost performing these analyses within their SMCS proposals? | Attachment 6 | Test and compatibility analysis is out of scope. Offerors should not cost these activities. Results will be made available post-award. | N | N/A | |
| 43 | Within the Future Objectives List (FOL) (Attachment 5) there is a statement "These requirements are provided as an indicator of future SMCS development and are considered a starting point for agile development after the initial version (e.g., initial backlog population)." Can the Government please clarify what is the initial backlog population? Is the Government saying that agile development is not necessary until after the FOL items with Implementation Timing with entries of "1" are completed? Is the term "initial version" used consistently between the FOL and the Initial Software Requirements Specification (SRS)? | Attachments 5 and 3 | Agile development begins on day 1 of the POP. The SRS document contains an initial set of requirements that would be used within the contractor's agile development process to populate the product backlog. At this time, the government envisions agile development techniques to be used throughout the SMCS lifecycle. The future requirements list is a notional set of requirements that would be validated and decomposed within user groups and in coordination with stakeholders within the contractor's agile development process. The term “initial version" is used consistently between the FOL and the Initial Software Requirements Specification. | N | N/A | |
| 44 | Figure 1 in the Operational Requirement Document (ORD) has a box labeled "Requirements" and cites "NSC Prototype 2025-2110 MHz Band Spectrum Sharing System Architectures". These requirements are shown feeding into defining the sprints that will develop SMCS. Can the Government please provide additional detail regarding these requirements? Are these requirements reflected in the Reference Architecture attachment to the RFP? | Attachment 2 | The NSC prototype efforts are not reflected in the reference architecture since they remain under consideration by the government. Final assessment of the maturity and potential implementation of these projects are not completed. As a result, no information is available. | N | N/A | |
| 45 | Related to question 19, the ORD states that the "initial operating capability (IOC) is likely to be a partially automated solution relying on operational procedures to be implemented by both the DoD POC and the SBE POC utilizing standard, existing communications systems (e.g., email and telephone). Is IOC the same as the "initial version" term used in other reference documents attached to the RFP? Is there an IOC in place today or are offerors to bid an e-mail and telephone based solution for the initial version of SMCS? | Attachment 2 | The IOC utilizing standard, existing communications systems (e.g., email and telephone) is available to today and is being tested as a stop gap solution to implement the business process illustrated in the ORD (attachment 2). Offerors should not bid an e-mail and telephone based solution for the initial version of SMCS. The initial version of SMCS is web based and is intended to replace current IOC email and telephone based processes. | N | N/A | |
| 46 | The flow diagram on Page 13 of the ORD has a block labeled "SMO Interference Analysis". Is this interference analysis what is listed in the FOL as Requirements 009.1, 009.2, 009.3, 009.4, and 010 OR is this block an "outside of SMCS process" that is performed by the SMOs? Do any of the blocks within the ORD diagrams represent outside of SMCS software (is the objective to fully automate all blocks represented in the ORD diagrams including those citing external (to DSO) organizations)? | Attachments 2 and 5 | The diagrams and other process information in the ORD represent the initial end-to-end business process for coordinating access to the 2025-2110 MHz band. The initial end-to-end process was developed through a series of Table Top Exercises (TTX) conducted with DoD and Broadcaster stakeholders. The end-to-end process is expected to be refined over time as joint collaboration with the Services and Broadcasters is conducted. At this time, SMCS will automate a subset of the end-to-end process where the processes and tools used by the Services to generate coordination requests for input to SMCS is outside the scope of SMCS development. | N | N/A | |
| 47 | Multiple operational requirements (in the ORD) include the statement “Not explicitly represented in the process diagrams. Implicit operational requirement that is essential for successful analysis within the process". Can the Government please clarify this entry? Are these operational requirements mapped to software requirements within the SRS or FOL? How/where are they to be represented in the SMCS design? | Attachment 2 | The ORD states: “Not explicitly represented in the process diagrams. Implicit operational requirement that is essential for successful analysis within the process.” This statement refers to the human action required of the Society of Broadcasters (SBE) to provide current data on their systems. It is implicit since it is not directly represented within the business process information. This ORD requirement ties back to SMCS in that the screens viewed by SBE need to include an area where SBE representatives possessing the appropriate database access privileges can input the data. These requirements are not specifically mapped to the SRS or FOL. However, these requirements will be represented and defined in the SMCS design during the agile process. | N | N/A | |
| 48 | PWS para 5 states that “A database of ENG and DoD operations (to include operational and technical characteristics of ENG and DoD systems)...shall also be required..” Is the SMCS to be housed on a classified network? Will there be a SMCS on the high AND low side? Is a Cross Domain Solution a requirement of this effort to enable ENG collaboration in the presence of protected information? | RFP PWS para 5 | SMCS is an unclassified system. At this time, there is no requirement for a cross domain solution. However, user access to data will be governed by role based access controls. | N | N/A | |
| 49 | PWS paragraph 5 includes a term "industry standard model". Can the Government please define this term? | RFP PWS para 5 | Replace the phrase "industry standard models" with "available COTS and GOTS capabilities" | Y | RFP Section C, PWS para 5 | |
| 50 | Can the Government please provide a listing of the locations where SMCS capabilities are to be hosted and on what IT platforms? | SMCS is expected to be hosted in a contractor environment on contractor-furnished IT platforms. SMCS shall be accessible via web interface, enabling universal access to SMCS capabilities. | N | N/A | ||
| 51 | Page 58, KEY PERSONNEL, 4th sentence – should it be "...no change in KEY personnel…."? | RFP Page 58 | Yes, the 4th sentence in this section refers to Key Personnel. | Y | Section H - Key Personnel | |
| 52 | Page 46, Task 4 - Disaster Mitigation Support requires the vendor to establish a DM location. Is the requirement for a hot or cold DM plan and location? What is the required failover time for bringing the system back online in the event of the primary system becoming nonoperational? | Page 46, Task 4 | The requirement is for a cold DM plan and location. For failover time, please refer to the AQL for Task 6.3. | N | N/A | |
| 53 | Requirement 28 in the FOL (Attachment 5): Does the SMCS system require a sensing solution as part of the system design? Or is the requirement stating that the SMCS system must be able to ingest a data feed from an external sensing source to augment the spectrum sharing analyses? If the latter, can the government provide information on the sensing system to include an API document? | Requirement 28 in the FOL (Attachment 5) | The requirement is stating that the SMCS system must be able to ingest a data feed from an external sensing source to augment the spectrum sharing analyses. This requirement is based on ongoing research and development activities. The technology is not mature nor designated for implementation. As a result, an API document or further information is not available. The intent of this future objective is to provide an indicator of future SMCS development. | N | N/A | |
| 54 | What is the Government anticipated user story capacity of the development team per sprint? What is the Government anticipated sprint duration? | General | The offeror should propose a capacity and duration that is most appropriate for the SMCS requirements. | N | N/A | |
| 55 | The "CLIN Summary" tab auto populates the 6-Month Ext for CLIN x005, Task 5. This Task would only occur one time - either Option 4 OR at the end of a 6-Month Ext period. Please confirm that the "6-Month Ext" period should be $0 for Task 5 (only). | N4143_Hybrid_Price_Template.xlsx | The pricing proposal should include separate line items by CLIN for the additional six-month period IAW FAR 52.217-8. These prices shall be identical to the proposed pricing in the six months prior to expiration of the base period, or the final option period, if option periods are present. | N | N/A | |
| 56 | Will the government delete the 30 miles Place of Performance requirement listed below? The reasons are: |
Minimal benefit to the government - If the contractor provides a local meeting room, then it becomes transparent to the government where the work is performed.
| A local meeting room within 30 miles shall be sufficient. Contractor presence at local meetings shall be required. | Y | RFP Section C. PWS Para 9 | |
| 57 | Government Furnished Property (GFP)/Government-Furnished Equipment (GFE)/ Government-Furnished Information (GFI). Only GFI is being provided in support of this requirement. |
| Please clarify if the government is providing computers that are to be used in the project. Are these computers to be used for all aspects (unclassified, classified) (management, technical) of the project? | The Government is not providing any computers at this time as GFP/GFE. The ODC plug in the pricing template provides funding for the contractor to acquire computers to be used for the technical aspects of the project. | N | N/A | |
| 58 | Will the government provide the documents listed below several weeks before the proposal is due? The reasons are: |
-Proposal needs to address the requirements: The government’s SOW is based on satisfying the requirements listed in these documents. Without basing the proposals on the requirements, the proposals will not address the government’s needs.
| -Fairness: The incumbent DISA support contractors who helped DISA prepare these documents have a substantial and unfair advantage over other contractors. | The Government has provided a set of initial documents for use as resource in the preparation of proposals. The documents represent the current state of collaboration between the Services and Broadcasters. The implicit and explicit requirements contained in these documents are expected to be refined and used to populate the SMCS product backlog within the contractor's agile development process. The documents were prepared by Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and reviewed by the Government. The FFRDCs will not be bidding on this solicitation. | N | N/A | |
| 59 | · Is there a SOW given for this contract? |
· What the performance period?
· What level of effort is required?
· What software to monitor the spectrum do you specify to use, a GFE?
| · Where is the contract to be performed, what location? | Refer to relevant sections of the RFP. | N | N/A | |||
| 60 | Would the Govt. please provide the list of tools and technologies currently being used for Agile software development, sustainment, helpdesk, disaster mitigation and configuration management | General | This is a new requirement. It is expected that the contractor will propose the tools and technologies to be used to meet the SMCS requirements. | N | N/A | |
| 61 | Would the Govt. please provide the specifications of the environment that will be used to host SMCS? | General | The offeror shall propose an environment for hosting SMCS. | N | N/A | |
| 62 | What tools does DISA currently have for managing requirements? | General | This is a new requirement. It is expected that the contractor will propose the tools and technologies to be used to meet the SMCS requirements. | N | N/A | |
| 63 | Who will be responsible for the system administration of the environments and infrastructure? | General | The offeror will be responsible for system administration of the environments and infrastructure. | N | N/A | |
| 64 | Has coordination of this band already begun? If yes, then, what is currently used for analysis and data storage | General | Coordination of this band has begun in limited geographic areas. At this time, the coordination is manual (telephonic and email coordination) where all data and tools used to support and document the coordination resides at the offices involved in the coordination. | N | N/A | |
| 65 | Will SMCS be deployed on premise or milCloud? | General | At this time, MilCloud is not expected to be the hosting environment. The winning contractor is expected to provide the hosting environment for SMCS. | N | N/A | |
| 66 | Will the Govt. clarify how many references to submit for Volume III? Section L states no more than three (3) and the Past Performance Worksheet contains four (4) references | RFP, Section L.15; Pg. 119 / Past Performance Worksheet | Answered in Question 22 | N | See Question 22 | |
| 67 | Would the Govt. please clarify what is to be provided for Section G in Volume V - Contract Documentation | RFP, Volume V - Contract Documentation; Section G - Contract Administrative Data, Pg. 122 | The contractor POC should be included. Refer to Section G1 for the required information needed for the POC | N | N/A | |
| 68 | Would the Govt. please provide a sample template for the Supply Chain Risk Management Plan? | RFP, Volume V - Contract Documentation: Section C - Performance Work Statement, Pg. 122 | Contractor format acceptable | N | N/A | |
| 69 | Would the govt. please provide the SMCS Reference Architecture files in a .jpg or .png format? The zip file provided "4-_SMCS_Reference_Architecture-v1.0" we were not able to open | 4-_SMCS_Reference_Architecture-v1.0 | The file extension can be changed from MDZIP to ZIP to open within Windows. | N | N/A | |
| 70 | Please confirm if the Software Development Plan is required with proposal submission because no instructions or evaluation criteria is provided for this plan | PWS, CDRL# A010, Page 31 | Answered in Question 34 | Y | See question 34 | |
| 71 | What is the expected volume of helpdesk calls? | PWS, Section 6.3.2 - Subtask 3.2, Page 35 | Help desk calls will be proportional to the approximate user base of 200 users. | N | N/A | |
| 72 | Please confirm if the O&M plan is required with proposal submission, because no instructions or evaluation criteria is provided for this plan | PWS, CDRL# A031, Page 36 | The O&M Plan is not required with the proposal | N | N/A | |
| 73 | Will the government clarify the dates associated with the analysis requirements in the future objectives document? | 5-_SMCS_Future_Objectives_List | The date categories 1, 2, and 3 are defined in the FOL. Specific delivery dates are not required. The FOL items are provided as notional requirements that would be refined and decomposed over time in collaboration with stakeholders. The implicit and explicit requirements in the FOL are expected to be refined and used to populate the SMCS product backlog within the contractor's agile development process. | N | N/A | |
| 74 | If subcontractors are proposed, are they required to complete a Cost/Price volume including the Cost/Price spreadsheet same as the prime? |
RFP, Section L.16- Volume IV - Cost/Price, Pg 120 4.) If the offeror identifies subcontractors in their cost (or technical) proposals regardless of assigned workshare, in accordance with FAR 15.404-3(b), the prime contractor shall conduct appropriate cost or price analyses to establish the reasonableness of proposed subcontract prices and include the results of these Subcontractor analyses in the price proposal. The offeror shall identify the subcontractor relationship between the prime and subcontractor, and ensure subcontractor(s) provide the following information:
a.) Unsanitized Subcontractor cost proposal, to include a cost build-up identifying direct labor rates, all applicable indirect rates, and profit/fee. Subcontractor costs shall also be substantiated in accordance with the requirements detailed for prime contractor costs. If needed, the subcontractor may submit its cost breakout directly to the Contract Specialist identified in the request for proposal (RFP).
b.) The Subcontractor shall also provide a DCAA-approved letter of an approved accounting system (if relationship is predicated on a cost-reimbursable basis) c.) The Subcontractor shall provide their Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) cognizant points of contact . .
| N | N/A | ||||
| 75 | “For all in-person meetings and reviews, the contractor shall provide facilities capable of hosting meetings, and providing demonstrations, including software demonstrations (as appropriate). These facilities shall be within thirty (30) linear miles of the DSO Annapolis facility.” Question. Would the Government extend the facilities distance requirement from thirty (30) linear miles to forty (40) linear miles to allow for more competition for this solicitation? | PWS 6.1.1 Subfactor 1.1 - Program Management Planning and Reporting (page 23 of 17) | See Question 56 | Y | See Question 56 |
| 76 | Is an OCCI plan required, at all, if we DO NOT have any perceived or actual OCCI? | General | See Section L paragraph 7 which states that if the offeror believes that no OCCI exists, the OCCI response shall set forth sufficient details to support such a position. | N | N/A |
| 77 | We noticed there isn't a specified validity period for proposals that are submitted. We will assume the Government does not have one unless you advise otherwise. | General | Proposals received in response to this solicitation shall remain valid for 90 calendar days from the date of receipt of proposals. Further, should the Offeror be awarded this contract, the Offeror will furnish the items and/or services identified in its proposal at the price quoted to the designated point(s) within the time specified in the schedule. | Y | Section L, paragraph 1 |
| 78 | For the DD254, the Government requests the contractor to complete block 6. If we have additional company locations that we are reporting, per Section L, Other Information Required, where the work will be performed, should we also complete block 8 of the DD254 at this time? | General | Yes. All locations should be completed and submitted with the proposal package | N | N/A |
| 79 | As per the response to Question 19 the offeror needs to bid transition out in all option years. Can you please confirm that our understanding is correct? | Q&As #19 | Confirmed | N | N/A |
| 80 | Per the response to Question 19, if the offeror bid transition out in all years, that will require the offeror to bid for Task 1-4 for only 10 months and would require the 2 months to be bid under transition out task. If transition out is not exercised for option 1/option 2/option 3, how will the offeror support the full contractual requirements for those 2 months. | Q&As #19 | Tasks 1-4 should be bid completely for each 12-month period. Task 5 is an additional task within each 12-month period. | N | N/A |
| 81 | The government requests County and Facility. Would the County Code be acceptable if no facility code exists for the offeror | Volume 5 | Yes | N | N/A |
| 82 | Could the Government provide a version of the SMCS Reference Architecture in a MS Word/VISIO, pdf, JPEG, or other common application format. We cannot open the document originally provided by the US Government as part of the RFP package. | Attachment List #4 | Common application files (JPG, DOCX, PDF, and XLSX) are available in a zip file. Offerors shall directly contact the point of contacts on this notice via email to request a copy of the file. The subject line of the email shall read "HC104719R0010 - Request for SMCS Reference Architecture Common Application Files. | Y | Attachment #4 Zip File |
| 83 | RFP Section L, page 43 reads: "The pricing proposal should include separate line items by CLIN for the additional six-month period IAW FAR 52.217-8." Please confirm that bidders need to add two separate tabs in the cost template for the 6-months extension – one for FP and one for Cost CLINs. | Section L, page 43 | No. The optional 6-month extension period will automatically be calculated within the "CLIN Summary" tab and additional tabs in the Price Template are not required. | N | N/A |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .