Questions_and_Answers_Matrix_Amndmt_3_07182018_v2.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 14 KB Posted

Attached to
C4S Afloat Operations Services
Solicitation number
N32205-18-R-1015
Issued by

About this file

Question and Answer Matrix

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
N32205-18-R-1015_Amendment_4.docx DOCX document
Amendment_3_-_N32205-18-R-1015.docx DOCX document
Question_and_Answer_Matrix_v3.2_-_Afloat_Ops_-_07052018.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Inventory.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
N3220518R1015_Amendment_0002.docx DOCX document
Attachment_1_DD254_v2.pdf PDF
Combined_CDRLs_v3.pdf PDF
Amendment_1_released.docx DOCX document
Question_and_Answer_Matrix_-_Afloat_Ops.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
N32205-18-R-1015_C4S_Afloat_Ops_RFP.docx DOCX document
referencees_combined.pdf PDF
Attachment_5_-_Non-Disclosure_Agreement.docx DOCX document
Combined_CDRLs.pdf PDF
Attachment_1_DD254.pdf PDF
Attachment_2_Price_Proposal_Spreadsheet.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Show all 15

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

Technical Answers Paragraph/section Contractor Question/Comment Government Response

RFP with Amendment 2, Q&A #21 and Section 20.1 Key Personnel pages 30 and 31. In Amendment Number 2, MSC has indicated that all key positions now require IAM-II certification. (1) While appropriate understanding of Information Assurance principles are necessary, the IAM level II requirements do not seem to be aligned to the proper IAM level for scope assigned to these key positions. These positions do indeed need to be cognitive of IA principles and practice, however these positions do not include admin privileges, nor will they be required to perform tasks or development to determine MSC's enterprise IA posture. (2) The IAM-I certification more closely aligns to the PWS and performance requirements outlined in Section 20.1 since key personnel will not be directly responsible for the determination of enterprise IA requirements nor will they be tasked to individually manage the systems deployed and controlled by shipboard personnel for day-to-day operation. (3) Our understaning is that the current workforce performing this scope operates with an IAM-I certification. (4) We request the government review this requirement to ensure the proper intent that IAM-II is the required 8570.01M level necessary to perform the assigned job function. (5) (1) Amendment Number 2 only clarified the already existing requirement. It did not generate a new ("now require") requirement.

(2) DoD 8570 Table AP3.T1 Summary of IA Workforce Requirements was used to classify each position listed within the RFP. Amendment 2 provided IA WORKFORCE AND CERTIFICATIONS Requirements for N3220518R1015 PWS.

(3) DoD 8570 states "IAM I: Usually an entry level management position with 0 to 5 or more years of management experience." The only key position that can be interpreted as this lower level of management would be the 20.2.10 Technical Writer.

The 20.1.2 Installation Mgr, 20.1.3 Sustainment Mgr, and 20.1.4 NOC Wideband Sat Comms Sys Mgr all have requirements listed in the RFP well beyond the minimum IAM-I to include "managing a globally dispersed and highly technical workforce" as well as "manage the entire bandwidth allocation within each ocean region."

For example, "The Installation Manager (IM) shall have a minimum of five (5) years’ experience...", "The IM shall have experience with managing the deployment of diverse C4 capabilities across a globally dispersed installation area. The IM shall be able to demonstrate an understanding of the C4 capabilities installed across MSC platforms."

(4) Not applicable.

(5) According to the detailed requirements of DoD 8570 CHAPTER 4, these three key positions, 20.1.2, 20.1.3, 20.1.4, are properly aligned with IAM-II requirements.

Section 20 Understanding that removing the IA certification requirements in their entirety may present another obstacle on your end, if that option is not feasible would you please consider comporting the solicitation to the flexibility that DoD Directive 8570.01-M promotes within Section C4.2.3.2? This section of the manual states that assigned personnel must achieve the appropriate baseline certification within 6 months of their assignment of IA duties (1). This would maintain the presence of the requirement while not excluding a highly capable candidate(s), and overall offer, from being proposed which may represent the best value for MSC. (1) The section(s) of the 8570.01-M manual which states that assigned personnel must achieve the appropriate baseline certification within 6 months of their assignment of IA duties applies to "military and Government civilian personnel."

Paragraph C2.3.9 of DoD 8570.01-M: "Contractor personnel supporting IA functions in Chapters 3, 4, 10, and 11 shall obtain the appropriate DoD-approved IA baseline certification prior to being engaged. Contractors have up to 6 months to obtain the rest of the qualifications for their position outlined in AP3.T1."

Contract engagement is defined as when the Period of Performance starts date. If personnel fail to obtain IA baseline certifications prior to engagement, it will be considered a failure to perform its contractual obligations.

RFP with Amendment 2, Q&A #21 and 22 and Section 20 Personnel Requirements, pages 29 and 30. In Amendment Number 2, MSC has modified Section 20 - Personnel Requirements - to add a requirement for IAT-III certification for all OCONUS locations. This is a change that will negatively impact the bidder’s ability to staff, backfill and replace qualified personnel in those locations and is unnecessary for the performance of the level of access and oversight of systems identified throughout the PWS. IAT-II, (specified in PWS section 20.2 Non-Key positions) covers network-level rights and is commensurate with accessing the networks onboard MSC ships and sites and in line with the labor categorization used throughout the rest of this section. IAT-III is only necessary, per 8570.01-M, in cases where the privileges and scope of work for an individual span the entire enterprise – which is limited to a few MNOC personnel and not performed by any field technician, regardless of location. We request the government review this requirement to ensure the proper intent that IAT-III for OCONUS locations is the required 8570.01M level necessary to perform the assigned job function. The OCONUS positions have been evaluated and classified as 20.2.8 Journeyman Technician which requires IAT II level certification.

Section 20Personnel Requirements has been modified to add a requirement for IAT-III certification for all OCONUS locations. This is a change that will severely impact the bidder's ability to staff, backfill and replace qualified personnel in those locations and is unnecessary for the performance of the level of access and oversight of systems identified throughout the PWS. IAT-II covers network-level rights and is commensurate with accessing the networks onboard MSC ships and sites and in line with the labor categorization used throughout the rest of this section. IAT-III is only necessary, per 8570.01-M, in cases where the privileges and scope of work for an individual span the entire enterprise - which is limited to a few MNOC personnel and not performed by any field technician, regardless of location. Was this addition made in error and will it be removed from the requirements?The OCONUS positions have been evaluated and classified as 20.2.8 Journeyman Technician which requires IAT II level certification.
Section 20In the recent amendment, MSC has indicated that the key positions now require IAM-II certification. While appropriate understanding of Information Assurance principles are necessary, the IAM level II requirements do not seem to be aligned to the proper IAM level for scope assigned to these key positions. These positions do indeed need to be cognitive of IA principles and practice, however these positions do not include admin privileges, nor will they be required to perform tasks or development to determine MSC's enterprise IA posture. The IAM-I certification more closely aligns to the PWS and performance requirements since key personnel will not be directly responsible for the determination of enterprise IA requirements nor will they be tasked to manage the systems deployed and controlled by shipboard personnel for day-to-day operation.

As historical reference, the current workforce performing this scope operates with an IAM-I certification. The new IAM level II certification seems excessively restrictive particularly to small business and may in fact inhibit the pool of viable bidders We request the government review this requirement to ensure the proper intent is stated in the final requirements. *** Verbiage from the first reponse (row 3) is also applicable for this inquiy ***

DoD 8570 states "IAM I: Usually an entry level management position with 0 to 5 or more years of management experience." The only key position that can be interpreted as this lower level of management would be the 20.2.10 Technical Writer.

The 20.1.2 Installation Mgr, 20.1.3 Sustainment Mgr, and 20.1.4 NOC Wideband Sat Comms Sys Mgr all have requirements listed in the RFP well beyond the minimum IAM-I to include "managing a globally dispersed and highly technical workforce" as well as "manage the entire bandwidth allocation within each ocean region."

For example, "The Installation Manager (IM) shall have a minimum of five (5) years’ experience...", "The IM shall have experience with managing the deployment of diverse C4 capabilities across a globally dispersed installation area. The IM shall be able to demonstrate an understanding of the C4 capabilities installed across MSC platforms."

Additional Info Baseline Certifications shall be in place at time of period of performance engagement. Contractor will have from time of award to task order issuance to have all personnel under this contract comply with baseline certifications. Ordering period under this contract will commence on 12/1/2018 and the first expected task order will be potentially issued on or about 1/1/2019.

GE Comment Resolution List

File details come from the government source that posted it.