Set_4_QandA.pdf

RTS Engineering and Technical Services (RETS) W9113M-15-R-0007

Set 4 of Government Responses to Industry Questions

Note: The Government answers are based on information known at the time of this release.

Offerors and potential offerors shall rely on the Final RFP for proposal preparation. In the event of inconsistencies between answers provided to industry questions and the RFP, the final published RETS RFP is the only document that industry shall rely upon and definitively states the Government's requirements.

1. Question: DRFP Section L & M and DPWS. Can the Government please clarify if the offeror is to submit both a phase-in plan and phase-out plan as part of our submission? If so, will the Government consider removing plans from page count limitations, as a phase-out plan can contain an equal amount of detail, and thus page count, as a phase-in plan?

Answer: Both phase-in and phase-out transition must be proposed as required by Sections B, L and M of the solicitation. Refer to Section L, Table L.1 of the final RFP for page limitations.

2. Question: DRFP Section L. Can the offeror assume that all incumbent staff possess the requisite training and certifications as specified in the PWS?

Answer: The Government expects the offerors to propose personnel/positions that meet the training and certifications requirements specified in the final RFP and Attachments.

3. Question: DPWS. Will the Government provide a complete, detailed GFM list for the Worthy?

Answer: The Worthy equipment items are identified on the “Supplemental Tab” of Final RFP Attachment 13 – RETS GFE.

4. Question: DRFP Section H. Are there offices in Building 1008 for the RETS

Contractor? If so, how many total and how many are single occupancy?

Answer: Yes, there are offices in Building 1008 for the RETS contractor. Refer to the final RFP Section H for specific information.

5. Question: DRFP Section L. Please clarify, preferably by example, what is meant by

"limiting factors" in paragraph a. Similarly, please clarify, preferably by example, what is meant by “constraints” in paragraph c.

Answer: Limitations must be taken into account during mission planning.

Constraints and restraints are two types of limitations (limiting factors). Operational limitations are actions required or prohibited by higher authority or other restrictions that limit freedom of action, such as diplomatic agreements, political and economic conditions in affected countries, and host-nation issues. A constraint is a requirement placed on a mission by a higher authority that dictates an action, thus restricting freedom of action. A restraint is a requirement placed on the mission by a higher command that prohibits an action, thus restricting freedom of action. Many operational limitations are commonly expressed as rules of engagement.

Operational limitations may restrict or bind course of action (COA) selection or may even impede implementation of the chosen COA. An example applicable to RETS is that rotary wing aircraft cannot fly at night due to pilots not being Night Vision Goggle certified.

Offerors and potential offerors shall rely on the Final RFP for proposal preparation. In the event of inconsistencies between answers provided to industry questions and the RFP, the final published RETS RFP is the only document that industry shall rely upon and definitively states the Government's requirements.

6. Question: DPWS. During the site visit, it was stated that the next PWS will include the requirement for the RETS contractor to Operate and Maintain the USAV Worthy vessel, in addition to the KMRSS TM, Comm, and Flight Safety equipment. Please provide detailed information regarding what this O&M entails: ship's crew, captain certifications, dry dock schedules, how many times/year is the Worthy at sea for STS and TMS functions, when the next extended overhaul is due, and other pertinent details so contractors can estimate the staffing requirements and maintenance costs.

Answer: Refer to final RFP Sections H, L and Attachments. For proposal purposes, assume RTS averages two deployments/FY lasting three weeks each.

7. Question: DPWS. Is the UDS process automated and who controls the tool and process?

Answer: UDS is not an automated tool. The offeror will use the UDS (format) per the requirements of the PWS. Refer to Attachment 05 to the final RFP and general information can be found at the Range Commanders Council's public web site (http://www.wsmr.army.mil/RCCsite/Pages/default.aspx) for additional information on the use of UDS.

8. Question: DPWS. Is C&A/RMF being done by others and associated artifacts provided to the contractor for situational awareness?

Answer: No. Accreditation is a RETS requirements. The RETS PWS references the DODI 8510-01 for definition of RMF. Refer to the final RFP and Attachments.

9. Question: DPWS. Is CCI the only100% inventory requirement on contract?

Answer: No. Refer to final RFP and Attachments (PWS) for CCI and non-CCI inventory requirements. Army Regulation 190-51 defines CCI inventory requirements. Federal Acquisition Regulation defines non-CCI inventory requirements.

10. Question: DPWS. Will the government provide preventive maintenance inspection and service (PMIS) information for all RETS-contract covered systems in advance of the Final RFP?

Answer: PMIS is not a RETS requirement. RTS has not used PMIS.

11. Question: DPWS. Will the government provide historical failure/corrective action information for all RETS-contract covered systems in advance of the Final RFP?

Answer: Historical information is provided in the RETS Offerors Library in two EXCEL spreadsheets, titled “Enclosure 1 & 2 of RTS Work Orders FY12 and FY13

(FOUO).”

Offerors and potential offerors shall rely on the Final RFP for proposal preparation. In the event of inconsistencies between answers provided to industry questions and the RFP, the

12. Question: DPWS. Will the government provide the latest MTBF and MTTR records for all RETS-contract covered systems in advance of the Final RFP?

Answer: Historical information is provided in the RETS Offerors Library in two EXCEL spreadsheets, titled “Enclosure 1 & 2 of RTS Work Orders FY12 and FY13

(FOUO).”

13. Question: DPWS. Will the government provide a list TMDE items that cannot be supported locally and must be shipped to designated locations for calibrations according to the current Support Agreement Between U.S. Army TMDE Activity and the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command (USASMDC/ARSTRAT) in advance of the Final RFP?

Answer: Refer to the final RFP, Section L. For proposal purposes quantities by type (on island and off island calibration) are provided in Section L.

14. Question: DPWS. Can the government identify the specific certifications required by personnel performing explosives work (PWS 3.1.1.6.2)?

Answer: Refer to the final RFP and Attachments. PWS 3.2.4.2 provides references for explosive safety handling certifications. DA PAM 385-64 identifies the required explosive safety handling certifications.

15. Question: DPWS. Will the Government provide a notional mission schedule for transition through base period?

Answer: Refer to the final RFP, Section L.

16. Question: DRFP, Section H. When will the Government furnish the "rates established by USAG-KA" for medical and dental services?

Answer: Access to limited medical and dental services are available from USAG- KA; however, these services are not provided by RETS contract. Individuals should rely on their individual health care provider for coverage of medical and dental costs.

Treatment for major illness, significant health conditions and emergencies (except triage and stabilization) are not available. The establishment of rates for these services is outside the RETS contract.

17. Question: DRFP, Attachment 1. Will the government require subcontractor Facility

Security Officers to fulfill Security Manager requirements; specifically, SMs must have a 'nationally recognized security certification'.

Answer: Contractor and subcontractor Facility Security Officers (FSO) are only required to have FSO certification and training.

Offerors and potential offerors shall rely on the Final RFP for proposal preparation. In the event of inconsistencies between answers provided to industry questions and the RFP, the final published RETS RFP is the only document that industry shall rely upon and definitively states the Government's requirements.

18. Question: DRFP, Section L. Is the cost of Defense Base Act insurance included in the estimated ODC amounts in Section [L] 11.

Answer: No, the cost of DBA insurance is not included in the for proposal purposes ODC amounts provided in Final RFP Section L.

19. Question: DPWS. The PWS states, “Ensure that all RTS Instrumentation listed in the RTS ISFM and TFEM, are maintained and all RTS Instrumentation maintenance on systems listed in the ISFM and TFEM is recorded via an Army-approved standard logistics information system (LIS)”. Question: Does the government require that contractors use a standard Army Logistics Information System such as GCSS-A or can a contractor provided solution be used?

Answer: Refer to final RFP and attachments. Offerors are to use an LIS system that will meet the requirement stated in the RETS PWS.

20. Question: General. The government has indicated that a Facility Security

Clearance is required at time of award. Question: For those offerors that are considering bidding as a new entity, such as a Joint Venture, will the government consider an acquisition approach that provides for obtaining a Facility Security Clearance prior to award so that new entities can participate in this competition?

Answer: The USG is working on streamlining the facility clearance process with SMDC Security by having the Contracting Officers Representative (COR) provide sponsorship timely along with their request for investigation to Defense Security Service (DSS). This can be completed timely by the COR only if the offeror has provided all needed information in their "request for sponsorship letter". Refer to the final RFP. The DSS process currently takes 151 days if the offeror does not have any issues that would preclude them from obtaining a facility clearance.

21. Question: General. Will the government confirm that any new bidding entity, such as a Joint Venture, must be set up as a legal entity no later than upon submittal of the offerors proposal?

Answer: A formal joint venture (JV) has to be a legal entity at the time that it submits its proposal. If it is an informal JV, then the two or more firms involved have to be themselves legal entities and they must have a written agreement between them at the time that the proposal is submitted. Offerors should note that even in the case of an informal JV, their arrangement does have legal standing and should they be the awardee, they will have entered into a legally binding contract as a JV with the Government.

22. Question: DRFP Section L. Regarding Volume VI Cost/Price proposal [L.3, Volume

VI, a. General Instructions, section 8, pg 105]. This section requires that the prime offeror submit a copy of the proposal to DCAA and DCMA. In our experience, these

Offerors and potential offerors shall rely on the Final RFP for proposal preparation. In the event of inconsistencies between answers provided to industry questions and the RFP, the final published RETS RFP is the only document that industry shall rely upon and definitively states the Government's requirements.

agencies do not usually wish to see proposals until they are requested to complete an audit, which is rare on a competitive proposal. Will the Government consider adjusting this requirement and defer submittal to DCAA and DCMA until they request a copy of the proposal?

Answer: Offerors are required to submit copies of their proposal to their cognizant DCAA and DCMA.

23. Question: DPWS. What software language is utilized for the software development required? Approximately how many Lines of Code (LOC) are currently in place?

Answer: Existing code was generated and maintained using C, C++ and Java programming languages. Refer to final RFP Section L for proposal preparation purposes lines of code quantity.

24. Question: DPWS. The PWS states that the contractor must operate, maintain, troubleshoot, and repair the RTS Satellite Communications (SATCOM) Facility 24 hours/day, 7 days/week. Would the Government provide information on what response time expectations are?

Answer: Refer to final RFP and Attachments (PWS paragraph "RTS SATCOM Facility").

25. Question: DRFP Section H. Will the Government provide a list of labor categories and base wage rates that are currently being paid on the current contract? If not provided, all non-incumbent offerors risk having proposals adjusted up or down if rates are inconsistent with current rates. Offerors are required to pay current wages (grandfathering); only the incumbent can accurately provide this data as part of their proposal response.

Answer: Grandfathering only applies to a select group of existing RMI workforce.

Refer to the final RFP.

26. Question: DRFP, Section L. Volume 1, Section 3 states: “include Section K, DD

Form 254 and other applicable fill-ins for team members. See FAR 4.102 regarding contractor signature requirements.” Does this requirement apply only to team members that comprise the prime offeror (such as JV members), or does it include subcontractor team members too?

Answer: In accordance with FAR 4.102 and Section K, DD 254, signature requirement applies only to the team members which comprise the joint venture and not to the subcontractors.

27. Question: DRFP Section L. Section 4 requires resumes for key personnel. We recommend the Government exclude resumes from the allocated page count for Volume III. Offerors will have a minimum of five Key Personnel. Providing detailed

Offerors and potential offerors shall rely on the Final RFP for proposal preparation. In the event of inconsistencies between answers provided to industry questions and the RFP, the final published RETS RFP is the only document that industry shall rely upon and definitively states the Government's requirements.

qualifications of proposed key personnel could require 15-20 pages. Will the Government consider excluding Key Personnel resumes from the page count?

Answer: Refer to Section L of the final RFP.

28. Question: DRFP, Section L. In the Sample Task instructions, offerors are asked to

“provide the process and a work flow diagram describing the process by which logistics coordination will take place with the USAG-KA Garrison for required logistics support to the mission.” Can the Government provide additional details or Standard Operating Procedures to help level the playing field?

Answer: Standard Operating Procedures for this process do not exist. This contractor to contractor coordination is a new process at RTS for the RETS contract.

Refer to final RFP Section H Contractor-Contractor Relationships.

29. Question: DRFP Section L. In the Sample Task instructions, offerors are asked to

“identify key activities and describe the process for configuration and check-out of RTS range instrumentation and communication assets in the Mission Summary Test Plan. This is a specific requirement that non-incumbent offerors must make assumptions about to provide a response, whereas the offerors currently performing work on Kwajalein can answer more precisely and accurately. We recommend that the Government focus sample task instructions more on management areas instead of technical requirements in an effort to level the playing field.

Answer: Refer to final RFP, Sections L, M and attachments. The Government has updated the Offerors Library and has confirmed the offerors library contains sufficient information to respond to the Sample TD.

30. Question: DRFP Section L. The RFP requires offerors to develop a response to the

Sample Technical Directive Solution requirements. Highly technical sample tasks can be incumbent friendly, since the incumbent has more familiarity with the actual work and manhour requirements. Given that the winning offeror will retain the majority of the technical workforce, we recommend structuring the proposal response more on the key discriminators offerors bring – their management approach, tools and processes, and innovations/efficiencies that deliver cost savings to the Government.

We recommend adding another subfactor: Innovations, with the Section L text being as follows: “The Offeror shall describe in detail any innovative practices, techniques, or approaches that it proposes to employ or utilize technically, operationally, and/or managerially and include the expected benefit to RETS, including any estimated financial value of proposed innovations (if any) in terms of cost savings, cost avoidance, and/or cost benefit to RETS. Details supporting such estimates (if any) may be included in the Cost volume as a voluntary appendix.” We suggest the associated Section M text read: “The Government will evaluate any proposed innovations for their degree of perceived achievability by the contractor proposing the

Offerors and potential offerors shall rely on the Final RFP for proposal preparation. In the event of inconsistencies between answers provided to industry questions and the RFP, the final published RETS RFP is the only document that industry shall rely upon and definitively states the Government's requirements.

innovation(s), the relative risk associated with the proposed innovation(s), and the potential and expected value to RETS of the proposed innovation(s).” Will the Government consider this approach?

Answer: The Government considered the Offeror's recommendation. No additional factors shall be included in the Test Mission Sample Technical Directive or evaluation factors identified in Section M. Offerors shall describe any innovative practices, techniques, or approaches within their proposals. Refer to final RFP and attachments.

31. Question: DRFP, Section L. The RFP requires offerors to present their maintenance approach; however, the instructions provided are high level and do not provide specific details so that offerors can develop a comprehensive approach.

Likewise, Section M states that the Government will evaluate based on “the adequacy of the offeror's planned resources, metrics, maintenance schedule, inventory control processes, and MTBF/MTTR record and status reporting methodology for successfully implementing the proposed maintenance approach.”

Current Kwajalein contractors can provide a more accurate response to this requirement than non-incumbent offerors. We recommend the Government provide additional detail regarding the maintenance requirements, tools currently being used to track maintenance, historical data, etc. so that all offerors can propose a maintenance approach tailored to Kwajalein RETS requirements.

Answer: The USG has provided the representative work order history and system availability reports in the Offerors' Library.

32. Question: DPWS. Will the contractor be responsible for security violations by other organizations (MIT/LL, MDA, other contractors not under the RETS contractor control, RTS) discovered during these site assistance visits or other inspections that result in a non “pass”? Will RTS ensure that visit authorization requests and itineraries for Answer: The RETS contractor will not be responsible for security violations committed by other organizations with respect to “pass” or “fail”, except the RETS contractor is responsible for violations committed by itself and its subcontractors.

The question in the last sentence was submitted incomplete and therefore is not answerable. Refer to final RFP and attachments or resubmit the question.

33. Question: The Government states that the Kwajalein Enterprise Asset Management System (KEAMS) would not be provided. Will the Government provide information on if that data would be exported to the contractor? If not, then this introduces a significant contract risk for a non-incumbent. Will the Government provide details on how that information captured in KEAMS will be made available to the winning offeror?

Offerors and potential offerors shall rely on the Final RFP for proposal preparation. In the event of inconsistencies between answers provided to industry questions and the RFP, the final published RETS RFP is the only document that industry shall rely upon and definitively states the Government's requirements.

Answer: All relevant data will be transferred during contract transition in accordance with Government approved phase-in plan.

34. Question: DRFP, Executive Summary. The Draft RFP states anticipated contract award date is 28 November. With a 90 day transition to commence 1 December, and required two-week lead time minimum to gain approval to enter US Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll (and limited flight availability), we recommend an earlier award and notice to proceed allowing personnel to arrive on Kwajalein so they are present for the full period of the transition.

Answer: Two weeks is a submission lead time, not an approval lead time. The Government will make every effort to expedite processing the visitor entry request approvals for phase-in purposes.

35. Question: DRFP, Section H. The DRFP states that USAG-KA will provide heavy equipment operations and maintenance. In 2015 and 2016, RTS purchased heavy equipment (manlifts, cranes, forklifts) due to the overall age and unavailability of the heavy equipment provided by the Garrison. Question: Will this equipment continue to be RTS’ and under the control of the RETS contractor, or will the equipment convert to the Garrison? Does the Garrison plan on replacing the over-age manlifts which have hampered operational availability? What is the plan for deconflicting usage of manlifts during overlapping mission critical RTS and Garrison requirements?

Answer: Refer to the Garrison Equipment List and GFE attachment. The Garrison will be responsible for maintenance and replacement of Garrison Equipment List items. The RETS contractor will be responsible for maintenance and replacement of RETS equipment in accordance with the final RFP and attachments. Refer to final RFP, Section H Contractor-Contractor Relationships.

36. Question: DRFP, Section H. The DRFP lists associate contractors. Question:

There has been discussions about a delayed or phased transition. If the RTS contract transitions first, and base operations remain being performed by the current contractor for a period of time, how will the RETS contractor interface with the current contractor for support, if the current contractor is not an associate contractor?

Answer: Refer to final RFP, Section H Contractor-Contractor Relationships.

37. Question: DRFP, Incentive Clause. The Conflicts between the RETS and Base

Operations could cause unplanned schedule delays impacting RETS contractor incentive fee evaluations; for example, some vessel maintenance equipment and scheduling for possible engine work resides on the pier which is controlled by the Base Operations contractor. RETS test operations utilizing the Worthy could be negatively impacted due to Base Operations maintenance facility schedule conflicts

Offerors and potential offerors shall rely on the Final RFP for proposal preparation. In the event of inconsistencies between answers provided to industry questions and the RFP, the final published RETS RFP is the only document that industry shall rely upon and definitively states the Government's requirements.

or parts delivery issues. Government noted in one on one meetings that conflicts between RETS and Base Operations contractors will be resolved using reporting mechanisms in the CDRLS and Incentive Clause documents. One sentence was noted in para. 1.6.4 of the Incentive Clause regarding delays. Question: Can the Government please outline the specific RETS process, reporting requirements and approval authority to be used to document conflicts between the RETS contractor and the Base Operations Contractor that result in RETS delays where RETS is not penalized?

Answer: Refer to final RFP, Attachments and A024 CDRL sample. Government approved down time will give relief for delays caused by events outside of the RETS contractor’s control.

38. Question: DRFP. The division of responsibilities for Worthy maintenance equipment and facilities ashore are not clearly defined between the RETS contractor and the Base operations Contractor. Question: What are the specific responsibilities for Worthy maintenance equipment and facilities ashore between the RETS contractor and the Base operations Contractor?

Answer: Refer to final RFP and attachments (including the RETS PWS) for RETS Worthy Maintenance responsibilities.

39. Question: Industry Day, Kwaj Tours and Scripts. Several facilities, due to upgrade and modernization activities (e.g., KREMS radars), are now occupying less physical space than the initial design. This creates the potential for moderate to large unused spaces within technical facilities. What is the Government’s guidance regarding RETS contractor use and/or modification of this “extra” space?

Answer: Post award recommendations for space reutilization will be considered on a case by case basis.

40. Question: This document describes regulations for Kwajalein access. For the purposes of Phase-in, what designation will apply to contractor personnel who are assigned to Kwajalein and/or Roi Namur phase-in activities?

Answer: Phase-in personnel are TDY to Kwajalein on an unaccompanied basis for the duration of the transition period. Meal services will be available but not furnished by the Government.

41. Question: DRFP, Section H.16. Please explain the process for securing approval for Off-duty employment?

Answer: The requirement for contracting officer approval is removed. However, as prescribed by 3.1004(a) and 3.1106, the final RFP Section I incorporates the following clauses: FAR 52.203-13 Contractor Code of Business Ethics and Conduct, and FAR 52.203-16 Preventing Personal Conflicts of Interest.

Offerors and potential offerors shall rely on the Final RFP for proposal preparation. In the event of inconsistencies between answers provided to industry questions and the RFP, the

42. Question: For the RETS contract, there are significant cost and quality of life impacts that may impact personnel located or assigned to OCONUS sites. With the Kwajalein BOS contract being bid separately and not on the same schedule as RETS, personnel cost of living, including an estimation of additional contractor workforce costs such as school fees for on-island dependents, could in fact change.

Would the Government provide plug numbers so that offerors can price these consistently – given the uncertainty associated with housing, schools, etc. falling outside of the RETS scope?

Answer: Refer to the final RFP and attachments.

43. Question: Given the information requested in the Sample Task, non-incumbents do not have access to the current information that the incumbent has to effectively respond to the ST and develop a compelling BOE. We recommend that the Government consider removing the Sample Task, making it more of a management scenario, or provide all incumbent related information so that offerors can bid effectively. Otherwise, there is no way a non-incumbent can score higher than the incumbent – possibly equal to the incumbent, which then can lead to more of a cost shoot out and not a best value acquisition.

Answer: The Government considered the Offeror's recommendation; however is not removing the Test Mission Sample Technical Directive or evaluation factors identified in Section M. Refer to final RFP, Sections L, M and attachments. The Government provides sufficient information in the PWS, RFP and assumptions, Sample Task description and Offerors Library to enable offerors to provide a complete sample task response. The Government has confirmed the Offerors Library contains sufficient information to respond to the Sample TD; for example, mission type descriptions, UDS overview, RTS instrumentation descriptions and capabilities, and RTS Space Operations guidance documents.

44. Question: In the most recent Question and Answer document the Government has indicated that the Kwajalein Enterprise Asset Management System (KEAMS) will not be provided by the Government. Respectfully request, as part of the technical library

(1) KEAMS user manual and/or instructions for use, (2) at least the last full year of KEAMS records, and (3) a description of which assets are and are not currently tracked within the KEAMS system. This data is necessary for offerors to assess (A) the impact of KEAMS data migration as part of transition and (B) an indication of the current fidelity of the system in use today and the level of effort required to utilize the system.

Answer: All relevant data will be transferred during contract transition in accordance with Government approved phase-in plan.

Offerors and potential offerors shall rely on the Final RFP for proposal preparation. In the event of inconsistencies between answers provided to industry questions and the RFP, the final published RETS RFP is the only document that industry shall rely upon and definitively states the Government's requirements.

45. Question: Volume III Section 1 asks offerors to provide their labor resource mix using internal labor categories. Additionally, offerors are asked to provide supporting rationale for any deviations from Table L.4 which identifies TMS/I&M Activities. In some cases TMS/I&M Support Activities represent a single RETS labor category (e.g. Chief Engineering Marine) but in other cases the activities represent a functional grouping (e.g. Mission Operations, Planning and Coordinating). Will the Government clarify how these TMS/I&M Support Activities relate to labor categories or the PWS so that a clear comparison can be made between an offeror’s labor resource mix and the government’s estimate?

Answer: The RETS labor categories listing provides education and experience requirements. Offerors should propose their own labor categories mapped to the RETS labor categories. Table L.4 provides an estimation for Informational Purposes Only of the level of effort hours allocated between Kwajalein and Huntsville. The actual allocation of labor categories and hours proposed (i.e., labor mix) is at the offeror's discretion. It is the offeror's responsibility to ensure that its proposed allocation is consistent with and feasible for executing the offeror's planned approach for satisfying the TMS/I&M performance requirements of the PWS.

46. Question: The contractor shall ensure all classified information / materials are properly accounted for, contain applicable markings and protected IAW AR 380-5, DoDM 5200.01 Volumes 1-4, and RTS Kwajalein Atoll and ROC-H Command Security Procedures. The contractor shall provide document control for RTS Government and contractor operations and process and prepare classified material for transportation / transmission as required by applicable Army regulations and policies. Is the contractor required to implement a Document Control Accountability system?

Answer: The RETS contractor is responsible for accountability IAW Command procedures and applicable regulations. There is no requirement to implement a system that meets specific Government regulations; however RETS contractor is required to maintain accountability per Command procedures and regulations.