Questions_and_Answers.pdf

AG-024B-S-16-0019 11 April 2016

Questions and Answers

1. Regarding Past Performance submission

Question:

(b) For the purpose of past performance evaluation the Offeror must submit completed past performance questionnaires (Appendix 2) for each performance event to be considered

We did not receive Appendix 2

Please disregard the appendix 2, the requirement for submission of past performance information is located under submission requirements #3. There is not a required format and only the information in that section is required.

It reads as follows:

3. Proposals shall include past performance information on most recent five (5) to ten

(10) specific contracts (no more than 3 years old) that demonstrates performance relevant to the Statement of Work (SOW) performance requirements. Past performance information for State and local governments, private sector clients, and subcontracts that is similar to the Government requirement will be evaluated equally with similar Federal contracts. Past performance information is proprietary source selection information and will be treated in accordance with FAR 3.104. Past performance proposals shall be limited to no more than 10 pages. Past performance proposals must include at a minimum;

a. Project descriptions, locations, and performance periods (demonstrating relevancy to

SOW requirements)

b. Customer name, point of contact (two POC’s for each non-Federal reference), and phone number

c. Contract details (value, type, and number)

d. Completion date

2. Regarding the Statement of Work: Chapter VI, Section B, Paragraph (a) “Regulatory”

Question:

If we are not in the position to offer a positive response to any of the three scenarios (i.e., STC, 8110-3, or 337) requested in this section are we potentially not qualified to bid?

The SOW minimum requirements for Tier’s 1, 2 &3 require a permanently mounted unit which would be subject to these regulatory requirements. Tier 4 is a portable unit and therefore is does not fall under these regulatory requirements.

3. Regarding the Statement of Work: Chapter VI, Section C “Tier 2 AFF Systems”

Question:

At this time, none of our hardware is capable of handling an RS232 or other wired connection into the device to receive external (telemetry) data from the aircraft. Due to this fact, are we potentially not qualified to bid on Tier 2 hardware?

AG-024B-S-16-0019 11 April 2016

An RS232 or other wired connection is a requirement for Tier 2 and Tier 3 hardware.

Devices not meeting the minimum requirements will not be reviewed.

4. Regarding the Statement of Work: Chapter IV “Schedule of Items”

Question:

If we are not able to potentially offer Tier 2, 3, or 4 hardware items how do we account for this on the CLINs within the prototypical project pricing spreadsheet? Are these data cells left blank?

If a provider does not offer a device meeting the requirements for an individual Tier, they may mark “No Bid” on the CLIN.

4) Regarding the Interface Control Document (ICD):

Question: Who modifies the generic “Company A” text found throughout this document to supplant with our actual company name and title of individual approving, etc. ?

An individual within a company with knowledge of the network structure, such as an

Operations Manager or position above, should modify the document.

5) Regarding the Prototypical Project Pricing Matrix “Subscription Service Price”:

Questions: Under the headings ‘fixed pricing’ and ‘variable messaging’ there is a request for costing to be supplied by the bidder in each option period. We are requesting clarity on the values indicated in the ‘Qty of Messaging’ column. Do these values represent per ping position reports packets or some other quantity, such as operational hours? I.e., are these message quantities for SMS or text message traffic or simply for data position pings? If they are not for data position pings, what volume of flight hours would each tier of hardware be expected to operate at within each option period?

The Qty of Messaging column indicates the anticipated number of standard messages such as data position reports. This information should be used as a basis for pricing only.

On the pricing matrix, the quantity of messaging seems confusing as some of the numbers are the same. Can you please clarify?

The quantity of messages on the pricing matrix are an estimate only and do not reflect a guaranteed amount of messaging. The numbers on the pricing matrix are for pricing and evaluation only.

The past performance information section under Contract Details it asks for value, type and number. What information is required for “number”?

The number referred to is the contract number.