RFQ_DJD-17-Q-0195_Amend_0002_10-3-17.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE I PAGE OF PAGES 1 I 1 7

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ . NO. 15 PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

000 2 Block 16C

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADM INISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE I DEA Headquarters

Office of Acqu k sition and Relocation Mgt

87 01 Morrisset e Drive

Springfield VA 22 1 52

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No ., street, county , state and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

Pro spective Quo~ers DJD - 17 - Q- 0195

0 98. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

09 - 18 - 2017

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

I D 108. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

CODE FACILITY CODE

11 . THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers 0 is extended D is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended , by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and return ing _ copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (cl By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT r HE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER If by virtue of th is amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted , such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and th is amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NO. IN ITEM 1 OA.

D

D B. TH E ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date. etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43 .103(b).

D C THIS SUPfl>LFMFNTAL AG REEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority )

D E. IMPORTANT: Contractor D isnot, D is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible .)

The purpose on this amendment is to provide answers to questions and extend the date for receipt of quotes o 10 : 00 AM ET on N ovember 3 , 2017 . Accordingly :

a . The answe s to questi o ns , attached , are hereby incorporated into the above numbered s o licitation .

b . All other erms and conditi o ns remain unchanged .

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed , remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

158. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

15C.DATE SIGNED

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Of ficer

16C.DATE SIGNED

10 - 03 - 20 1 7

STANDAR D FORM 30 (REV. 10.al \

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Questions and Answers RFQ No. DJD-17-Q-0195/Amendment 0002

Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO) Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) Software and Services

1. How to enter a response of “C” when “C” is not included in the drop-down list of Codes

Answer: It was an error in the spreadsheet; attached is a new version to allow for C (RFQ ATTACH 1 DEA MRO Requirements 20170928).

2. For onsite personnel, are Green Card holders able to be onsite for implementation and training?

Answer: Yes, provided they pass the standard criminal history check.

3. General IT 3.07 – Please clarify “pre-delivered” alerts requirement

Answer: Those alerts that are already a part of the software that require no creation or configuration

4. General IT 12.06 – Does instant messaging mean email and/or text messaging or is this requirement for the mechanics to perform day-to-day functions when not connected online to main MRO system?

Answer: Could be either email or text messaging, particularly for off-site mechanics.

5. General IT 20. – RFP specifies Bar Code 128. Will code 3 of 9 also work?

Answer: We prefer 128 although 3 of 9 will work as long as there is a plan to move to 128 in the near future.

6. General IT 20. – is RFID in use or plan for near future?

Answer: Not in use at this time, we view that as a process improvement in the future. Not Required.

7. Acquisitions 5.02, .03, .04 – Can you provide samples of these reports or indications of data content & format like that in question 5.06?

Answer: Once selection is made content and examples will be provided on all reports.

8. Acquisitions 5.12 – Please clarify the requirement for Expiring Vendor Currencies

Answer: Expiring vendor currencies was a poor choice of words. Many of our vendors must provide documentation of their certifications and we would like to be able to track the whether their documents are current.

9. Fiscal 5.04 – Electronic invoice file for AP invoices, AR invoices or both?

Answer: Electronic documentation storage, for scanned or emailed documents received from vendor that can be attach to an invoice.

10. Fiscal 5.05 – What transactions will flow between the new system and SAP?

Answer: Primarily invoice and labor data that is exported from SAP to import into the MRO.

11. Fiscal 5.05 – Is the SAP interface to address daily activity, i.e., purchasing, encumbrance accounting, etc. or is the SAP interface for month-end transactions?

Answer: SAP interaction is only through imported and exported data since SAP and the MRO systems are air gapped.

12. Fiscal 5.06 – What capabilities / format are required for the time tracking system interface

Answer: Import from and export to text file.

13. Supply 3.08 – Please provide additional clarification on types of images expected for uploading and retrieval

Answer: bmp, exif, png, jpeg, tif, .gif etc. all standard raster image formats.

14. Fleet Management – Are Scope and Maintenance Task synonymous, i.e., 100 hour check? If not please define Scope

Answer: Same thing

15. Fleet Management – Using a 10% tolerance of an OEM’s 1000 hour check, does overflight mean the aircraft can operate up to 1100 hours?

Answer: Yes

16. Fleet Management 6.05 – What documents are envisioned for this requirement? Is a requirement for mechanics and inspectors or all personnel?

Answer: All Personnel.

17. How are these services currently being performed? Under contract? In-house?

Answer: This is a new contract requirement for services currently being performed in house.

18. If these requirements are currently being performed under a contract,

a. Who is the Contractor?

b. What is the contract number?

c. When does the contract expire?

d. What is the current contract value?

Answer: See answer to question 17.

19. What is the anticipated RFP release date?

Answer: This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial products/services. The RFQ was posted on FBO.gov 9-18-2017 as stated in the announcement which is the same day the requirement was published in Federal Business Opportunities (FBO).

20. Will the DEA IT staff sustain (backup, patch, monitor, manage the database and applications tiers, etc.) the hardware/software once the solution is implemented? Or will these activities remain the responsibility of the software provider?

Answer: DEA IT staff will sustain the software on site.

21. Are all of the DEA requirements listed on the 9 core tabs in the requirements spreadsheet “must have” and therefore any potential solution is required to meet 100% of those requirements either through OOTB functionality/configuration or custom development? If not, can the DEA prioritize their requirements into categories related to the criticality of need? One approach is using a MUSCOW ‘must have’ (required through config or development or not technically acceptable), ‘should have’ (required through config or dev, but can also be supported through business process change), ‘could have’ (will have if satisfied by configuration), or ‘won’t have’ (only used if available without configuration directly OOTB).

Answer: The requirements listed in the nine core modules list all functionality the DEA wants for its MRO. Full 100% adherence to those requirements is not required for a package to be reviewed or accepted but serve a basis for evaluation of different packages.

22. Will the ‘additional desired’ module functionality be evaluated for technical acceptability? i.e., Can the offeror be technically acceptable without meeting all of the additional module requirements? If so, will additional module capabilities be evaluated as strengths/differentiators on top of the core modules?

Answer: The offeror can be technically acceptable without meeting all of the Additional Desired Modules. Additional desired modules will be used to identify strengths/differentiators.

23. Could the government please provide specifics of its aircraft fleet to include (a) types of aircraft,

(b) counts of each type of aircraft, (c) counts of leased and owned aircraft?

Answer: 16 different models 1 208 Cessna 1 208B Cessna 1 550 Cessna 1 60 Lear 7 AS350 Airbus

1 ATR 42-320 ATR

1 ATR 42-500 ATR

9 B300 Beech

8 B407 Bell 4 B412 Bell

13 206 Cessna 36 206H Cessna

5 206S Cessna 5 210 Cessna 4 MD369 McDonnell Douglass

54 Fixed Wing Single Engine Piston 20 Rotary Wing Single Engine 7 Fixed Wing Single Engine Turbine 13 Fixed Wing Multiple Engine Turbine 4 Rotary Wing Multiple Engine

24. Could the government please provide a list of the solutions with which it expects the MRO solution to interface, including distinguishing between commercial off the shelf (COTS), government off the shelf (GOTS), and custom developed solutions, e.g., chart of accounts maintained in the Unified Financial Management System (UFMS) financial system and synchronized with the MRO solution, etc.? As part of the answer, could the government please provide which system(s) they intend to be the system(s) of record in the end-state landscape?

Answer: There are no existing solutions that the MRO will interface with, depending upon the capabilities of the MRO the DEA will write such solutions that the vendor cannot provide. This is the reason the DEA is requiring access to the software API’s

25. Could the government please identify any legacy software applications in use to support the MRO function which would be replaced by the new solution?

Answer: Pentagon 2000SQL, Professional Flight Management

26. Could the government please identify the types, volume, and sources of any data it expects to be converted into the new MRO solution?

Answer: MRO data stored in SQL Server database 26GB Pentagon 2000 SQL, Flight data from Professional Flight Management Pervasive database 17.9 GB

27. Could the government please provide the specifics of the information technology infrastructure, e.g., application and database servers, databases, etc., including sizing, and operating system and other infrastructure support software and versions, that it intends to make available for vendors to use to deploy the MRO solution in multiple environments that facilitate software development lifecycle management, e.g., development, test, and production environments? Also, the government notes the "user interface must be capable of cloud deployment...." Does it intend to use a DEA cloud environment for the MRO solution and, if so, could it provide specifics of it to include whether hosted externally or by DEA on premise, etc.?

Answer: DEA environment is virtual servers residing on a FC of 2 2012 Hypervisors with SAS of 7 TB available

Software: Windows 2012,2016 Datacenters Serves, SQL Server 2014, 2016. DEA has access to server licenses for all Microsoft products.

Dev: 1 IIS Server WS2016, 1 2016 SQL Server WS2016

UAT: 2 NLB IIS servers WS2012, 2 FC 2014 SQL Servers WS2012

Prod: 3 NLB IIS servers WS2012, 3 FC SQL Servers WS2012

DEA has not determined if there will be an in-house cloud solution consisting of virtual servers or Microsoft Azure for Government Cloud.

28. The government notes in the SOW that the “user interface must be capable of cloud deployment to include mobile capable interfaces.” Will the government require the end state solution to be accessed by mobile devices and, if so, could the government please advise as to the type(s) of mobile devices, e.g., iOS, Android, Windows, etc.?

Answer: DEA expects that a large number of the interfaces be have mobile device interfaces for windows tablets and iOS phones and tablets. Whether that be through responsive web design apps or mobile apps is left to the vendors discretion.

29. What level of maintenance on the aircraft does the government intend to capture in the new MRO system?

Answer: Line maintenance to Heavy Maintenance to complete engine and component rebuilds, also to include aircraft modifications.

30. Is there an OCI requirement to separate vendors’ pursuit of the Maintenance System Implementation solicitation (this solicitation) from the solicitation “Total Aviation Operations and Maintenance Support Services,” #DJD17N0004?

Answer: Yes. The Agency takes OCI issues seriously and addresses them as they are identified.

31. Could the government extend the due date of the solicitation responses to allow additional time for vendors to incorporate the government's responses to questions in their proposals?

Answer: Yes, the due date for quotes is hereby extended to 10:00 AM ET November 3, 2017.

32. General-For the reports specified in the requirements spreadsheet, do they already exist? If so, what formats are the reports in today?

Answer: Many of the reports currently exist in Microsoft .rdl format others exist in the current MRO in proprietary format. Once a vendor is selected examples of all reports can be provided as well as .rdl documents for those reports that exist in SQL Server Reporting Services.

33. General-Does the DEA utilize an existing ERP system today? If so, what system?

Answer: Pentagon 2000 SQL

34. General--Does the DEA utilize an existing online training platform today? If so, please elaborate on the platform.

Answer: No

35. General--Please provide the list of vendors that responded to Sources Sought Notice DJD-17-N- 0006.

Answer: The following firms responded to the RFI.

1) Arcanum

2) Array Information Technologies

3) IBM

4) IFS North America

5) Reagent

6) Rusada

7) Tapestry Solutions

36. General--In order to have enough time to properly address responses to these questions in our proposal, please extend the due date for this RFQ from October 20, 2017 to November 3, 2017.

Answer: Yes. See answer to question 31.

37. General--Are there any systems the MRO needs to interface with?

Answer: See answer to question 24

38. General--If Yes to the above, please provide a list of the interfaces and the direction of data flow (incoming/outgoing/bi-directional) as well as frequency (real-time, daily, weekly, monthly, etc).

Answer: See answer to question 24

39. General--Please elaborate on the requirement for product support and maintenance. Is the DEA only looking for software support i.e. defect resolution with the core product and availability of software patches and new software versions? Does the DEA also want services to apply software patches, upgrade software versions and/or implement new functionality and features?

Answer: DEA is looking for software support i.e. defect resolution with the core product and availability of software patches and new software versions. DEA will implement with DEA IT staff patches, upgrades etc.

40. General--Please elaborate on the mobile requirements. Is DEA looking for a mobile solution, does the MRO system just need to support mobile products or does the MRO system just need to be accessible from a mobile device? Does mobile need to be used in a connected or disconnected state?

Answer: See question 28, DEA would prefer that all devices be used in a connected state, however DEA will consider disconnected state options.

41. Section 3.2.2--Data Migration--Currently how many work orders are created monthly?

Answer: Avgs over the last 9 years

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

127 83 85 80 70 63 73 75 70 73 60 63

42. Section 3.2.2--Data Migration--Does the data migration only include Master Data? (for example:

assets, locations, parts, tools, anything that can be used in a work order or service request or other transaction)

Answer: DEA will begin with only Master Data. If there should be a practicable method to move work order, service request, other transaction it will be considered as an additional project and would be a most desired state.

43. Section 3.2.2--Data Migration--If it includes more than Master data, what transactional Data is requested?

Answer: Maintenance transactions, supply transactions, Acquisitions data, fiscal data

44. Section 3.2.2--Data Migration--Can the legacy data be provided in an excel spreadsheet? If not, in what format will it be provided?

Answer: It can be provided in any format

45. Section 3.2.2--Data Migration--Is there a required data retention requirement for transactional data (i.e., work orders, service requests)? If yes can the transactional data continue to be referenced in the legacy system?

Answer: No retention requirement exists, also see question 42

46. Section 6.22--Price Quote – The Offeror shall submit its price quote in a similar format as shown in Attachment 2. The price quote shall include all direct and indirect expenses including the GSA Access Fee and profit Since vendors are to include GSA Access Fee, is it the Government’s intent to issue a Delivery Order against a vendor’s GSA IT Schedule 70 contract?

Answer: Reference to the GSA Access Fee is an error and is deleted. This is not a FAR 8 procurements?

47. Attachment 2--Pricing Quote Example – Hardware--Is the DEA looking to procure mobile and/or server hardware as part of this solicitation? If mobile devices are desired, please specify the number of devices required.

Answer: DEA currently has server and mobile devices. Should vendor need server hardware not currently available DEA will procure it separately. This line is intended to identify items such as bar code scanners, bar code printers or if proprietary hardware is required etc.

48. Is the required "complete project schedule with major milestones" the same thing as the PWS?

Or is the project schedule included in the PWS?

Answer: No. The Project Schedule is just that.

49. According to the RFQ, the pricing volume and technical volume will be reviewed separately. So, should the proposed payment schedule be included in Volume 1 Technical or Volume 2 Price?

Answer: Payment schedule would be with Price in Volume II. No pricing information is to be included in Volume I.

50. It is unclear how these requirements are to fit into the response since they are not included in the Instructions to Vendors Section 7 -- Evaluation. Can the DEA please clarify where responders need to include this information in the outline provided?

Answer: Additional instructions follow to provide clarification:

Quote Volumes:

The written quote shall be prepared in two parts:

Volumes Title

I. Technical Quote II. Business Quote

The Vendor shall further organize their technical quote with the following sub-divisions:

PHASE I

Technical Quote (Volume I)

Factor 1.1: Operations Oriented Functionality

Following the instructions provided on the DEA MRO Requirement—Instructions to Offerors (Excel Workbook), Attachment 1, the Offeror shall rate itself on each individual element listed. The Offeror shall also submit a Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) that meets all the objectives specified in the Statement of Objectives (SOO). The Government will subsequently evaluate the responses and arrive at an adjectival rating for each subfactor and Factor

1.1 overall. The Offeror shall provide but is not limited to the following documents:

Software Capabilities.

Technical Architecture and Requirements.

Security Architecture.

Training.

Migration Plan.

Customer Service Plans and Service Level Offering.

The vendor shall provide the following information in the spreadsheet:

Core Modules:

Subfactor 1.1.1. General Requirements IT: Describe how the Vendor will address common or universal functionality overall within the application.

Subfactor 1.1.2. Administration: Describe how all travel is captured and processed;

Subfactor 1.1.3. Acquisitions: Describe how Vendor relations are maintained while supporting cost effective purchasing that is in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations;

Subfactor 1.1. 4. Fiscal: Describe (i) how the GL and AP functions support the field service business functions and transactions and allow finance staff to report efficiently and accurately and conduct analysis of results; (ii) provide an integrated process to manage Vendors, track purchase commitments and pay Vendors; (iii) provide improved controls over expenses via approvals and system based matching; and (iv) streamline all processes via reduced paper based processes;

Subfactor 1.1.5. Supply: Describe how the system (i) supports day-to-day operations while providing streamlined parts and property data analysis and availability; and (ii) maintains accurate and efficient parts and property inventory for the Aviation Operations Center and off site warehouses;

Subfactor 1.1.6. Quality Control: Describe how accurately the system tracks all elements of airworthiness of the aircraft fleet (Components: Airframe, Airframe Parts, Engines, Engine Parts.

Scope Measures: Hours, Landings, Cycles, Torque Events, Days, etc.);

Subfactor 1.1.7. Fleet Management: Describe how well the system schedules and maintains operational readiness of fleet and response to all unscheduled maintenance events (Components:

Airframe, Airframe Parts, Engines, Engine Parts. Scope Measures: Hours, Landings, Cycles, Torque Events, Days, etc.);

Subfactor 1.1.8. Maintenance: Describe how the system supports the performance of maintenance in an FAA Part 145 Repair Station while ensuring compliance with Federal Regulations;

Subfactor 1.1.9. Technical Publications: Describe how the system ensures availability of the most current set of technical documentation for all aircraft types in the fleet;

Additional Desired Modules:

Subfactor 1.1.10. Training: Describe how the system tracks and schedules all employee training;

Subfactor 1.1.11. Operations: Describe how the system provides for the safest and most efficient flight request and scheduling system to better intergrade operations in the mainstream of the AOC.

Factor 1.2: Past Performance

The Offeror shall provide a list of up to three prior customers/clients and up to three existing customers/clients with similar requirements that were at least one year in length and performed within the last 3 years, i.e. agency/company name; contract number and title; and name, address and telephone numbers of the point of contact/Contracting officer/Contracting officer’s Representative. The Offeror shall identify any terminations (whether for convenience or default) of any contracted services within the last 3 years.

The Government will evaluate past performance under existing and prior contracts for similar services within the last three years based on information obtained from references provided by the Offeror and any information the Government obtains through reference checks, its own knowledge/experience, and/or from other sources (i.e. Contracting Offices, Past Performance Information Retrieval Systems (PPIRS), and Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting Systems (CPARS)).

The Government will contact up to three of the Offeror’s customers for their comments on the Offeror’s:

(1) Software capabilities;

(2) Data conversion techniques;

(3) Delivery and migration process;

(4) Training effectiveness;

(5) Customer service and Service Level Agreement responsiveness;

(6) Software update effects and frequency;

(7) Overall customer satisfaction.

(All vendors determined to be in the competitive range will be provided an opportunity to demonstrate their proposed solution.)

Price Quote (Volume II)

The Offeror should submit the following information with its Business Quote (Volume II):

a. BUSINESS INFORMATION TO BE FURNISHED – The Offeror shall provide the following business information with their business quote:

• Company Name, Address, Point of Contact

• DUNS number

• CAGE CODE number

• NAICS Code

• Business Size

• RFQ Amendment acknowledgements

• Price Quote – The Offeror shall submit its price quote in a similar format as shown in Attachment 2. The price quote shall include all direct and indirect expenses including profit.

• Any changes or updates to the representations and certifications on file in the System for Award Management as required by paragraph (b) of Federal Acquisition Regulation provision 52.212-3 Contractor Representations and Certifications – Commercial Items.

• Completion of DEA-2852.209-70 – Organizational Conflicts of Interest – The Offeror shall refer to clause DEA-2852.209-70 Organizational Conflicts of Interest (MAY 2012) located in attached clause matrix. Furthermore, the Offeror shall include a section in its price quote (Volume II) to warrant that to the best of its knowledge and belief, there are no relevant facts or circumstances that would give rise to an organizational conflict of interest as described in FAR Subpart 9.5, and the Offeror has disclosed all such relevant information. In the event that an actual, potential, or apparent organizational conflict of interest is discovered prior to award, the Offeror shall make full disclosure of the particular facts and circumstances to the Government’s Contracting Officer in writing. This disclosure shall include a description of the actions that the Offeror has taken, or proposes to take in order to avoid, mitigate, or neutralize the risk to the Government.

• Completion of DEA-2852.242-74 – Contract Administration Points of Contact.

• Certification of Teaming Arrangements and/or Subcontracting Information.

• DEA-2852.203-70 Former Employment or Assignment with DEA – DEA Contractor Ethics Questionnaire.

PHASE 2—Evaluation of Live Demonstration

(for those Offerors in the Competitive Range only)

Factor 2.1. Live Demonstration of Operations Oriented Functionality.

The Offeror shall provide a live demonstration of their product/solution to DEA Aviation at the Air Operations Center in Fort Worth, Texas. The demonstration may include an introductory presentation, followed by a live demonstration of the software packages capabilities in the areas listed on the DEA MRO Requirements document. The evaluation of software capabilities will be performed based on the DEA MRO Requirements spreadsheet evaluated by commodity subject matter experts present at the demonstration. The Government will consider the delta between the software package capabilities as presented from the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) in Factor 1.1 and the Live Demonstration in Factor 2.1. Specifically, the Government will evaluate the following subfactors:

Core Modules:

Subfactor 2.1.1. General Requirements IT: Demonstrate common or universal functionality overall within the application. The Government will assume that all functionality is available throughout the application unless specifically identified or clearly not applicable in that process;

Subfactor 2.1.2. Administration: Demonstrate how all travel is captured and processed ;

Subfactor 2.1.3. Acquisitions: Demonstrate how Vendor relations are maintained while supporting cost effective purchasing that is in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations;

Subfactor 2.1. 4. Fiscal: Demonstrate (i) how the GL and AP functions support the field service business functions and transactions and allow finance staff to report efficiently and accurately and conduct analysis of results; (ii) provide an integrated process to manage Vendors, track purchase commitments and pay Vendors; (iii) provide improved controls over expenses via approvals and system based matching; and (iv) streamline all processes via reduced paper based processes;

Subfactor 2.1.5. Supply: Demonstrate how the system (i) supports day-to-day operations while providing streamlined parts and property data analysis and availability; and (ii) maintains accurate and efficient parts and property inventory for the Aviation Operations Center and off site warehouses;

Subfactor 2.1.6. Quality Control: Demonstrate how accurately the system tracks all elements of airworthiness of the aircraft fleet (Components: Airframe, Airframe Parts, Engines, Engine Parts. Scope Measures: Hours, Landings, Cycles, Torque Events, Days, etc.);

Subfactor 2.1.7. Fleet Management: Demonstrate how the system schedules and maintains operational readiness of fleet and response to all unscheduled maintenance events (Components:

Airframe, Airframe Parts, Engines, Engine Parts. Scope Measures: Hours, Landings, Cycles, Torque Events, Days, etc.);

Subfactor 2.1.8. Maintenance: Demonstrate how the system supports the performance of maintenance in an FAA Part 145 Repair Station while ensuring compliance with Federal Regulations;

Subfactor 2.1.9. Technical Publications: Demonstrate how the system ensures availability of the most current set of technical documentation for all aircraft types in the fleet; and

Additional Desired Modules:

Subfactor 2.1.10. Training: Demonstrate how the system tracks and schedules all employee training;

Subfactor 2.1.11. Operations: Demonstrate how the system provides for the safest and most efficient flight request and scheduling system to better intergrade operations in the mainstream of the AOC.

51. Please clarify the number of CD ROMs required for our submission?

Answer: 4 sets of 2 CD’s 1)Technical and 2)Price

52. Can responders use a smaller font size for graphics?

Answer: Only in graphics

53. Should the QASP be included in the PWS? Or is this a separate document that responders also need to include?

Answer: Yes, QASP and PWS are separate documents

54. Should responders include the required documents as part of the sub factors? Or are these additional, separate documents that we need to include in addition to the PWS, QASP, and 11 sub factors?

Answer: These are additional documents to the PWS, QASP and subfactors.

55. What are the Model/Design/Series and number for each fixed wing and rotary aircraft type?

Answer: 16 different models 1 208 Cessna 1 208B Cessna 1 550 Cessna 1 60 Lear 7 AS350 Airbus

1 ATR 42-320 ATR

1 ATR 42-500 ATR

9 B300 Beech

8 B407 Bell 4 B412 Bell

13 206 Cessna 36 206H Cessna

5 206S Cessna 5 210 Cessna 4 MD369 McDonnell Douglass

54 Fixed Wing Single Engine Piston 20 Rotary Wing Single Engine 7 Fixed Wing Single Engine Turbine 13 Fixed Wing Multiple Engine Turbine 4 Rotary Wing Multiple Engine

56. Would DEA clarify what standards will be used to determine performance and usability criteria?

There is no other mention of these criteria in the RFQ?

Answer: This can only be determined once the additional work has been identified.

57. Since this is a COTS product and development is usually accomplished at the vendors facilities, does DEA expect to have Field Service or other Representatives from the vendor working within the AOC facility?

Answer: It is expected that the vendor will deliver a COTS package to DEA, however implementation will occur only at DEA AOC location.

58. Would the DEA entertain other RDMS other than Oracle and SQL Server being used for the data layer?

Answer: No.

59. Does the DEA have plans to interface or integration this offering with other systems or applications? If yes, what specific systems or applications?

Answer: There are no existing solutions that the MRO will interface with, depending upon the capabilities of the MRO the DEA will write such solutions that the vendor cannot provide. This is the reason the DEA is requiring access to the software API’s

60. Could the DEA provide a definition of what they consider Remote Reporting to be?

Answer: DEA desires to have mobile interfaces for the input of flight log data.

61. Could the DEA be more specific on what the expectation is for tracking passengers and cargo, and for Hazardous materials which regulatory body does the DEA use for Hazardous materials (CFR-49, UN DG, IATA DG, or DOD)?

Answer: Simple manifest level tracking

62. What data will DEA provide in the tables? In what format? Will DEA's flight planning system(s) be made available to offerors to interface with? If so, what flight planning system(s) are in use?

Alternatively, will OFP's for each aircraft type be made available? Would the DEA verify this data is correct and up to date?

Answer: Data on aircraft fuel efficiency and cruising speed of the aircraft and yes we will keep it up to date.

63. The Microsoft operating systems Windows XP and Windows Vista are past their Microsoft End of Support Lifecycle dates and Internet Explorer versions 7 and 8 are also past the End of Support lifecycle dates?

Answer: Not sure where this clause matrix came from, DEA aviation utilizes Windows 10 as a primary OS 99% and Windows 7 for under a few legacy systems

64. Will the AOC have unrestricted internet connectivity (wireless access) available for the vendor to connect to servers at the vendors facilities?

Answer: No, security protocols forbid it.

65. Will the government provide information regarding the current data source and type to be migrated to the new MRO solution?

Answer: MRO data stored in SQL Server database 26GB Pentagon 2000 SQL, Flight data from Professional Flight Management Pervasive database 17.9 GB

66. Will the government provide information regarding the process to install and implement the MRO software solution within the DEA network?

Answer: Vendor will provide software and installation instructions and DEA IT will get it installed.

67. Will the government specify if the expectation is that one COTs product is to be proposed to accomplish all the Core Module requirements or one solution that may integrate multiple COTs products?

Answer: Government would prefer one COTS package for core modules.

68. Will the government provide an “AS-IS” of the current solution? This will allow the analysis and determination prior to submission which impacts solution and pricing.?

Answer: Assume current product fulfills all core requirements and Operations additional required module. DEA would like vendor to propose a solution that fulfills requirements core and additional all in an integrated package.

69. Will the government provide the location of the DEA Test lab the vendor will use outlined in 3.2.5?

Answer: DEA AOC facility Fort, Worth TX

Quote Volumes: