Draft RFP Questions and Answers 2.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AIR FORCE INSTALLATION CONTRACTING CENTER

27 Sep 21

F-16 International Aircraft Maintenance and Pilot Differences Training – Draft RFP FA300221R0002 Questions and Answers # 2

1. Will the USG host a Pre-solicitation Conference, as forecast in Section L of the Draft RFP? If so, will there be one-on-one discussion opportunities afterward?

ANSWER: USG does not intend to hold a pre-solicitation or preproposal conferences in person due to the COVID-19 Health Protection Measures on the installation. In lieu of the preproposal conference, USG intends to emphasize the need for robust Questions and Answers prior to proposal submission.

2. By what process will the USG validate newly developed courseware?

ANSWER: IAW Section M Subfactor 1 Executive Summary, “The standard has been met when: The offeror demonstrated a comprehensive effort to effectively organize, coordinate, plan, initiate, execute, monitor and control the program to establish the training capability to include courseware, syllabi, and any student materials within the 120-calendar day mobilization period”. The Government will not validate newly developed courseware for the IDIQ Program, but program awardees shall adhere to PWS paragraph 1.4.3 to establish the training capability to compete/perform task orders for a given PNAF.

At the task order level, the timing of CSTO availability will be disclosed prior to task order proposal submission. Note: See PWS Paragraph 1.7.1.1. which states, “The government has unlimited data rights to F-16 CSTOs and technical data (not to include OFP data) and will provide access to F-16 V and Block 70/72 technical orders when they become available”.

Furthermore at the task order level, IAW- Section G paragraph 2, “If in receipt of written Contracting Officer authorization as specified per Task Order, the United States Government (USG) may provide new production, upgrade and existing Country Specific Technical Orders (CSTOs). Additionally the USG may provide United States Air Force (USAF) developed F-16 Courseware to aid the timely development of courseware per task order. As specified per Task Order, if USG cannot provide final, manuscript, draft CSTOs, or USAF developed F-16 Courseware, then the contractor can use other-than-USG provided data to develop courseware in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7020”.

IDIQ Program Awardees should leverage the TOPR Questions and Answers Period to initiate a robust dialogue recommending Training Tasks and to submit questions in regards to which training tasks should be instructed. TOPR proposal submission will include Individual Specialty Tasks Identified for Training, which will be evaluated. After development, USG will validate the courseware prior to the disclosure process. End of course critiques will also be examined.

3. By what process will the USG validate ready-for-training capability after the mobilization period?

ANSWER: See Section M Factor 1 Technical: Subfactors 1 – 3 for the criteria to establish a training capability. The Government will conduct multiple site visits during the mobilization period and at mobilization completion to ensure the IDIQ program awardees can compete/perform task orders.

The PWS will be revised to incorporate the contractor proposed Comprehensive Schedule and Work Breakdown Structure in the Performance Requirements Summary (PRS), which the Government will validate by performing numerous site visits during the mobilization period and at mobilization completion.

4. Regarding the contractor’s responsibility for providing required support and test equipment, will the USG offer equipment for long lead items unavailable within the 120-day mobilization period?

ANSWER: See PWS paragraph 1.4.6.2.1 which states, “The contractor shall provide all support equipment, trainers, bench stock, consumables for all Pre-Delivery training requirements performed at the contractor-provided facility(s)”.

5. An aircraft in Maintenance OJT is like an aircraft in Depot Maintenance. Just as with an aircraft in Depot, there are concurrent, multi-system maintenance activities on the aircraft every day, all day, for extended periods. Aircraft in Depot are removed from flying status, with no need or attempt to maintain them in flyable condition. Depot aircraft are returned to flyable condition, inspected, and flown for functional checks after Depot work is complete. Maintaining aircraft in flyable condition during Maintenance OJT would be the equivalent of attempting this during Depot Maintenance and would be similarly infeasible. Unlike an aircraft on flying status, for which needed maintenance is typically isolated to specific occurrences, an aircraft in Maintenance OJT has multiple systems compounding the influence on sustainment requirements every day. Given this consideration, together with the USG’s acknowledgment in a previous round of Q&A that, “The objective…is to maintain the aircraft to be able to be returned to AFLCMC control under USG supervision at the completion of pre-delivery training,” please confirm that pre-delivery F-16s in Maintenance OJT:

a) Will not be in a flying status. The requirement is for flyable condition. See Answer Below

b) Do not need to be in flyable condition at any specific time or interval during the period of Maintenance OJT. See Answer Below

c) Shall be returned to flyable condition as soon as possible after pre-delivery training, and that the methodology for fulfilling this requirement is at the discretion of the contractor.

See Answer Below

ANSWER: Clarification regarding flyable condition methodology: The government recognizes the need for training and maintenance. The following information will be added to the PWS as paragraph 1.4.9.1.1 to state, “The intent is to maintain flyable condition on a continuous basis to avoid aircraft refurbishment, or extensive downtime for maintenance due to lack of any maintenance activities during OJT. The contractor shall not exceed 30 calendar-day intervals to restore flyable condition. The government reserves the right to approve or disapprove changes to this interval, upon contractor request, in the event parts are required or some other circumstance, to be determined. The contractor may restore the aircraft to a flyable condition more frequently than the 30 day requirement. The contractor shall certify flyable condition of the aircraft every 30 calendar days to the COR in writing. The aircraft shall be in flyable condition no later than 30 calendar days after all OJT (that requires an aircraft) is complete for a given country and shall certify in writing to the COR when complete. The government reserves the right to approve or disapprove changes to this period, upon contractor request, in the event parts are required or some other circumstance, to be determined”. The PRS will be updated to incorporate an additional deliverable for the 30 calendar-day written certification.

6. How will the USG make fair price comparisons between bidders with recurring costs for the acquisition of country-specific data/OFP packages and the OEM incumbent with no recurring costs for data/OFP?

ANSWER: The evaluation criteria for the Source Selection is a Performance Price Tradeoff with Technical Acceptability of the Technical Factor. IAW Section M Paragraph 2.6, “Offerors shall submit all pricing using the Unit Price Book (UPB) (see Exhibit B). Each line item shall be fully burdened and all-encompassing to include, but not limited to, all fringe benefits, overhead, G&A, and profit. The UPB shall include not to exceed (NTE) unit prices. Offerors shall complete the UPB for all line items over the 10-Year Program Life Cycle. The total evaluated price (TEP) will be the aggregate of all NTE Extended Burdened Price line items in the UPB excluding Domestic and International Travel. Any other data provided by the Offeror with their price proposal that is not required by Section L will not be considered or evaluated”.

The means and methods to establish NTE Unit Prices, to include any costs for an OFP License with the OEM or otherwise provide pilot differences simulation capability to include F-16V and F-16 Block 70/72, is at the discretion of the offeror. Note: See PWS Paragraph 1.7.1.1. which states, “The government has unlimited data rights to F-16 CSTOs and technical data (not to include OFP data) and will provide access to F-16 V and Block 70/72 technical orders when they become available”.

At the Task Order Level, The Government reserves the right to choose evaluation criteria as listed in FAR

16.505 (b), to compete task orders. IAW Section G Paragraph 3, “The UPB line items shall be fully burdened and all-encompassing to include but not limited to Program Management, Maintaining Flyable Condition, materials, equipment, labor, facilities, and required courseware. UPB line item Not To Exceed Extended Burdened Price is the Quantity x Unit Price. Each TOPR proposal shall be based upon the individual line items derived from the Unit Price Book (UPB) attached to the IDIQ Program Basic Contract award. Individual line items proposed per TOPR shall not exceed the NTE extended burdened price. The contractor shall propose the quantity required per line item and the unit price (which can be less than, but cannot exceed the Not To Exceed Extended Burdened Price in the UPB).

The means and methods of pricing task orders is at the discretion of the program awardees. See Section G paragraphs 3 and 4 for Task Order Proposal Contents and Preparation Costs and Task Order Competition.

The Government Points of Contact for this Draft RFP are Joseph T. Ocampo email joseph.ocampo.3@us.af.mil and A. Ryan Rodriguez email arnold.rodriguez.3@us.af.mil.

A. RYAN RODRIGUEZ

Contracting Officer