RFP Questions and Answers with Gov Response.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AIR FORCE INSTALLATION CONTRACTING CENTER

22 Nov 21

F-16 International Aircraft Maintenance and Pilot Differences Training – RFP FA300222R0001

Questions and Answers

1. Can the USG confirm that the Training Tasks by Specialty list include all tasks required for F-16

Block 70/72/V?

Answer: The Training Tasks by Specialty (Section J Attachment 2) does not include all tasks for F-16

Block 70/72/V. Contractors must suggest/propose tasks at the task order level that should be included in the training. These tasks will be reviewed by USG SMEs for applicability. See also answer to question

2.

2. Can the USG confirm that all unmarked tasks in the new buy column of the Training Tasks by specialty list will not be required during execution of the program?

Answer: Section G Paragraph 3 states, “The F-16 Task List by Specialty (See Section J Attachment 2) shall constitute the minimum recommended tasks required per specialty. Program awardees shall utilize the F-16 Task List by Specialty and make a comprehensive determination/recommendation of which tasks are required per Task Order.

Training tasks other than the tasks listed in Section J Attachment 2 - F-16 Task List by Specialty are authorized and may be recommended/proposed at the Task Order level.”

The F-16 Task List by Specialty shows marked tasks that USG considers critical; these critical tasks are not be construed as the only tasks to be taught per specialty.

3. For task orders, does the USG intend to combine the elements of training scope – planning, courseware development, academics, OJT – into composite task orders, or break them apart into separate task orders?

Answer: The intent of the USG is to scope requirements into composite task orders for a given country which may include but not limited to academics, OJT, pilot training and train-the-trainer deliverables (if applicable).

4. For bidding purposes, can the Government provide a spares list to price parts during maintenance

OJT?

Answer: Refer to PWS paragraph 1.4.6.1. For country variant specific spare parts, the contractor shall coordinate with AFLCMC. AFSAT does not have a specific listing of spare parts.

5. [Ref: Solicitation, Section G and PWS, Scope, 1.4.3] How will the USG determine funding value of

TO 001 to support the Mobilization Period above the minimum obligation amount? Or is this cost solely the responsibility of the contactor and considered as preaward activities? If performed before award of

TO 001, is it reimbursable?

Answer: TO 0001 will be for the minimum obligation amount. Section G of the solicitation states, “Costs for preparation of proposals and pre-award activities shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor. Contractors will not be reimbursed for attendance during negotiations, preproposal conferences or any other Task Order pre-award activities.” Additionally Section G states, “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.” The means and methods of capturing mobilization costs within the UPB construct as described in Section G is at the discretion of the offeror.

6. [Ref: PWS, Scope, 1.4.4.1.1] Can the USG confirm that the USAF-developed courseware is editable?

Answer: The available documents are in editable MS Office or PDF format.

7. [Ref: PWS, Scope, 1.4.4.1.1] Can the USG provide the latest release dates of the USAF developed courseware?

Answer: Latest release dates are as follows:

Title Release Date

F-16C/D ACFT ARMNT SYS (TRBLSHTNG) Jun 2016

F-16 Combined Weapons Armament MX (AME) Oct 2019

F-16 ARMAMENT MAINTENANCE (AME) Oct 2019

F-16 Weapons Armament Maintenance (AME) Oct 2019

Avionics Test Station & Aircraft Components Jan 2020

F-16 (BLK 40/50)COMM,NAV & PNTN AIDS(CROSS) Oct 2019

F-16 (BLK 25,30,32) COMM, NAV AND PENETRATION Oct 2018

F-16 INST & FLT CNTL(CROSS)(BLKS 40/42;50/52) Aug 2018

AIRCREW FLIGHT EQUIPMENT APPRENTICE May 2016

AIRCRAFT STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE

APPRENTICE

Jan 2020

Nondestructive Inspection (NDI) Apprentice Aug 2019

F-16 ENG RUN (F110-GE-100/129) Aug 2020

F-16 ENGINE STARTING SYSTEM

TROUBLESHOOTING

Aug 2020

Aircraft Hydraulic Systems Apprentice Oct 2018

F100 ENGINE BLADE BLENDING Nov 2018

F110 ENGINE REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION Jun 2019

Aircraft MX Officer Course (AMOC)-PREREQUISITE Not

Available

Aircraft Maintenance Officer Course (AMOC) Apr 2018

ACCELERATED AIRCRAFT MX OFFICER COURSE Apr 2018

AIRCRAFT QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA) INSPECTOR

(2A)

Apr 2021

PMEL Apprentice Jan 2021

Crashed, Damaged or Disabled Aircraft Recovery (CDDAR)

Team Chief

May 2019

F-16 AIRCREW EGRESS SYSTEMS (O/M) Jul 2019

AIRCREW EGRESS SYS (A-10/F-15/F-16, ACES II) Mar 2020

F-16 EGRESS SYSTEM (OM) (CERTIFICATION

TRAINING)

Jul 2019

Aircraft Fuel Systems Apprentice Apr 2019

F-16 HYDRAZINE TANK SERVICING Jul 2017

F-16 AIRCRAFT FUEL SYSTEM Oct 2020

INITIAL WRM F-16 370/300 GALLON TANK BUILDUP Dec 2017

Aircraft Electrical and Environmental Systems Apprentice Sep 2019

F-16 C/D ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM Dec 2018

F-16 C/D ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS Jan 2021

F-16 WIRE REPAIR Apr 2020

F-16 ADVANCED WIRE REPAIR Oct 2020

Aircraft Metals Technology Apprentice Oct 2019

Fuels Apprentice Jun 2018

8. [Ref PWS, Scope, 1.4.4.2] Since the courseware CLINs are priced by each, can the USG confirm that no existing courseware will be used on this contract and that the USG expects new courseware to be developed for initial courses?

Answer: Only train-the-trainer courseware deliverables are individually priced in the UPB. Section G, paragraph 3 states, “If the train-the-trainer capability is required per task order, program awardees shall utilize the "Train the Trainer Courseware Deliverable" UPB line items to deliver the courseware and student materials to the Air Force Security Assistance Training Squadron (AFSAT) in accordance with

DFARS 252.227-7020.” Please note, not all countries will request the train-the-trainer courseware deliverable.

All courseware delivered (new and/or existing) under this contract shall adhere to the requirements in

Section M paragraph 2.2c which states, “Intellectual Property: Training courseware, syllabi, and student materials developed using funding under any Task Order(s) first created, generated, or produced and required to be delivered under this contract shall constitute instructional works and the copyright to these works shall be assigned in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7020, Rights in Special Works. If the offeror proposes to use exclusively privately funded developed training courseware, syllabi, and student materials for any of the train-the-trainer deliverables, the offeror is required to submit assertions in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7017, Identification and Assertion of Use, Release, or Disclosure

Restrictions. Assertions MUST be included in Section J Attachment 3. An award cannot be executed unless the offeror has provided sufficient information to enable the Contracting Officer to review any listed assertion. The offeror shall provide substantiating documentation (certified payrolls) in Volume I of the proposal and the United States Government (USG) must receive a cost savings reflected in the proposed Unit Price Book (Exhibit B) per train-the-trainer deliverable for all exclusively privately funded developed training courseware, syllabi, and student materials. License rights, transfer, and copyright shall be IAW DFARS 252.227-7020 (c) and (d).

9. [PWS, Scope, 1.4.5 and all sub-paragraphs] Given that program management tasks like planning, meetings, revisions of training plans and schedules, training assessments, pre-coordination with sub-contractors, etc., can be ongoing and independent of training execution tasks, can the USG provide an expectation in days/hours for the repetition of such activities for offerors to use for pricing estimates, as these quantities in most cases are unknown?

Answer: Section G of the solicitation states, “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.” The means and methods of capturing program management costs within the UPB construct as described in Section G is at the discretion of the offeror.

10. [PWS, Scope, 1.4.6.2.1] Given that many customers need unique, specific support equipment to be purchased, may the contractor be relieved of this requirement to provide it, as applicable?

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

11. [PWS, Scope, 1.4.9.1.1] Can the USG confirm, who shall be the certifying official for aircraft certification?

Answer: PWS paragraph 1.4.9.1.1 states, “The contractor shall certify flyable condition of the aircraft every 30 calendar days to the COR in writing, which is due to the COR no later than 5 business days after the 30 calendar day requirement.” The government will conduct periodic site visits to confirm status, in addition to flyable condition reporting by the contractor as specified in PWS paragraph 1.4.9.1.1.

12. [PWS, Scope, 1.4.10.1] The PWS states, “Officers shall be quartered separately in single rooms and two enlisted usually share a two-bedroom apartment.” There is a cost differential between one- and two-bedroom apartments. Can the USG provide an estimate of how many officers and enlisted students there will be in a pricing year?

Answer: Contractors should use a planning factor of 1 (one) officer for every ten (10) enlisted. Annual estimates for students cannot be provided due the complexities and variables of the Foreign Military Sales

(FMS) environment. See Section J, Attachment 6 for F-16 Estimated Requirement Schedule.

13. [PWS, Scope, 1.4.4.2.2] Can the USG clarify the training expectation of the student performance capability "to perform tasks as identified IAW applicable technical data with minimal supervision" versus the standard cited in the Performance Requirement Summary stating, “Student qualifications will generally be analogous to Organizational (O) and Intermediate (I) levels of maintenance when describing

USAF 5 or 7 skill levels. (Reference AFI 36-2101)."?

Answer: The PRS should state, “Student qualifications entering training will generally be analogous to

Organizational (O) and Intermediate (I) levels of maintenance when describing USAF 5 or 7 skill levels.

(Reference AFI 36-2101).” An amendment will be issued to incorporate the revised PWS at the earliest opportunity.

14. In order to provide a robust response and in anticipation of the upcoming holiday season, will the government consider a forty-five (45) day extension for proposal submission?

Answer: No, the government will not consider a forty-five calendar day extension for proposal submission.