Consolidated_RFP_and_PPC_Questions_9_Feb_17.pdf

Pre‐Proposal Conference Questions for Weapons School (FA4890‐16‐R‐0040)

This is a consolidated list of question received before, during and after the Pre‐proposal Conference held at

Nellis AFB on 1Feb 17. The list is subdivided into the following categories: USAFWS Academic Database (32 questions); Contractor Furnished Equipment (16 questions); Style Guide (2 questions); Administrative (35 questions); Instructions to Offerors (29 questions); Training Device Instruction (7 questions); and Security (1 question).

USAFWS Academic Database

1. Regarding the current courseware that resides on the Weapon School Academic Database,

a. Question: Is the courseware SCORM compliant?

Answer. Yes, the current contract courseware development standards require the same SCORM compliance as PWS para 1.6.5.3.1 for this solicitation.

b. Question: If the courseware is SCORM compliant, which SCORM version is the current courseware published in?

Answer. SCORM 2004

2. Question: If the courseware is SCORM compliant, does the SCORM manifest file track and report data to another system, such as a learning management system (LMS)?

Answer. Yes.

3. Question: Does the software (e.g., MS SharePoint, SQL, etc) that is used to operate the existing classified and unclassified systems of the USAFWS Academic Training Database convey to the successful bidder without cost? Note, if the software is provided by the Government, the software is not identified in para 3.3.2 nor 3.4.

Answer. The software does not convey “without cost” because the contractor will procure MS

Sharepoint as part of the standard AF software package required on contractor furnished computers in PWS para 3.5.1.

4. Question: In previously answered questions posted by the Government, the Government states at MS SQL is the software that supports the database functionality. Is this software Government provided software and will the Government update Section 3 to identify the software as GFP/GFE?

Answer. This software is not Government provided because the contractor will procure MS Sharepoint as part of the standard AF software package required on contractor furnished computers in PWS para 3.5.1.

5. Question: Ref PWS para 1.7.6.5. Does the current USAFWS Academic Training Database capable of generating reports and is the software used to generate reports GFE/GFP? Note, if the software is provided by the Government, the software is not identified in para 3.3.2 nor 3.4.

Answer. The current system has a report generation requirement identical to PWS para 1.7.6.5. and uses Microsoft Sharepoint.

6. Question: Regarding the last sentence of the PWS paragraph 1.7.6.10, please clarify, what the Government means by “emerging” USAFWS database requirements. It appears that the Government has included an undefined an unspecified workload that is not reflected in Appendix 1.

Answer. During the course of the contract the USAFWS and/or 6 CTS may identify additional requirements for the database to support. This sentence indicates the contractor shall provide the expertise to program and manipulate the database to meet these requirements. Workload to support the academic database is not included in PWS Appendix 1 as it is totally dependent on the contractor’s proposed system.

7. Question: Does the Government require the contractor’s employees who install, operate and maintain the database to be IAT certified (such as IAT II, Security Plus)?

Answer. Yes per PWS para 3.5.2 contractor will comply with base communications squadron requirements for trained computer personnel.

8. Question: Ref PWS para 1.7.6.11. What are the compatibility requirements or standards that the LAN manager will use to approve our system?

Answer. Per PWS para 3.5.1. all contractor furnished equipment shall be compatible with Air Force

Network Integration Center (AFNIC) Evaluated/Approved Products List (APL) and Standard Desktop

Configuration (SDC).

9. Question: Request the Government define the workload estimate associated with PWS 1.7.6.13 to allow bidders a basis in which to calculate the productive hours required to support this task if it is required in the future and to address the direct, indirect and ancillary work hours. If the Government cannot define the workload, recommend the Government include a separate cost reimbursable CLIN allowing the contractor to propose a cost estimate if and when the work is needed.

Answer. The workload to develop and maintain a courseware library for Special Access Program materials will be determined by the contractor’s choice for design and implementation of the library.

10. Question: It appears that the Government has a requirement to host academic materials on a third environment on JWICS; the other two being NIPR (unclassified) and SIPRNET (Secret).

a. Does the contractor need to provide the hardware to support JWICS hosted academic materials?

Answer. No. Per PWS para 3.2.2.1.2 the Government will provide access to computer systems for processing information above Secret.

b. Does the contractor need to provide the software to support JWICS hosted academic materials?

Answer. No. See response above.

c. Does the Government have a need to replicate the Academic Training Database functionality that resides on the NIRP and SIPRNET on the JWICS environment?

Answer. No.

11. Question: Ref PWS para 1.7.6.14. The Government suggests that the contractor could use Government sponsored DNI or DoD cloud computing capabilities. In the final sentence of the paragraph, the Government requires the contractor to provide an explanation of how the selected tool will meet requirements for security, uptime reliability, etc. However, JWICS security and reliability (uptime) are Government functions to which a contractor would not have influence over. Please clarify the Government’s intent with respect to how the bidder can explain how a bidder would meet the security and uptime reliability requirements of Government provided JWICS environment?

Answer. Per PWS, if the contractor opts not to use the Government sponsored systems option, then the contractor will provide an explanation of how their selected tool will meet requirements for security, uptime reliability, etc.

12. Question: Ref PWS Section 2, Performance Objective (8). One of the Academic/Training database (DB) performance measures is to ensure “no unauthorized access.” For the SIPRNET and JWICS (if required) the DB resides on Government owned and operated environment. Therefore, is the contractor’s role limited to providing and controlling user based access or is there also a contractor requirement to provide intrusion detection and prevention measures for the Government SIPRNET and JWICS?

Answer. Per PWS para 1.7.6.1 the contractor‐provided academic database will contain “controls to ensure only authorized users will have access”. This refers to the database itself and not the Government networks.

13. Question: Ref PWS para 3.5.2. To properly scope the hardware/software requirements, what is the size in MB of the content being hosted on the current unclassified and classified USAFWS Academic Training Databases?

Answer. 2,180,000 MB unclassified; 1,500,000 MB classified.

14. Question: PWS paragraph 1.7.6 identifies the Government’s requirement for an internet‐based

Courseware Management System (CMS).

a. Is the CMS currently being used Government owned?

Answer: Yes, the USAFWS Academic Database is a deliverable under the current contract, however it runs on contractor‐provided servers.

b. If currently Government owned, will the Government provide the winning bidder with the required licenses to operate the CMS?

Answer: There are no licenses required as the current system is run on MS Sharepoint which is part of the standard AF software package required on contractor furnished computers in PWS para 3.5.1.

Follow‐up Question: Does this apply to the Sharepoint Enterprise/Standard application license on the contractor server or is it just the Sharepoint license for desktop computers?

Answer: Per PWS para 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 the contractor is responsible to provide all the hardware and software required to implement their proposed unclassified and SIPRNET‐based Academic Databases.

The contractor furnished equipment must comply with the Evaluated/Approved Product List and

Standard Desktop Configuration, however this software is not provided by the Government (see PWS para 3.2.2 for Government Furnished Equipment). The software loaded on contractor‐furnished equipment and any required licenses are the contractor's responsibility.

c. If not currently Government owned, in what form will the data be passed to the winning bidder?

Answer: Per PWS 3.3.1 all courseware and data will be transferred to the contractor in its existing format.

d. If not Government owned, does the Government require the CMS to be an MS Sharepoint based system?

Answer: The Government has not stated a requirement for the follow‐on to be Sharepoint based, only that any proposed system meet all requirements of PWS para 1.7.6.

15. Question: Does the Government’s PWS requirement include a contractor provided Learning Management

System or is MS Sharepoint a technically acceptable solution?

Answer: Any proposed system must meet all requirements of PWS para 1.7.6. The current system is

Sharepoint‐based.

16. Question: Regarding the Electronic Gradebook currently being used:

a. Is the Electronic Gradebook Government owned?

Answer: Yes, the Electronic Gradebook is a deliverable under the current contract.

b. If Government owned, will the Government provide user licenses to the winning bidder?

Answer: No license is required as the current gradebook is run on MS Sharepoint which is part of the standard AF software package required on contractor furnished computers in PWS para 3.5.1..

c. If not Government owned, in what form and manner will the Electronic Gradebook be provided to the winning bidder?

Answer: N/A

d. Will it be provided to the winning bidder during the transition phase or after contract start date?

Answer: The USAFWS Academic Database will be transferred during Phase In, so as to be operational at the end of the transition per PWS para 1.7.6.12.

17. Question: Does the current/existing database accessed through Microsoft SharePoint make use of other

Microsoft Add‐In modules, if so, will the government provide those modules post‐award?

Answer: Yes, the USAFWS Academic Database includes add‐in modules deliverable under the current contract.

18. Question: Can the Government confirm whether the current/existing database is a Microsoft SQL database or an Oracle Database?

Answer: The current database is a Microsoft SQL database.

19. Question: What version of MS Sharepoint is currently being used?

Answer: SharePoint 2010

20. Question: What version of SQL Server is currently being used?

Answer: SQL 2008R2

21. Question: How many cores are currently being used on the SQL server?

Answer: Database servers are contractor furnished equipment (CFE). Configuration of CFE is determined by the contractor.

22. Question: Can the current Academic Database perform all the current database requirements stated in the PWS?

Answer: The current Academic Database meets all the requirements of the current contract PWS. The new contract has revised requirements and any proposed system must meet all the requirements of PWS para

1.7.6.

23. Question: Who controls access to the Academic Database?

Answer: Contractor controls access on behalf of the USAFWS Commandant per PWS para 1.7.6.1.

24. Question: What is the current SharePoint version and associated database (Entity Framework, LINQ to

Entities, SQL / Stored Procedures, etc.) being employed for execution of the contract requirements? Are the current database operations inside SharePoint?

Answer: See questions 19, 20 and 22. Architecture and configuration of CFE is determined by the contractor.

25. Question: What Database is currently being used (SQL or Oracle?) Who owns the database licensing currently?

Answer: SQL. Incumbent contractor.

26. Question: How many databases are there and what is their approximate size?

Answer: There are classified and unclassified databases as required by PWS para 1.7.6.1. The approximate sizes are: 2,180,000 MB unclassified; 1,500,000 MB classified.

27. Question: What method of redundancy is currently in place for the training database system? Offsite storage? Is the system clustered or just a hot back‐up?

Answer: Current database structure and system architecture are incumbent proprietary. Proposed systems must comply with PWS para 1.7.6.8. for redundancy.

28. Question: What is the current unclassified Training Management LAN Architecture and Data flow (high level)?

Answer: Current database structure and system architecture are incumbent proprietary.

29. Question: Are there any Assured File Transfers (AFT) between the unclassified and classified systems? If so LOW to HIGH, HIGH to LOW and frequency?

Answer: File transfers from "low to high" are on the order of several dozen per year. These may be done manually (move material up via appropriate media and then add higher information) or use the Government provided tools to facilitate the required file transfers. Transfers from "high to low" are less than a dozen per year and are done manually after removal of classified content or declassification of material (i.e. re‐ create the product on the low side, update a lower‐level archive copy, or other approved process).

30. Question: Is the MS SharePoint software used on the classified and unclassified system owned by the Government? That is, is it part of the Government's Enterprise License? Or is it a Contractor‐owned license?

Answer: This software is not Government provided. The contractor will procure MS Sharepoint as part of the standard AF software package required on contractor furnished computers in PWS para 3.5.1.

31. Question: Since a current database is being used, will the Government provide all documentation regarding the current database for offerors to review?

Answer: No. Current database structure and system architecture documentation are not deliverables under the current contract.

32. Question: Reference PWS Section 1.7.6 ‐ USAFWS Academic/Training Database. Does the current USAFWS

Academic/Training Database meet all the stated PWS requirements?

Answer: The current Academic Database meets all the requirements of the current contract PWS. Any proposed system must meet the requirements of the PWS issued with this solicitation.

Contractor Furnished Equipment

1. Question: Ref PWS para 1.7.14. Does the FECOC Registrar use:

a. GFE to register students?

b. If not, does the Registrar handle any personally identifiable information (PII) that would need to be encrypted?

Answer. Yes, a Government furnished desk and work station would be provided to the Registrar under this option.

2. Question: Para 3.5.1 requires the contractor to “…identify and furnish all equipment to be purchased in performance of this requirement.” Section 6, Subfactors instructions do not specify which plan the contractor should provide a list of CFE; Section 7 para 4.1.4 implies that the CFE should be listed in the Phase‐In/Phase Out Plan. Please confirm which plan bidders should include the CFE.

Answer. Per PWS para 1.7.4.1 the Phase‐In plan will contain a detailed list of Contractor Furnished

Equipment. RFP Section 7 para para 4.1.4, Apect 1.C. states the list will be evaluated under Sub‐Factor D. All Other Plans and Contractor Furnished Equipment.

3. Question: PWS Para 3.5.2, LAN Server, requires contractors to describe the physical location of this equipment in their ISDMP, per para 1.6.2.10. Is there a Government requirement for the Server

Equipment supporting the unclassified Database requirements to be physically located at the USAF WS or at Nellis AFB?

Answer: There is not a requirement to house the unclassified servers at Nellis AFB.

4. Question: Where are the current unclassified servers USAF WS located?

Answer: At the Nellis AFB Communications Squadron and in building 102 (Government‐provided contractor facility on base).

5. Question: How many SIPRNET small computers must the contractor provide?

Answer: Sufficient numbers for your proposed personnel to be able to perform the work in the PWS.

6. Question: Will the government provide a list of the current Contractor Furnished Equipment and

Government Furnished Equipment before or at Final RFP release?

Answer: No, the current contractor’s Contractor Furnished Equipment (CFE) list is proprietary data. The

Government Furnished Property (GFP)/ Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) for this contract is described in PWS para 3.2.2.

7. Question: Reference PWS Paragraph 3.5.1.

a. Will the Government provide amplifying information regarding the scope of the Contractor

Furnished Equipment in the Final RFP release?

Answer: No, the referenced paragraph states the Government’s position on CFE.

b. Is it the Government’s expectation for vendors to propose delivering NIPRNET small computers for only each proposed contract instructor and CWD staff member or is there a requirement for vendors/contractors to provide small computers for USAF users such as in the Learning

Center and/or other non‐contractor small computer users?

Answer: The contractor must furnish sufficient equipment for their personnel to accomplish the PWS work only. There is no requirement to provide equipment for USAF users and there is no Learning Center at the USAFWS or 6 CTS.

c. What is the scope/number of small computers required to be connected to the USAFWS

SIPRNET?

Answer: The CFE required is determined by each contractor’s proposed solution to accomplish the work in the PWS.

8. Question: Will the Government/USAF LAN Manager be providing unclassified and classified small computer hard‐drive software imaging support similar to other USAF ACC contracts or will contractors be expected to image all of the hard drives associated with CFE?

Answer: The contractor will be expected to image all of the hard drives associated with CFE.

9. Question: Who owns the licensing for the current SharePoint? If contractor owned is the licensing transferable?

Answer: Incumbent contractor and not transferable. The contractor will procure MS Sharepoint as part of the standard AF software package required on contractor furnished computers in PWS para 3.5.1.

10. Question: Who currently owns the unclassified LAN server(s) and switch?

Answer: The LAN server(s) and switch are contractor furnished equipment (CFE) under the current contract. This requirement remains unchanged in solicitation PWS para 3.5.2.

11. Question: Will the current unclassified server and equipment be transferred to the next contractor or is it the property of the incumbent contractor and be removed by end of transition.

Answer: The LAN server(s) and switch are contractor furnished equipment (CFE) under the current contract. This requirement remains unchanged in solicitation PWS para 3.5.2. Disposition of CFE is the responsibility of the incumbent.

12. Question: If the unclassified server(s) are contractor owned and may be transferred what is the approximate age?

Answer: The LAN server(s) are contractor furnished equipment (CFE) under the current contract.

Disposition of CFE is the responsibility of the incumbent.

13. Question: Who owns the current unclassified desktop computers (networked pc's, standalones and terminal systems). If contractor owned how many PC's are required.

Answer: The classified (up to Secret) and unclassified desktop computers are contractor furnished equipment (CFE) under the current contract. This requirement remains unchanged in solicitation PWS para

3.5.1. The current number of PC’s is part of the incumbent’s proprietary proposal and will not be released.

Your proposal must include sufficient equipment for your proposed personnel to be able to perform the work in the PWS.

14. Question: PWS paragraph 3.5 Contractor Furnished Equipment and Subparagraphs 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 require the contractor to price and provide the hardware and software equipment including computers, servers and switch computer equipment as required to implement the contractor’s proposed unclassified and SIPRNET‐based USAFWS Academic/Training Database. Pricing this requirement will be a significant expense in the proposal and in an LPTA environment will place a non‐incumbent offeror at a large competitive price disadvantage to the incumbent since they already have all the necessary equipment in place. Will the government consider providing a plug number for the hardware and software equipment including computers, servers and switch computer equipment that all offerors must bid in their proposal? Another approach that can be used to level the playing field would be to have the incumbent bid all new hardware and software equipment in their proposal thereby eliminating the pricing advantage they currently have with their existing equipment and software tools in place in place. Either approach will level the playing field for all offerors submitting a proposal.

Answer: The Government will not provide a “plug number” for the hardware and software required as

CFE since these cost are a direct result of the contractor’s proposed solution. A detailed list CFE will be included in the Phase‐In Plan per PWS para 1.7.4.1.

15. Question: Reference PWS Section 3.5 ‐ Contractor Furnished Equipment. As a significant cost advantage, the current incumbent may already have all of the CFE in place. Will the current incumbent be required to bid the CFE as part of the new program?

Answer: The Government has issued the same instructions to all potential offerors on how to build their proposal. A detailed list CFE will be included the Phase‐In Plan per PWS para 1.7.4.1.

16. Question: Is the licensing cost for SQL (standard or enterprise) part of the "standard AF software package or is it the responsibility of the winning contractor to acquire licenses?

Answer: Per PWS para 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 the contractor is responsible to provide all the hardware and software required to implement their proposed unclassified and SIPRNET‐based Academic Databases. The contractor furnished equipment must comply with the Evaluated/Approved Product List and Standard Desktop Configuration, however this software is not provided by the Government (see PWS para 3.2.2 for Government Furnished Equipment). The software loaded on contractor‐furnished equipment and any required licenses are the contractor's responsibility.

Style Guide

1. Question: Ref PWS para 1.7.13.2.1. Will the Government’s Training and Courseware SME provide additional requirements for each deliverable that are not specified in the final Style Guide?

Answer. Ref PWS para 1.7.13.1, the Government SMEs will work with the contractor after award to answer any questions on deliverable formats.

2. Question: Review and analysis of the WS associated Style guide would assist in the refinement of our CWD estimates. Will the Government be providing Contractors a copy of the PWS referenced Style guide prior to or at Final RFP release?

Answer: The Government will post the current draft version of the Style Guide with the final RFP.

Administrative

1. Question: PWS Para 1.3.1 indicates the contractor will submit a Strike Mitigation Plan with the contractor’s proposal. Please advise which Subfactor of the technical volume would the Government like bidders to include the required Strike Mitigation Plan.

Answer. PWS Version 0.3 revised referenced paragraph for the Strike Mitigation Plan to be delivered as a stand –alone document within 10 business days after contract award. It is no longer part of the proposal.

2. Question: The PWS para 1.3.1 states the bidder is to submit a Strike Mitigation Plan with their proposal yet the Appendix reference state “if required.” Please clarify, is a Strike Mitigation Plan required or not?

Answer. The current workforce is unionized and so a Strike Mitigation Plan is required.

3. Question: Please provide the current Air Force Network Integration Center (AFNIC) Evaluated/Approved

Products List (APL) and Standard Desktop Configuration (SDC) computer hardware requirements and software configurations as part of the solicitation allowing bidders to accurately project and price hardware and software solutions.

Answer. The list is maintained on‐line and may be accessed by contacting the Defense Information

Systems Agency at disa.meade.ie.list.approved‐products‐certification‐office@mail.mil and requesting access to the Approved Products List.

4. Question: Appendix 1 does not define the workload for “Out‐of‐Cycle Changes” and “Urgent Action

Directions.” Would the Govt be able to define the needed workload allowing the bidders to calculate the labor to support these requirements; or, would the Government be willing to include a cost reimbursable CLIN if and when this support is needed?

Answer. No. By their nature “Out‐of‐Cycle Changes” and “Urgent Action Directives” are infrequent and unpredictable. When these items occur, the Government Subject Matter Experts will work with the contractor to determine if the work can be accommodated within the PWS workloads by revising the courseware delivery schedule or if a contract modification is required to accommodate the work. See PWS para 1.6.4 and A1.3.

5. Question: Ref PWS para 1.7.11.6, Does “99 CS” mean 99th Communications Squadron or 99 computer security?

Answer. 99th Communications Squadron

6. Question: Ref PWS para 1.7.14.13. What type of equipment is the registrar tasked to troubleshoot?

This job task appears to be uncommon for a registrar, yet, might better fit an instructor IAW the SCA Directory of Occupations.

Answer. The Registrar would be tasked to troubleshoot basic computer and projector functions in the classrooms used for teaching FECOC. This would be to ensure the classroom is ready for the instructor and report any discrepancies to the appropriate Government POC.

6. Question: Ref PWS para 3.4.1. What custodial services does the Government expect the contractor to perform beyond those currently provided by the Government or via another service provider? The current requirement is not clearly defined and cannot be accurately priced IAW the solicitation requirements.

Answer. The contractor is responsible for interior cleanliness of assigned workspaces, at the same level as the other Government employees in the Weapons School and 6 CTS are. The amount of work cannot be quantified in a workload table as it is dependent on base services contractors that are outside the purview of this solicitation.

7. Question: Ref PWS para 3.4.7. Will the contractor be reimbursed for the cost of mailing courseware, etc. under CLIN X004 or another CLIN?

Answer. No, this CLIN is for reimbursing the reproduction costs only. The Government will pay mailing costs directly (not under this contract), the contractor will prepare material for mailing. PWS version 0.3 para

3.4.7. was modified to clarify this point.

8. Question: Ref para 3.5.2. Please verify that the term “CSSO” is current and accurate and if so, please provide the AFI reference. This term may be outdated and inconsistent with current DoD and AF information assurance (IA) guidance.

Answer. The term “CSSO” has been replaced with the current term “Information Assurance Officer” or IAO in accordance with AFI 33‐200 in Version 0.3 of the PWS.

9. Question: Ref PWS para A1.1.1 and A1.2. Is the Government using the term “estimates” and

“estimated” as in approximate or as in calculate?

Answer. The workloads in PWS appendix 1 are categorized as “estimates” as in approximations. Hence the potential 10% variation mentioned in PWS version 0.3 para A1.1. The intent is for the contractor to provide the hours of academic instruction and new lesson equivalents specified in the PWS, while allowing the flexibility to make small adjustments (less than 10%, plus or minus) without requiring a contract modification.

10. Question: Please provide attachments referenced in the draft DD254 paragraph 13.

Answer. The attachments were posted to FBO with the Final RFP.

11. Question: PWS Para 1.6.5.3 references DoDI 1322.20, Development and Management of Interactive

Courseware (ICW) for Military Training, however, the Government’s DoD Website does not list this instruction as a current DoD instruction. It appears this DoD Instruction may be rescinded/obsolete. If it isn’t, will the Government provide a source for this guidance?

Answer: The referenced document is available on the Defense Acquisition University Portal located here: https://dap.dau.mil/policy/Lists/Policy%20Documents/DispForm.aspx?ID=3139

12. Question: Is there an incumbent contractor currently performing these services or if this is a new requirement. If there is an incumbent, could you please provide the contract number?

Answer: Yes, The contract Number is FA4890‐13‐C‐0004.

13. Question: Is the Conference date/time set?

Answer: Yes, the pre‐proposal conference will be held at USAF Weapons School, 4269 Tyndall Ave, Bldg 282, Nellis AFB, NV, 89191‐6074 on 1 Feb 2017 at 0900 hours local time.

14. Question: The PWS states the following documents must be delivered with the proposal.

A4.2.1.1. Delivered with proposal:

A4.2.1.1.1 Training Workload Management Plan; PWS Para 1.5.5 A4.2.1.1.2 Instructional Systems Development Management Plan (ISDMP); PWS Para 1.6.2 A4.2.1.1.3 Quality Control Plan; PWS Para 1.7.8 A4.2.1.1.4 Phase‐In/Phase Out Plan; PWS Para 1.7.4 A4.2.1.1.5 Training and Certification Plan; PWS Para 1.7.7..1

From the discussions at the Pre‐proposal conference some of us believe that Mr. Satava told the group we could simply extract our proposal response to Section L&M and call that our deliverable.

For example, Section L, Paragraph 4.1.4, Aspect 3 states, “Quality Control Plan (QCP). The offeror’s proposal provides a Quality Control Plan IAW PWS 1.7.8. This aspect is met when the offeror’s proposal thoroughly demonstrates all of the following:

A. QCP contains ISO 9001‐based quality management systems.

B. Clearly explains the inspection system used to cover all services listed in the Service Summary (refer to PWS Section 2), with specifics as to the areas to be inspected on a scheduled and unscheduled basis, frequency of inspections, and the title and organizational placement of the inspectors.

C. Clearly explains the records documenting inspections and corrective or preventive measures taken and how these records will be maintained and made available to the Government.”

Issue: To stay within page count our response in the proposal is compliant, but at a less detailed level then a complete plan. If the customer requires a separate Plan submitted with the proposal that is not included within the page count we normally submit a very detailed plan that includes a significant number of pages.

Question: Will our response in the proposal to this Subfactor suffice as the separate deliverable required in the PWS for a Quality Control Plan? Or is the offeror expected to deliver a separate and detailed Quality Control Plan as required by the PWS?

This questions applies to all instances where Section L&M overlap with the required deliverables stated in the

PWS.

Answer: The contractor will deliver all of the plans specified in the PWS as “submitted concurrent with contractor’s proposal” as an integral part of the proposal and within the 100 page limit for Volume 1, Technical (see RFP Section 6, para 5). These plans must be of sufficient fidelity to allow a proper evaluation using the criteria established in RFP Section 7, para 4. During Phase‐In the awardee will deliver a standalone version of the ISDMP, QCP, Phase‐In/Phase‐Out Plan, and Training and Certification Plan.

15. Question: Is the 10% workload variation cited in PWS para A1.2 actually a violation of the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) where the Government expects “something for nothing”?

Answer: No, this variance is included in the PWS so all potential bidders are aware of the requirement and should address it in their proposals, in accordance with PWS para 1.1. This is also reflected in the evaluation methodology in RFP section 7, para 4.1.1., Sub‐factor A, Aspect 1.A. “Manning calculations/charts accurately reflect ALL the CAT and CWD workload from PWS Appendix 1 for primary and optional CLINs.”

(Emphasis added).

16. Question: Please verify the "Hours" column is defined as the number of instruction hours". If not, please clarify the meaning of "hours".

Answer: Yes, per the text in PWS para A1.3, “Hours” in the table is “classroom hours”.

17. Question: Please define the acronym "NLE" used in the table on PWS page 39, para A1.3.1..

Answer: NLE is New Lesson Equivalent. This acronym has been added to PWS para 4.10 and PWS para A1.3. in PWS Version 0.3.

18. Question: Please provide the seniority dates of all CBA covered personnel in order to be able to complete rates and fringe.

Answer: The exact composition of the incumbent’s team is proprietary information.

19. Question: Are all of the companies listed on the CBA part of the current contract, i.e. subs to incumbent?

If not, why are they on the CBA?

Answer: Yes.

20. Question: Is the majority of CWD done on site at Nellis?

Answer: Under the current contract, yes.

21. Question: Does the government provide all classroom instructional aids?

Answer: Per PWS para 3.2.2.1.1. the Government provides the training equipment required by the course syllabi supported by this contract; and audiovisual equipment required to support approved lesson plans.

22. Question: Paragraph A1.3.10.1 57 ATG FECOC Optional CLIN CWD shows 5.6 NLE. The hours indicate that is should be 14 NLE?

Answer: Yes. The referenced table has been corrected in PWS Version 0.3.

23. Question: Do we have to submit questions before the site survey? Or can we wait until after the site survey?

Answer: No, questions can be submitted after the site survey.

24. Question: Please provide a list of key USAF personnel that must be addressed by this requirement.

Answer: At a minimum key USAF personnel include those personnel introduced at the Pre‐Proposal Conference on slide 5; i.e. the Contracting Officer, Contract Manager, Contracting Officer’s Representative, USAFWS Deputy Commandant for Academics, USAFWS Chief of Integration Office, 6th Combat Training Squadron Commander; ACC TRSS Detachment 8 Director.

25. Question: Who is Final resolution on adverse Past Performance? (SBA or SSA)

Answer: When a procuring agency finds that a small business is not eligible for award based on a non‐ responsibility determination or a failure to satisfy definitive responsibility criteria, the agency is required to refer the matter to SBA for a final determination under its certificate of competency procedures.

26. Question: In solicitation, page 5, Section 3, Item No. 0105, Supply/Service is listed as “Base Year (FY18) MQ‐9 WIC/Sensor AIC”. Recommend adding "CAT/CWD" to the end to be consistent with the convention used on other Item No that include both CAT and CWD pricing.

Answer: CAT/CWD will be added to the end for consistency

27. Question: In solicitation, page 11, Section 3, Item No. 1005, Supply/Service is listed as “Base Year (FY18) MQ‐9 WIC/Sensor AIC”. Recommend adding "CAT/CWD" to the end to be consistent with the convention used on other Item No that include both CAT and CWD pricing.

Answer: CAT/CWD will be added to the end for consistency.

28. Question: In solicitation, page 18, Section 3, Item No. 1013, Supply/Service is listed as "Option Year 1 (FY19) 57 ATG FECOC". Recommend adding "CAT/CWD/Reg" to the end to be consistent with the convention used on Item No 0013.

Answer: CAT/CWD/Reg will be added to the end for consistency.

29. Question: In solicitation, page 21, Section 3, Item No. 2005, Supply/Service is listed as "Option Year 2 (FY20) MQ‐9 WIC/Sensor AIC”. Recommend adding “CAT/CWD” to the end to be consistent with the convention used on other Item No. that include both CAT and CWD pricing.

30. Question: In solicitation, page 25, Section 3, Item No. 2024, Supply/Service is listed as "Option Year 2 (FY20) 57 ATG FECOC”. Recommend adding “CAT/CWD/Reg” to the end to be consistent with the convention used on Item No. 0013.

Answer: There is no item No. 2024. Page 25 Section 3 No. Item 2014 CAT/CWD will be added to the end for consistency.

31. Question: In solicitation, page 29, Section 3, Item No. 3005, Supply/Service is listed as "Option Year 3 (FY21) MQ‐9 WIC/Sensor AIC". Recommend adding "CAT/CWD" to the end to be consistent with the convention used on other Item No that include both CAT and CWD pricing.

32. Question: In solicitation, page 33, Section 3, Item No. 3013, Supply/Service is listed as “Option Year 3 (FY21) 57 ATG FECOC”. Recommend adding “CAT/CWD/Reg” to the end to be consistent with the convention used on Item No. 0013.

33. Question: In solicitation, page 37, Section 3, Item No. 4005, Supply/Service is listed as “Option Year 4 (FY22) MQ‐9 WIC/Sensor AIC”. Recommend adding “CAT/CWD” to the end to be consistent with the convention used on other Item No. that include both CAT and CWD pricing.

34. Question: In solicitation, page 41, Section 3, Item No. 4013, Supply/Service is listed as “Option Year 4 (FY22) ATG FECOC”. Recommend adding "CAT/CWD/Reg" to the end to be consistent with the convention used on Item No 0013.

35. Question: In the Collective Bargaining Agreement, Page 17, Article 30, Section 30, states this agreement shall continue in full force and effect up to and including 31 July 2016. The Cover on CBA notes effective date of 1 August 2016 ‐ 31 July 2019. However, noted article in CBA states it was effect up to 31 July 2016. Is the CBA provided with the solicitation the most current CBA?

Answer: The CBA posted is the most current. We are in the process of coordinating to correct the effective date in the noted article in the CBA.

Instructions to Offerors

1. Question: Is the PWS “Training Workload Management Plan” the same as the solicitation’s “Training

Management and Approach” or are they different documents? If different, please advise which Subfactor of the technical volume would the Government like bidders to include the required Training Workload

Management Plan.

Answer. The “Training Management and Approach” is the name of the subfactor under which the technical acceptability of the contractor’s Training Workload Management Plan will be evaluated. See RFP section 7, para 4.1.1., Subfactor B, Aspect 1.

2. Question: The PWS paragraph 1.6.2.10 asks the bidders to describe how resources will be acquired and utilized for the accomplishment of the ISD effort for the USAF Weapon School Academic Database. In the third sentence of the PWS paragraph, the PWS mentions “…concurrence of the training system.” Please clarify:

a. Which “training system” and “parent system” is the Government referencing?

b. How is this training system impacted the acquisition and use of resources for the ISD effort and or the

Academic Database?

Answer. PWS para 1.6.2.10 is part of the overall ISD Management Plan which describes the contractor’s proposed entire courseware development effort to support all the squadrons and weapon systems taught at the USAF Weapons School and 6 CTS, not just for the Academic Database. In this section of the ISD

Management Plan the contractor should explain how resources will be acquired and utilized for accomplishment of the ISD effort and support of the USAF Weapons School Academic Database. The “training system” in this instance is the USAF weapons School and 6 CTS curriculum; the “parent system” refers to all the weapon systems represented in the Weapons School.

3. Question: The Government requires the contractor’s employees to attend a variety of Government meetings; but, the Government does not provide the bidder any basis in which to calculate the productive hours needed to support attendance at the required meetings. The length and duration of the Government meetings would be unknown to all bidders except the incumbents. To fully address the requirements noted in the solicitation para 8.4, request the Government provide the bidders with the frequency and number of hours these meeting occur over a 12‐month period of performance.

Answer. PWS para 1.7.2.5. states that attendance is not required if it precludes performance of

“academic events”. Contractors should include their proprietary calculations for ancillary time to account for these events as part of their Training Workload Management Plan. See PWS para 4.7.1 and 1.5.5.

4. Question: The PWS para 1.7.6.12 suggests that the contractor could propose upgrades or enhancements to the Academic/Training Database. Yet, the Government has specified that it will use an LPTA as opposed to a

Trade‐off evaluation methodology to determine the awardee. Please clarify your intent. It seems incongruent

IAW solicitation LPTA evaluation process for a bidder to propose and price improvements to the USAFWS

Academic Training Database when the Government has not specified any additional performance objectives nor database improvements in the PWS. Recommend the Government include a separate cost reimbursable

CLIN to be negotiated post award, allowing for a requirement and cost analysis to be coordinated and completed.

Answer. The Government will not give a preference for exceeding minimum requirements under

LPTA.

5. Question: Ref PWS para 4.1.3.1. Which management plan (TWMP or ISDMP) should bidders include their “work‐a‐rounds” in?

Answer. Service Core Function Expertise will apply to both academic training and courseware development. Any “work‐a‐rounds” to cover all the required areas should be addressed in the appropriate plan.

6. Question: IAW the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) included with the draft solicitation, employees governed by the CBA are entitled to overtime. PWS 4.6.1 suggests that the normal working hours may be expanded which would potentially require the contacted company to pay overtime. To accurately calculate overtime and provide the labor estimation IAW the solicitation, can the Government provide the number of expanded hours by CBA labor category that are needed to meet the solicitation requirements; or, would the Government include a “Surge” CLIN to cover the cost of the hours outside of the scheduled PWS hours of operation (4.6.1) if and when this event would occur?

Answer. No. The contract is fixed price and it is up to the contractor to manage his workforce and provide the services required. Any overtime costs are the contractor’s responsibility. It is the Contractor’s responsibility to manage overtime costs and employees within the Fixed Price.

7. Question: The solicitation instructions require the bidder to provide “a breakdown (by CLIN) of labor (labor category, number of positions and productive hours).” Considering the LPTA evaluation methodology, and requirements to meet the solicitation instructions, is it correct for the bidders to include the PWS A1.2 workload variance of up to 10% into the calculated productive hours, as well as, to meet the Government’s price reasonableness and realism determination?

Answer. Yes, the 10% variation must be addressed in the contractor’s proposal.

8. Question: Ref Draft RFP Section 6, para 7.2.E. In the solicitation, the Government is asking the bidders to describe the performance standard that have been established in each area. In the PWS Section 2, Services Summary, it identifies performance objectives and performance measures? Please clarify, which performance standards the Government is referring to.

Answer. Refer to PWS Section 1 for performance standards across the contract requirement. I.e. PWS para 1.5.2 describes Standards of Performance for Instructors. PWS Section 2 also contains standards and references to the applicable PWS paragraphs under the heading of “Performance Measures”.

9. Question: Ref Draft RFP Section 6, para 7.2.E.i. In the last sentence of the solicitation referenced paragraph, in the paragraphs titled Workload Analysis Charts, the instructions references “Staff support positions” in Appendix 1. Please clarify which positions in Appendix 1 are designated as “Staff support positions.”

Answer. Ref PWS para A1.3.10.1.1 57 ATG FECOC Optional CLIN Registrar

10. Question: Ref Draft RFP Section 6, para 7.2.E.i. In the paragraphs titled Workload Analysis Charts of the reference, Government encourages the bidders to use the sample charts referenced at Appendix 3; however, no charts are noted at Appendix 3 to the solicitation nor the PWS. Please clarify, should the reference be Appendix 1 to Section 6 in the solicitation?

Answer. Yes, an amendment will be issued to correct this.

11. Question: PWS paragraph 1.7.14 states that the “Number of personnel and duty locations are in Appendix 1.” However, Appendix 1 identifies a number of projected labor hours for the FECOC Registrar position(s) and then as an optional CLINS. Please clarify the intent, is it a number of persons or number of labor hours?

Answer. The contractor will provide the number of Registrar work hours as specified in Appendix 1 if the Optional CLIN is exercised.

12. Question: Reference PWS Section 1.5.5 ‐ Training Workload Management Plan. Will the Government provide the current Training Workload Management Plan?

Answer: No, the current Training Workload Management Plan is part of the incumbent’s proprietary proposal and therefore is not releasable.

13. Question: Will the Government provide the current Quality Control Plan?

Answer: No, the current Quality Control Plan is part of the incumbent’s proprietary proposal and therefore is not releasable.

14. Question: Will the Government provide the current Training and Certification Plan?

Answer: No, the current Training and Certification Plan is part of the incumbent’s proprietary proposal and therefore is not releasable.

15. Question: Section 7, Subsection 7.2.E.iii Subfactor C states "Courseware Development Approach and ISD Management Plan." Is there an existing ISD Management Plan and other related documents the Government can provide?

Answer: The current ISD Management Plan is part of the incumbent’s proprietary proposal and therefore is not releasable.

16. Question: Would the Government provide a copy of the QASP that will be used for the awarded contract?

The Government is requesting bidders deliver a QCP; however the QASP, as stated in the referenced requirement, contains information vital to QCP formulation.

Answer: The Government’s Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) will be posted on FBO.

17. Question: Reference PWS para 1.7.14 states to provide personnel to register students for each FECOC class. Is this a "core" or "operational" requirement? The FECOC CAT requirement in Appendix 1 A1.2.10.1 is currently an optional requirement. Request clarification as to whether the Registrar requirement is required on day one of contract or if it will be executed when the Optional FECOC CAT requirement is executed.

Answer: The Registrar functions are part of the optional 57 ATG FECOC Optional CLIN workloads as stated in PWS para A1.3.10.1.

18. Question: PWS para 1.5.1 states "…and monitoring of computer‐based and self‐paced instruction periods." Please provide additional information concerning the expected level of effort for this requirement if not already incorporated in CAT tables of Appendix 1. For example, how many computer‐based periods, number of computers in the training laboratory, whether an Instructor/SME must be available in each MDS, etc.

Answer: There is no current requirement for the contractor to monitor computer‐based and self‐ paced instruction periods at this time.

19. Question: Current workload analysis – What’s the current FTE (CME) count?

Answer: That information will not be provided as it was part of the incumbent’s proprietary proposal.

20. Question: If there is one acceptable proposal, would the government enter into negotiations to have a minimum of two (2) acceptable proposals?

Answer: See Section 7, paragraph 1.2

21. Question: Paragraph 52.222‐42, Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal hires (May 2014), shows a flat rate of $36.25/hour for fringe benefits. The CBA shows $6.70/hour for all plus a 4% match ($4,000.00 maximum per year). So, can you explain the 36.25 per hour amount referenced in the RFP?

Answer: The $36.25 per hour fringe benefit rate referenced in the RFP is from the Office of

Management and Budget’s guidance and is for informational purposes only.

22. Question: In solicitation, page 92, Section 4, Small Business Subcontracting Goals – if applicable, please state whether the reference is applicable to this solicitation.

Answer: The reference is not applicable to this solicitation.

23. Question: In the solicitation, page 94, Section 4, Budget Cuts, Reference states “…if the Fighter program is affected.” Please clarify what is meant by “Fighter program.”

Answer: The reference should read as follows: In the event of congressionally mandated budget cuts, the scope of work for this contract will be reduced as required if the “Weapons School” is affected.

24. Question: In the solicitation, page 96, Section 6, submission of Proposals. May we hand carry proposal submissions. If so, please provide instructions on where to deliver proposals and how to gain access to Langley

AFB.

Answer: Yes. Please refer to Section 6 – Instructions to Offerors, 4. Submission of Proposals.

25. Question: In the SF1449, Page 1, Item 8, since the February 27 is a Monday and proposals have to be shipped to VA, request the due date be pushed to the March 1, 2017 (Wednesday) so there’s adequate business day to ship proposals and confirm receipt.

Answer: The due date will remain unchanged.

26. Question: In the SF1449, CLIN Section, CLINS 0106 and 0112, will the Government provide the Period of

Performance?

Answer: Yes, the Period of Performance for CLINS 0106 and 0112 is 01 Oct 17 – 30 Sep 18.

27. Question: In the SF1449, Section 2, Item 6, Section 2 Continuation of SF1449 Item 6 states, “This contract to be awarded on or about 1 Dec 2016.” Will the Government provide the correct award date?

Answer: Yes, this contract is expected to be awarded on or about 7 Jul 2017.

28. Question: In the SF1449,Section 6, Subsection 5.3, the note requests that page numbering be…