1_MQ-9_PPC_Slides_22Feb18.pdf

This Briefing is:

UNCLASSIFIED

Headquarters Air Combat Command

Pre-Proposal Conference

MQ-9

Contract Aircrew Training and Courseware

Development (CAT/CWD)

Bill Law, HQ ACC TRSS Imelda Reantaso, HQ ACC AMIC

22 Feb 2018

Welcome Remarks

49th OG

Col Jeffery Patton

Introductions

• Mr. Bill Law – HQ ACC TRSS Program Manager

• Ms. Imelda Reantaso – HQ ACC AMIC Contract Manager

• Lt Col Jason Plfug – TRSS Det 2 CC

• Maj Carson Heier- 16 TRS/ADO

• Attendees

Purpose

• Provide industry a review of the contract requirements

– Program Overview

– Clarify Requirements

– Review Advance Questions

– Tour Facilities

– Review Courseware

– Invite additional questions from industry

• Provide clear understanding of evaluation process

Agenda Holloman Leadership Remarks

Administrative/ROE

Program Overview

Acquisition Overview Clarify Requirements and Evaluation Criteria

Review Advance Questions

Break

View Courseware

Lunch

Tour Classrooms, Learning Center, PMATS and GCS

Wrap Up/Submit Questions

0900 – 0905

0905 - 0910

0910 – 0925

0925 – 0945

0945 – 1015

1015 - 1030

1030 - 1130

1130 – 1300

1300 – 1500

~1500 - ???

Administrative

• Sign-in

• Rest Rooms

• Emergency Exits

• Break Room

• Lunch

Rules of Engagement

• ACC AMIC/PKB is the POC for information

• Remarks and explanations provided at the conference/site visit shall not change the terms of the solicitation unless it is formally amended in writing

• All questions must be submitted in writing.

• Government is not liable for expenses incurred by offerors prior to contract award

Rules of Engagement

• Communication

• All questions should be directed to the briefers

• No recording devices, cameras or cell phones are permitted in the facilities

• You are not permitted to roam freely in the facilities and/or classified areas

• Courseware materials must remain in conference room – No exceptions

• Tours

• Must posses a SECRET clearance to access certain areas

• You are not permitted to handle any Government equipment while on the tour

• You are required to stay with the group at all times

Program Overview

• Performance Locations

• PWS Requirements

• Deliverables

• Risks

Mr. Bill Law MQ-9 CAT/CWD Program Manager

• Performance Locations

• MQ-9 FTU, Holloman AFB, NM

• White Sands Missile Range

• MQ-9 FTU, March ARB, CA

• MQ-9 FTU, Hancock ANGB, NY

• MQ-9 FTU, Creech AFB, NV

• USAFWS Support

Hancock Field

Creech AFB

March ANGB

Holloman AFB

• Key PWS Requirements

• Contract Aircrew Training (CAT)

• Courseware Development (CWD)

• General

• Contract Aircrew Training

• Academic Classroom Instruction

• Instrument Refresher Course

• Training Device Instruction

• Mission Flight Instruction

• Launch and Recovery Instruction

• USAF WS Support

• Courseware Development

• Develop New Courseware

• Review and Revise existing Courseware

• Develop/update computer based training materials

• Respond to Out-of-Cycle changes and Urgent

Action Directives

• Use AF Instructional Systems Development

(ISD) model

• General Tasks

• Develop/Adhere to proposed:

• ISD Management Plan

• Quality Control Plan

• Instructor Training and Certification Plan

• Transition Plan

• Recruitment and Retention Plan

• Develop/Maintain Learning Management System

• Provide:

• Courseware Development Schedule

• Academic Scheduling

• Required Reports and Deliverable

• Support Functions

• Meet Employee Qualification Requirements

• Meet Security Requirements

• Maintain Master Files

• Deliverables Appendix 4 in PWS – Not Separately Priced

• Plans due with Proposals

• Transition Plan

• Training Workload Management Plan

• Instructor Training and Certification Plan

• Recruitment and Retention Plan

• Plans due Post Award

• Strike Mitigation Plan

• Government Flight Operations Procedures Plan

• Instructional Systems Development (ISD) Plan

• Deliverables (cont)

• Courseware to include:

• Courseware Delivery Schedule

• Lesson Strategy Report

• Examination Package

• Lesson Plan

• Lesson Presentation

• Student Study Guide

• Instructional Media Package

• Training Manual

• Master Files

• Electronic Grade Sheets

• Conference Meeting Minutes

• Contractor’s Progress, Status, and Management Report

• LMS Database and Files

Program Risks

• Funding

• Budget Cuts

• Manning of Key Positions

• Shortage of Qualified IPs

Acquisition Overview

Ms. Imelda Reantaso Contract Specialist

ACC AMIC/PKB

imelda.reantaso.1@us.af.mil

(757) 225-5797 mailto:imelda.reantaso.1@us.af.mil

• Authority

– FAR Part 12: Commercial Contracts

– FAR Part 15.3: Negotiated Contracts

– DoD Source Selection Procedures, effective 31 Mar 16

– AFFARS 5315.3: Mandatory Procedures, dated 3 Oct 17

• Notice to Offerors

– Sufficient number of Proposals/Competition are expected to award using the Best Value source selection procedures

– Government intends to make award without discussion but reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed necessary.

Therefore, you are cautioned to submit your best proposal upfront.

• Contract Structure CLINs Baseline Work Optional Work

FIRM-FIXED PRICE

Phase-In (3 mos.) Broken out by base N/A

Creech CLINs CAT, Support, 26 WPS Support

Flying & FIUT Training, Launch/Recovery

Holloman CLINS CAT, CWD, Support, NM taxes

Flying & FIUT Training, Launch/Recovery, Admin Sprt

March CLINs CAT and Support FTU Flying & Launch/Recovery

Hancock CLINs CAT and Support FTU Flying & Launch/Recovery

Travel (NTE) Applies to baseline work only

N/A

Shift Differential

(NTE)

Applies to baseline work only

N/A

• CLIN Structure

CLIN # TITLE DESCRIPTION LOCATION

X001 Phase In Transition Holloman X002 Phase In Transition Creech X003 Phase In Transition March X004 Phase In Transition Hancock X101 MQ-9 CAT Labor Holloman X102 MQ-9 CWD Labor Holloman X103 Support Positions Labor Holloman X104 MQ-9 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X105 MQ-9 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X106 MQ-9 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X107 MQ-9 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X108 MQ-9 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X109 MQ-9 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X110 MQ-9 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X111 MQ-9 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X112 MQ-9 Flight Training Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X113 MQ-9 Flight Training Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X114 MQ-9 Flight Training Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X115 MQ-9 Flight Training Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X116 MQ-9 Flight Training Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X117 MQ-9 Flight Training Instruction Optional Labor Holloman X118 MQ-9 L/R Training Optional Labor Holloman X119 MQ-9 CAT Labor Creech X120 Support Positions Labor Creech X121 USAF WS Support Labor Creech X122 MQ-9 11 ATKS Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Creech X123 MQ-9 11 ATKS MQ-9 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Creech X124 MQ-9 11 ATKS Launch and Recovery Flying Training Optional Labor Creech X125 MQ-9 11 ATKS Launch and Recovery Flying Training Optional Labor Creech X126 MQ-9 AFRC Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Creech X127 USAF WS Support Optional Labor Creech

• CLIN Structure continued…

CLIN # TITLE DESCRIPTION LOCATION

X128 MQ-9 CAT Labor March X129 MQ-9 Support Positions Labor March X130 MQ-9 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor March X131 MQ-9 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor March X132 MQ-9 Flying Training Optional Labor March X133 MQ-9 Flying Training Optional Labor March X134 MQ-9 Flying Training Optional Labor March X135 MQ-9 Launch and Recovery Training Optional Labor March X136 MQ-9 Launch and Recovery Training Optional Labor March X137 MQ-9 CAT Labor Hancock X138 Support Positions Labor Hancock X139 Training Device Instruction Optional Labor Hancock X140 Flying Training Instruction Optional Labor Hancock X141 Flying Training Instruction Optional Labor Hancock

• Best Value Source Selection Process

• Subjective Trade-Off

• Requirement is mature and well defined

• Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Contract

• 100% Small Business Set-Aside

• Commercial Service

• Period of Performance

• 3 months Phase-In

• 12 month (Base year) + 4 Option Years

• Evaluation Factors

• Factor 1 – Technical

• Factor 2 - Risk

• Factor 3 – Past Performance

• Factor 4 – Price

• In terms of the hierarchy of importance:

• Technical capability is most important

• Risk is less important than Technical but more important than

Past Performance and Price

• Past Performance is more important than Price

• Price is least important

• Technical Evaluation Methodology

• Separate Technical/Risk-Rating Process

• Technical Capability will be assessed at the subfactor level, overall factor-level rating will not be assigned

• Must meet all aspects of the technical subfactors and received a minimum “Green” Technical rating and “Low” Technical Risk Rating

• Technical Subfactors:

• Subfactor A: Manning Workload Analysis, Training Workload Management

Plan, and Recruitment, Training and Retention Plan

• Subfactor B: Organizational Structure and Roles, Responsibilities and Communications, Transition Plan, and Courseware Personnel and Instructor Training and Certification Plan

• Subfactor C: Learning Management System and Contractor Furnished Equipment

• Technical Capability will be evaluated using the ratings below:

• Technical Risk ratings will be assessed at the subfactor level, overall factor-level rating will not be assigned

• Past Performance

• Assessed at Factor level

• Determine Recency: Demonstrated performance (min 12 months) during the last 5 years from date the RFP is issued (8 Feb 2018)

• Determine Relevancy: Definitions next slide

• Must meet all aspects of relevancy definition

• Quality of evaluated past performance considered at this stage

• Assign Performance Confidence Assessment Rating

• Past Performance – Relevancy

• Past Performance – Confidence Assessments

• Price

• Price will be evaluated using techniques established in FAR 15.404-1 to ensure the Government receives a fair, reasonable, and balanced price

• Will be evaluated on the total, overall evaluated price, which consists of the total proposed price (FP and NTE CLINs) of the transition period, base contract period, option years and all optional CLINs (to include a six-month extension of services IAW FAR 52.217-8)

• Color or adjectival ratings will not be assigned

• The Government will evaluate proposed prices to determine whether prices reflect a clear understanding of the requirements and are consistent with the various elements of the offeror’s Technical Capability Proposal

• Basis of Award

• Award to one contractor whose offer was the most advantageous to the Government, in regards to technical capability, risk, price and other factors considered

• Price is the least important factor. Therefore, the Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest proposed price

• Intend to award without discussions, therefore final determination as to best value may be solely based on the initial proposal as submitted

• A subjective evaluation will determine if the offeror’s technical approach and proposed price represents the greatest value to the Government

• Other Considerations

• Price competition will be the primary method to establish price reasonableness

• If proposed pricing cannot be determined fair and reasonable, other than cost or pricing data will be obtained

• Prior to award:

• Complete Pre-Award Survey

• Request Certificate of Competency from SBA

• Ensure proposals are responsive and conform to solicitation requirements

• Deem offerors are responsible IAW FAR Part 9

Description Estimated Date

Issue Final RFP 8 Feb 18

Pre-Proposal Conference 22 Feb18

Past Performance Due 13 Mar 18

RFP Closing Date 13 Mar 18

Initial Evaluation Complete ~1 Apr 18

Competitive Range ~10 Apr 18

Interim Evaluation ~15 May 18

Request FPRs ~15 Jun 18

Source Selection Decision ~28 Jun 18

** Notice of Award ~1 Jul 18

Phase-In ~1 Jul - 30 Sep 18

Contract Start Date 1 Oct 18

Notional Milestones

Q&A

ADVANCED QUESTIONS

ANSWERS

Advance Questions Question 1 Reference. CAE USA, Inc. and Local Lodge SC-711, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), Effective September 1, 2017 for Creech AFB, NV. Article 9, Section 13 - Payment Calculations. Severance Pay and Loyalty Pay will be calculated on the current hourly wage, the SQP wage and the dual qualification wage rate as defined in Article 12, Section 2.

Observation. The reference to Article 12, Section 2 does not include a “dual qualification wage rate”. In addition, there are no other references to a “dual qualification wage rate” in the CBA.

Question: Can the Govt please identify and explain the “dual qualification wage rate” and which labor categories this rate applies?

Answer (Correction): The dual qualification wage rate does not apply, however, “SQPs” will apply for the appropriate skill level.

Question 2 Reference: CAE USA, Inc. and Local Lodge SC-711, IAM, CBA, Effective September 1, 2017 for Creech AFB, NV. Article 13, Section 2 -Rates of Pay.

Observation: The table with the rates of pay in the CBA does not include several labor categories called out in the RFP/PWS. Offerors will need to know all wage rates applicable to all labor categories to generate accurate pricing. The following labor categories are listed in the RFP/PWS, but there are no pay rates listed in the Creech AFB CBA.

Question: Can the government please provide the pay rates for all labor categories in the PWS but not listed in the CBA for Creech AFB, NV?

Answer:

a. Scheduler (PWS (A3.2.1.7) (Only Lead Scheduler is listed in the CBA) For purposes of this solicitation use the “Lead Scheduler” pay rate at Creech.

b. Learning Management System (LMS) Specialist (PWS paragraph 4.2.6) (Is this position not required at Creech AFB?)

LMS Specialist is not required at Creech 37

c. Operational Training Support Instructor (PWS paragraph 1.2.4)

This was updated in the PWS to read “Simulator Instructor”.

d. Operational Training Simulator Instructor (PWS paragraph 1.2.4.8) This skill is paid at the applicable (IP/SO) Instructor/SME wage rates identified in the CBA.

e. Training Specialist (PWS A3.2.1.7) This skill has two categories for Creech (GTIMS Specialist and Squadron Operations Support Specialist). These positions are not covered in the current CBA. Amendment is forthcoming to incorporate the applicable Department of Labor Wage Area Determination.

Question 3 Reference: PWS paragraph 4.2.4. The first sentence states that “Instructors shall be competent SMEs (for definition of term, refer to Section 4, paragraph 4.7.44)”.

Observation: The reference to Section 4, paragraph 4.7.44 explains the Syllabus. It appears that the correct reference in parenthesis should be paragraph 4.7.43 instead of paragraph 4.7.44.

Question. Will the government verify the reference to paragraph 4.7.44?

Answer: Reference should be 4.7.43

Question 4

Reference: PWS A1.2.3.2. Hancock and March Training Days.

Observation: The PWS states that there will be an estimated 251 Academic and Simulator training days and 208 estimated Flying training days (4-day fly week). The 208 estimated flying days for a 4 day fly week suggests that flying could possibly occur on holidays.

Question. Does the government plan to fly on holidays at March and Hancock? If so, how many holidays per year could be fly days?

Answer: The Government does not plan on flying on Federal Holidays at any of the work sites.

Question 5 Reference. CAE USA, Inc. and Holloman Aircrew Trainer Employee Association (H.A.T.E.A) CBA, Effective August 1, 2017 for Holloman AFB, NM. Article 14, Section 2 -Rates of Pay.

Observation. The table with the rates of pay in the CBA does not include several labor categories called out in the RFP/PWS. Offerors will need to know all wage rates applicable to all labor categories to generate accurate pricing. The following labor categories are listed in the RFP/PWS, but there is no pay rate listed in the Holloman AFB CBA.

Question. Can the government please provide the pay rates for all labor categories not listed in the CBA for Holloman AFB, NM?

Answer (Correction):

a. GTIMS/LMS Training Specialist (PWS paragraph 1.2.4) (The CBA has a GTIMS Training Specialist, but there is no combined GTIMS/LMS Training Specialist).

Experience with Unions is that they will not allow companies to unilaterally introduce a new position and then combine it with a current position.

The GTIMS/LMS Training Specialist is equivalent to the GTIMS Training Specialist in the current CBA . PWS will be updated.

b. Learning Management System (LMS) Specialist (PWS paragraph 4.2.6 and A2.2.5)

Deleted. (Correction)

c. Operational Training Simulator Instructor (PWS paragraph 1.2.4.8) This skill is paid at the applicable (IP/SO) Instructor/SME wage rates identified at the CBA.

d. Instrument Refresher Course Instructor (PWS paragraph 4.2.4.1.3) This skill is paid at the applicable (IP) Instructor/SME wage rates identified at the applicable CBA and as required by PWS para 4.2.4.1.3.

e. Training Specialist (PWS paragraph A3.2.1.7) This is deleted on the revised PWS.

f. Curriculum Developer (PWS paragraph 4.2.5) This is a category of personnel not a specific position. See PWS para 4.2.5.

g. Courseware Manager (PWS 1.2.1.2 (13) and 4.6.2) There is no specific requirements for a courseware manager.

h. Learning Center Monitor (PWS 4.7.23) Per the PWS para 4.7.23. an IP or ISO

i. Audio/Visual Library Attendant (PWS 1.2.1.2 (15) This is not a specific work category.

j. Educational Technician (PWS paragraph 4.2.5.2) (The CBA has an Educational Technologist, but not an Educational Technician)

It is the same for this contract.

k. Lead Scheduler/GTIMS Associate (PWS paragraph A2.2.5) (The CBA has a GTIMS Associate and a Scheduler, but there is no “Lead Scheduler” or combined Scheduler/GTIMS Associate) GTIMS Associate position has been deleted. The GTIMS Training Specialist and Scheduler are paid at the same rates.

Question 6 Reference: CAE USA, Inc. and Holloman Aircrew Trainer Employee Association (H.A.T.E.A) CBA, effective August 1, 2017 and AOCE, Inc. and H.A.T.E.A. effective August 1, 2017 for Holloman AFB, NM. Article 14, Section 2 -Rates of Pay.

Observation: The table with the rates of pay in the CBA includes several labor categories that are not called out in the RFP/PWS. Offerors will need to know the PWS requirements that these labor categories are responsible for and the minimum qualification levels. The following labor categories are not listed in the RFP/PWS, but they are listed in the Holloman AFB CBA.

• Programmer/CBT

• Educational Technologist

• Graphic Artists/Illustrator

• Word Processor II

• Administrative Assistant

• Tactical Scenario Support Specialist

• White Cell (WCO)

Question. Can the government please provide the exact PWS requirements that these labor categories are responsible for and the minimum qualification levels?

Answer: IAW paragraph A.6.9. Workload Table, the contractor is required to produce the identified types of courseware. It is up to the contractor to provide the appropriate personnel to meet the PWS requirements.

The following positions (Administrative Assistant, Tactical Scenario Support Specialist, and WCO) are no longer PWS requirements.

Question 7 Reference: PWS, Section 4, General Information and Contractor Personnel.

Observation: Section 4 lists many of the minimum qualifications for contractor personnel such as years of experience, education levels, and other qualifications for most of the labor categories. However, some labor categories are not included and do not have minimum qualification requirements listed.

Question: Can the government please provide the years of experience required, education levels, and minimum qualification levels for the labor categories above?

Answer:

Program Manager (PWS 1.3.5 (5)) This is a contractor management level position and is up to the company who they decide to manage the contract.

Security Manager (PWS 4.3.1.6) The contractor can identify whomever they want to be a security manager.

Courseware Manager (PWS 1.2.1.2 (13) and 4.6.2) There is no specific requirements for a courseware manager.

Lead Scheduler (PWS 1.2.4.5.1.1 and A2.2.5) See PWS para. 4.2.9

Learning Center Monitor (PWS 4.7.23) See IP and ISO Instructor qualifications.

Graduate Training Information Management System (GTIMS) Training Specialist (PWS 1.2.4 and 1.2.4.2) See GTIMS Specialist PWS para. 4.2.7.

Graduate Training Information Management System (GTIMS) Associate (PWS 1.2.4.5.1.1) See PWS para. 4.2.7.

Operational Training Simulator Instructor (PWS 1.2.4.8) See Operational Training Simulator Instructor PWS para. 1.2.4.8. and subparagraphs.

Squadron Flying Operations Support Specialist (PWS 1.2.4.10) Person must be able to do the work required IAW PWS para. 1.2.4.10.

Audio/Visual Library Attendant (PWS 1.2.1.2 (15)) No such position.

Question 8 Reference: DRFP Page 156, Sub-factor C, Aspect 2. “Demonstrates that proposed CFE is compliant with the Air Force Network Integration Center approved product list.” As this list is only available from a .mil computer, will the Government provide the approved products list?

Second Reference: Attachment 1 PWS Section 1.2.3.4.3

Question: Can the Government provide the Air Force’s approved equipment list?

Answer: No. The Equipment List can change daily so a contractor must go online to the Air Force Network Integration Center (AFNIC) site and request approval.

Website is as follows: https://www.disa.mil/Network-Services/UCCO https://www.disa.mil/Network-Services/UCCO

Question 9 Reference: RFP 8.1 states The offeror shall complete Section 3 of the solicitation (Schedule of Supplies and Services (CLINS)) by inserting the price elements (unit price and extended amount) for all Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract line item numbers (CLINS), including Phase-In, Base Year, Option Years, and Optional CLINs. For ease of administration, all TOTAL pricing should be rounded to whole dollar amounts and divisible by 12. The solicitation will provide a pre-established NTE amounts for the Travel CLINs that will become part of the total evaluated price for all offerors. Section 3 shall be submitted using Microsoft 2010 or later.

Question. Will the Government allow use of Microsoft Excel as a substitute to producing this in Microsoft Word to significantly reduce the size of the Cost Volume?

Answer: Yes, Microsoft Excel will be used for the pricing information. Attachment 5- Price Spreadsheet has been incorporated to the Final RFP for offerors to input their pricing proposal. See Section 8.0 Instructions for Volume III for details.

Question 10

Reference: Past Performance Relevancy.

Draft Solicitation Reference: Table 4, Past Performance Relevancy, page 174 Issue: Although this is a small business set-aside acquisition, the descriptions associated with adjectival ratings in the past performance relevancy table – including those related to size, scope, complexity, student throughput, and contract value – reflect performance activity levels that normally can only be demonstrated by large businesses.

Question: Will the Government revise the performance relevancy descriptions for adjectival ratings to more realistically reflect performance qualifiers at all relevancy levels that could be demonstrated by highly qualified small businesses?

Answer: No

Question 11 Reference: CBA-Based Pricing Consistency.

Draft Solicitation Reference: Paragraph 8.0, Instructions for Volume III – Price Proposal (Factor 3); and Paragraph D) Factor 4–Price, Section 7 Issue: Current CBAs include rates of pay and associated labor costs at established escalation levels through 30 September 2020, encompassing the base and first option year of the new contract.

Question: Will the Government require pricing for the base and option years of this acquisition that is based on currently established CBA rates?

Answer: For pricing purposes, offerors are to use the applicable FY19 CBA rates for base and all option years.

Question 12 Reference: Learning Management System (LMS) and SIPRNET.

Draft Solicitation Reference: Paragraphs 1.2.3.4 and 1.2.3.4.1, Learning Management System (LMS) Issue: Paragraph 1.2.3.4 calls for an LMS that is “an internet based knowledge portal which provides student, instructor, and other required personnel access to approved courseware for each unclassified course of instruction specified in the PWS.” Subparagraph 1.2.3.4.1 indicates that “classified material shall be located on a classified server that can be accessed via a SIPRNET web page. . .”

Question: Would the Government clarify and provide more detail about the requirements for SIPRNET content and access in the LMS?

Answer: Some of the material we work with is classified. The SIPRNET reference refers to a parallel system similar in structure that would reside on SIPRNET and enable our ideal training program. Long term, our winning contractor does need to support SIPRNET requirements and be able to do work in that medium.

Question 13 Reference: Instructional Systems Development Management Plan due date. Draft Solicitation Reference: Appendix 4 of PWS and Section 1.3.2 of PWS.

Issue: Appendix 4 of PWS states that Instructional Systems Development Management Plan is due with proposal but section 1.3.2 of PWS states it is due 10 days after contract award.

Question: PWS Section 1.3.2 and Appendix 4, Table 1 have conflicting due dates for the Instructional Systems Development Management Plan (ISDMP) (“within ten

(10) business days of contract award” and “Within proposal”, respectively). Can the Government please confirm our understanding that the ISDMP is NOT required with proposal submission (consistent with Sections 6a and 7 of the DRFP)?

Answer: Initial ISDMP is due 10 days after contract award. Any modification required to the ISDMP at any time are due within 15 business days of notification.

Question 14 Reference: DRFP Section 6a, paragraph 7.5 PPI Contents, subparagraph D.

Question: Can the Government please confirm our understanding that the 1 page “Summary” referenced in subparagraph D should include only “the nature or portion of work performed” and “the percentage of the total effort performed” for each contract reference submitted, and should NOT include the information requested in subparagraphs E and F?

Answer: See revised paragraph 7.5 PPI Contents of the official RFP. The one (1) page limit for the Summary applies and yes, it does not include the information requested in subparagraphs E and F.

Question 15 Reference: DRFP Section 6a, paragraph 7.5 PPI Contents, subparagraphs E and F.

Question: Can the Government please clarify where the information requested in subparagraphs E and F should be included in Volume II (i.e. as a standalone section or integrated into the individual Past and Present Performance Contract References referenced in subparagraph G)?

Answer: See revised paragraph 7.5 PPI Contents of the official RFP. The information requested on subparagraphs E and F of the draft RFP should be included in the revised subparagraph D, Table of Past Performance Information Contract References.

Question 16 (3-Part) Reference: DRFP Section 6a, paragraph 7.5 PPI Contents, subparagraph G.1.

Question (a): Can the Government please clarify if the instruction to “Submit one

(1) sheet for each contract reference” constitutes a 1 page limit for each Past and Present Performance Contract Reference for the information requested subparagraph G.1.?

Answer: Yes, contractor will submit one (1) sheet for each contract reference. See revised paragraph 7.5 PPI Contents of the official RFP.

Question (b): If there is a 1 page limit, can the Government please clarify if the information requested in subparagraphs E and F is part of the page limitation?

Answer: Information requested in subparagraphs E and F of the draft RFP is not part of the page limit. This information is included in subparagraph D.

Question (c): If there is a 1 page limit, will the Government increase the page limit to 5 pages per Past and Present Performance Contract Reference to allow for a full discussion of relevance to the Relevancy Criteria in Section 7 of the RFP as instructed in subparagraph G.1.?

Answer: No, the page one (1) page limit summary for each reference remains.

Question 17 Reference: DRFP Section 6a, paragraph 7.5.G.2 and 7.6.

Question: As completed CPARS may contain proprietary and / or confidential information, will the Government allow completed CPARS for subcontractor Past and Present Performance Contract References to be sent directly to the Government or in a sealed envelope addressed to the Government with the proposal submittal?

Answer: Yes, the Government will allow subcontractor completed CPARS in a sealed envelope addressed to the Government with the proposal submittal.

Question 18 Reference: Attachment 1 PWS Section 1.2.2.8.(4)

Question: What authoring system is currently used for MQ-9 courseware (PowerPoint only or other software?)?

Answer: CWD also used Word, Adobe Acrobat and CBT-based programs.

Question 19

Reference: Attachment 1 PWS Section 1.2.2.8.(5)

Question: Does the MQ-9 program currently make use of the USAF cloud-based Enterprise System for courseware development?

Question 20

Reference: Attachment 1 PWS Section 1.2.3.4.4

Question: Is the current LMS (Moodle) used to serve courseware to the other MQ- 9 sites? If not, how are the sites now obtaining access?

Answer: Yes

Question 21

Reference: Attachment 1 PWS Section 1.2.3.4.4

Question: Is the current LMS (Moodle) hosted on the NIPRNET (.mil)?

Answer: Yes, it is available on NIPRNET to hang courseware.

Question 22

Reference: Attachment 1 PWS Section 1.2.3.4.4

Question: Has the version of Moodle being used for MQ-9 been modified in any way from the open-source product openly available?

Question 23

Reference: Attachment 1 PWS Section 1.2.3.4.4

Question: Does Moodle interface directly with TIMS, or is there an air-gap that requires transfer of information from Moodle to TIMS?

Question 24

Reference: Attachment 1 PWS Section 1.2.3.4

Question: What is meant by “multi-site collaboration”? Is it connecting multiple networks, synchronizing databases, or remote data manipulation (lessons, materials, contents, etc.)?

Answer: No, the courseware development system is hosted on a server that all sites have access to.

Question 25

Reference: PWS 1.3.6 (2) and RFP Section 6 (ITO), Para 6.2, Sub-factor A, Aspect 3

PWS reference states in regard to the Recruitment/Retention Plan that the plan “At a minimum, the plan shall address ”three items, to include: “Training capability to provide training for new instructor pilot and sensor operators if Government training resources are not available.” However, the RFP Sub-factor A, Aspect 3 does not contain that training capability requirement.

Question: Should this training capability requirement be included in Sub-factor A, Aspect 3?

Answer: In PWS para 1.3.6., (2) is deleted. PWS will be amended.

Question 26

Reference: Optional CLIN 0135, X035

Cites PWS reference as A4.3.3.1 (same as given in CLIN 0134)

Question: Should PWS reference be A4.3.3.2?

Answer: No, CLIN 0135, X035 are duplicates. They will be deleted.

Question 27

Reference: Optional CLIN 0136, X036

Cites PWS reference as A4.3.3.2.

Question: Should PWS reference be A4.3.4.2?

Question 28

Reference: Optional CLIN 0137, X037

Cites PWS reference as A4.3.3.2.

Question: Should PWS reference be A4.3.4.2?

Answer: Yes, RFP Price Schedule will be corrected

Question 29

Reference: Optional CLIN 0102, X002

Cites PWS reference as A6.8

Question: Should PWS reference be A6.9?

Question 30

Reference: RFP Page 125 CLIN 1042

Lists POP as “01-OCT-2019 TO 21-SEP-2020.”

Question: Should end of POP be 30 SEP 2020?

Answer: Yes, RFP will be amended.

Question 31

Reference: RFP Page 126 CLIN 2026

Lists POP as “01-OCT-2019 TO 21-SEP-2020.”

Question: Should end of POP be 30 SEP 2020?

Question 32

Reference: RFP Page 128 CLIN 3002

Lists POP as “01-OCT-2021 TO 21-SEP-2021.”

Question: Should end of POP be 30 SEP 2022?

Question 33

Reference: RFP Page 129 CLIN 3020

Lists POP as “01-OCT-2021 TO 21-SEP-2021.”

Question: Should end of POP be 30 SEP 2022?

Question 34

Reference: Page 155, RFP Section 6A, ITO, Para 5.3

Paragraph titled “Pages Not Included in Page Count” lists “…,and Volume I

– Technical, Section 1-Prerequisite Documentation will not be included in the page count.”

Question: What does the Section 1-Prerequisite Documentation refer to?

Answer: Section 1 does not apply and will be deleted.

Question 35

Reference: Page 161, RFP Section 6A, ITO, Para 7.5 E 1

States, “. Submit one (1) sheet for each contract reference…”

Question: Does a sheet constitute one page?

Question 36

Reference: Page 183, RFP Section 7, Evaluation Factors for Award, Subfactor C, Aspect 1 a), last sentence.

States, “Remove “you” and “your” from the Section 6 and 7. Should not be writen (sic.) in first person.”

Question: Is this an edit comment that should be removed?

Answer: Yes.

Question 37

Reference: PWS Para 1.2.4.8

Discusses duties of Operational Training Simulator Instructor at Creech AFB; however, Section 4.2.4.1, Instructor Qualifications, does not list any qualifications for this position.

Question: Is the position a future requirement or was it inadvertently omitted from the qualifications section?

Answer: This position is not a future position. See PWS para 1.2.4.8.1.

Question 38

Reference: PWS Para 4.3.1.1

List of contract performance sites includes White Sands Missile Range, NM. However, White Sands is not list in Para 1.0, Scope of Work.

Question: Is White Sands a correct performance location for this contract?

Answer: Yes. A change will be made to the PWS para 1.0 to add White Sands Missile Range as a place of performance.

Question 39

Reference: PWS Para A2.1. Footnote #1 below table.

States, “FMA and FMS classes are integrated…”

Question: Should “FMA” be changed to “FAM”?

Answer: Yes. A change will be made to the PWS to reflect FAM.

Question 40

Reference: PWS Para A3.1.

States, “…requirements at Creech AFB are broken down into four separate sections: 11 ATKS, 432nd OSS, AFRS, and 26th WPS.

Question: Should “AFRS” be changed to “AFRC”?

Answer: Yes. A change will be made to the PWS to reflect AFRC.

Question 41

Reference: Attachments 1, 3, 4, & 5

Each attachment references AFMAN 36-2236, Guidebook for Air Force Instructors, as the Authoritative Reference. AFMAN 36-2236 was rescinded.

Question: Is there a replacement directive?

Answer: No. AFMAN 36-2236 is not rescinded, it is obsolete. It is not mandatory but there is relevant information in this regulation that can be used. A change will be made to the PWS to reflect that it is not mandatory.

Question 42

Reference: RFP Sec 3, page 24 and 25

CLIN 0140 cites PWS A5.3.4. This PWS paragraph regards Hancock ARB FTU SUPPORT, which is called out in CLIN 141.

Question: Please confirm if this PWS reference should be deleted from

CLIN 0140?

Answer: Yes, and should be the reference for CLIN 141.

Question 43

Reference: CBA: Creech AFB, Article 14, Section 2

Question: Please confirm for those instructors earning SQP pay that SQP is paid for all hours worked and that this applies to all sites?

Question 44

Reference: PWS A.3., page 55

Question: Please confirm all instructor CLINS at Creech AFB should be priced using LR SQP?

Question 45

Reference: PWS 4.1.1, PWS 4.1.3

Dedicating 75% of training days to Site Manager duties seems excessive and unnecessary.

Question: Can this requirement be removed since the goal appears to be to have the SM or his representative available on short notice for meetings, which is already addressed in 4.1.3 "The SM or alternate..."?

Answer: No. The requirement remains as written

Question 46

Reference: PWS A2.2.5

Question: Can a requirement for an administrative assistant be added to Holloman FTU support? We believe this is highly appropriate based on the projected contractor head count.

Answer: This is not a required position in the PWS.

Question 47

Reference: Attachment 3 - Wage Determinations Each page 1 of 1

Question: The provided Wage Determinations (WD) contain only the cover page, and the link at bottom of each WD does not list the WD/SCA labor cats/wages. Please provide the entire WD listing all labor cats and wages for each location.

Answer: Attachment 3 is the WDs for the CBAs. An amendment is forthcoming to incorporate the applicable Department of Labor Wage Area Determination.

Question 48

Reference: Attachment 1 – PWS 17 Jan 18 Section AT3.5, Frequency and Milestones, page 79 “A Lesson Plan shall be prepared for each academic lesson PMATS and flight event.”

Section A6.9, Estimated CWD for FY19-FY23, Note 2, page 70 “PMATS/Flight Lesson Package normally consists of a training manual for each syllabus, electronic grade sheet, and may occasionally contain a Lesson Strategy Report and Lesson Plan, when required.”

Question: For courseware labor scope purposes, request clarify if Lesson Plan is required for each PMATS and Flight Event, or if it is occasionally required? If it is occasionally, request USG define “occasional” as a percentage of 100%.

Answer: Not required. Para A6.9 CWD workload note 2 will be amended to only include electronic gradesheet and a lesson strategy report.

Question 49

Reference: Attachment 1 – PWS 17 Jan 18 Section A6.9, Estimated CWD for FY19-FY23, Note 2, page 70 “PMATS/Flight Lesson Package normally consists of a training manual [Att 7] for each syllabus, electronic grade sheet [Att 8], and may occasionally contain a Lesson Strategy Report [Att 1] and Lesson Plan [Att 3], when required.”

The PWS also references Instructor Guides (IGs), Briefing Room Interactive (BRI), and Squadron In-Flight Guides

Question a: Which PMATS Training Device Packages and Flight Lesson Packages deliverables include IGs, BRIs, and Squadron In-Flight Guides?

Answer: Not required. Para A6.9 CWD workload note 2 will be amended to only include electronic gradesheet and a lesson strategy report.

Question b. Are there deliverable attachments (including content requirements) for IGs, BRIs, IFGs?

Answer: Not required. Para A6.9 CWD workload note 2 will be amended to only include electronic gradesheet and a lesson strategy report.

Question c. Is there any type of presentation (ILT PPT or ICW) that is a required deliverable for PMATS Training Device Package/Flight Lesson Package? What Attachment is it?

Answer: Not required. Para A6.9 CWD workload note 2 will be amended to only include electronic gradesheet and a lesson strategy report.

Question 50

Reference: Attachment 1 – PWS 17 Jan 18 Section 4.1, Site Manager, page 29 ”The contractor shall provide a Site Manager (SM) at each place of performance who shall be responsible for the performance of the work.”

CBA Hancock 2018 V4 (Attachment) Section 2, Job Classifications, page 12, “All employees shall fall within one of the following job classifications: a. Pilot Instructor;

b. Sensor Instructor; c. Administration (Includes Scheduler, Registrar, and Training Specialist positions).”

Question a: Site Manager (SM) is not explicitly included in the Hancock CBA under Section 2, item c. Is the Hancock Site Manager considered an “Administration” position and rate for purposes of Hancock CBA?

Answer: Yes, an administrative position for the company. See answer to question b.

Question b. Please verify Hancock SM is/is not covered under CBA.

Answer: No, SM positions are management level positions and are not covered under CBA’s. It’s up to the contractor to determine and price this position.

Question 51

Reference: Attachment 4 – Collective Bargaining Agreements, Holloman Section 2 – Rates of Pay, page 15

Question: Holloman CBA lists “Administrative Assistant”, but the PWS does not list requirement for this position/labor cat. Please define the Administrative Assistant’s role and requirement?

Answer: There is no administrative assistant requirement in this solicitation.

Question 52

Reference: Attachment 4 – Collective Bargaining Agreements, Holloman Section 2 – Rates of Pay, page 15 Attachment 1 – PWS 17 Jan 18 Section 1.2.4.3 GTIMS Specialist (Holloman AFB/Creech AFB), page 11

Question: Holloman CBA does NOT list “LMS/GTIMS Specialist” as required in the PWS 1.2.4.2. Which Holloman CBA listed position is fulfilling the requirement of PWS 1.2.4.2 LMS/GTIMS Specialist?

Answer: The GTIMS/LMS Training Specialist is equivalent to the GTIMS Training Specialist in the current CBA . PWS will be updated.

Question 53

Reference: Attachment 4 – Collective Bargaining Agreements, Holloman Section 2 – Rates of Pay, page 15 Attachment 1 – PWS 17 Jan 18 Section 1.2.4.3 GTIMS Specialist (Holloman AFB/Creech AFB), page 11

Question: Holloman CBA lists “GTIMS Associate.” Is this the “GTIMS Specialist” as required in PWS 1.2.4.3? If not, which Holloman CBA listed position is fulfilling the requirement of PWS 1.2.4.3 GTIMS Specialist?

Answer: GTIMS Associate position has been deleted. The GTIMS Training Specialist and Scheduler are paid at the same rates.

Question 54

Reference: Attachment 1 – PWS 17 Jan 18 Section 1.2.4.6, Joint Interface Control Officer (JICO) (Creech AFB/Holloman AFB)

Question: Please verify that JICO position is not a CBA position, and not covered under some other labor category listed on the Holloman CBA?

Answer: Yes, JICO is not covered in the CBA. Amendment is forthcoming to incorporate the applicable Department of Labor Wage Area Determination.

Question 55

Reference: Attachment 1 – PWS 17 Jan 18 Section 1.2.4.3, GTIMS Specialist, page 11 Section 1.2.4.8, Operational Training Simulator Instructor, page 15 Section 1.2.4.10, Squadron Operations Support Specialist, page 18

Question: Please verify that the GTIMS Specialist, Operational Training Simulator Instructor, and Squadron Operations Support Specialist positions are not Creech CBA positions, and not covered under some other labor category name already listed on current Creech CBA.

Answer: GTIMS Specialist is a new position at Creech and not covered in the current CBA. Amendment is forthcoming to incorporate the applicable Department of Labor Wage Area Determination.

Question 55 (Cont)

Question: Please verify that the GTIMS Specialist, Operational Training Simulator Instructor, and Squadron Operations Support Specialist positions are not Creech CBA positions, and not covered under some other labor category name already listed on current Creech CBA.

Answer: Operational Training Simulator Instructor is identified in the CBA as a Sensor or Pilot L/R Flight Instructor.

Answer: Squadron Support Specialist is a new position at Creech and is not covered in the current CBA. Amendment is forthcoming to incorporate the applicable Department of Labor Wage Area Determination.

Question 56

Reference: Attachment 1 – PWS 17 Jan 18 Section 1.2.4.10, Squadron Operations Support Specialist, page 18

Question: Please verify that this position is not a Hancock CBA position, and not covered under some other labor category name already listed on Hancock CBA?

Answer: Squadron Support Specialist is a new position at Hancock and is not covered in the current CBA. Amendment is forthcoming to incorporate the applicable Department of Labor Wage Area Determination.

Question 57

Reference: Attachment 1 – PWS 17 Jan 18.

Attachment 3, Lesson Plan, page 79 “The contractor shall prepare and deliver a Lesson Plan for each academic lesson identified in each course syllabus.”

Attachment 5, Student Study Guide, page 81 “The contractor shall prepare and deliver a Student Study Guide for each academic lesson.”

Question: Please verify that Attachment 3 and Attachment 5 are not required for Interactive Courseware (ICW), and that only Attachment 1, Lesson Strategy Report (LSR) and Attachment 6, Instructional Media Package (IMP) are required for ICW.

Answer: ICW do not require attachment 3 nor attachment 5.

Question 58

Reference: RFP 8Feb18 (Attachment) Section 3, Schedule of Supplies/Services, CLIN 0134, page 22 Section 3, Schedule of Supplies/Services, CLIN 0135, page 22

Question: CLIN 0134 and CLIN 0135 are identically worded. Please clarify the difference between these CLINs.

Answer: CLIN 0135, X035 are duplicates. They will be deleted.

Question 59

Reference: RFP 8Feb18 (Attachment) Section 3, Schedule of Supplies/Services, CLIN 0140, page 24 Section 3, Schedule of Supplies/Services, CLIN 0141, page 25 Attachment 1 – PWS 17 Jan 18 Section A5.3.4, Hancock ARB FTU Support, page 68

Question: According to RFP Section 3, page 24 and 25, CLIN 0140 cites PWS A5.3.4. This PWS paragraph regards Hancock ARB FTU SUPPORT, which is called out in CLIN 141. Please confirm if this PWS reference should be deleted from CLIN 0140.

Answer: Yes, and should be the reference for CLIN 141.

Question 60

Reference: Attachment 4 – Collective Bargaining Agreements, Creech Article 14, Section 2 , page 17

Question: Please confirm for those instructors earning SQP pay that SQP is paid for all hours worked and that this applies to all sites?

Question 61

Reference: Attachment 1 – PWS 17 Jan 18 Section A3. CREECH AFB Workload, page 55

Question: Please confirm all instructor CLINS at Creech AFB should be priced using LR SQP.

Question 62 Reference: RFP 8 Feb18 (Attachment) Section 3, Schedule of Supplies/Services, CLIN 001, CLIN 002, CLIN 003, pages 4-5. Contractor shall furnish all personnel, equipment, tools, materials, supervision, and all other items that are required to perform MQ- 9 Contract Aircrew Training (CAT) and Courseware Development (CWD) in accordance with the Performance Work Statement. Period of Performance is 01 Jul 18 - 30 Sep 18.”

Question a: It appears incumbent contractor is obligated to perform all work through 30 Sep 2018. Request USG cite specific PWS paragraphs for Phase-in CLINs, and describe exactly what work would be required of offeror during that 3 months?

Answer: The current contract period of performance ends on 30 Sep 2018. See PWS para 1.3.1.

Question b: In addition, RFP Phase-in CLINs do not mention “Support”.

Do Phase-in CLINs apply only to CAT and CWD exclusive of Support Positions?

Answer: See PWS para 1.3.1.

Question 63

Reference: PWS 1.3.6 (2) Recruitment and Retention Plan states, “Training capability to provide training for new instructor pilot and sensor operators if Government training resources are not available.”

RFP Evaluation criteria, Page 182, Sub-factor 3 removed this statement.

Question: Should this statement also be removed from the PWS?

Answer. Yes, PWS para 1.3.6 (2) will be removed.

Question 64

Reference: PWS Attachment 8 Electronic Grade Sheets

Question: Are electronic grade sheets currently in place at all four locations?

Question 65

Reference: Table A3.2 on PWS Page 55 seems to have errors in the 3rd and 4th rows of the data listing 42 students/year when it seems it should be 24 students/year in each row.

Question: Will the Government please verify the numbers should be 24 in each row?

Answer: This class will be scheduled to be instructed 8 times per performance year. The student per class will be amended to 5-6 per class.

Question 66

Reference: RFP Page 186, Section D) 2. states, “an assessment of affordability will be performed on the total evaluated price.”

Question: Will the Government explain the procedures that will be taken to conduct an assessment of affordability and what will constitute acceptable criteria for affordability?

Answer: The best value trade-off process allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. The perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal shall merit the additional cost within the contractor’s proposal.

Evaluation will be based on the Government’s analysis of the perceived benefits of the higher price proposal.

Question 67

Reference: RFP Section 6a paragraph 7.1, paragraph 7.5, and Attachment 1

Question: (a): Can the Government please clarify whether hard copies of the pages generated from the PPI tool are required in Volume II (as hard copies of the PPI tool pages are not included in the minimum required sections listed in 7.5), or is the PPI tool only required to be submitted as part of the electronic copy?

Answer: The PPI Tool is required only for electronic submission of the past performance.

Question 67 (cont.)

Reference: RFP Section 6a paragraph 7.1, paragraph 7.5, and Attachment 1

Question: (b): If hard copies of the pages generated from the PPI tool are required in Volume II, can the Government please clarify where they should be inserted in the Volume in relation to the minimum required sections listed in 7.5?

Answer: See Note under paragraph 7.1 of the RFP.

Question 68 Reference: Table 4, Past Performance Relevancy, page 184 Issue: NAICS code 611512, Flight Training has a size standard or 27.5M.

The Past Performance total contract value requirement for a Very Relevant rating is $50M, Relevant rating is $30M, and a Somewhat Relevant rating is $10M. These size standards are out of line with most small business portfolios in this NAICS code regardless of technical ability. This requirement may serve to limit competition on this procurement to primarily those businesses with an ANC-type corporate structure that have the benefit of being allowed to share Past Performance among companies.

Question: To ensure the Government can attract proposals from a wider pool of qualified, best-of-breed small business for this effort, we respectfully request that the final bullet in the Somewhat Relevant section of Table 4 – Past Performance Relevancy be changed to: Total contract value equal to or greater than $4 million.

Answer: No, the relevancy criteria will remain as is.

Question 69 Reference: PWS paragraph A2.2.4, FY19-23 Launch and Recovery training table, page 54 Issue: Para. A2.2.4 shows the requirement for 24 hours support per day for Launch and Recovery support with 8-hour shifts per the note below the table. Our understanding is that contractor aircrews are doing both launch and recovery. With a 10-hour fly day, one crew cannot do both the launch and recovery.

Question: How many sorties can we be expected to support each day, for both launch and recovery?

Answer: The L/R crew has an 8-hour shift and will support workload required for that shift. The “10-hour fly day” has nothing to do with the 8-hour shift.

Question 70 Reference: Section 6A, 7.1 & Attachment 1 Section 6

Question: Is it the Government's intent for offerors to provide electronic copies of the PPI data (Business Relationships and Past Performance" on a separate CD, or may offeror provide PPI data on the same CD used to submit the entire proposal?

Answer:…