AT-III Final RFP Questions-Answers_20Sep21.docx

Aerial Targets III FA489021R0012 Industry questions in response to Final RFP posted 11 Aug 2021 and Virtual Pre-Proposal Conference 30 Aug 2021

Concern: The level of effort in the PWS directly conflicts with the Draft SOL FA489021R0012 1Jul21 1530 (Section B/Item 4).

Question: Will the Government please clarify and correct either the PWS FA489021R0012 (Basic) 11Aug21 or Draft SOL FA489021R0012 1Jul21 1530 (Section B/Item 4) or verify that the Government’s requirement is to price for the addition of 300 FSAT aircraft per year (1800 in total at the end of the option years)?

1. Government Response: PWS is correct and CLI X004 is correct. PWS para 3.4.6 provides for 25 aircraft over FFP baseline of 50 aircraft. For pricing/billing purposes the 25 aircraft over baseline pricing is on a per aircraft per month basis. Up to 25 per month for 12 months is 300 maximum for pricing/billing purposes. The maximum quantity of aircraft over baseline is 25 aircraft at any time under contract terms.

Concern: Unable to accurately staff and price for the NDI workload.

Question: Will the Government please clarify:

1. Is the NDI work being performed by local base NDI personnel? Or:

2. Is the NDI Technician labor category a non-CBA position?

2. Government Response: NDI at Tyndall only is a new requirement being added to the current contract’s last option year. Prior to this coming last option year, the NDI work was previously provided by base NDI personnel. Anticipate NDI position to be added to the CBA at some point, but this is a company and union decision, not the Government.

Question: Can an offeror combine consecutive contracts that are the exact same work for the exact same customer and treat the group of contracts like option years to meet the value requirement? In this scenario, there is no break in performance from one contract to each follow-on renewal.

3. Government Response: Section M under recency uses the terminology, “active contract performance.” If one PPI were submitted for multiple contracts for the exact same work with the exact same customer, this would count as one PPI for both recency and relevancy.

Question: If one or more teaming partner (subcontractor) has the certification, is it beneficial or advantageous to also submit the teaming partner’s AS9110C certificate?

4. Government Response: No, as this is simply a pre-requisite requirement there is no trade-off available for exceeding the Government’s stated requirement.

Question: Will the Government consider specifying the level of effort, if any, required of the contractor to support Foreign Military customers?

5. Government Response: There is no level of effort required in the PWS for FMS customers. Contract requirements contained in the PWS provides mission support to enable the 53 WEG to perform their mission.

Discussion: There is no paragraph 2.12.2.7 in the PWS. It appears that this CDRL should refer to PWS 2.12.4.

Question: Will the Government revise the CDRL to reference PWS 2.12.4?

6. Government Response: Appendix B CDRL A001 is corrected to reference PWS Paragraph 2.12.4 and change reflected in Amendment 0001.

Discussion: PWS 2.12.4 refers to the summary report as "QA" while CDRL A001 refers to it as "QC." Also, other PWS references to Quality refer to QC/Quality Control versus QA/Quality Assurance.

Question: Will the Government revise PWS 2.12.4 to refer to “QC summary reports”?

7. Government Response: All applicable PWS and CDRL references were changed from “QC” to “QA”. Changes are reflected in Amendment 0001.

Question: For the purposes of the proposal, will the Government specify the anticipated level of effort for the Contractor in (a) assisting the TELMOC contractor in troubleshooting radio equipment; and (b) providing radio troubleshooting assistance to 337th 325 ACS?

8. Government Response: This is an ad hoc level of effort associated with unscheduled breaks. Instances of support for assisting in troubleshooting estimated to be 1-5 times per year using 1-2 techs for 8 hours each occurrence.

Question: For the purposes of the proposal, will the Government specify the anticipated level of effort (quantity and frequency) to train Government and Government-directed personnel in the operation and maintenance of HW/SW built by the Contractor?

9. Government Response: This is a rare ad hoc occurrence. Level of effort estimated less than 2 times per year/1 technician for 8 hours each occurrence.

Question: For the purposes of the proposal, will the Government specify the anticipated level of effort in developing and providing this instruction?

10. Government Response: This is an ad hoc level of effort associated with familiarization training for newly assigned pilots/controllers. Instances of support estimated to be 1-2 times per year for 8 hours each occurrence.

Question: If less than the specified time of notice is given and the Contractor is unable to accomplish the request, will the Contractor be penalized on the Incentive Award Fee?

11. Government Response: Negative, the Contractor will not be penalized for not accomplishing the request if less than the specified time is given according to the PWS.

12. Section L PWS/Section A PWS/Appendix G

The PWS states: “The Government shall furnish all SP and GP vehicles at the start of the contract listed on Appendix G as Government Furnished Vehicles (GFV); however, the contractor shall replace vehicles at the Contractor’s expense thereafter. The Government Furnished Vehicles (GFV) provided at the start of the contract will continue to be Government-owned throughout their life-cycle. At the end of their life-cycle the Contractor will request disposition instructions from the Government. After implementing disposition instructions, the vehicle will be removed from the GFV inventory. Replacement vehicles will be contractor furnished and owned at the Contractor’s expense.”

Discussion: Section L requires that the contractor provide a vehicle fleet to support all contract requirements at contract start. PWS Appendix G Government Furnished Vehicles (GFV) provides a listing of vehicles currently used in support of this program that will be provided to the contractor at contract start. However, offerors are not provided with a complete listing of the vehicles currently supporting the program because contractor-owned vehicles are not included in the list. This represents an unfair advantage to the incumbent contractor, who has complete information on the entire vehicle fleet, both GFV and contractor owned.

Question: Will the Government provide a listing of contractor-owned vehicles, similar to the Appendix G listing, currently supporting the program?

12. Government Response: The contractor owned vehicles include 8 Pick-ups (1 4x4), 2 utility trailers and 3 vans.

13.

PWS/Section A

Discussion: PWS Appendix H, Workforce Minimum Qualifications, includes no qualifications for a Functional Check Flight/Operational Check Flight pilot.

Question: Does the Government’s intend for the contractor to actually perform FCFs/OCFs, or to only support and coordinate FCFs/OCFs?

13. Government Response: The PWS requirement is only to support and coordinate FCFs/OCFs or high speed taxis, if required. There is not a pilot requirement on this contract.

14. PWS/Section B

Discussion: CDRL A021 was not released with the rest of the CDRLs.

Question: Will the Government provide CDRL A021, Personnel Report?

14. Government Response: CDRL A021 corrected in PWS Appendix B and available in the release of Amendment 0001.

15. PWS/Section A

Question: Will the Government consider specifying the quantities, locations, and level-of-effort associated with maintaining, storing and tracking/inventorying these Government assets?

15. Government Response: The spares and account numbers are not finite and fluctuate based on the need from year to year in all categories described in the question.

1) Munitions accounts are items that are forecasted and some are annual authorized. There are 5 munitions accounts that are managed in Egress, AFE, FSAT, SSAT Launch pad and SSAT. There are currently 32 different stock numbers managed across the 5 accounts. The overall number of assets on-hand is 11,250, but that’s only a snap shot in time.

2) Refer to APP C for the minimum documents that will be managed in the technical reference library.

3) The SSAT material and parts are managed in supply and there are items that require mx actions prior to use and during post flight; therefore, the numbers change as well as we attrit drones through WSEP shots/drone kills.

4) GRDCS Pods will be removed from the PWS and that will reflect in the release of Amendment 0001.

5) The audio visual, DLS systems, RIS LRUs are identified in the GFE tab under RIS and most of the spares that are managed in data base outside of the supply system accounted for in local data base. There are estimated 500 parts managed on various systems in this repository and the majority of the spare are located in 1801 facility. The number includes spares and units installed in the system. You will have review the GFE listings for additional installed unit information.

Again, this effort is up to the contractor to manage and formulate best practice to accommodate the storage and forecasting. The numbers provided in Gov’t reply is a snap shot in-time. The overall tracking documents will be provided at contract transition.

16. Section M

Question: Will the Government please fix the numbering of this section?

16. Government Response: Factor 1 - Small Business has been updated to section M-3.

17.

Section L, Attachment 1

Discussion: Evaluating Factor 3, Past Performance, is now correctly numbered M-5.

Question: Will the Government please revise the quoted Section L paragraph to refer to Section M-5 instead of M-4?

17. Government Response: Section L, Attachment 1 has been updated to state Section M-5 in paragraph D.

18.

Solicitation Number FA489021R0012

Page 31, attached file for Section C

Reference: Section C - Description/Specifications/Statement of work. PWS Appendix I - Workload Data.

Discussion: PWS Appendix I doesn't appear to have been included in Bidders Library.

Question: Will the Government provide PWS Appendix I?

18. Government Response: There is not an Appendix I. It will be removed from the Solicitation. Workload Data will be reposted with Amendment 0001.

19. Section L

Discussion: The Government normally has a program office in place, like the QF-16 or BQM program offices, to lead cradle-to-grave life cycle planning, execution and management and control of GFP, that the maintenance contractor would normally support.

Question: Is there a program office in place to lead program management efforts for the Government related to the RIS? If not, does this task infer the maintenance contractor could be called upon to act as an RIS program management entity without a Government program management activity?

19. Government Response: Yes, there is a Government System Program Office (SPO) for RIS, however not all systems are contained in their portfolio such as ACDS, Wind Data Info, APTM, and BC3. Other GFP not associated with SPO life-cycle management such as general tools and equipment items will be the responsibility of the O&M contractor

20. Section L

Discussion: Without specific context on how the generic terms like “demand planning, grounded weapon system mitigation, retrograde of line item replacement units, and disposition” apply to the support of the FSAT, SSAT and RIS programs, our capability to provide a specific approach to “properly use and positively influence AF supply chain operations at the retail and wholesale levels from acquisition of supplies materials and equipment” will be handicapped by our lack of insight into the complexity of these areas of concern compared to the incumbent contractor.

Question Would it be possible to provide some specific context on the importance of these areas and recent examples of where improvements could be expected for FSAT, SSAT and RIS?

20. Government Response: Logistics management is an important aspect of this contract requirement. The Government is entrusting thousands of items of GFE to the Contractor to account and maintain to ensure availability to support the mission. The proposed approach to use and positively influence the supply chain to support PWS requirements is primary to successful logistics support. Because of the complexity of the logistics program it is vital for potential offerors to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the AF Supply System and the challenges in managing that program for an aircraft MX unit.

21. Appendix H – Workforce Minimum Qualifications

Several positions state: “Skills equivalent to at least a USAF {X}-level Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC).”

Will the Government please provide the equivalent AFSCs for clarification?

21. Government Response: Skills equivalent for 5-skill level is a Journeyman level; 7-level is considered a Craftsman level. Specific AFSCs are called out when AF career filed experience is required such as for fuels (2A671) hydrazine spill response team lead. The Government does not intend to introduce more restrictive requirements than those listed in App H, Workforce Minimum Qualifications.

22. PWS App E GFF 11Aug21

Many of the Government provided facilities are Temporary Shelters. Are all Temp Facilities fully compliant and certified to conduct the operations the Government has assigned to those facilities?

Are there any limitations to conducting operations within the Temporary Facilities that may impact Contractor’s ability to meet the contract requirements? For example, environmental restrictions such as lightening within 5/10 Nautical Miles, humidity control, electrostatic discharge, etc.?

22. Government Response: Temp Facilities currently in use are fully compliant and certified for operations that are currently assigned; however, T8520 at launch pad has lightening protection (LPS) but not up to requirements. During Lightening within 5 miles situations, the launch pad employees must vacate this facility even though it has LPS.

23. PWS App G GFV 11Aug21

What does “AWT TIN” stand for in the Notes Column?

23. Government Response: AWT TIN= Awaiting Turn-In.

24. PWS App G GFV 11Aug21

The “In Use” column is not sequential numbering. What do the numbers in “In Use” signify?

24. Government Response: The “In Use” column is basically a place holder and has no bearing. This column was used to track total numbers for each assigned area, but no longer applicable

25. PWS App G GFV 11Aug21

25. Government Response: Vehicle has been repaired. Appendix G has been updated and available with release of Amendment 0001.

26. PWS App G GFV 11Aug21

26. Government Response: Vehicle has been repaired. Appendix G has been updated and available with release of Amendment 0001.

27. PWS App G GFV 11Aug21

27. Government Response: Vehicle has been repaired. Appendix G has been updated and available with release of Amendment 0001.

28. PWS App G GFV 11Aug21

28. Government Response: Vehicle was turned-in and was not replaced by the Gov’t. Appendix G has been updated and available with release of Amendment 0001.

29. PWS App H Workforce Min Quals 11Aug21

29. Government Response: All personnel require a Secret clearance at a minimum. Higher level clearance requirements will be shared after contract award.

30. PWS Section A

30. Government Response: Vehicles in support of Wendover ops will be rented by the Contractor and reimbursed by the Government on the Deployment and Off-Station Activities CLIN.

31. PWS Section A

31. Government Response: This listing will be provided during the Transition period.

32. PWS Section A

32. Government Response: Yes, the Government will ensure incumbent contractor personnel training and certification records are available at transition.

33. PWS Section A

33. Government Response: Intrastate transport only.

34. PWS Section A

Question (1): Are contractor FCF/OCF aircrew required, and if so, are they required at both Tyndall and Holloman?

Question (2): Can the Government provide historical workload data for contractor aircrew if required?

34. Government Response: There are no aircrew/pilot requirements on this contract.

35. Section L

Question: Can the Government clarify if a completed Section B is, or is not, required to be included in the Business Section in addition to the Factor 4, Price Section?

35. Government Response: Section L-4.5 has been updated to state that pricing information shall not be included in any other factor volume. The intent of the original statement was to ensure other evaluation teams would not see pricing information. The Business Sections of the proposal will only be viewed by the contracting and pricing teams, as such a completed Section B is required as annotated in Section L-3.3 Table 1.

36. Section L

Question: Will the Government provide all workload data necessary for bidders to develop a proposal for this Final solicitation?

36. Government Response: Previously provided workload data has been re-provided with Amendment 0001.

37. Section L & M

37. Government Response: Yes, there are 47 QF-16 at Tyndall and 12 currently reside at Holloman.

38. Section M

38. Government Response: This language has been removed from the first paragraph of M-3.

39. Section M

39. Government Response: As has previously been answered, the Government is not dictating a minimum quantitative requirement for small business or any socio-economic category subcontracting for this requirement. The parameters are outlined in the three paragraphs of Section M-3.

40. Section M

41. Government Response: Negative. The Government has re-provided available workload data with Amendment 0001.

42. Solicitation/Schedule B

43. Government Response: The correct PoP for CLIN 5011 is 1 Oct 27 – 30 Sep 28. Section B has been updated.

44.

Solicitation/Schedule B

44. Government Response: The correct PoP for CLIN 6003 is 1 Oct 28 – 30 Sep 29. Section B has been updated.

45. Solicitation/Schedule B

45. Government Response: The entries currently included in the X012, X013, and X014 CLINs are the Government’s anticipated rates applicable to those specific CLINs. The verbiage in Section L-4.5 applies and offerors should propose any applicable rates and include them in the CLIN description.

46. Solicitation/Schedule B

46. Government Response: The intent of this statement is that “fully burdened overtime labor” would already include all the burdens and would therefore not have the G&A percentage included in the X014 CLIN description applied a second time.

47. Solicitation/Schedule F

47. Government Response: The correct Delivery Schedule for CLIN 0011 is 1 Oct 22 – 30 Sep 23. Section F has been updated.

48. Solicitation/Schedule F

48. Government Response: The correct Delivery Schedule for CLIN 6003 is 1 Oct 28 – 30 Sep 29. Section F has been updated.

49. Section B & PPC Slides

49. Government Response: Corrected all CLINs X006 with consistent calculations:

X006: 20 per month x 12 months = 240.

50. Section B

50. Government Response: The correct Unit of Issue for CLIN 4003 is Lot, which has been updated in Amendment 0001.

51. Section L - Instructions to Offerors, PWS & PWS App G, GFV listing, Industry Questions Response dated 11 Aug 21

Question 1: PWS APP G is a GFV listing and the PWS paragraph 4.6.4.2 and Q&A number 65 clearly states that all GFVs are Government-owned, can the Government confirm if vehicles titled in PAE's name are Government owned (possible obtained as Contractor Acquired Property (CAP)) and will be transferred to the new contract recipient?

Question 2: In order to properly estimate the up-front cost of transferring vehicles from the incumbent fleet, can the Government please provide the number of vehicles that have been dispositioned (and replaced be the contractor) to date?

Question 3: Several Government vehicles have significant mechanical issues and several are awaiting turn-in, will all safety deficiencies be corrected and vehicles awaiting TIN be replaced with other GFVs before award of this follow-on contract?

Question 4: Request the Government provide vehicle maintenance histories of major maintenance (anything besides basic servicing) that has been done on each Government owned vehicle. This allows all offerors to ascertain in depth vehicle condition and possible replacement needs.

Question 5: Can the Government please clarify if it is their intent to also transfer special equipment listed on Tab A in APP G to contractor ownership?

51. Government Response: Question 1: Yes, all vehicles listed on App G & titled in PAE’s name are Gov’t-owned and will be transferred to follow-on contractor. Costs will include transfer of registration & insurance at new Contractor’s expense.

Question 2: Yes, the number of vehicles purchased by the incumbent/currently in use and not listed on App G to support the contract is 13 (see Answer to question #12). All GFVs in Appendix G that have a license plate number listed in the “License#” column will require registration transfer.

Question 3: Vehicles deemed not repairable will be turn-in prior to end of the current contract; vehicles retained and needing repair will be repaired prior to the end of the current contract.

Question 4: The inventory in Appendix G was updated with major MX information that was available. The Gov’t added a column named “Significant MX History” that includes the information requested.

Question 5: Yes, all items listed shall be transferred for contractor use.

52. Final PWS Appendix B - CDRL

Question: Can the government provide an updated CDRL A021 for the Aerial Targets program?

52. Government Response: Appendix B, CDRL A021 has been corrected and will be available at the release of Amendment 0001.

Question 1: The PWS requires Offerors to maintain the UTTR launch shelter structure and installed launch equipment. It additionally requires Offerors to repair the MCS van and UTTR Mobile Drone Control Trailers. However, within PWS Appendix D, E and G there is no section, nor any GFE, GFF or GFV shown that is assigned to UTTR. Is there any Government material GFE, GFF or GFV assigned at UTTR that the Offeror is responsible for?

Question 2: PWS Appendix C, has no unique Pubs or Forms shown for UTTR. Request the Government confirm no unique pubs, forms or Host Tenant Support Agreements exist for UTTR?

53. Government Response: 1). Mobile Drone Control System at UTTR. Currently there are 2 mobile trailers/structures that houses the previous version of GRDCS HDW/Software. The GRDCS equipment installed in the trailers are maintained by SPO generated user guides/manuals and commercial manuals. The trailers are maintained as a trailer with best vehicle/trailer mx practices. The mobile control stations are being replaced by the GRDCS system set –up at Wendover. The Wendover system mirrors GRDCS system at Tyndall with current hardware and software. This system is maintained IAW SPO generated T.Os.

2). UTTR Launch Structures. Houses launch consoles and interface to launch rail cables, etc. There are tech manuals and operating manuals to maintain and operate the launch system. System utilizes a laptop that contains the software and interfaces to launch consoles. The laptop does not stay at UTTR and its redeployed back to Tyndall. The rails are a modified BQM-34A rail and they are maintained per a rescinded T.O. that’s not centrally managed by the Air Force. The launch system also includes a trailer mounted air compressors and power supplies. They are maintained per commercial manuals.

3). The MCS van is no longer a mobile control station and has been renamed as Drone launch Communications (DLC) Van. Changes reflect in the PWS with details in Paragraph 4.6.4.2.5. It is only used for its installed wireless comm system repeater and it’s used at the end of the drone way for the NULLO launch crew intrasite comm. It also houses UHF radio and LMR for communication back to GRDCS. The contractor shall maintain the onboard comm systems per commercial manuals. Additionally, the contractor shall perform all vehicle upkeep and maintenance per T.O. and best practices. The contractor will also maintain the onboard generator per commercial manuals.

4). No support agreement at UTTR. Needs and support are addressed uniquely for every deployment with the local UTTR/Dugway range control squadron.

Are font and margin restrictions applicable to the Excel file submissions (cost/pricing model) and do files need to be print ready?

54. Government Response: No, font and margin restrictions are not applicable to Excel file submission. Yes, please make all files printable.

Will the Government remove the letters of consent from the page count for Factor 3?

55. Government Response: Section L-3.9 has been updated to remove this from the page limit.

Will the Government be issuing another PWS prior to solicitation closing date, or should offerors use this version as the final version of the PWS?

56. Government Response: The word “DRAFT” in the header and footer of the PWS has been removed.

Will the Government allow the contractor to provide narrative information concerning adverse Past Performance as an attachment to the volume that is not page counted?

57. Government Response: Section L Attachment 1 is the required information offerors need to provide. Responding to adverse past performance is an offerors decision and as such is not included in the form. The page count limit will not be updated.

Questions: Request the Government provide the following documents to Offerors as noted in response to question 32.

53 WEG OI 21-1, Aerospace Equipment Maintenance Management 53 WEG OI 63-2, Range Control Facility Software/Firmware/Hardware Configuration Control Board & Software Configuration Management Procedures 53 WEG OI 91-1, Safety 53 WEG OI 91-2, Mishap Prevention Program 53 WEG OI 91-4, Range Safety Division 53 WEGI 11-250, 53 WEG Air Operations 82 ATRS OI 11-2, Squadron Operations 82 ATRS OI 11-5, Drone Operations PAE OI 2, Munitions Key and Lock Management PAE OI 8, Engine Maintenance Runs PAE OI 10, SSAT Red Ball Procedures PAE OI 11, Functional (Operational Check Flight Program and High Speed Taxi Check (FSAT) PAE OI 13, Explosives and Munitions-Tyndall PAE OI 17, Explosives and Munitions-Holloman PAE OI 32, Enginement Management and Status Reporting PAE OI 39, FSAT Red Ball Procedures PAE OI 41, Program Management Information System (PMIS) PAE OI 47, Document Control

58. Government Response: WEG OIs 91-1, 91-2, 91-4 are now rescinded and will be removed from App C. 82 ATRS OIs are only applicable to operations and will be removed from App C. Other requested Instructions cannot be released or downloaded for copy based on document author’s non-consent to release. The PAE OIs are not mandatory compliance documents and were erroneously included in Appendix, C Paragraph 2.2; References to contractor OIs were removed from Appendix C. The Appendix was corrected and will be available with release of Amendment 0001. OIs labeled “PAE OI” will be available at contract transition for reference.

59. Government Response: Appendix B, CDRL A001, Tab 3 explains the requirements for capturing and documenting RIS data to include mx actions. The scheduled maintenance action for systems outside of IMDS are captured in a maintenance log and included in the Monthly Summary CDRL A001. All unscheduled maintenance documented and tracked on Local RIS Form 1. This is a binder located in the RIS technician’s office and captures MX info IAW PWS 3.2.1.7 Also, tracked technician binder are RIS Form 40s for significant history data. It logs high failure and major maintenance items on systems. ACDS - Weekly and daily checks are documented on RIS Form 58 and located in 1801 Comm room. 1801 Facility UPS – Daily checks are documented on AFTO Form 244 located in UPS room of 1801. GRDCS Consoles Daily CDT and GDD checks are documented on RIS Form 16 and are located in GRDCS room. DLS-R quarterly and annual maintenance is documented on RIS Form 12 and are located in Supply/benchtest room of 1801.

Will the Government define what documentation is required to satisfy this requirement?

60. Government Response: The documentation is simply the information required in FAR 22.805(a)(5) in a readable format.

Will the Government accept a statement of compliance as documentation to satisfy this requirement?

If no, please provide direction on what documentation is required to be submitted with the proposal to satisfy this requirement.

61. Government Response: Yes, a statement of compliance would count as documentation that you are compliant with the VETS-4212 requirement.

62.

Draft RFP

p. 141 The solicitation requires that offerors possess a Top Secret Security Clearance, but is silent as to the treatment of Joint Ventures. Will the Government consider revising the solicitation language to permit participation by Joint Ventures where at least one of the members possesses the Top Secret Security Clearance similar to the solicitation's treatment of the required AS-9110 certification?

62. Government Response: The Government is re-answering this question from the draft RFP due to the recent GAO ruling InfoPoint, LLC, B-419856. Per that ruling and the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) revised regulations, if all parties to the Joint Venture hold the required clearance they will be eligible for award. Section L-1 has been updated to make this clear.

63. On the PTAC page it states to see attached documents for all required information, but there are no attachments. The question is, will the aircraft maintenance have to be performed on the AFBs that are listed?

63. Government Response: Yes, Aircraft maintenance will be performed at Tyndall AFB, FL; Holloman AFB, NM, the UTTR site in Utah; and other CONUS locations as required. The PTAC page information was gleaned from information posted on SAM.gov. Search for “Aerial Targets III FY23” on SAM.gov for all information posted regarding this RFP.

64. Is the government willing to post any Host Tenant Support Agreements to SAM?

64. Government Response: HTSAs are posted to SAM.gov with Amendment 0001, however they are outdated and being rewritten. The documents will not add value to requirements research or understanding. The PWS provides contract requirements in sections A and C related to services and services provided.

65. Regarding UTTR’s vehicle and equipment list, are there any transition requirements at that site?

65. Government Response: Yes, on-site equipment will need to be inventoried/transferred during Transition. UTTR has a boom truck permanently assigned. Other vehicles for UTTR ops are rented during deployed ops.

66. Has the Tyndall Host Tenant Support Agreement been updated?

66. Government Response: Negative, Tyndall HTSA is being rewritten

67. Tyndall Building 256 and Holloman Hanger 1080, have these buildings been renovated or torn down?

67. Government Response: Tyndall Building 256 and Holloman Hanger 1080, are in process of renovations. Tyndall Building 256 is being partially renovated.

68. Is the Government willing to provide a copy of any Host Base Agreements associated with Aerial Target program support for Tyndall AFB, Holloman AFB, and the Utah Test and Training Range deployment locations?

68. Government Response: Current HTSAs for Tyndall and Holloman are being rewritten. There is not a HTSA in-place at UTTR. The PWS provide contract requirements in Sections A and C related to services and services provided.

69. Is the Government willing to provide a copy of the incumbent contractor’s non-proprietary Operating Instructions listed in PWS Appendix C?

69. Government Response: The OIs listed as “PAE OI” are not PWS compliance mandatory documents and were developed to fulfill incumbent contractor policy. These documents will be made available at contract transition, but the contractor will be expected to develop their company policy as required. The references to PAE OIs were erroneously included in Appendix C, Paragraph 2.2 and are removed. The corrected Appendix C will be available with release of Amendment 0001.