B-1_B-52_CAT-CWD_Q A_21_Mar_16.pdf

NUMBER REFERENCE QUESTION ANSWER

01 RFP, Att 6 Attachment 6, PPQ, states that PPQ are due 4 Apr 2016 and the RFP states PPQ are due 14 Apr 2016. Please confirm PPQ due date. PPQs are due NLT 4:00 PM (CT) on 14 Apr 2016. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this typographical error.

The Government’s PWS as written doesn’t specifically define a requirement for all CWD staff to be physically located at either Barksdale or Dyess AFB. Is it the Government’s expectation/requirement for all CWD staff to be physically located full-time at one of these locations?

This is a performance-based requirement which allows contractors to propose their own unique approaches to some of the requirements. So long as a contractor can demonstrate they can successfully fulfill the CWD portions of this requirement with off-site employees, that would be considered an acceptable approach. Staffing solutions must meet timelines for courseware delivery, scheduled review/revisison, out-of-cycle changes, urgent action directives, and major block/system changes as defined in the PWS

Will the Government evaluate as technically acceptable a CWD staffing solution that specifically includes Graphic Artist and Programmer “reach-back” support of unclassified lessons from a Corporate or non-Dyess/Barksdale AFB location?

This is a performance-based requirement which allows contractors to propose their own unique approaches to some of the requirements. So long as a contractor can demonstrate they can successfully fulfill the CWD portions of this requirement with off-site employees, that would be considered an acceptable approach. Staffing solutions must meet timelines for courseware delivery, scheduled review/revisison, out-of-cycle changes, urgent action directives, and major block/system changes as defined in the PWS

Is there a Government expectation/requirement for the CWD staff to be specifically associated with/assigned to and only supporting the B-52 OR B-1 weapon system CWD or is a blended CWD supporting team technically acceptable?

This is a performance-based requirement which allows contractors to propose their own unique approaches to some of the requirements. So long as a contractor can demonstrate they can successfully fulfill the CWD portions of this requirement without "full-time/dedicated" CWD employees, that would be considered an acceptable approach. Staffing solutions must meet timelines for courseware delivery, scheduled review/revisison, out-of-cycle changes, urgent action directives, and major block/system changes as defined in the PWS

Will the government evaluate as technically acceptable, a collaborative/blended team approach with personnel geographically separated but holistically/collaboratively developing both B-52 and B-1 unclassified Interactive and classroom-based instruction deliverables?

This is a performance-based requirement which allows contractors to propose their own unique approaches to some of the requirements. So long as a contractor can demonstrate they can successfully fulfill the CWD portions of this requirement without "full-time/dedicated" CWD employees, that would be considered an acceptable approach. Staffing solutions must meet timelines for courseware delivery, scheduled review/revisison, out-of-cycle changes, urgent action directives, and major block/system changes as defined in the PWS

The PWS indicates that there will be classified CWD associated with this contract that will have to be physically developed on-site at both Barksdale and Dyess AFBs. Can the Government provide the number of classified lessons (or unclassified to classified ratio) for each of these locations to inform a vendor’s development of a collaborative/holistic approach for the combined classified and unclassified CWD effort?

Currently there are 75 B-52 classified courses and 25 B-1 classified courses.

07 Will the Government accept as technically acceptable, a proposed CWD solution that provides temporary on-site Graphic Artist and Programmer support, having appropriate clearances, to support classified CW when required?

This is a performance-based requirement which allows contractors to propose their own unique approaches to some of the requirements. So long as a contractor can demonstrate they can successfully fulfill the CWD portions of this requirement without "full-time/dedicated" CWD employees, that would be considered an acceptable approach. Staffing solutions must meet timelines for courseware delivery, scheduled review/revisison, out-of-cycle changes, urgent action directives, and major block/system changes as defined in the PWS

The courseware specified in PWS Para A1.5 will assumedly support all B-52/B-1 aircrew positions, however, the PWS doesn’t specifically identify/associate a ratio/percentage of “New Lesson Equivalents” (NLE) to specific weapon system crew positions similar to CWD information in other similar USAF multi-position CAT/CWD contract PWSs. In order to determine/calculate specific workload/hours for crew position specific subject matter expertise (Instructors) required to support the CWD effort, will the government provide an estimate of the ratio/percentage, by crew position, needed to support the estimated CWD.

a. For the B-52 FTU CWD in para A1.8.1, for example, is the CWD effort for the 97.5 NLE Instructor Led Lesson Packages split evenly between Pilot, WSO, and EWO positions? 60% WSO, 20% Pilot, 20% EW under the current syllabus.

b. Similarly, for the B-1 FTU/CT CWD PWS charts, is the ICW/IL CWD effort split evenly between the Pilot and WSO positions?

The courseware/lesson split for the 4 current B-1 syallabi is approximately 36% Pilot, 29% WSO, and 35% combined crew under the current syllabus.

The PWS indicates that there will be classified CWD associated with this contract that will have to be physically developed on-site at both Barksdale and Dyess. Can the Government provide the number of classified lessons (or an estimate) for each of these locations to inform a vendor’s development of a collaborative/holistic approach for the combined classified and unclassified CWD effort?

Currently there are 75 B-52 classified courses and 25 B-1 classified courses.

10 Is there a Government requirement for all CWD or Instructor staffing to be full-time positions? No

Reference PWS paragraphs 4.2 and 8.6.6.1, will the Government accept as technically acceptable a proposed LMS/CMS/Database solution proposing a Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) LMS/CMS/database that will deliver all LMS/CMS/database PWS requirements, including the world-wide accessibility and availability requirements, but IS NOT “server-based” but is supported by a vendor via secure cloud-base services solution similar to other Government procured services contracts?

LMS/CMS is not required to be server based as long as all functional and availability requirements are met.

12 Is there a requirement for all LMS/CMS/Database Hardware to be physically located at Dyess or Barksdale if all PWS delivery service requirements/constraints are met? No

Reference the Government’s answer to question number 40, and the referenced factsheet, can the Government confirm they will provide the moodle-based LMS system’s requirement’s specifications and database schemas/maps required by vendors to ensure the existing moodle based LMS associated SQL database can be imported to a vendor’s proposed LMS without any loss of data? This information is specifically associated to the specific data interchange between the moodle-based LMS and the SQL database and will be required by the successor contractor.

Database Schema information does not currently exist but it could be exported (if needed) in the event the existing database was not provided.

The existing database, however, would be transferred to successor contractor in all cases. All open source software and/or programs would transfer to successor contractor if necessary and/or requested. All courseware master files are property of the Government and will be provided to the successor contractor in accordance with PWS para 3.3.2. and 8.4. The Government will provide a demonstration of the current B-1/B-52 Academic Database at the pre-proposal conference.

If access to the proprietary software C2 Build is required, the offeror should contact C2 Technologies Inc. 1921 Gallows Road Suite 1000, Vienna, VA 22182, T: 703-448-7900, F: 703-748-2775, E: Curtis Cox: ccox@c2ti.com, http://www.c2ti.com/

B-1/B-52 CAT/CWD - DRAFT RFP Q&A

14 Reference para A1.4.2.3, B-1 FTU Academic Instruction, please confirm that FIC can be taught by either an instructor pilot or WSO?

All FIC lessons are combined pilot/WSO, either/both specialties can instruct those lessons.

Reference B-1 Dyess CT academic training (A1.4.2.4.1), can the Government confirm that all of these courses are required to be taught by an Instructor Pilot? If not, please explain which specific courses could be taught by a WSO.

IRC and NVG training should be taught by an instructor pilot. Aircraft servicing, SEPT, and IBS training can be taught by either an IP or

WSO.

Reference B-1 CT Training Device Events (A1.4.2.6.1), can the Government confirm that the three device instructors per event consist of a pilot and 2 WSOs? If not please explain which events have a different Pilot/WSO composition.

1 Instructor Pilot and 2 Instructor WSOs in the simulator to operate the instructor console positions.

CLIN 0001 & 0002, p.

3 of 69; PWS para 1.3.

p. 3

Both referenced CLINs indicate PoP for Phase-in as "01 Aug 16 - 30 Sep 16". However, PWS Para 1.3.

last sentence states, "A phase in period is planned starting 1 September 2016 - 30 September 2016".

Question: Could the Government please confirm there will be a 2-month phase period from 1 August 2016

- 30 September 2016?

The phase-in period is 01 Aug 16 - 30 Sep 16. PWS Para 1.3. will be corrected to reflect these dates via an amendment to the solicitation.

18 Ref PWS Para A1.4.2.2.2. (Page 40).

In the table for B-52 FTU Training Device Events - Lower Order Trainers, the line for E IQ has a math error. The entry in the "TOTAL HOURS" column of 4.59 hours seems low for 18 students per year.

Question: Could the Government please confirm what correct the entry should be in the "Device Instructors per Class Per Event"? (If it's a 1:1 instructor-student ration, then "6" should be the correct entry.)

Total hours should show 27.54. PWS will be corrected via an amendment to the solicitation.

19 PWS Para A1.8.4.

(Page 44).

In the table for B-1 FTU CWD, Option Year Two thru Four, the lone for "ICW/CBT Instructional Media Package" shows "65.8" as the "New Equivalent" total. In doing the math based on table entries for that line item, the calculation should be as follows: 5 at 100% + 144 at 30% + 176 at 10% + 20 at 1% = 5 x 1.00 + 144 x 0.30 + 176 x 0.10 + 20 x 0.01 = 5 + 43.2 + 17.6 + 0.2 = 66. If the decimal point moves too far in the last multiplication (20 x .01) to derive 0.02, then the resulting "New Equivalent" total becomes 65.82 or rounded to 65.8 as shown in the PWS. Question: Should the "New Equivalent" total for "ICW/CBT Instructional Media Package" be changed to "66"?

ICW/CBT Instructional Media Package should show 66.0 and Instructor Led Lesson Pkg should show 69.1. PWS will be updated to reflect changes via an amendment to the solicitation.

20 PWS Para A1.8.4.

(Page 44)

In the table for B-1 FTU CWD, Option Year Two thru Four, the line for "Instructor Led Lesson Pkg" shows "68.9" as the "New Equivalent" total. In doing the math based on the table entries for that line item, the calculation should be as follows: 5 at 100% + 144 at 30% + 176 at 10% + 20 at 1% = 5 x 1.00 + 153 x

0.30 + 180 x 0.10 + 20 x 0.01 = 5 + 45.9 + 18.0 + 0.2 = 69.1. Again, if the decimal point moves too far in the last multiplication (20 x .01) to derive 0.02, then the resulting "New Equivalent" total becomes 68.92 or rounded to 68.9 as shown in the PWS. Question: Should the "New Equivalent" total for "Instructor Led Lesson Pkg" be changed to "69.1"?

ICW/CBT Instructional Media Package should show 66.0 and Instructor Led Lesson Pkg should show 69.1. PWS will be updated to reflect changes via an amendment to the solicitation.

CLIN 1109 (RFP Page 11 of 69) and PWS Para A1.8.5. (Page 44)

CLIN 1109 is the first CLIN encountered that deals with B-1 CT CWD. It lists a period of performance of "01 Oct 17 - 30 Sep 2018". The table in PWS Para A1.8.5 shows "B-1 Continuation Training CWD Base Year" requirements. The Base Year in this contract is 01 October 2016 - 30 September 2017, yet there is no CLIN in which to price the Base Year B-1 CT CWD. The CLIN 1109 is for Option Year One.

Question: Since there are no B-1 CT CLINs in the Base Year for the contract, where do the "B-1 Continuation Training CWD Base Year" requirements get priced? Is the Table in PWS Para A1.8.5 still valid, or should its CWD requirements be considered for Option Year One and priced in CLIN 1109?

There are no B-1 CT CLINS in the base year. Table A1.8.5. should show Option Year 1 and A1.8.6. should show Option Year Two thru Four. PWS will be updated to reflect changes via an amendment to the solicitation.

22 PWS Para A1.8.6.

(Page 44)

The table in Para A1.8.6 shows B-1 CT CWD requirements for Option Years One through Four. Question:

Based on Question #5 above, should the performance periods change to Option Years Two through Four?

There are no B-1 CT CLINS in the base year. Table A1.8.5. should show Option Year 1 and A1.8.6. should show Option Year Two thru Four. PWS will be updated to reflect changes via an amendment to the solicitation.

23 PWS Para A1.8.5. and A1.8.6 (Page 44)

The paragraph titles list "(Optional CLIN x110)." Question: Should the Optional CLIN be changed to "x109" for these paragraphs? A1.8.5 and A1.8.6 should show X109. PWS will be updated to reflect changes via an amendment to the solicitation.

24 PWS Para A1.4.2.4.1 (Page 40)

The paragraph title lists "Optional CLIN x108)" for Dyess CT classroom events. Question: Should the Optional CLIN be changed to "x107" for this paragraph?

A1.4.2.4.1 should show X107. PWS will be updated to reflect changes via an amendment to the solicitation.

25 PWS Para A1.4.2.4.2 (Page 41)

The paragraph title lists "(Optional CLIN x109)" for Ellsworth CT classroom events. Question: Should the Optional CLIN be changed to "x108" for this paragraph?

A1.4.2.4.2. should show X108. PWS will be updated to reflect changes via an amendment to the solicitation.

26 PWS Para A1.4.2.6.1 (Page 42)

The paragraph title lists "(Optional CLIN x108)" for Dyess CT training device events. Question: Should the Optional CLIN be changed to "x107" for this paragraph?

A1.4.2.6.1. should show X107. PWS will be updated to reflect changes via an amendment to the solicitation.

27 PWS Para A1.4.2.6.1 (Page 42)

The paragraph title lists "(Optional CLIN x109)" for Ellsworth CT training device events. Question:

Should the Optional CLIN be changed to "x108" for this paragraph?

A1.4.2.6.2. should show X108. PWS will be updated to reflect changes via an amendment to the solicitation.

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Para 9.5 E 1 (Page 42 of 69)

Instructions state, "Submit one (1) sheet for each contract reference…" Quesiton: Does the government want a single-page (i.e. one proposal page) write up for each contract refernce?

Based on this question/request, the government will allolw up to a three (3) page summary for each contract past performance reference. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

PWS Section 1.3 and RFP page 3, Section

SF 1449

The PWS states Phase-In is 01 September 2016 - 30 September 2016 while the RFP states Phase-in is a 2 month PoP, 01 August 2016 - 30 September 2016. Please clarify. The phase-in period is 01 Aug 16 - 30 Sep 16. PWS Para 1.3. will be corrected to reflect these dates via an amendment to the solicitation.

30 PWS Section 2.2.1.20. What database program is used for the current Training Tasks List? In what format will the current TTL be provided to the winning contractor?

There is no "database program" associated with TTLs. TTLs will be provided as "Word" documents.

31 PWS Section 3.3.2. In the Working Document/Master Files table, under Master Files, are the "Slides, Paper, Story Boards" also working documents or just final deliverables?

The Master files are all final deliverables. Working documents are contained in the production folders as described in PWS para 3.2.2. and 6.1.8.

32 PWS Section 3.5.3. Is there an associated Contractor due date for conversion of the ISD Management Plan to a stand-alone document post contract award?

3.5.2. ISD Management Plan. The contractor will develop, produce, and provide an ISD Management Plan to the CO concurrently with the contractor's proposal.

ISD management plan will be converted after contract award by the TRSS/CC.

33 PWS Section 4.2. What is the current LMS? Is it a COTS product? See 12-C-0003 LMS/CMS Fact Sheet

34 PWS Section 4.2.1.1. Are there are any custom reports or plugins in use by the current LMS. If so, what is the basic functionality of those reports/plugins? Will these reports/plugins be provided?

See 12-C-0003 LMS/CMS Fact Sheet

35 PWS Section 4.2.1.1. Are there any custom non-SCORM interactions between the current lessons and LMS?

Yes. There are a few CBT lessons that incorporate interactive activities (scenarios, quizzes, etc.) for student practice. These practice activities are enhancements to the lesson and are used to reinforce that lesson's instructional objective(s). However, the progress of these interactive activities is not tracked nor reported to the EGB as the results have no bearing on the overall grade awarded for that specific lesson.

PWS Section 6.2.20.

and Appendix 4, Section A4.2.2

The PWS lists a Lesson Presentation as a component of the Instructional Media Package. Is this the same item that is listed as CDRL A012 - Lesson Presentation in Appendix 4, Section A4.2.2? Yes. Lesson presentation is also required for Instructor Led Lesson Package

37 PWS Section 6.2.23.

The PWS lists Lesson Presentation as a component of the Instructor Led Package. Is this the same item as referenced in PWS 6.2.20 Instructional Media Package and listed as CDRL A012-Lesson Presentation in Appendix 4, or is this a general reference to Style Guide Attachment A5, Instructor Led Lesson Package, A5.1 Lesson Presentation? Please clarify.

Lesson presentations are required for Instructor Led Lesson Package and Instructional Media Package

38 PWS Sections A1.5,

3.4.6 and 3.5.1

The terms Courseware Development Schedule and Courseware Delivery Schedule are used in PWS, are these the same thing?

Yes

PWS Section A4.2.2 and Attachment 2-Style Guide

The PWS lists A0112 - Lesson Presentation, this CDRL is not provided in the Attachment 2 - Style Guide, please provide. Examples will be provided at the pre-proposal conference.

40 PWS A4.2.2 The PWS indicated the title of CDRL A016 as Exam Package, Style Guide Attachment A9 indicated the title as Test Package. Please clarify preferred title.

Exam Package is the preferred title.

41 LMS/CMS Fact Sheet, Section 3.a

"The Moodle LMS is open source software that uses MySQL as its database back end (for data storage) and a server-side scripting language known as "PHP" web application (for user interface)." Please verify that the current LMS is Moodle.

Yes, the current LMS is Moodle.

42 LMS/CMS Fact Sheet, Section 3.e

"The EGB was developed on-site by an employee represented by the Prime Contractor (Sonoran); no license agreements exist or are required." Please verify the EGB is USG-owned and will be provided to the winning contractor with the associated AF User's Manual.

Yes, the EGB is USG-owned and will be provided to the winning contractor with the associated AF User's Manual.

43 LMS/CMS Fact Sheet, 3.e

Since applications developed using ASP.NET and C+ can include precompiled code, will the Government provide all necessary source code to modify and maintain the EGB?

"The application was built as an ASP.NET web application with server side code written in C#." Yes, all necessary source (or development) code will be provided to modify and maintain the EGB.

Attachment 2 - Style Guide, Section A1.4, PWS Section 3.5.1 and PWS Section A4.2.2

Attachment 2 states the initial Courseware Delivery Schedule is due to the COR no later than 45 days after contract award. Per PWS 3.5.1 and A4.2.2, the initial Courseware Delivery Schedule is due no late than 15 days after start of Phase-in. Which is correct?

When this was initially written, we were hoping to have the contract awarded 30 days before Phase-In. So "45 days after contract award" and "15 Days after the start of Phase-In" were one-in-the-same. If the contract is awarded less than 30 days to the phase-in date, then "15 Days after Phase-In" will be the required date. In order to alleviate any confusion, Attachment two will be modified to reflect "15 Days after Phase- In" via an amendment to the solicitation.

45 PWS Section 4.8

Contractor shall provide the Government resume(s) of potential employee(s) for Government review no later than 15 days prior to hiring. Current employees who will transition to the new contract are exempt from the full resume review and may be submitted by name in a letter to the Government for review/concurrence. Question - Are resumes required with the proposal?

No, résumés are not required for the proposal.

46 CDRLS

The following CDRLs are referenced but not included in Att 2 Style Guide: A001-A006, A012, A021, and A022. Question - Request copies of these CDRLs or clarification that all requirements for these CDRLs are contained solely in the PWS.

All requirements for these CDRLs are contained in the PWS.

PWS Section 4.14.2, Strike Mitigation Plan, PWS Appendix 4, Section A4.2.1.

PWS Sec 4.14.2 states that a Strike Mitigation Plan will be prepared if all or part of the workforce is or becomes unionized. The Plan will be submitted during phase in. PWS Section A4.2.1 lists CDRL A001 Strike Mitigation Plan will be delivered with proposal. Please clarify when the Strike Mitigation Plan is due.

The Strike Mitigation Plan is due IAW PWS 4.14.2. The plan is not due with the proposal. PWS A4.2.1. will be corrected via an amendment the solicitation.

48 PWS Section 1.3 Scope of Work

Section 1.3 references Whiteman AFB while other sections list Ellsworth AFB as a location where work could be added. Question - Is Whiteman AFB a possible location for additional work under this contract?

This was inadvertantly left in the PWS when on-site B-2 training was being considered for incorporation into this contract. It is not going to b therefore this will be removed from the PWS via an amendment to the solicitation.

49 CBA

Since the employees under this contract are subject to the CBA and their benefits are dictated by their longevity/seniority, request the government provide a list of the employees, their hire dates, and their associated longevity in order to better price this effort?

IAW FAR 22.1204 - Certified Service Employee Lists, the predecssor contractor is required to furnish a certified list of the names of all servi employees working under the contract and its subcontracts to the Contracting Officer not less than 30 days before completion of the contract.

Immediately upon reciept of the certified service employee list but not before contract award, the contracting officer shall provide the certified employee list to the successor contractor.

PWS Section 3.4.4 Out-of-Cycle Changes and Section 3.4.5 Urgent Action Directive

Section 3.4.4 and 3.4.5 discusses requirements for Out-of-Cycle changes and Urgent Action Directives.

How often (at what frequency) do these requirements occur? Unfortunately, Out-of-cycle changes and UADs are unknown/unpredictable. We have no control over these and cannot predict the frequency.

51 RFP Section B and PWS Appendix 1

The RFP lists Optional - CT CWD, B-1 (CLINs 1109, 2109, 3109, 4109), with a base year with three option years. However, PWS Appendix 1 provides workload estimate tables for A1.8.5 B-1 Continuation Training CWD Base Year (Optional CLIN x110) and A1.8.6 B-1 Continuation Training CWD Option Year One thru Four (Optional CLIN x110). Question - Should the Table/Section titles be updated to read A1.8.5, B-1 Continuation Training CWD Option Year One thru Three (Optional CLIN x109).

There are no B-1 CT/CWD CLINS in the base year. Table A1.8.5. should show Option Year 1 and A1.8.6. should show Option Year Two thru Four. PWS will be updated to reflect changes via an amendment to the solicitation.

52 Style Guide Section A5 Style Guide Section A5.5.2 states "The lesson presentation software generates the primary bulk of the lesson study guide." - Request clarification: what is meant by presentation software generates" The lesson study guide consists mainly of the presentation material from the lesson. See Style Guide Attachment 7.

Style Guide Section A4

Syle Guide A4.4.4 Media Generation Programs/Files. (this is part of CDRL A010 - ICW/CBT Instructional Media Package) states "Programs used to design, develop, run and maintain the CBT(s). This includes the exact software packages and user documentation used for production. Also included will be authoring languages, authoring system flow diagram generation programs, script storyboard generation programs, graphic and animation generation programs, set up and installation files (and explanations of how to use set up/installation files in a text-based document that can be read by MS Office), and an index/listing of all files". - Question - Does this mean that the Government wants the Contractor to deliver the software packages (Captivate, Photoshop, etc) as part of the deliverable?

No, the contractor is not required to deliver the actual software package used to develop the ICW/CBT, but should reference what software they intend to use. All ICW/CBT shall be designed to run on the Air Force Network Integration Center (AFNIC) approved products list (APL) and standard desktop configuration (SDC) per PWS para 4.12.2.4. and 6.2.25.

54 LMS/CMS Fact Sheet

The proprietary C2 Technologies, Inc program "C2 Build" is used at Barksdale AFB for courseware development.

Question: Is the successful contractor required to use C2 Build? If we are not required to use C2 build, is the final product from this build fully editable using COTS HTML editors? Will all associated source materials and uncompiled code be provided for editing and maintaing these lessons?

No, the Government does not require the use of C2 Build. In this instance, C2 Build serves as a SCORM CBT packaging tool. Per PWS para

3.3.2 the government will provide all of the existing courseware and Master Files in their current condition during Phase In.

55 LMS/CMS Fact Sheet "Dyess uses a Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) solution, to perform CBT lesson development functions."

Question: With is that COTS application? Adobe Captivate

The final RFP CLIN 0105 (CT-IRC) removes/does not include the B-2 IRC that was in the draft RFP, however, no changes were made to the Final PWS IRC CWD requirements in para A1.8.8. Can the government confirm whether or not there is a B-2A CT IRC requirement and confirm specifc requirements in the final PWS para A1.8.8 CT IRC paragraph/chart?

There is a requirement for B-2 IRC CBT. The requirement for B-2 IRC is Courseware Development only and requires no actual performance at Whiteman AFB.

Past Performance Instruction RFP para 9.5. E. states: "Submit one (1) sheet for each contract refernce….." Will the government consider increasing the number of sheet (pages) for each contract reference?

Based on this question/request, the government will allolw up to a three (3) page summary for each contract past performance reference. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

PWS Appendix 4, A4.2.1. identifies Plans to be delivered with the proposal, to inlcude A001-Strike Mitigation Plan (If required): PWS para 4.14.2. PWS para 4/14/1, Strike Mitigation Plan, sates: "This plan will be submitted to the Contracting Officer (CO) during Phase In for Barksdale AFB and Dyess AFB; and within 30 days of the date that a Collective Bargaining Agreement is singed by all parties for other preformance locations." Can the government confirm when the Strike Mitigation Plan is to be delivered?

The Strike Mitigation Plan is due IAW PWS 4.14.2. The plan is not due with the proposal. PWS A4.2.1. will be corrected via an amendment the solicitation.

Solicitation, Page 6, Item No 0106

Reference states that Travel is to be "FFP". Please verify it is the Government's intent to make this a Cost Reimburseable CLIN. Since travel is unknown, recommend this CLIN be changed to Cost Reimburseable.

Commercial contracts cannot have cost-type CLINs. Because of this, travel will be a FFP NTE amount. Reimbursement of travel will be IAW the JTR.

Solicitation, Page 6, Item No 0106

Item references PWS paragraph 1.8.2.2 which does not exist. Please provide correct reference. The PWS reference for travel is 4.3.1.2. The travel CLINs, x106, will be revised to reflect the correct PWS reference. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

Solicitation, Page 10, Item No 1106

Reference states that Travel is to be "FFP". Please verify it is the Government's intent to make this a Cost Reimburseable CLIN. Since travel is unknown, recommend this CLIN be changed to Cost Reimburseable.

Commercial contracts cannot have cost-type CLINs. Because of this, travel will be a FFP NTE amount. Reimbursement of travel will be IAW the JTR.

Solicitation, Page 10, Item No 1106

Item references PWS paragraph 1.8.2.2 which does not exist. Please provide correct reference. The PWS reference for travel is 4.3.1.2. The travel CLINs, x106, will be revised to reflect the correct PWS reference. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

Solicitation, Page 19, Item No 3106

Reference states that Travel is to be "FFP". Please verify it is the Government's intent to make this a Cost Reimburseable CLIN. Since travel is unknown, recommend this CLIN be changed to Cost Reimburseable.

Commercial contracts cannot have cost-type CLINs. Because of this, travel will be a FFP NTE amount. Reimbursement of travel will be IAW the JTR.

Solicitation, Page 19, Item No 3106

Item references PWS paragraph 1.8.2.2 which does not exist. Please provide correct reference. The PWS reference for travel is 4.3.1.2. The travel CLINs, x106, will be revised to reflect the correct PWS reference. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

Soliciation, Page 23, Item No 4106

Reference states that Travel is to be "FFP". Please verify it is the Government's intent to make this a Cost Reimburseable CLIN. Since travel is unknown, recommend this CLIN be changed to Cost Reimburseable.

Commercial contracts cannot have cost-type CLINs. Because of this, travel will be a FFP NTE amount. Reimbursement of travel will be IAW the JTR.

Solicitation, Page 23, Item No 4106

Item references PWS paragraph 1.8.2.2 which does not exist. Please provide correct reference. The PWS reference for travel is 4.3.1.2. The travel CLINs, x106, will be revised to reflect the correct PWS reference. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

Solicitation, Page 35, Paragraph 1.1.

Reference uses the word "Part" to refer to the 3 volumes. Recommend changing "Part" to "Volume". Rationale:

The rest of the instructions uses the word "Volume" .

The verbiage will be changes from the word "Part" to the word "Volume". An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

Solicitation, Page 38, Paragraph 7.

Reference states "(Submit five (8) paper copies…)". Please verify this should read "(Submit eight (8) paper copies…)".

This is a typo, the verbiage will be corrected to reflect "(Submit eight (8) paper copies and one (1) electronic copy)". An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

Solicitation, Page 39, Paragraph 7.2 D. Last Sentence.

Reference states "The offeror shall fill out the cross reference matrix indicating…". Request the Government clarify whether or not a cross reference matrix is a mandatory requirement of Volume I. Rationale: The reference is worded as if it is a mandatory requirement; however, the previous text states cross‐referencing is "permitted".

IAW the solicitation para 7.2.D, cross-referencing between different volumes of the proposal is not permitted, however it is permitted within a proposal volume. If you choose to cross-reference within a proposal volume, then a matrix should be provided.

Solicitation, Page 39, Paragraph 7.2 D. Last Sentence.

Reference states "The offeror shall fill out the cross reference matrix indicating…". Is it the Government's intent to provide a format for the cross reference matrix as part of the solicitation or is it up to offerors to determine the appropriate format on their own? Rationale: The reference is worded as if the Government is referring to a specific cross reference matrix.

IAW the solicitation para 7.2.D, cross-referencing between different volumes of the proposal is not permitted, however it is permitted within a proposal volume. If you choose to cross-reference within a proposal volume, then a matrix should be provided. The format for the cross reference matrix is completely up to each offeror

Solicitation, Page 40, Paragraph 8.5.

Reference states "Supporting data may be submitted in a format selected by the offeror, but should not exceed 3 pages." Request the Government verify the page limit is still valid. Rationale: Previously stated page limitation for Price Volume is "None."

Based on this question and another related question/request on the same issue, the government will not restrict the number of pages for supporting pages in the price volume. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

Solicitation, Page 47, Paragraph Aspect 3 A. This question was asked during the draft as Number 10 ‐ Government stated "This will be changed/addressed in the final RFP. Reference states “The proposed LMS/CMS ensures all data, files, records, lessons, reports, etc.

from the current LMS/CMS (Structured Query Language (SQL) ‐based) will transfer to any proposed LMS/CMS architecture without loss of material or fidelity.” Request the Government provide better definition of its evaluation criteria. This evaluation criteria is ambiguous as it does not state how the bidder will be evaluated.

Whereas all Source Selection has a degree of subjectivity, this evaluation criteria does not provide sufficient insight into what key elements are required to be address to show compliance. Also, the Government has not provided, and has not stated they will provide information needed concerning the current LMS/CMS to allow bidders adequately understand the scope, magnitude and specific capabilities and elements to be transitioned.

There will be a demonstration of the LMS/CMS at the pre-proposal conference which hopefully answers this question for you.

Solicitation, Page 48, Paragraph 4.2.1. Recommend the Government require offerors provide Base and Option Year subtotals, 6‐month extension pricing, and a Total Evaluated Price (TEP) total as part of the Schedule of Supplies/Services. Rationale: The current method of price evaluation has the Government manually totalling the offerors CLIN amounts and developing 6 month extension pricing. We understand this will be time consuming and could be prone to errors.

If the Offeror provides the same totals, it would give the Government a cross‐check during evaluation and could reduce errors that may not be found until the debriefing of unsuccessful offerors.

The option to extend the contract IAW 52.217-8 is not an actual priced option but must be evaluated as part of the TEP in order to be utilized.

Because of this, and to eliminate any confusion, our office does not have offerors list these prices since they are required to be the same prices as the final option period (but for a shorter time-period). If you are concerned about our math skills, you can feel free to include those prices in a spreadsheet, however they should not be included as part of your actual price schedule or reflected in a "Total Contract Value", "Total Contract Price", etc.

Att1, PWS, Page 3, Paragraph 1.3.

Reference states "A phase in period is planned starting 1 September 2016 – 30 September 2016." Please verify this should be changed to 1 August 2016 ‐ 30 September 2016. The phase-in period is 01 Aug 16 - 30 Sep 16. PWS Para 1.3. will be corrected to reflect these dates via an amendment to the solicitation.

Att1, PWS, Page 12, Paragraph 4.2

Does the current LMS contain PII, specifically any part of the Social Security Number as defined by DoD Instruction 1000.30? Rationale: Information is needed for transition planning. LMS does not contain PII

Att1, PWS, Page 12, Paragraph 4.2

If PII exists within the LMS, has the contractor/sponsoring government organization received permission, IAW DoDI 1000.30 to continue use of any part of a SSN? LMS does not contain PII

Att1, PWS, Page 12, Paragraph 4.2

If PII exists within the LMS, has the contractor/sponsoring government organization submitted a plan to reduce and eliminate the use of any part of a SSN? LMS does not contain PII

Att1, PWS, Page 12, Paragraph 4.2

If PII exists within the LMS, will the current contractor be required to eliminate the use all PII, IAW DoDI 1000.30 and DoD 5400.11‐R, prior to transferring data to new contractor? LMS does not contain PII

Att1, PWS, Page 12, Paragraph 4.2

Is the current LMS/CMS connected in any way to the government NIPRnet? Rationale: Government provided fact sheet describes the current contractor LMS as being hosted on government facilities and accessible via the internet through the use of a local ISP provider. The fact sheet also states web security is protected by SSL (Secure Socket Layer) certificate from a commercial vendor. Clarification is needed to understand whether a direct commercial connection is available on site.

The LMS is not connected to (or hosted on) the NIPRnet. It is hosted on a secure commercial site (https) and requires a user name and password for access. It does not require a CAC or .mil computer to access, but can be accessed from the NIPRnet computers (or any computer) through the internet.

80 Att1, PWS, Page 13, Paragraph 4.3.1

Reference states "B‐52 training device instructors are required to meet minimum AFI 11‐2‐B‐52 Vol 1 CT requirements for training devices …" Ther referenced AFI does not state specific CT requirements for Instructor, but instead references the Unit's RTM (Ready Aircrew Program Tasking Memoranum). Request the Government provide the RTM related to meeting CT for the B‐52.

Government will provide B-52 RTM.

Att1, PWS, Page 36, A1.2.2.3. Table lists two B‐1 Pilot Senior Offer Course (SOC); however, Table A.1.4.2.3 and Table A.1.4.2.5 shows 3 classes per year. Which is correct?

SOC billets vary from year to year based on leadership assignments and TPS demographics. They are not programmed like the Bcourse and TXC PFTs. The dates in the first chart are hypothetical and represent a potential realistic timeline. Depending on how the billets fall, we sometimes have classes with more than one pilot or WSO in a class. BL: plan on an average of 6 students/year split among the 2-3 different sessions, usually evenly split between pilots and WSOs.

Att1, PWS, Page 37, A1.2.2.4. Table lists two B‐1 WSO Senior Offer Course (SOC); however, Table A.1.4.2.3 and Table A.1.4.2.5 shows 3 classes per year. Which is correct?

SOC billets vary from year to year based on leadership assignments and TPS demographics. They are not programmed like the Bcourse and TXC PFTs. The dates in the first chart are hypothetical and represent a potential realistic timeline. Depending on how the billets fall, we sometimes have classes with more than one pilot or WSO in a class. BL: plan on an average of 6 students/year split among the 2-3 different sessions, usually evenly split between pilots and WSOs.

PWS 3.3.2. Working Document/Master Files table.

Are the Training Devices: Instructor Guides and Training Devices: Grade Sheets covered by the A013 - Instructor Guide and A016-Exam Package CDRLs provided in the Style Guide? If not, please provide the associated CDRLs.

Yes the Training Devices: Instructor Guides listed in PWS para 3.3.2 Master File list are covered by CDRL A013. The Grade Sheets are part of the electronic gradebook in PWS para 4.2.1.7 and do not have a CDRL. Any hard copy gradesheets will be provided by the Government.

PWS 3.3.2. Working Document/Master Files table.

Please provide the associated CDRL for the Training Devices: Briefing Guides. Briefing guides are redundant with instructor guides. Instructor guides are covered by CDRL A013. We have removed PWS reference to simulator briefing guide. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

85 PWS 6.2.20 and A1.6 Please provide the CDRL for the Lesson Plan referenced in the PWS paragraphs.

Lesson Plans are an integral part of the AF ISD process as described in AFH 36-2235 and are part of interactive courseware packages in CDRL A010 and instructor led lesson packages CDRL A011. Existing lesson plans will be delivered with the current courseware as per PWS para 8.4. They do not have a separate CDRL.

86 RFP, 7.2.E.i., p. 39 Workload Analysis Charts are incorrectly identified as provided in (RFP Attachment 6) The RFP will be corrected to read "RFP Attachment 7". An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

87 RFP, 8

The CBA agreement signed June 23, 2015 references rates for labor categories for periods Current, and then years starting Oct 15, Oct 16, and Oct 17. The FBO notice February 29, 2015 suggests "The Government expects to make an award on or about 14 July 2016, with the 2-month Phase-In period of (Aug-Sep 16) and actual performance start date of 1 Oct 2016". The contract with options runs through September 21, 2021. Question: What direction is there for pricing direct labor rates for this effort in relationship to the CBA provided? For instance, should we use Oct 16 and Oct 17 rates and project for years not covererd by the CBA through 2021. Keep direct rates constant based on Oct 16 and beyond based on the implementation of a new negotiated CBA after award with a contractor. Other?

Section 4(c) of the SCA makes the wage rates and monetary fringe benefits of a “predecessor” contractor's CBA enforceable under the Act for the following (“successor”) contract period. Once that CBA has expired, the successor contractor must negotiate a new CBA. The Contracting Officer must review the new CBA to determine whether the rates appear to be excessive. No one can accurately predict what the new negotiated CBA rates will be in the future, however keep in mind that any approved increase in rates are an allowable cost increase (modification) to the contract once they have been finalized.

88 RFP, 8.5

Supporting Price Backup Data. Certified cost or pricing data is not required. However, supporting data is requested to verify pricing in balanced per FAR 15.404-1(g). Supporting data should explain the methodology used in developing proposed CLIN prices. Supporting data shall be provided in a table format, to include, at a minimum, a breakdown (by CLIN) of labor (labor category, number of positions and productive hours, breakout of Other Direct Costs (ODC), direct and indirect rates, and subcontract costs. Supporting data may be submitted in a format selected by the offeror, but should not exceed 3 pages. The Government reserves the right to request additional pricing information after receipt and evaluation of proposals. Question: The Pricing Support requirement in red in L8.5 for 38 CLINs well exceeds 3 pages. Probably about 10 pages when done and even with some work, we probably can't get it below 6-8 pages and meet all the "include" requirements. Is the 3 page restriction firm or is there "no limit" as stated in the ITO?

Based on this question and another related question/request on the same issue, the government will not restrict the number of pages for supporting pages in the price volume. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

89 PWS, App 5 Are the items listed in Appendix 5 of the PWS all inlcusive? And is there no GFE at Barksdale? This appendix will be updated in the next few days. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

90 PWS, 8.3, p. 32

The GFE listed in this paragraph (and sub-paragraphs) identify computers, printers, hard-drives, etc. as shown in Appendix 5 for use by contractor personnel to perform contract duties. Question: Is Appendix 5 correct when it shows no GFE at Barksdale AFB?

This appendix will be updated in the next few days. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

91 PWS, 8.3. p. 32

It would be easier to accurately price contractor furnished property and equipment if the government provided a detailed list of government supplied items to include all support equipment and property. Please provide listing to bidders as soon as practicle.

This appendix will be updated in the next few days. An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to reflect this change.

The Final PWS Appendix 4, CDRL, para A4.2.2 identified the Courseware Delivery schedule being due NLT 15 days after start of Phase-In, however, the Style Guide provided by the Government states in para A1.4 that the CDS is due to the COR NLT 45 days after contract award. Can the Government confirm when the CDS is due?

When this was initially written, we were hoping to have the contract awarded 30 days before Phase-In. So "45 days after contract award" and "15 Days after the start of Phase-In" were one-in-the-same. If the contract is awarded less than 30 days to the phase-in date, then "15 Days after Phase-In" will be the required date. In order to alleviate any confusion, Attachment two will be modified to reflect "15 Days after Phase- In" via an amendment to the solicitation.

Q&A doc and PWS 2.2.1.20.

Q#30 states "There is no "database program" associated with TTLs, TTLs will be provided as Word documents."

PWS 2.2.1.20. states "Maintain Training Tasks List (TTL) database for B-52/B-1 crew training." Question: Is the contractor simply required to maintain the Word documents or actually create a TTL database for this effort? Please calrify?

Contractor will maintaint the current TTL word documents.

94 Q&A doc, Q#34

The 12-C-0003 LMS/CMS Fact Sheet does not identify any customer reporting features or plugins in use in the current Moodle LMS. Please verify there are no custom reporting or plugin features that will need to be generated/duplicated by the incoming contractor.

There is no specific requirement for custom reporting or plugin features.

Q&A doc, Qs#36, 37 & 39

Based on the Q&A document and bidders conference, it appears CDRL A012 Lesson Presentation is part of the Instructional Media Package and Instructor Led Lesson Package and does not have a standalone CDRL delivery requirement. Please clarify CDRL A012 is just the presentation portion of the ILT/CAI and ICW/CBT and will be delivered as compenent of CDRLs A010 and A011.

CDRL A012 is the presentation portion of ICW/CBT.

Q&A doc, Q#69 and RFP Section 7.2 D

Per Q#69 "If you choose to cross-reference within a proposal volume, then a matrix should be provided." Per RFP

7.2 D "The offeror shall fill out the cross reference matrix indicating the proposal reference information as it relates to the RFP, PWS, and CLIN references found therein." Is the matrix intended solely to provide a quick reference for any internal section cross-references in the proposal volume, as indicated by Q#69, or the internal to external (ie RFP/PWS) sections cross-references as indicated in the RFP? Or both? Please clarify.

Cross referencing between volumes is PROHIBITED. If, for the sake of space, you decide to reference a section of the RFP, PWS, etc. within you proposal volume instead of pasting the applicable paragraph(s) into the proposal volume, a cross-reference matrix should be accomplished.

PWS, Page 13, Para 4.3.2.2

Reference requirement: "Instructors will qualify in each lesson block and for each training device that they instruct." Request the Government provide a list by area (Pilot, WSO, EWO) and by Course (BQT and TX) of the number of lesson blocks that require qualification. Rationale: Without this type of information it is difficult for a non‐incumbent contractor to understand the extent of qualification requirements for our staffing approach ‐ whether transitioning current incumbents or introducing new experienced personnel. For example if the Pilot IQ has 5 Lesson Blocks vs 25 Lesson Blocks would make a big difference in our staffing and phase‐in approach.

The Government is curently researching this questions for a response. A revised Q&A will be posted to FBO within the week.

PWS, Page 13, Para 4.3.2.2

Reference requirement: "Instructors will qualify in each lesson block and for each training device that they instruct." Request the Government provide a list by area (Pilot, WSO, EWO) and by Device of the qualification requirements; i.e. is it qualification by whole device or is it qualification by Scenario/Activity related to a Lesson Block. Rationale: Without this type of information it is difficult for a non‐incumbent contractor to understand the extent of qualification requirements for our staffing approach ‐ whether transitioning current incumbents or introducing new experienced personnel and planning for transition training. For example, what does it mean for a Pilot instructor to be qualified in WST device instruction? And what does it mean for a EWO or WSO to be qualified in any of the high level or low‐level device instruction.

Qualification is by scenario/activity. Instructors do not "qualify" on a training device. Training device qualification is inherent in instructor qualification.

PW…