Amendment 1 - Robots QA.docx

1. Do you have a specific format that you prefer as it relates to the RFP that works best for you and your particular office specifically?

· We do not have a specific format aside from what is detailed in the RFP.

2. Will the Government consider extending the proposal and system receipt deadlines?

· The Government is extending both the proposal and system due dates. Please see updated RFP.

3. Do the two systems submitted have to be the proposed final configuration or can currently on hand systems with alternate components be submitted for Government Validation and Evaluation. Specifically, can the radios be a different model than our proposed/priced configuration? The form, fit and function will be nearly identical to the proposed system.

· Delivered systems must be in the same configuration as the proposed system.

4. The RFP states the price list is not contractually binding. Can you elaborate how and when binding prices will be negotiated?

· The prices proposed on the price list will be contractually binding but the quantities will not.

5. Are prices to be an estimate based on costs for the year 2021?

· Prices should reflect the fact that systems may be ordered at any point in the 10 year ordering period.

6. Do you anticipate the delivered systems will be covered continuously by an annual maintenance plan (no gaps)?

· Yes, the Government intends to cover each system continuously by an annual maintenance plan. However, the Government reserves the right purchase systems without maintenance plans.

7. Will the USAF accept a commercial Identification Procedure as an alternative to the IUID requirement?

· The contractor must comply with the requirements of clause 252.211-7003 Item Unique Identification and Valuation.

8. Will the USAF accept having a single unit for the USG evaluations?

· Please refer to paragraph III.C. “Contractors must supply sufficient equipment to run two systems simultaneously for at least 10 hours per day.”

9. Will the USAF accept Ubuntu for operating systems in the robot vehicle electronics, operator control unit or both? If no, can the Government provide a list of Linux Operating Systems acceptable under the program?

· Ubuntu 16.04.4 can be used. See answer to question #24 for full list of approved operating systems.

10. Would the Government consider including a program management CLIN to capture the recurring the cost of reviews, meetings, reports and other programmatic support activities? If not, which of the CLINS should these costs be allocated to?

· No. Contractors should allocate management costs wherever they deem appropriate.

11. For purposes of computing CLIN 2 pricing, can the Government please provide the number of hours a robot is expected to be operational during a year? Without this information, CLIN pricing will not be consistent from vendor to vendor.

· The Government intends that systems will be used 30 hours per month.

12. Per RFP “All submitted pages shall be single sided, typed, standard A4 pages. Type shall be no smaller than size 12 font.” Question: Would the government clarify the use of “A4 (standard European)” paper size. This paper size effects margins and printing capabilities, would the government change the ‘standard’ paper size to 8 ½ x 11 which is standard United States paper size.

· Paper size changed to standard 8.5x11.

13. Per RFP “Due to Tyndall AFB email size limitations, the total size of proposal submission shall not exceed five megabytes (5-MB) of data; recommend all offerors confirm the receipt of all emailed proposals to the appropriate Government POC.” Question: Would the government clarify if the Volume I Technical Proposal is over five megabytes (5-MB); may the Offeror break the Volume I Technical Proposal into separate files (up to 5 MB each; appropriately identified as Volume I – Technical Proposal – file XX of XX) for delivery to the Government utilizing multiple e-mails with the solicitation number and email XX of XX in the subject line?

· Offerors may break volumes into smaller files for emailing.

14. Could the government verify that it requires proposals submitted in PDF format for all volumes with exception of the pricing spreadsheet/workbook?

· Proposals should be submitted in PDF format.

15. May the Offeror provide past performance information for their subcontractor, vendor, or trade partner?

· Offerors may provide such information but it should not be relied upon as the only submitted past performance information.

16. Please confirm that the only pricing information to be submitted is the Price Sheet (attachment 2)? Will the Government clarify the sentence: “Prices shall be consistent with the pricing submitted on the proposal, including any discounts”? Is this referring to another Volume or submission requirement?

· Offerors shall submit pricing data that substantiates the prices listed on the price sheet. This information should be included in Volume IV Price Sheet/Pricing.

17. Can the government please specify the required delivery schedule for the 170 systems?

· The Government intends to purchase 35 systems per year. Systems should be delivered within 180 days after date of order.

18. Will the CLIN for Robotic Systems be a 1-year period of performance (PoP) or 1-year with 9 option years to cover the full 10-year IDIQ PoP? Follow-on: If the Robotic Systems CLIN PoP is longer than 1 year, how should the Offeror handle escalation for purchases that occur outside the base year of the contract? Will future/option year pricing for systems be negotiated?

· This is a commodity contract so there are no “option years.” The contract has an ordering period of 10 years. CLINs may be ordered against the contract at any point in this ordering period. Please see question 74 with regards to escalation.

19. Will the CLIN for “One year of Maintenance (for one system) IAW 3.2.5” be a 1-year period of performance (PoP) starting with delivery of the system or 1-year with option years to cover the full 10-year IDIQ PoP? Follow-on: How should the Offeror handle escalation for proposed pricing that occurs outside the base year of the contract? Follow-on: Will future/option year pricing for systems be negotiated?

· This is a commodity contract so there are no “option years.” The contract has an ordering period of 10 years. CLINs may be ordered against the contract at any point in this ordering period.

20. RFP States “3.2.9 Safety. The contractor shall work with the Government to identify, evaluate, and mitigate mishap risks to levels acceptable to the system user. System hazards shall comply with federal (and state, where applicable) laws and regulations, Executive Orders, treaties, and agreements. Section 4 of MIL-STD-882 provides a legal reference, identifying the basic system safety requirements to be observed and followed by contractor personnel.”

a. Please clearly specify or clarify “work with the government” and the required deliverables associated with this section.

· This will be dependent on the mishap and the risk level.

b. Please clearly specify or clarify the risk levels acceptable to the system user.

· This will be dependent on the mishap.

c. Will the government more accurately specify the specific tasks of MIL-STD-882 and the “federal (and state, where applicable) laws and regulations, Executive Orders, treaties, and agreements” the Offeror shall comply with?

· The contractor shall comply with ALL of MIL-STD-882 and ALL federal (and state, where applicable) laws and regulations, Executive Orders, treaties, and agreements.

21. RFP States “3.2.10 Deficiency Reporting. The contractor shall assist field users to process, investigate, and resolve deficiencies for the end item or component under this service.” Question: Please clearly specify or clarify “assist field users” and the required deliverables associated with this section.

· Vendors must investigate and provide deficiency resolution when equipment failures are identified by users. Corrective actions will be provided to the user and to the AFCEC program management. If the vendor identifies a deficiency applicable to all systems, the vendor will coordinate resolution with the AFCEC Program Manager.

22. To more accurately estimate pricing, please clarify if pricing for the maintenance plan includes the labor, components to be repaired/replaced, and consumables or just labor associated with maintenance and consumables. The pricing template does not appear to have line items for these sections. Can the government confirm where these SOW elements are to be priced?

· Maintenance plan pricing should be fully burdened to include all costs associated with maintaining the robots. There will be no additional CLINs for labor, components, or consumables.

23. The descriptions for Travel and Shipping CLINS each provide that reimbursement shall be for direct costs only, no overhead, fee, G&A, indirect, etc. Question: Can the Government please clarify that offerors who normally apply indirect cost adders to Travel and Other Direct Costs, in accordance with their accounting practices/estimating system/disclosure statement, may bill the full costs incurred for Travel and Shipping (direct and indirect costs, No Fee) and that Government will reimburse total costs Not to Exceed the amounts specified in the Price Sheet?

· The travel and shipping CLINs will not allow for “additional charges such as overhead, fee, G&A, indirect, etc.” regardless of a contractor’s accounting practices. Orders against the travel and shipping CLINs will be FFP and will be on a per-order basis.

24. “Only use approved operating systems such as” Question: Will the government please provide a list of “approved operating systems”?

· The approved operating systems are as follows:

Oracle Linux 7.3 EAL1 Oracle Linux 7.3 OSPP Windows 10 and Windows Server (April 2018 Update) PikeOS Separation Kernel 4.2.2 X-Ware IoT Platform SC PR/SM for IBM z14 and IBM LinuxONE Systems Driver Level D32L with Bundle Level S29 Ubuntu LTS 16.04.4 with KVM and QEMU 2.5 Microsoft Windows 10 and Microsoft Windows Server (Fall Creators Update) IBM z/VM Version 6 Release 4 EulerOS v2.0 build 3.10.0-327.59.59.46.h34.x86_64 Microsoft Windows 10 (Creators Update) NetApp ONTAP® 9.1 Nimble Storage, Inc. NimbleOS, versión 4.2.0.1-499435-opt Dell EMC CCRA Certificate 2017-10-20 2022-10-20 EAL2+ RACF for z/OS Version 2 Release 2

FIN.X RTOS SE V4.0

IBM z/OS Version 2 Release 2 Microsoft Windows 10 Anniversary Update Home Edition, Pro Edition and Enterprise Edition (32 and 64 bits) Microsoft Windows Server 2016 Standard Edition and Datacenter Edition Oracle Weblogic Server 12.1.3 Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 7.1 PR/SM for IBM z13 GA2, z13s GA1, and IBM LinuxONE Systems Driver Level D27i NetApp® Clustered Data ONTAP® 8.3.1 McAfee Endpoint Security 10.1.0 with ePolicy Orchestrator 5.3.1 Microsoft Windows 10 and Windows Server 2012 R2 SUSE Linux Enterprise Server Version 12 PR/SM for IBM z13 EC GA1 Driver Level D22H z/OS Version 2 Release 1 Alcatel-Lucent 7-Series Service Router Operating System (SROS) Family VMware® vSphere 5.5 Update 2 JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6 Version 6.2.2 RACF Element of z/OS Version 2, Release 1 z/VM Version 6 Release 3 NetApp Clustered Data ONTAP® 8.2.1 Router operating system : Comware V7.1 running on MSR2000, MSR3000 and MSR 4000 Series Routers Red Hat Enterprise Linux on 32 bit x86 Architecture, Version 6.2 NetApp Data ONTAP® v8.2.1 7-Mode

25. Can the government clarify or put constraints on “all terrain conditions”.

· No, the Government cannot clarify or constrain all conditions in which the robotic system shall be used.

26. “Climb and descend 32-degree stairs with limited operator manipulation” Question: Can the government clarify/define “limited”?

· Systems should have a preset configuration for climbing stairs.

27. Would the Government consider making all services described in SOW 3.2 Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee CLINs?

· No, all CLINs on this contract will be FFP.

28. Para 3.2.5 - Paragraph (a) states the USAF can purchase unlimited maintenance plans in one-year increments. Paragraph (d) states the USAF may extend the maintenance plan for a period of up to one year past the end of the contract ordering period. If the contract ordering period is 10 years then maintenance plans can be purchased through 11 years. Is the maximum number of one-year maintenance plans on any one unit is 11 or is it unlimited?

· In this sentence, “unlimited” does not refer to a quantity but to the plan. The maintenance plan is unlimited (covers all repairs and maintenance). The Government may only purchase plans during the 10 year ordering period. In accordance with SOW 3.2.5.d, the Government may extend the maintenance plan for a period up to one year past the end of the contract ordering period.

29. Government Evaluation Section - Is the government willing to provide some specifics of what will be tested at the evaluation? If so, it would help the contractors plan for training, spares, consumables, and support.

· No, the Government will not describe or constrain the scenarios that will be used for evaluating the systems.

30. Government Evaluation Section - Can the government comment on the type of support expected for the evaluation? Is the contractor expected to have personnel on site for 8 weeks in case of problems or in case assistance is needed? Is the contractor expected to make repairs to a robot if it goes down? What is the expected turnaround time for repairs? Can repairs be made on base or will the robot have to be removed and repaired and then returned?

· There should be no additional support required after initial training session. The contractor may not be on site during the evaluation period. If the system fails or is damaged, the vendor will be notified and a solution will be determined based on the specifics of the issue.

31. Line 6 - Is the expectation that the contractors provide a daily rate for training and the number of days and the number of travel days for a specific training exercise will be decided at a later date.

· Correct, this should be a daily training rate. The rate will be multiplied by the number of training days to achieve the total training cost.

32. Line 8 – Is the cost of a transport container included in the shipping cost line or is that cost included with the robot cost?

· The robot cost should include any individual containers that hold the OCU, batteries, repair kits, etc. Shipping containers used to transport the system as a whole may be billed to the shipping CLIN.

33. If the Prime selects to do the Commercial Small Business Plan at the product Line level, will the Government confirm that this contract can be the only contract processed under the plan since the SOW requirements are unique to this solicitation? If not, can the Prime submit an Individual Subcontracting Plan?

· This requirement is for commercial items so the subcontracting plan must be a commercial plan, not an individual plan. The plan must cover all commercial items sold by the company over the course of a fiscal year.

34. SOW states “Contractor will work directly with AFCEC Cyber Security POC to ensure all delivered information technology (IT) hardware is in compliance with AFMAN 17-203, Information Technology (IT) Asset Management (ITAM).” Question: Does the Government mean to reference AFMAN 17-1203, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) ASSET MANAGEMENT (ITAM) or AFI 17-203 Cyber Incident Handling?

· The SOW has been corrected to reflect AFMAN 17-1203.

35. My question has to do with if this Solicitation is purely a COTS only program or is it also possible for the interest of future EOD Breaching Capability? The emerging technology would have to go through OTA component prototype development phase for TRL-6.

· This requirement is only for COTS systems.

36. Regarding to Government Validation and Evaluation, Will the Government be firing Disrupters during the evaluation and testing to assess compliance with SOW Section 3.0.f? If yes, can the Government confirm that it will be the PAN disrupter and, if so, will the Government be using their own PAN Disrupters? Can the Government provide information on the initiator they would require to be interfaced to the robot?

· Yes, the PAN will be used during the evaluation. The DRST will be used if the robot does not have an approved firing system.

37. Combo RFP Para IIIA – Can the 5mb file be a zip file?

· No, zip files are not permitted through our firewall.

38. Combo RFP Para IIIC – The RFP specifies a 4 hr training time in November for the trials. Four hours is easily enough to learn where all the buttons are and to perform simple driving and lifting tasks. However, if tasks like stair climbing and slope traversing or delicate manipulation are planned then we recommend 2 days of training and practice. Alternately, to get a complete evaluation of each robot working to its full capability, a representative from each vendor could be allowed to execute the tasks initially before allowing the soldiers to tackle the task. Will the USAF consider a longer training period to better prepare for a thorough evaluation?

· Due to time constraints, the Government cannot provide additional training time.

39. Combo RFP Para IIIC – The RFP indicates the evaluation will require "up to 8 weeks". If 8 weeks is the maximum, can you provide a most likely duration for the evaluation?

· The Government estimates that evaluations will take 4 weeks but may take up to 8 weeks.

40. Combo RFP Para IIIF – The cost spreadsheet does not have any place to put optional accessories (like a communications tether) that may be useful to the USAF at some point. Can we submit additional price data beyond what is requested in the spreadsheet?

· Yes. Additional items should not be included in the spreadsheet but should be included in the substantiating documentation of Volume IV Pricing.

41. Combo RFP Para VI – Para C Factor III – The "Completeness" paragraph indicates that the proposal will be assessed for level of detail of the offeror-provided cost/price data for all requirements in the SOW and assessing the traceability of estimates". Can you be more specific about what cost/price data is being requested? In which document would that data be provided?

· In addition to the pricing spreadsheet, Volume IV Pricing should include adequate documentation to substantiate the pricing proposed in the Price Sheet.

42. SOW Para 3.1.3.1 - What radio frequency is required when demonstrating 800m LOS range?

· The frequency of the radio proposed by the contractor. The systems may use 2200-2290 MHz (max power 2W), 2412-2462 MHz (max power 1W) or 4800-4940 MHz (max power 1.6W). Radios must be software controlled for at least frequency and power.

43. SOW Para 3.1.4 – What are the required frequency ranges? Are two different bands required? Is it acceptable for the robots provided for evaluation trials to be equipped with single-band radios?

· Trials can be done with single-band radios (see previous answer). Dual-band radios are preferable. System must be capable of S and C band for worldwide operations either in single or dual-band radios. These must be software controlled, have swappable transceivers or both.

44. SOW Para 3.1.7 – What is the height of the BRV door opening?

· The opening is 78.5 inches high and 46 inches wide.

45. SOW Para 3.1.9 – How many PAN disruptors must be installed on a robot?

· One.

46. SOW Para 3.1.10 – Would it be acceptable to use an alternative method to prevent accidental contact with the Stop/Off switch (e.g. have the switch recessed into the robot)?

· The Government will consider alternative designs so long as the button cannot be inadvertently pushed.

47. SOW Para 3.2.1 – Does the flat rate fee for training include the travel costs or is travel cost above and beyond the flat rate Training price?

· No, the training price should not include travel costs. The price for training should be the per-day price for training only.

48. SOW Para 3.2.1 – How many people are in the 1-day training classes? How many robots will be used in the training class?

· There will likely be 5-7 people per training class. One robot system will be used.

49. SOW Para 3.2.1 – Is the labor cost incurred for travel time to and from the training location included in the travel CLIN or included in the Training cost? If included in the training cost, how can we propose accurately if we don't know the locations?

· Any additional costs should be burdened into the training price. The travel CLIN is only direct travel costs (labor not allowed).

50. SOW Para 3.2.5 – In paragraph c it says the contractor is responsible for all maintenance and repairs during the maintenance plan period. However, in paragraph a it says that the contractor just ships a replacement part. Can we assume that the USAF will repair the robot if they are capable and that the contractor is responsible for all replacement parts in that case. For any repair the USAF cannot accomplish, the contractor is responsible for the parts and labor to repair. Can we assume that the USAF will send the robot back to the contractor for these repairs?

· The Government is responsible for installing the replacement parts delivered by the contractor if the parts can be installed in the field. If repairs cannot be conducted in the field, the contractor shall send the Government a replacement system and the broken system will be returned to the contractor for repairs. Alternatively, the contractor may send a representative to conduct repairs on site.

51. SOW Para 3.2.5 - For maintenance, can we assume that the USAF will perform any maintenance they are capable of doing and that the supplies and parts will come from the maintenance kits? For any maintenance the USAF cannot accomplish, is the contractor is responsible for the labor to perform the maintenance? Can we assume that the USAF will send the robot back to the contractor for this maintenance?

· The Government will be responsible for any field maintenance required for the systems. Supplies and parts will come from the maintenance kits. Any maintenance that cannot be conducted in the field will be the responsibility of the contractor. If maintenance cannot be conducted in the field, the contractor shall send the Government a replacement system and the system requiring maintenance will be returned to the contractor for maintenance. Alternatively, the contractor may send a representative to conduct maintenance on site.

52. Price Sheet - What is a "repair kit' referenced in Attachment 2, line 2? Is it the same as the General Purpose User Maintenance Kit referenced in line 4 and SOW 3.2.12

· Yes, these are the same.

53. Price Sheet - What is a "spare kit' referenced in Attachment 2, line 2? Is it the same as the Spares Kit referenced in line 5 and SOW 3.2.13?

· Yes, these are the same.

54. Price Sheet - For line 6, Training, do we account for travel time to each base in this line?

· The contractor may include travel time in their proposed Training price if they see fit. The contractor may not bill additional training days for travel.

55. Price Sheet - If there are unique cables and tools for maintenance, things that need to be purchased only one time, in which line should those costs be included?

· Any items required to use the system should be included in the Robotic System price. Additional items not included in the Robotic System price may be described in Volume IV Pricing.

56. Price Sheet - Is the USAF interested in the assumptions that go along with the pricing data? If so, where would we put those assumptions?

· Pricing assumptions should be detailed in Volume IV Pricing.

57. Is the USAF willing to consider milestone payments for deliveries under the robot CLIN?

· The contractor may invoice for deliveries as soon as they have been accepted by the Government. The contractor does not need to wait until an entire order has been delivered before invoicing.

58. What does the USG consider the runtime for a EOD mission? Can the USG also clarify that the requirement is to meet the minimum 3 hour runtime? SOW 3.0 and 3.1.1

· Three hours of continuous use.

59. Are the user guides that the Government references in this clause only consists of the a) User, and b) Maintenance? SOW 3.1.5

· Yes, as well as all manufacture guides and manuals necessary to assist the government in obtaining an Approval–to-Operate (ATO) for a stand-alone system robotic system through the DoD Risk Management Framework process.

60. How often is the Contractor required to provide the statistics? Is this an annual, quarterly, weekly, or other frequency requirement? SOW 3.2.2

· Statistics should be provided quarterly in the PSRs.

61. Can the USG define the scope of required upgrades? SOW 3.2.4

· Upgrades necessary to sustain the system. This is primarily software and firmware updates but may include updates to prevent obsolescence issues.

62. Is the contractor responsible for providing electronics upgrades to cover unexpected obsolescence issues? SOW 3.2.4

· Yes, the contractor is required update the systems as necessary to prevent obsolescence issues.

63. Is the contractor responsible for the cost of upgrades and will the USAF unilaterally decide when an upgrade is warranted? SOW 3.2.4

· The cost of upgrades should be included in the Maintenance Plan price. The latest software and firmware should be made available so that users can update as necessary. As the contractor is responsible for all maintenance and repairs, the contractor is responsible for determining when obsolescence related updates are necessary.

64. Will ECPs to the baseline be issued/approved by the USG and costed by the contractor where upgrades are necessary to address obsolescence/sustainment issues? SOW 3.2.4

· The contractor is responsible for obsolescence/sustainment issues while under the unlimited maintenance plan.

65. What is the anticipated capability level in the field to perform the repairs? SOW 3.2.5

· The field can perform simple remove and replacement of components or subassemblies.

66. Will the USG perform PM according to the manual? SOW 3.2.5

· The government will perform simple periodic maintenance. It cannot be stated that all periodic maintenance will be conducted without first seeing the manual.

67. Is the MSR the same as the Section 3.2.2 requirement, and the website maintenance supporting Section 3.2.4? SOW 3.2.5?

· No, the PSR is a document that should be delivered to the Government quarterly in accordance with SOW 3.2.2.d. The PSR should include the data from the website.

68. How will the Government best identify deficiencies? Team on base? PM Call? Portal for reporting? SOW 3.2.10

· The government will identify deficiencies in any manner where they are identified to include team, unit, PM call, portal, incident report, after action report, etc. The contractor website should have a page for reporting and tracking deficiencies.

69. Will deficiencies based solely on the robotic parts or user experience? SOW 3.2.10

· Both.

70. During Government evaluations, what will the experience level of the Government operators be? RFP C/Subfactor 2

· Experience levels will vary. All users will be NAVSCOLEOD graduates.

71. Will the Government entertain alternate proposals, or is the USG only interested in a straight procurement? RFP III Proposal

· The Government is interested procuring a COTS system which meets the requirements as defined by the SOW. The Government is not interested in a development contract. Contractors may submit an alternative proposal in addition to their primary proposal.

72. What is the applicability of the DFAR 215.304 (c)(i)(B) small business participation clause, to a commercial COTS procurement?

· DFARS 215.304(c)(i)(B) is not a clause and is therefore not incorporated in this solicitation. The small business participation evaluation and the small business subcontracting plan required by the FAR and DFARS are outlined in the solicitation at III.E. and IV.

73. The Government included both the FAR 52.219-9 and DFAR 215.304 (c)(i)(B) in the small business participation evaluation factor. The latter DFAR requires subcontracting plans "to be structured to allow for consideration of offers from small businesses". Is it the Government’s intent to require offerors to include small businesses offers in proposal responses to maximize small business/vendor competition?

· No, the solicitation does not require offerors to submit offers from other businesses.

74. Is it the Government’s intent to have a single unit price for each CLIN for all 10 years of the ordering period?

· Yes, the pricing should be the same for all 10 years of the ordering period.

75. Can the Government provide further clarification on requirement 3.1.3.2 and the definition of interoperability? This seems to conflict with requirement 3.1.5, where the Government is seeking an ATO for a standalone robotic system.

· 3.1.3.2. is in reference to radio frequency interoperability. 3.15 is in reference to cyber security authority to operate. There is no conflict.

76. Should the proposers assume that only the operating systems and versions listed in 3.1.6a are approved, and all other operating systems, even those that may have an existing ATO, will be deemed non-compliant?

· Yes. Please see the answer to question #24 for a complete list of approved operating systems.

77. If the COTS system is not currently employing an approved operating system (as specified in 3.1.6a), is the Air Force willing to fund development to change the operating system?

· No, the Government is seeking a COTS solution and is not seeking any developmental options.

78. Can the Government clarify whether the scope of work for the contractor to assist the Government in obtaining an ATO is fully defined in sections 3.1.5 and 3.1.6, or is the Government looking for the contractor to develop a full RMF package? The effort required to provide a full RMF package would exceed what is detailed in this SOW.

· AFCEC has several Cyber Security teams to prepare the RMF package. However, help is required by the contractor to obtain an ATO for this system.

79. Can the Government confirm that there is a typo in 3.1.10b and it should read “…stop movement for the robot” rather than “…for all robots”? As written, there is an implication of multi-robot control, which appears to contradict 3.1.3.2.

· No, this is for multi-robot control. All robots to stop movement should communication be lost.

80. Can the Government provide clarification as to what is specifically required under 3.2.3 Technical Data?

· The Government cannot provide further clarification above what is detailed in the SOW.

81. Are there MIL-STD’s or Data Item Descriptions to detail what the Government requires from the contractor?

· No, the Government is requesting a COTS system.

82. The pricing sheet does not allow the vendor to propose tiered pricing to provide price breaks to the Government for higher quantity robot purchases. Is it the Government’s expectation that a single system order will be priced the same as a single order of 50 or 100 systems, for example?

· The pricing on the Price Sheet should be for a single unit. This is the price that will be used to determine the Total Evaluated Price. Any quantity price breaks should be listed in Volume IV Pricing.

83. The pricing sheet implies the Government could order all anticipated systems at the same time. Is this accurate?

· There is no maximum order quantity, however, the Government will not have adequate funding to order all anticipated systems at once.

84. Has the Government considered minimum order quantities to achieve better pricing through economies of scale in the production process?

· There are circumstances where the Government may be required to purchase a single system. While there is no per-order minimum, the Government guarantees to purchase at least 35 systems if the contract is awarded.

85. Does the Air Force plan to conduct safety release tests? If so, what are the contractor’s responsibilities to assist with this? What is the expected length of time for safety testing?

· No, this acquisition is for a COTS system. The Government will review what is provided by manufacturers.

86. The RFP states that the “...Government is responsible for any robotic system once it has arrived on site”. Does this include cost to repair and/or replace the system and components for damage resulting from user evaluation?

· Yes, the Government will be responsible for any repairs or replacement stemming from Government misuse of the delivered systems.

87. In the RFP, Section VI Proposal Evaluation: What is the evaluation criteria used to determine technical capability for factors such as sensor arrays, human machine interface and speed, ergonomics, mobility, stability, ability to perform robotic EOD tasks.

· The government will evaluate these factors based on the requirements of the SOW. The Government will not further specify evaluation criteria for the listed factors.

88. What is the evaluation criteria for other factors that may be evaluated that are not listed in the RFP or SOW?

· The Government is not specifying evaluation criteria for other factors not listed in the RFP or SOW.

89. Does the Government anticipate any future classified requirements associated with this program?

· No, the Government does not anticipate any classified requirements.

90. We understand that 3.2.5 defines 3 types of repair and maintenance events:

(System) Maintenance Repair of damages which (a) cannot be repaired by USAF users and (b) which are responsibility of the Contractor. Repair of damages which (a) cannot be repaired by USAF users and (b) which are NOT responsibility of the Contractor. The wording of paragraph 3.2.5 appears to suggest that a maintenance plan includes event types 1 and 2. Event type 3 is excluded from the maintenance plan. Please advise if this is correct?

· The SOW does not specify “type 1, 2, or 3 damages.” In accordance with SOW 3.2.5, the “contractor is responsible for all maintenance, repairs, updates and consumables (to include batteries and chargers) during the maintenance plan period. Contractor is not responsible for major damage caused by the Government due to improper operation, maintenance, or storage not in accordance with the standards as defined by system manuals. Contractor is not responsible for total loss or major damage due to acts of God (i.e. fires) or IED explosions”

91. The wording of paragraph 3.2.5c appears to suggest that any damages during the maintenance plan period are to be covered at the Contractor’s risk and cost with sole exception of event type 3 damage. Please advise if this is correct?

· Any damages during the maintenance plan period are to be covered at the Contractor’s risk and cost. The SOW does not specify a “type 3 damage.” Contractor is not responsible for major damage caused by the Government due to improper operation, maintenance, or storage not in accordance with the standards as defined by system manuals. Contractor is not responsible for total loss or major damage due to acts of God (i.e. fires) or IED explosions.

92. Regarding paragraph 3.2.5c “The Contractor is responsible for all maintenance, repair, updates and consumables (to include batteries and chargers) during the maintenance period.” In order to accurately price a one-year maintenance plan, can you provide any additional information regarding the usage rate, op tempo, or operational availability of a single robotic system? If this cannot be provided for the robotic system, are you able to provide the number of charge cycles or number of uses for batteries per year?

· The Government anticipates that systems will be used 30 hours per month.

93. We understand that the Contractor shall not be held responsible for: Damages caused by Government due to improper operation not in accordance with the standards as defined in the system manuals, Damages caused by Government due to improper maintenance not in accordance with the standards as defined in the system manuals, Damages caused by Government due to improper storage not in accordance with the standards as defined in the system manuals, Damages caused by Act of God (fire, IED). In order to support the Government in the event of such damages, the Contractor will: Respond according to the priority level of the repair notification (High/medium/low), Hold appropriate inventory, ship a billable replacement component to the user or provide billable repair service within an adequate time period from receipt of repair notification. Please advise if this is correct?

· Yes, this is correct. The Government is financially responsible for any such damages or loss.

94. Are there any restrictions on battery chemistry? Is there a preference with Lithium over NiMH? How many back to back 3 hour missions does the quoted equipment need to perform in a given day?

· There are no restrictions or preferences.

95. There is no mention of the tasks that need to be performed by the robot to determine which accessories are necessary. Are the only items expected in this solicitation the items listed in the Robotic System line of the price list? This price sheet does not include any accessories, is this the governments intent?

· Offerors should detail what accessories are available for their system and the price of each accessory in Volume IV Pricing.

96. In the price list it states the pricing is for one day of training. Is it expected that operator training, maintenance training, parts ordering and system repair processes are all to occur in only one day?

· No, the Government will order multiple days of training as required for each session.

97. Will the government accept any J/F-12 certified radio? Are there preferences based on the equipment being used for EOD? What frequencies are intended?

· Yes. Please see the answer to question #42.

98. Are repairs in 5 days required worldwide or only for CONUS operations? How will overseas repairs be requested? Will each flight be responsible for their own repair requests or will there be a central depot?

· In accordance with SOW 3.2.5, “the contractor shall ship a replacement component to the user within 5 calendar days of repair notification.” This applies to all locations. Repair requests will be made by the user through the website required by SOW 3.2.4.a.

99. Per the solicitation equipment must arrive at Tyndall by the 16th of November for field trials, but then it says that scheduling for training will be coordinated after proposals are received. If a vendor intended to personally deliver the robots and perform the training would they be able to deliver their equipment in conjunction with their scheduled training date?

· No, training will not begin immediately after systems are received. There will be several days between system receipt and training.

100. In section 3.1.5 and 3.1.6 it states that the contractor will assist the government in obtaining approval and supply detailed system information. It is our understanding that this detailed information is only needed after an award, correct? Is there basic information expected in the response to this solicitation?

· Yes, this will only be required after contract award.

101. Under section 3.1.2 Sensors and Attachments, a near infrared sensor is identified. Is a Long Wave Infrared (LWIR) thermal sensor acceptable?

· While LWIR is a welcomed accessory, it does not meet the requirement of a near infrared sensor as described by the SOW. There are certain details which can be seen by near infrared which cannot be seen by LWIR.

102. Do you have a definition or example of general engineering drawings as outlined in section 3.2.3(c)?

· Vendors will provide general engineering drawings that visually communicate how the robot functions and is constructed. A full tech data package is not required but drawings must be of sufficient detail that trained maintainers could repair the system. These drawings may be included in maintenance manuals or provided separately. Please see 252.227-7015.

103. The table in Section III.G. indicates that Small Business Participation and Price Sheet/ Pricing are both in Volume 3, even though they are different factors. Please confirm that Small Business Participation and Pricing should be combined into one volume.

· RFP corrected to indicate separate volumes.