Gov't Responses to Industry Draft RFP.docx

QUESTION/COMMENT

Paragraph 1.1 Basis for Contract Award The USG has determined LPTA is an appropriate approach to determine the source for this effort. PPT allows for the tradeoff of a higher price when good past performance is evident. Because the USG is familiar with all interested parties, the risk for negative past performance is low and therefore the USG does not feel it would benefit any further by utilizing a PPT source selection method.

CLINs 0001AA-0001AHF are used to price First Article and Production ILS equipment for each runway (i.e. Single/Dual Freq. Localizer, Null Ref./Capture-Effect Glideslope). Given the ATC facility ILS Status and Flight Check Radio equipment is only required per location or base, should there be a separate CLIN's for the location specific items?

If the government elects to use the existing draft CLIN structure in the final RFP, please clarify how the flight check radio and ILS Status equipment should be priced.

Solicitation: Section B, ILS SOW: 1.6.2, ILS Perf Spec: Table 3.4 MRS-27 & Table 3.5 IF-13 Only one radio is required per site. A separate CLIN for pricing purposes will be established on the official RFP.

Solicitation: Section B, The ILS SOW has been edited to provide clarification and will be attached in the official RFP release.

The descriptions in the Part I, Section B for first article CLIN's 0001AA-000AD do not correspond to the first article kits shown in ILS SOW 1.6.2.1. Please Clarify.

We concur with the first article kits shown in 1.6.2.1 given the Localizer and Glideslope systems operate independent of each other and installation/qualification of one of each type of Localizer and Glideslope (#1 Single Freq. Localizer, #2 Dual Freq. Localizer, #3 Null Ref. Glideslope, #4 Capture-Effect Glideslope) would demonstrate compliance with ILS Modernization requirements. We recommend that the Part I, Section B first article CLIN's correspond to the first article kits shown in ILS SOW 1.6.2.1 as follows:

CLIN 0001AA - 1st Kit: 5825K3122050A - Single Frequency Localizer

CLIN 0001AB - 2nd Kit: 5825K3122050B - Dual Frequency Localizer

CLIN 0001AC - 3rd Kit: 5825K3122050C - Null Reference Glideslope

CLIN 0001AD - 4th Kit: 5825K3122050D - Capture-Effect Glideslope

ILS SOW: 1.6.2.1

Solicitation: Section B, The ILS SOW and the CLIN Structure of the RFP will be edited to provide clarification.

SRD Table 3.11.1; SAF-4 CDRL package will reflect the correct DID at official RFP release.

No specific schedule for the procurement is provided. This lack of specificity creates a challenge for companies that are considering bidding because it is unclear when and what level of resources will be required.

Can the Government provide more detail or estimates for the final RFP and contract award?

General

NSR

Program Schedule

The schedule will be provided in the official release. However, depending on the number of systems ordered on each delivery order, a range of 3 to 4 per month delivery is anticipated.

No specific detail about POM funding for this program is provided. This makes it difficult for companies to assess the business case for the program.

Can the Government provide more detail or estimates for the program budget? Does the Government have an estimated "price point" for each installation?

General

NSR

Program Funding

USG estimates are based on a variety of sources which include industry responses to the RFI, Industry Day as well as previous government contracts, in addition to internal estimating procedures. The USG chooses not to share this information with industry in a competitive source selection.

The Government has included the Progress Payments Clause (52.232-16), but has not included the Invitation to Propose Performance Based Payments Clause (52.232-28). Per recent DoD Guidance regarding contracting financing terms, it is our understanding that Performance Based Payments are more preferred than Progress Payments.

Given this guidance, the Government should permit contractors to propose Performance Based Payments and incorporate FAR 52.232-28 in the Solicitation.

Solicitation/ Contract:

FAR 52.232-16

Progress Payments with Alt III

Performance Based Payments are acceptable and the appropriate clause will be included in the official release.

As the Fixed Base ILS contract is not expected to meet the $5000,000,000 value threshold identified in FAR 4.1401(a), this clause is not appropriately included.

Please delete this clause.

Solicitation/ Contract:

FAR 52.204-10

Reporting Subcontract Awards

The clause is mandatory IAW FAR 4.1403 as stated herein and cannot be deleted, “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.204-10 Reporting Executive Compensation and First-Tier Subcontract Awards, in all solicitations and contracts of $25,000 or more.

(b) The clause is not required in –

(1) Classified solicitations and contracts; or.

(2) Solicitations and contracts with individuals.”

Given the Government's desire for contractors to utilize the existing commercial data and components to the maximum extent possible and the fact that the acquisition will utilize Lower Price Technically Acceptable source selection procedures, we believe that the inclusion of FAR 52.219-16 is not appropriate for the Fixed Base ILS program.

Please delete this clause.

Solicitation/ Contract:

FAR 52.219-16

Liquidated Damages - Subcontracting Plan

The clause is mandatory IAW FAR 19.708(b)(2) as stated herein and cannot be deleted, “(2) Insert the clause at 52.219-16, Liquidated Damages --Subcontracting Plan, in all solicitations and contracts containing the clause at 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, or the clause with its Alternate I or II.

Given the Government's desire for contractors to utilize the existing commercial data and components to the maximum extent possible and the fact that the acquisition will utilize Lower Price Technically Acceptable source selection procedures, we believe that DFARS 252.246-7001 is not the best approach to achieve the Government's objectives, as delineated in DFARS 246.710(1).

The inclusion of DFARS 252.246-7001 is not appropriate for the Fixed Base ILS program; it should be removed and the Government's objective to obtain quality products that are free of defects be accomplished through maximum use of standard commercial warranties for commercial components and utilization of FAR 52.246-2 for items not covered under a commercial warranty.

Solicitation/ Contract:

DFARS 252.246-7001

Warranty of Data

The USG will consider removing this clause in lieu of the Inspections Clause upon release of the official RFP.

Remote equipment status shall be provided that is approved by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for use within a remote Air Traffic Control (ATC) location. The indicator shall also be the primary communication connection to the field equipment such that any available status, remote diagnostics or other communications should primarily connect through the ATC status indicator (other communications paths may exist).

Would the government consider changing "Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)" to read "competent civil aviation authority"?

Performance Specification

MRS-1

ATC Remote status indicator

The USG is unable to change from FAA to any other authority due to the fact that the FAA is the regulating body for USAF ATCALS.

For logging purposes, a real time, GPS clock/calendar incorporating at least date, hours, minutes, and seconds (time ≥ 6 digits) shall be provided to ensure date and time accuracy to within 1 minute a month.

The ILS equipment uses built-in digital clocks for time stamping events. The clocks can be synchronized to the clock in the RMM computer. A GPS clock should not be required if the accuracy requirement is only one minute per month. If GPS timing is required, the GPS clock could be installed at the RMC.

Performance Specification

MRS-18

Real Time Clock

GPS receiver is not required. This requirement will be removed.

The remote status and remote maintenance unit(s) shall provide eight hours of operations in the event that commercial power is lost. This includes communication access to the unit(s), such that remote maintenance personnel can still maintain the system within the eight hours.

The ILS is required to provide minimally via 56k-baud Hayes compatible modem (dialup) and TCP/IP Ethernet for status and diagnostics (ref GEN-1). The battery backup cannot support the communication network in the event of a power failure. Please clarify.

Performance Specification

MRS-28

Remote Status Power Interruption

The intent for the backup power is for the ILS equipment only.

A radio transceiver shall be provided capable of monitoring/receiving and transmitting VHF radio frequencies over the world-wide band of frequencies utilized for FAA flight check (118 to 138 MHz).

Is this a typo? The aeronautical VHF communication band is from 118-137 MHz. Standard radios do not provide coverage to 138 MHz.

Performance Specification

FCR-1

Two-way communication

USG concurs and the specification will be corrected to reflect 118 – 137 MHz upon release of the official RFP.

Price will be evaluated first and the proposals will be listed from lowest to highest price. The technical/management evaluation will be performed followed by the past performance evaluation, starting with the lowest evaluated price offeror. The first two proposals evaluated as technically acceptable with acceptable or neutral past performance will be considered the best value proposals and all other technical evaluations will cease.

Given D-ILS, which has similar RMM requirements, would the Government consider that this procurement should also be evaluated as best value?

Sec M

2.3 Evaluation Methodology

LCTA Evaluation

The USG has determined LPTA is an appropriate approach to determine the source for this effort. Because this is non-developmental, commercial-type systems, technical acceptability should be readily justified and the lowest price will provide the best value to the government.

Do you intend to provide a list of Data Elements required to support delivery of this CDRL? This DID is old (1997) and does not provide much in the way of specific guidance.

CDRL

A019 Supplemental Data For Provisioning

No additional information on this item is available. The DID is the most recent document available.

Do you intend to provide interested bidders access to the TOs anticipated to require updates?

CDRL

A022 Tech Order Updates

The government will scan to determine releasable information with regard to the T.O.’s and provide that info on CD format to interested parties upon request.

states, “….Also provide a discussion on the support equipment which will no longer be required as a result of the modification.”

Does the customer have a (general or specific) listing of the support equipment in use and approximate age?

Section L Paragraph 2.3, Subfactor C Support Equipment age

It is intended that the support equipment will be included in the Tech Orders; however age is not a factor and is not specified in the T.O.

Removal of old equipment and its disposition. It does say the system will be provided in working order but nothing about the removal of the old equipment.

Please clarify the government's intentions.

General

NSR

Removal of old equipment and its disposition.

The intent is that the old equipment should be removed in serviceable condition (piece parts) and turned in to local base supply. However this is subject to change and official disposition will be given by the PCO after contract award.

It is understood that the installation schedule will need to tightly coordinated between the government and contractor. However, clarifications of the responsibilities of installation scheduling should be addressed in the SOW. This program will have significant scheduling challenges with cost drivers if (when) delays or rescheduling occurs. This is compounded by the Flight Check requirements for each system acceptance that can be expected to cause delays and increased costs.

Please clarify the government's intentions.

General

NSR

Responsibilities of installation scheduling

It is expected that USAFE/PACAF sites will be accomplished first. However, this is subject to change. Offeror’s should propose appropriate risk within their pricing to accommodate for potential changes or disruptions.