Question Set 1.doc
DOC document 72 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Aircraft Components and Accessories
- Solicitation number
- FA8106-09-R-0007
View the file
Other files
Show all 33
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Question Set 1 for RFP FA8106-09-R-0007
| Question # |
| RFP QUESTIONS |
| ANSWER |
| 1 |
| Reference Section L page 67 of 106 paragraph 2.2.6.2. What section of the proposal should contain the requested Cross Referencing Matrix (CRM) and does it count against the total page count? |
| It should be included as an attachment to the Model Contract since it relates to the entire proposal. It will not count against the page count limitation of the technical volume. |
| 2 |
| Reference Section L page 71 of 106 paragraph 4.2.7. Is it acceptable to include the required IMP and IMS as an attachment to the Model Contract as described in paragraph 7.3.6? |
| The IMP and IMS are mentioned in table 2.2 as not being limited to the 150 page count. The IMP and IMS will be attached to the technical volume and adhering to all requirements in Section L for font and line spacing. |
| 3 |
| Reference SRD paragraph 3.2.4.4.12. We understand the Air Force is currently procuring new Cockpit Voice Recorders (CVRs) for the KC-10. Should we assume that the incoming aircraft will have a CVR capable of recording datalink messages or should we include the cost of a new CVR as part of the CNS/ATM program? |
| The CVRs will already be installed on the KC-10s which will be modified on this contract. New part number is 2100-1025-22 which provides a minimum of two (2) hours of recording time. |
| 4 |
| Reference Appendix C. Are the contractor's flight and ground procedures---approved by the DCMA-provided Government Flight Representatives (GFR)---considered satisfactory evidence of compliance with the USAF referenced benchmark publications listed in Appendix C? |
| The contractors’ ground and flight procedures must comply with USAF referenced benchmark publications listed in Appendix C. |
| 5 |
| Reference SOO paragraph 5.3.5. In reviewing DODI 5000.02 it is noted that an Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) is only called out in Table 5, Enclosure 4 as being required for Cost/Incentive contracts. In addition, section 4.3.2.4.2 of the Defense Acquisition Handbook states "Program managers should use the IBR throughout the program when Earned Value Management is required." Since the KC-10 CNS/ATM program is a FFP contract it does not seem appropriate to require an IBR. Can the requirement to conduct an IBR be removed? |
| The requirement will be retained for the IBR and notify the offeror’s that the IBR will not include EVM or cost reporting. The IBR will address technical, schedule, resources and risk. Also the initial IBR will be accomplished as soon as feasible after approved Preliminary Design Review (PDR). |
| 6 |
| Reference SRD Section 3.2.6.2. The requirement to display "flight mode annunciators" on the CNS/ATM install displays does not appear to be a CNS/ATM requirement. The existing flight mode annunciators are a component of the current Autoflight system and any work done now to incorporate the annunciators will likely be removed when the Autoflight system is upgraded in a future spiral. Since this requirement seems to be outside of the program goals "Red Box" presented at Industry day, will the Air Force consider removing this requirement from the CNS/ATM SRD? |
| Concur that this requirement is not a CNS/ATM requirement and recommend deleting from the SRD. This appears to be para 3.2.6.3 instead of 3.2.6.2 |
| 7 |
| SOO paragraph 5.6.6.5 states: “Develop and deliver an appropriate ATD initial spares package for each modified device to support the 98 percent device availability requirement. (CDD Threshold)”. Section B and the CLIN pricing matrix state that spares are not to be priced. This appears to be in conflict with the SOO requirement. Section M, 6. Factor 3 – Cost/Price states “The overall evaluated proposal price will be calculated as the sum of all CLIN extended price total for all years, excluding any Not Separately Priced (NSP) or To Be Negotiated (TBN) CLINs.” Ref RFP page 98 -105 For complete details on CLIN quantities. Additionally, the “Initial Spares” CLINs state “To Be Negotiated”, so should not be priced as noted above. Also SRD 3.9.2.5 (and referenced by Section L & M Subfactor 5 (c)]: Spares. The contractor shall ensure initial spares are in place not later than 90-days prior to first aircraft delivery. Please clarify the Government's position on the pricing of spares. |
| The intent with having the “spares” as TBN was based on the unknown of the solution set. The SRD will be changed to reflect relief on the “90-days” requirement. Also, “Spares” will not be evaluated under the Section L&M Subfactor 5(c). Gov’t will request a proposal for spares (TBN) after recommended spares list is delivered. |
| 8 |
| SOO paragraphs 5.6.6.8 through 5.6.6.8.4 state: “5.6.6.8 FTD and WST modification schedules simultaneously support aircrew training for fielded legacy and CNS/ATM modified operations as required during fleet conversion. (CDD Threshold)” “5.6.6.8.1. No more than one FTD or WST down for modification at any time.” “5.6.6.8.2. Development of All KC-10 CNS/ATM ATD accomplished during EMD.” “5.6.6.8.3. The first FTD will be modified during EMD.” “5.6.6.8.4. The first WST delivered with the seventh production aircraft.” SRD paragraph 3.7.3.1 states: “Aircrew Training System requirements shall include the modification of two (2) existing Flight Training Devices (FTD) and four (4) Weapons System Trainers (WST). For the CNS/ATM modification, the ATDs shall be the primary source of aircrew training. One (1) FTD and one (1) WST shall be modified to the aircraft KC-10 CNS/ATM Program configuration to provide initial squadron aircrew difference training (THRESHOLD).” SRD paragraph 3.7.3.1 (underlined) appears to be in conflict with SOO paragraphs 5.6.6.8 - 5.6.6.8.4. Please clarify which approach provides the correct guidance. |
| SOO paragraphs are correct. SRD para 3.7.3.1 is not in conflict. Depending on offerors’s aircraft delivery schedule, difference training could continue up to IOC. Difference training will start with the 1st a/c using the FTD and will continue with difference training using the WST when it is delivered at the time of the 7th a/c until all crews have received difference training. |
| 9 |
| In the SRD, requirement 3.2.2.4.1 (page 7) states: "....shall provide...including coupled vertical navigation....." In the previous version of this requirement, the "shall" was a "should". Given the direction from the government that an autopilot upgrade was not part of this program, please confirm if VNAV coupling is a firm requirement. |
| VNAV coupling is not a requirement. (para SRD 3.2.2.4.1) SRD will be revised with RFP amendment to delete: "including coupled vertical navigation" |
| 10 |
| Please clarify where the Technical Publications efforts should be bid as there is no obvious place for us to allocate the costs. We normally place this against the Data CLIN (0005 in this case), but this CLIN is flagged as "Amount: Not Separately Priced" and is colored tan in the attached CLIN Pricing Matrix and is removed from the CLIN pricing description shown in Section M, 6. Factor 3 – Cost/Price of the solicitation |
| Cost shall be included in the CLIN where the work will be accomplished |
| 11 |
| Please clarify what certification efforts go against the Test/Eval/Cert CLIN; aircraft only, or aircraft and LRUs. |
| All required certifications go in CLIN 0003. |
| 12 |
| Please clarify where to allocate the kits (Group A & B) for the test vehicles; CLIN 0001 EMD, 0002 Mod Test Vehicle, or 0003 Test/Eval/Cert. |
| CLIN 0002 Mod Test Vehicle |
| 13 |
| Please provide clarification on the color coding on the CLIN Pricing Matrix attached to the RFP; are the tan-colored cells not to be filled in (turns a number of CLINs into No Bid CLINs), or should this be interpreted some other way? |
| No pricing required in the tan-colored cells. |
| 14 |
| Reference: Section L, pages 67 and 68 of 106, 2.3 (a) (b) (c) Page Size and Format |
Background: 2.3(a) “Page line spacing shall be 1.5 lines.”
2.3(b) “For charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no less than Arial 8. For tables, the text shall be no less than Arial 10.”
2.3(c) “Pages, tables, charts, graphs, and figures that do not comply with the stated format in paragraph (a) and (b) above will be estimated for page count, based on the correct paper size, margins, text size and font.”
Question: Is single line spacing for titles, tables, charts, graphs, (including IMS, CSOW, and IMP) figures, and captions acceptable?
In accordance with the wording in Section L, pages 67 and 68, para 2.3(a)(b) & (c), all pages, tables, charts, graphs and figures must comply with the stated format. The CSOW is an attachment to the model contract (see Section L para 7.3.6., page 77) and not limited to page count. The IMS and IMP are to be attachments to the technical volume and are not included in the 150 page count per table 2.2, page 65. All attachments must comply with the font size and line spacing as stated in the instructions.
Reference: Section L, page 68 of 106, 2.3 (a) (b) (c) Page Size and Format
Background: 2.3(a) “Page line spacing shall be 1.5 lines.”
“Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than Arial 12 point.”
2.3(b) “For charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no less than Arial 8. For tables, the text shall be no less than Arial 10.”
2.3(c) “Pages, tables, charts, graphs, and figures that do not comply with the stated format in paragraph (a) and (b) above will be estimated for page count, based on the correct paper size, margins, text size and font.”
| Question: When compared to Arial 10 point, 1.5 spacing, the mandated Arial 12, 1.5 spacing consumes approximately 45% more space. Would the Government revise the font size requirement for proposal text to 10 point Arial in order to more effectively respond to the RFP requirements. Additionally, revising the font requirement from Arial 12 to Arial 10 would save paper in those sections without page restrictions. |
| Requirement is as stated in Section L. |
| 16 |
| Reference: Section L, page 65 of 106, 2.2.2 |
Background: “A Team List of the Offeror’s primary Point of Contacts shall be submitted in each volume…” Question: Is it required that a Team List be included in the Executive Summary and Cost/Price volumes?
In accordance with section L, para. 2.2.2 the team list is required for the Executive Summary and the Cost/Price volumes.
| 17 |
| Reference: Section L, page 66 of 106, Table 2.2, Vol. V |
Background: “Team List Attach 2.0 (Not included in 65 page limit)” Question: What is the “65 page limit” referencing?
“(Not included in 65 page limit)” is a clerical error and should not be considered. It will be removed when the amendment is posted.
| 18 |
| Reference: RFP, CLIN 006, Page 6 of 106; RFP, CLIN 1016, Page 12 of 106; RFP, CLIN 1019, Page 13 of 106 |
Background: CLIN 0006 includes Aircrew Training Device (ATD) Non-Recurring Engineering for Weapons System Trainer (WST) and Flight Training Device (FTD); and delivery of one FTD in FY12. CLIN 1016 starting in FY12 includes delivery of one WST in FY13. CLIN 1019 starting in FY12 includes ATD spares for FTD and WST to be delivered in FY13.
Question: How will the FTD delivered in FY12 be spared until the CLIN 1019 ATD Spares are delivered in FY13 without an ATD spares CLIN in Engineering and Manufacturing Design?
There will be no contract provisions for spares to support the first FTD until initial spares are awarded in FY12. Lead time for FTD delivery and initial spares delivery depends on the offeror’s solution.
Reference: RFP, CLINs Option Year 4, Beginning on Page 31 of 106
Background: Option year 4 does not include CLINs for Travel, and Over & Above
Question: How will the contractor travel costs be reimbursed in Option Year 4?
It was perceived that travel would not be required in the last production year.
| 20 |
| Reference: RFP, CLINs Option Year 4, Beginning on Page 31 of 106 |
Background: Option year 4 does not include CLINs for Travel, and Over & Above Question: How will Over & Above costs be funded in Option Year 4?
An Over & Above CLIN was not perceived as being required in option year 4.
| 21 |
| Reference: RFP, CLINs EMD, Beginning on Page 4 of 106 |
Background: EMD does not include a CLIN for Over & Above Question: How will Over & Above be funded during EMD?
Over & Above was not perceived as being required in EMD.
| 22 |
| Reference: Statement of Objectives (SOO) paragraph 5.3.5 Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) includes a subparagraph: 5.3.5.1. Initial IBR as soon as feasible but not later than one month after contract award….. |
Background: The conference that is normally conducted “as soon as feasible but not later than one month after contract award” is the Post Award Conference (PAC) and the IBR is normally later than the Post Award Conference in order for the contractor and Government to meet all of the requirements of the “The Program Managers' Guide to the Integrated Baseline Review Process”.
Question: Can the contractor provide a Post Award Conference “as soon as feasible but not later that one month after contract award and then an IBR after the PAC?
SOO para 5.3.5 will be rewritten to adjust the time frame for conducting an IBR as referenced in question above.
| 23 |
| Reference: Aircraft Site Survey at Travis AFB |
Background: Upper fuselage exterior and some interior areas related to existing antenna installations were not accessible during the survey. During discussion with KC-10 program personnel, it was indicated that photos of the existing upper fuselage antennas and an antenna study would be made available to bidders to clarify requirements related to proposal requirements for antenna location and compatibility.
Question: Please provide photos, antenna study, and related information as soon as possible but no later than June 12, for utilization during proposal preparation.
The EMC COSITE ANALYSIS for GATM report was posted to FBO 6/11/09
Reference: SRD 3.2.4.2 Voice Communications
Background: SRD 3.2.4.2 does not reference the desired frequency range of operation.
Question: What is the required frequency range of operation for VHF communications so that a suitable antenna can be selected?
Current capability is 116.000 through 152.000 MHz. Cannot degrade current capability.
| 25 |
| Reference: SRD 3.2.4.2.1.7 |
Background: “The KC-10 VHF fade margin shall be 10db at a LOS range of 200 NM.” Antenna selection is dependant on whether the 200 NM range is required across the entire operating band.
Question: Does the 200 NM range requirement apply across the entire VHF operating frequency band?
As stated, this requirement applies across the entire frequency band.
| 26 |
| Reference: SOO, Paragraph 1.3.1 |
Background: States that IOC includes the capability of the Aircrew Training System (ATS) to instruct all phases of aircrew training. However, the paragraph specifically identifies only three phases: Differences, Refresher and Initial Qualification training.
Question: Please confirm that this specific listing is not meant to exclude the capability to instruct other phases (e.g. Pilot Checkout Course, Requalification, Senior Officer Course and any Flight Engineer courses paired with affected pilot courses).
SOO para 1.3.1 specifically states that ATS will have the capability to instruct all phases of aircrew training. The three phases identified: Difference, refresher and Initial qualification training are not listed to limit ATS capability but are specific development requirements of this program.
| 27 |
| Reference: SOO, Paragraph 1.3 |
Background: SOO, Paragraph 1.3 states that two (2) FlightViz Debrief Tools are included in the modification if affected.
Question: Please confirm that this is meant to include all four (4) of the Weapon System Trainers (WSTs).
SOO para 1.3 states “Additionally, the following shall be included four (4) Weapon Systems Trainers (WSTs) and two (2) Flight Training Devices (FTDs). If the CNS/ATM modification affects the 11 Aircrew System Trainers (AST), two (2) FlightViz Debrief Tools, five (5) FMS Table Top Trainer and oil skin cockpit diagrams, these tools shall be included.” As stated all four (4) WSTs are included.
Reference: SRD 3.2.4.2.9.1
Background: “The KC-10 shall transmit and receive Satellite Communications (SATCOM) voice and data messages at each flight deck crew station.”
All other SATCOM data communications transmit receive access apply to the pilot/copilot only.
Question: Please clarify if this requirement also applies only to the pilot/copilot or is intended to include the Flight Engineer assuming that no legacy data communications (such as Iridium and UHF SATCOM) at the Flight Engineer’s station will be impacted.
(Referenced SRD para number in question is in error) Correct para number is 3.2.4.2.1.9. Paragraph will be changed to delete “and data messages”.
| 29 |
| Reference: SRD 3.2.4.4.12 |
Background: “CPDLC messages shall be recorded in Crash Survival Memory per FAA AC 20-160, Onboard Recording of CPDLC in Crash Survivable Memory.” The existing flight data & voice recorders are not compatible with the requirement to record the CPDLC messages and will require replacement and are also identified as obsolescence/maintainability issues.
Question: Please clarify if it the intent of the USAF to retrofit the existing flight data and cockpit voice recorders prior to aircraft induction to the CNS/ATM modifications and what replacement equipment would be incorporated.
The KC-10 FDR and CVR have the capability to record this data. We recently replaced our CVR with a unit that has the capability to record Datalink messages. Be sure to read AC 20-160 to determine where messages need to be recorded.
| 30 |
| Reference: SOO 5.1.3.4, 5.1.3.4.1, 5.1.3.4.2 |
Background: SOO 5.1.3.4. Kit Installation. Offeror responsible for access to FAA certified facilities to accomplish the installation of the KC-10 CNS/ATM modification kit.
SOO 5.1.3.4.1. Facilities that provide sufficient footprint to accomplish installation of all KC-10 aircraft within the schedule requirements to meet the established IOC and FOC dates as well as accommodate a maximum of five (5) aircraft in the installation process at any given time.
SOO 5.1.3.4.2. CNS/ATM modification not accomplished in conjunction with Program Depot Maintenance (PDM) or at any military or Government facility.
Question: Although not worded as a complete sentence, the requirement in SOO 5.1.3.4.2 appears to preclude performing the CNS/ATM modification in conjunction with Program Depot Maintenance (PDM), which results in a stand-alone mod with up to 5 aircraft down at any given time. That, combined with 3 aircraft in PDM, will result in 8 aircraft out of service. Other considerations are duplicated receipt, access, closure and delivery requirements that will drive up costs.
Will the customer revise 5.1.3.4.2 to allow the Offeror to properly manage depot throughput while maintaining a maximum of five (5) aircraft in flow for combined PDM and CNS/ATM modifications?
As the SOO states, KC-10 CNS/ATM is a standalone modification and will not be combined with PDM. Will clarify SOO para 5.1.3.4.1: There can be no more than five (5) aircraft down for modification at any time.
Reference: SRD 3.2.4.2.1.7
Background: “The KC-10 VHF fade margin shall be 10db at a LOS range of 200 NM.” SRD does not specify whether this requirement for 10 dB fade margin at a LOS range of 200 NM applies to voice or data communications, or both.
Question: Does the 10 dB fade margin at a LOS range of 200 NM apply for voice communications, data communications, or both?
SRD para 3.2.4.2.1.7 will be deleted.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .