14_May_2010 ktr questions.xls
XLS spreadsheet 84 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Maintenance, Repair, and Rebuilding of Equipment
- Solicitation number
- FA8223-10-R-0130
About this file
Responses to contractor questions
View the file
Other files
Show all 46
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
Sheet1
| Definitization | |||||
| Technical | |||||
| Contractor | Document/PAGE | PARAGRAPH | LINE | Questions | GOVERNMENT RESPONSE |
| FS | CDRL B004 (Waiver request) is quoted in PWS 1.2.3 for MEL waivers to be approved by the PO/QAR. 1) Does the Government really intend for the contractor to go through the CDRL submission process in order to have the local PO/QAR approve a MEL waiver, normally done on the spot (or nearly so) in real time? 2) Note that waiver requests are for permanent non-compliance, whereas Requests for Deviation (DI-CMAN-80640C) is for a temporary condition (“specific number of units for a specified period of time”). | Yes, the government requires a formal CDRL request for waiver submitted to the PCO, the realtime approval will be verbal. | |||
| FS | CDRL B004 is also quoted in PWS Section 1.1.3.5 (5th bullet) as the means by which a waiver would be granted by the Government for a non-qualified student to enter a replacement course. If the contractor is to generate the waiver request, by what means, and with what timeliness will the contractor know without uncertainty that a student in not qualified for a replacement course? | ||||
| FS | PWS Section 5.3.1, IMP Table - 3.6 Systems Engineering Management includes a SEMS. By current management practices, the SEMS has been replaced by the tabular IMP. The data in a SEMS would normally be expanded into IMP Events, Accomplishments, Criteria table as is required for IMP Section 2. Is it reasonable to cross reference SEMS events (e.g., for design reviews, test completions, audits) to the corresponding item in IMP Section 2? | ||||
| FS | Section L, Paragraph 3.1, Page 9 of 12 states “A draft IMP shall be provided IAW the CDRL requirement A007 as Appendix B addressing the requirements of PWS section 5.3.1.” What is the relationship between the IMP, CDRL A008 and the Management Plan? |
a. Note PWS Section 5.3.1, IMP Table: Section 3.20 (the Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) Control Program), references PWS Paragraph 10.1 where the same plan is called for as part of CDRL A008.
| b. Note the (unnumbered) 1423 sheet refers to a four part management plan that includes the Training, HR, Transition and relocation plans listed in Table 5.3.1- 1 as part of the IMP. | Added A008 to PWS Para 5.3.1 (IMP) for inclusion of the additional plans to Appendix B (Draft IMP). Added A008 to Section L Instructions for delivery of Appendix B. The NEED TO DISCUSS WITH RICHARD | ||
| FS | PWS Annex C, Table C-5, item 5B: does “Frame 2 Capacity” equate to polygons per channel or some other non-product specific measure of performance? | ||
| FS | DRFP Section B – CLIN 1028 heading states “Yokota” in place of “Ramstein”. | Updated in Draft RFP posted 23 Mar 2010 | |
| FS | DRFP Section B – CLIN 1029 there is a discrepancy between the CLIN heading and CLIN text description; “Remote Site TBD Operations” vs. “ Option CLIN – C-130 ATS DMO Support” | Updated in Draft RFP posted 23 Mar 2010 | |
| FS | DRFP Section B – CLINs 1043 & 1044 are duplicates titled “Relocation of WST in excess of 50 miles.” | Updated in Draft RFP posted 23 Mar 2010 | |
| FS | DRFP Section B – CLINs 2062 & 2063 are duplicates titled “Option CLIN - Elmendorf Operations” | Updated in Draft RFP posted 23 Mar 2010 | |
| FS | PWS paragraph 2.2, titled Training Management System, states: The current TMS will be provided as GFE. However, it does not currently have the capability to interact with automated courseware and courseware authoring systems. The expectation is that capability be added to the TMS. In our experience the courseware and authoring system interface and interact with the Learning Management System (LMS). Please clarify if the term “TMS” stated above is used in lieu of LMS? Is there an existing LMS and if so, is it Government-owned? | No, TMS is not used in lieu of LMS. There is no LMS currently in place. | |
| FS | Throughout the PWS, there are references to “CDRL C012”. However, CDRL C012 it is not listed in paragraph 2.1.7.5, titled Data Deliverables | References to CDRL C012 have removed from the PWS. | |
| FS | The following CLINs reflect the period of performance as 1 Jan 2015 – 31 Dec 2015 but all other 7000 series CLINs reflect a period of performance of 1 Jan 2017 – 31 Dec 2017. Could the Government please clarify? CLIN 7002, 7003, 7005, 7006, 7017, 7043 | Updated in Solicitation Dated 6 May 2010 | |
| FS | CLIN 8062 reflects a period of performance of 1 Jan 2015 – 31 Dec 2015 but all other 8000 series CLINs reflect a period of performance of 1 Jan 2018 – 31 Dec 2018. Could the Government please clarify? | Updated in Solicitation Dated 6 May 2010 | |
| FS | Reference CLIN price summary worksheet and Section B: CLIN price summary file, under FTU CLIN Tab, the Period of Performance (POP) for Dobbins FTU, CLIN X017 is listed as FY10-FY14 however both the CLIN price summary worksheet and Section B show this CLIN active through the end of the contract, Dec 2018. Would the Government please clarify the POP for Dobbins FTU? | The POP for Dobbins FTU was updated in the RFP posted 6 May 10 to read Op yr 1-8 and eliminated FY10-14. | |
| FS | Reference CLIN price summary worksheet and Section B. Would the Government please clarify if Dobbins ARB continuation training (AMP) under CLIN price summary file, CT CLINs tab should be priced under CLIN X018 or X019? | ||
| FS | Reference Section L, titled Proposal Preparation Instructions, paragraph 1.5 titled Organization, page 298, reads: For digital files: |
e. Submit any Microsoft Project files in Microsoft Project 2003. There are no special “save” functions required for later versions of Project.”
However, item 7 reads”
| “7. As an exception, the IMS full Microsoft Project file shall be in the native Microsoft Project 2007 “.mpp” format or other compatible software.”. Can the Government please provide clarification regarding the version of Microsoft Project to be used when submitting any Microsoft Project files? | The RFP posted 23 March 2010 contained instructions for use of MS Project 2007. | ||
| FS | Reference Section L, titled Proposal Preparation Instructions, paragraph 4.1.1 titled Past Performance Information Sheets (PPIS) (Section 3a), page 305, reads:“The offeror has discretion in determining the most beneficial mix and quantity of contracts by prime offeror, key partners, or subcontractors covering as many of these elements as is practical. A minimum of five (5) contracts shall be for the prime offeror and if less than ten (10) relevant contracts are submitted, the contractor shall specifically state and acknowledge its number is less than the ten (10) it could submit.”. | ||
| Given the number of contracts required to be submitted by the prime, this limits the number of contracts that can be submitted by key partners and subcontractors. Would the Government consider reducing the minimum contracts submission (5) requirement for the prime to allow key partners and subcontractors to submit a sufficient number to support evaluation of their past performance or reduce the number of contracts required to be submitted by the prime? | The government will post the updated requirement of prime past performance contracts to be submitted with PPIS IAW Section L Para 4.1.1. VALIDATE ANSWER | ||
| FS | Reference PWS paragraph 0.3, titled Applicable Documents, reads: “The contractor shall utilize the following documents referenced herein as guides in performance of specific tasks under this PWS (each is referenced in the applicable PWS paragraph):” However, the following documents are referenced in the PWS and not listed in Table 0.3-1 titled “Referenced Government Documents”. DOD 8570.01-M AFI 33-200DODI 8510.01 AFI 33-210 | ||
| DODI 8500.2 T.O. 00-20-1. Please clarify by adding these documents to the list of Applicable Documents or by deleting the subject documents from the applicable PWS paragraph(s). | The PWS was updated to include the referenced documents and included in the RFP posted 6 May 10. | ||
| FS | Reference PWS paragraph 1.4, titled “Curriculum Requirements” reads: “The contractor shall perform the following tasks, at a minimum, for new or modified courseware: j. Demonstrate that developed courseware runs successfully on a sponsor-designated SCORM conformant LMS/LCMS. m. Provide the capability to automate configuration management functions (versioning and history). The LCMS, once implemented by the contractor, will provide this feature.” Item j. indicates the sponsor will provide a SCORM conformant LMS/LCMS. However, item m. makes reference to the contractor implementing a LCMS. Can the Government please provide clarification regarding the use of the term “sponsor” and who will be responsible for providing an LMS/LCMS? | PWS para 1.4 (j) was re-worded to remove the word sponsor and was posted with the Draft RFP on 23 March 2010. | |
| FS | Reference PWS Paragraph 2.1.1.1, titled TSSC Functions, sub-item “w”, page 20, reads: “ w. Maintain and prevent obsolescence issues with Information Technology at all ATS locations, Government program management staff (AMC/A3TR/A and AFMC/SPO), AMCAOS Detachment 3, and 714TRS. This shall include compatible OS systems for courseware review and other contractor to Government electronic communications.”. Can the Government please provide a list of information technology equipment the contractor will be responsible for at each of the referenced ATS locations? | ||
| FS | PWS paragraph 2.1.8.2, titled Responsibility for Inspection, reads: “The contractor shall be responsible for planning, conducting, and successfully completing all tests, inspections, and evaluations necessary to fulfill the requirements of this specification. (CDRL B021)” Can the Government please clarify the reference to “… this specification.”? | ||
| FS | PWS paragraph 2.2, titled Training Management System, reads: “The current TMS will be provided as GFE. However, it does not currently have the capability to interact with automated courseware and courseware authoring systems. The expectation is that capability be added to the TMS.” Question: Typically, it is the Learning Management System (LMS) that interacts with automated courseware and courseware authoring systems versus a TMS. Can the Government clarify the requirement for the contractor to provide the capability for the TMS to interact with automated courseware and courseware authoring systems? | ||
| FS | PWS paragraph 4.1, titled Scope, second paragraph, third sentence, reads: “ The contractor shall propose an approach detailing how they will work as a directed sub-contractor on an aircraft contract.” Can the Government clarify the requirement for the contractor to work as a directed sub-contractor on an aircraft contract? | ||
| FS | PWS paragraph 4.1.1.1, titled “Visual System Upgrade reads: “When this option modification is exercised by the Government, the contractor shall upgrade image generators, projection systems, and provide TSSC database generation system tools in accordance with Annex C.” However, Annex C, paragraph 2.3 reads: |
“2.3 The VSR Database and Image Generator upgrades will produce improved scene density and eliminate calligraphic lights. Therefore, a display upgrade is required.”
Can the Government clarify the requirement to provide a display upgrade?
| FS | PWS paragraph 4.1.1.1, titled Visual System Upgrade, reads: “When this option modification is exercised by the Government, the contractor shall upgrade image generators, projection systems, and provide TSSC database generation system tools in accordance with Annex C.” Paragraph 4.2, titled General Modification Requirements, and its subparagraphs, addresses all of the requirements associated with a modification. However, none of the subparagraphs make specific reference to the visual system upgrade modification except for paragraph 4.4. titled Documentation, which states: “The modification Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) in Table 2.1.7.5-1 includes the preliminary data items in support of the C-130 ATS II Visual Modification.” Can the Government please clarify the requirement to specifically address the visual system upgrade when providing a response to the requirements contained in paragraphs 4.2 through 4.6? | |
| FS | PWS paragraph 4.4, titled Documentation, second to last sentence, reads: “The Contractor shall deliver the following data items to the Government in accordance with the initial delivery and frequency outlined in Table 2.1.7.5.-1.” The list of data items to be delivered was not provided. Can the Government please provide the data items? | A001, A002, B001 thru B021 if applicable. PWS paragraph 4.4 will be updated to reflect this. |
| FS | Question: Would the Government please provide the Section L Attachments in MS WORD? Currently these files are in Adobe Acrobat and cannot be filled in/modified. | The contract writing system automatically posts all documents in an Adobe format. A "Word" copy will be post on FBO as requested. |
| FS | PWS paragraph 2.1.7.5 list the following CDRLS |
C001 Training Situation Document (Courseware ISD) DI-SESS-81517B C002 Instructional Performance Requirements (Courseware ISD Instructor) DI-SESS-81518B C003 Instructional Media Requirements Document DI-SESS-81519B C004 Instructional Media Design Package (Courseware Design Documentation) DI-SESS-81520B C005 Training Program Structure Document (ISD Resources) DI-SESS-81521B NOT 1/T However, paragraphs 13.4.1 – 13.4.4 reference CDRL C007 and C010.
| These CDRLs are not listed on the master CDRL list. Please Clarify. | C006 and C007 will be added to Table 2.1.7.5-1. PWS paragraph 13.4 and its sub-paragraphs will be updated to reflect this. | |
| FS | Section L states that the PPIS (Attachment L-1) will be used to submit information. Section L also states that the hard copies of the pages generated from the past performance information tool (i.e. MS Access) are to be used in the hard copy of the past performance volume. |
Does the Government want hard copies of both means of reporting information?
| Does the Government intend to limit the use of CBA pricing in accordance with FAR 22.1002-3 including flatlining in the out years to just the Section J Attachment 3 Fixed rate table, OR should the labor rates used to establish the prices for all proposal CLINs listed in Atch4CLINSummary17Mar10.xlsx and Section B also be accordance with FAR 22.1002-3 including flatlining in the out years, as well? | Yes, Please see updated RFP FA8223-10-R-0130 Section L page 303 |
| There was not any Direct language regarding the use of CBAs instead of WDs. Please clarify. | Please see updated RFP FA8223-10-R-0130 Section L page 303 |
| Why is there more SCA clauses relating back to 22.106 description, but no expanisn direclty basck to 22.1002? Please Clarify. | There is a reference to FAR 22.1002 on page 302. Clauses relating to FAR 22. 1002 are perscribed in FAR 22.1006 and are therefore listed on page 278 of the RFP. |
| In attachment 7, Rev History I came across what I assume to be the previous contract # F42630-99-C-0195. Is this the follow on for that contract? | Attachment 7 is the Logistics Support package. This is a follow on for the FA8223-10-C-0005 and previously F42630-99-C-0195. |
| In FPDS contract # F42630-99-C-0195 is reported to be over 400m, assuming the new contract is the follow on, is it safe to assume that the new contract is going to have a similar value range? | Yes it will be consistant with the previous contract based on fluctuations in student throughput, training requirements, and inflation. |
| When researching contract # F42630-99-C-0195 in FBO, I found an award notice from 2003 indicating a total value of around $96,000, is this the value of one task order? | This is a C type contract there are no task orders on this contract. Please clarify your questions. |
Sheet2
Sheet3
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .