Question_and_Answers.pdf

Industry Question and Answer

- Pre RFP Release –

Note: Comments in black and entitled “Question” are received from Industry. Comments in blue and entitled “Answer” are from the Government.

06 June 2017

Question 1: If there is an incumbent, could you please provide the contract number?

Answer 1: The incumbent is Booz Allen Hamilton. Contract Number: GS00Q09BGD0013 Order No:

ID07130047.

Question 2: The term, "a primary line of business," is ambiguous. Would the government please consider modifying paragraph 1.1.4 to read, "The contractor shall provide oversight of test system hardware and software component development and production programs. Therefore, the contractor shall not produce automated test systems or test program sets for sale, beyond the development of proof of concept and other prototypes."

Answer 2: Paragraph 1.1.3. of the PWS is revised to the following:

“Therefore, the contractor shall not engage in AIS test system hardware, software, or TPS development or production.”

Question 3: Please confirm that an OEM would not be eligible to serve as a prime contractor under this

RFP.

Answer 3: The OEMs are not permitted to serve as the Prime Contractor for this effort.

Question 4: May we get access to the technical data library, especially concerning the LM and BAE equipment? Even just user manuals or TOs?

Answer 4: A bidder’s library will be posted to FBO in the upcoming days.

Question 5: Would the AF consider making the OEMs mandatory or directed sources. This would greatly increase competition for this effort.

Answer 5: No. The role of the integrator includes determining the correct source for any given task while taking into consideration all aspects of sound configuration management.

Question 6: Would the government please consider renaming the column, “Proposal Volume,” and rename the column labeled “Technical Volume,” as “Paragraph Reference.”

Answer 6: Section L Table 2 – Sample Cross Reference Matrix is revised to the following:

Table 2 – Sample Cross Reference Matrix

Section L Section M PWS Technical

Volume

Para. X.x. Para. X.x. Para. X.x. Para. X.x.

Question 7: Will the Government consider revising the proposal submission means to require electronic submissions only to alleviate the cost, time, and print-over-pdf precedence burdens associated with paper submissions?

Answer 7: No, the Government considered this request and will continue to require "both a paper and electronic media" (Section L para 2.15.1.)

Question 8: Will the Government consider allowing submission in an uneditable format (pdf) to ensure the proposal is seen by the evaluator exactly as intended, without any unintentional changes introduced by the evaluators' Word doc settings?

Answer 8: No, the Government considered this request and will continue to require the details stated in

Section L para 2.23 as written.

Question 9: Please confirm the requirements listed in Section L for Volume I do not include a summary of the entire proposal.

Answer 9: Correct, Volume I - Executive Summary does not include a “summary of the entire proposal” rather the elements listed in the outline (Section L, para 3).

Question 10: Confirm that no estimate or pricing is required for Sample Tasks

Answer 10: Correct, no estimate or pricing is required for the stated Sample Tasks.

Question 11: Recommend the Government rewords to read "Data Requirements: show approach to develop a Test Plan, approach to develop all required Field Service Bulletins, and show that ATE data to be updated includes the following: specifications, Technical Orders, engineering data, provisioning documentation, and Calibration and Measurement Requirements Summary (CMRS)."

Answer 11: Section L, para 5.2.1.5. is revised to the following:

“Data Requirements: show approach to develop a Test Plan, approach to develop all required Field

Service Bulletins, and show that ATE data to be updated includes the following: specifications, Technical

Orders, engineering data, provisioning documentation, and Calibration and Measurement Requirements

Summary (CMRS).”

Question 12: Does this subparagraph mean ''evidence of approach to deliver 100% of Sample Task ...

CDRLs "?

Answer 12: The intent of Section L, para 5.2.1.7. is as written. No changes were made to this para.

Question 13: The RFP does not provide any definition of the "work" the successful offeror will perform in the first 45 days. Should offerors assume the work defined in our responses to the sample tasks is the only work occurring in the first 45 days?

Answer 13: No. Section M, para 5.6.1.1. and 5.6.1.2. refer to elements that need to be represented in the Transition Plan component of the overall Program Management Plan. The sample tasks are not awardable tasks expected to occur during the first 45 days. Transition of the program is expected to occur during the first 45 days. It is expected that there will be "work" required to accomplish the transition. Evidence of a plan and the ability to accomplish the work of transition is required.

Question 14: Recommend the Government rewords to read "Data Requirements: show approach to develop a Test Plan, approach to develop all required Field Service Bulletins, and show that ATE data to be updated includes the following: specifications, Technical Orders, engineering data, provisioning documentation, and Calibration and Measurement Requirements Summary (CMRS)."

Answer 14: Corrected. Section M, para 5.4.1.5 is revised. See Answer 11.

Question 15: Does this subparagraph mean ''evidence of approach to deliver 100% of Sample Task ...

CDRLs "?

Answer 15: See Answer 12.

Question 16: Will the government confirm the requirement for a table of labor categories and hours be included in the program management sections of the STO. How will the government evaluate what is

“proper?”

Answer 16: The Government has deleted this section of the USAF Sample Task.