FA852512R31240______0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

JS

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

FA8525-12-R-31240-0001

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

FD20601231240

5. PROJECT NO (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE

WR ALC GRSKA, C-5 GALAXY DIVISION

235 BYRON ST BLDG 300 STE 19A

CP 478 926 6501

ROBINS AFB GA 31098-1670

BUYER: Donald J. Lyles/GRSKA Donald.Lyles@robins.af.mil Phone: (478) 926- 0552 No Collect Calls

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6) CODEFA8525

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

CODE

X

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

FA852512R31240

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

19-APR-2012

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended. Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods. ( a ) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; ( b ) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or ( c ) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return 1 copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

ROUTINE

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

BY ________________________________________________________

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY ____________________________________________________

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

FACILITY CODE

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE

30-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

PRESCRIBED BY GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

X

X X

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

Amendment/Modification FA8525-12-R-31240-0001

Continuation of block 14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate a revised Section L - Instructions to Offerors and to provide answers to RFP questions.

a. Section L - Instructions to Offerors, dated 3 May 2012, is attached and replaces Section L - Instructions to Offerors, dated 16 April 2012.

b. Travel CLINs X002 and Material CLINs X003 are not required to be priced as part of Volume I.

These CLINs will not be included in the total evaluated price.

c. All questions received have been answered as follows:

1. On the C-5 Engineering Requirements Review (ERR) Program, Solicitation Number: FA8525-12-R-31240, will the Government supply labor categories and their associated target hours for the FFP portion of the basic and options?

Answer: No, the vendor shall include this information as part of the proposal.

2. Will the Government provide a Microsoft Word version of the FACTS Sheet?

Answer: The Government has provided a Microsoft Word version of the FACTS Sheet within the attached revised Section L.

3. The draft version of the RFP stated that the contractor was required to support the RISOs. The wording has been changed in the latest RFP that makes this requirement unclear. Is supporting RISOs still a requirement of this RFP?

Answer: Yes, the effort will include supporting the RISO.

4. What are the materials that the government will be requiring the contractor to provide under CLIN 0003?

Answer: This CLIN is for the contractor to propose any special materials that may be necessary to support ERR efforts.

5. Are the offerors required to price the cost reimbursable Travel (CLIN 0002) and Contractor Furnished Parts/Materials (CLIN 0003)?

Answer: The Government does not require the Travel (CLINs X002) or Contractor Furnished Parts/Materials (CLINs X003) to be priced as part of the proposal as both are to be cost reimbursable no fee CLINs. These CLINs will not be included in the total evaluated price and will be funded as necessary upon award.

6. Are the offerors required to price the data reports in CLINs 0004 AA-AF separately?

Answer: No, the data CLINs can be priced separately or not separately priced.

7. DoD 8570.01-M, Information Assurance Workforce Improvement Program, is listed as an Applicable Document in Appendix A of the PWS. In the PWS paragraph 4.8.2 and ATTACHMENT #1, Present/Past Performance "FACTS Sheet," only the Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) is listed for Information Assurance Management (IAM) level 3 and Information Assurance Technical (IAT) level 3. Per DoD 8570.01-M, GLSC, CISM and CISSP are authorized certifications for IAM-3 and CISA, GSE, SCNA and CISSP are authorized certifications for IAT-3. Why does the Present/Past Performance "FACTS Sheet" only list CISSP as an acceptable certification and will the other authorized certifications be accepted per DoD 8570?

Answer: Yes, any certification that meets IAM-3/IAT-3 requirements per DoD 8570.01 is adequate.

8. The Enterprise Mission Assurance Support System (eMASS) is the system of record for Certification and Accreditation (C&A) for the Air Force. The Enterprise Information Technology Data Repository (EITDR) is the system of record for Portfolio Management. The PWS only states requirements to update and maintain EITDR. Maintenance of the C&A(s) will require eMASS access. Will the contractor be provided eMASS access?

Answer: Yes, the successful offeror will be required to apply for and gain access to eMASS to maintain the C&A.

9. Per the Air Force Designated Accrediting Authority (DAA) website, the applications listed in PWS Table 1 - Existing C-5 Applications are not currently accredited or have an expired accreditation. The PWS only speaks about maintaining accreditation (ATO/ATC) in the second paragraph under 4.8.2.5. Will all applications be reaccredited with current ATO/ATC(s) prior to contract award?

Answer: The Government has initiated the accreditation process. If accreditation is not completed by contract award; the successful offeror will be responsible for oversight.

10. Section L on page 7 cites an RFP attachment #3, Present/ Past Performance Questionnaire that is not included. The current attachment #3 is the transmittal letter which is cited as attachment #4. Will the government be adding this missing attachment?

Answer: Attachment #3 was mistakenly left out of Section L in the RFP. A new revised Section L has been attached through Amendment 0001. In Section L, the questionnaire has been inserted as attachment #3 and the transmittal letter was renamed to attachment #4.

11. Section L, paragraph A(8) requires that Vol. III be submitted 14 calendar days after RFP release. Please confirm that that date is 3 May 2012.

Answer: Due to revisions made to Section L involving the questionnaire, Vol. III shall be submitted by 18 May.

12. Additionally, Section L, paragraph A(8) states "failure to submit Volume III by the earlier date will not result in offeror disqualification." Does this mean that Vol. III may be submitted anytime between 3 May and 31 May?

Answer: Volume III is to be provided to WR-ALC 14 days from release of RFP Amendment 0001 so that the Government may begin review of the past performance information. However, an offeror will not be disqualified so long as Volume III is provided by 31 May 12.

13. PWS Section 4.8.1.1 requires the Contractor maintain membership with Airlines for America (A4A), formerly known as Air Transport Association of America (ATA).

Is this membership required prior to submitting the proposal or can the membership be obtained after award? Additionally can the membership fee (minimum $2500 annually) be included in the cost proposal?

Answer: The Contractor is not required to have an ATA membership as part of their proposal. As part of the proposal package the contractor shall either provide proof of membership or documentation on the plan to gain access to and receive ATA data updates to support the C-5 maintenance program. Membership fees may be included as part of the proposal.

14. There are multiple references in the PWS, Section L and Section M to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Continuing Analysis and Surveillance System (CASS) and Continuing Analysis Maintenance Program (CAMP) regulations. FAA Advisory Circular 120-79 describes a program that is very similar to Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) programs described in DoDI 4151.22, MIL-STD1798B, AFI-63-101 and NAVAIR 00-25-403. Will USAF approved RCM programs be accepted as Very Relevant Past Performance ?

Answer: RCM, like MSG-3, is a structured approach for identifying maintenance tasks.

CASS/CAMP implements and monitors a maintenance program for the tasks that were identified. See Section M for the definition of very relevant past performance.

15. Section L and Section M both require MSG-3 support experience for any Past Performance relevancy. AFMCI 21-103 defines RCM as "A maintenance concept that has the objective of achieving the inherent, or designed-in, reliability of a system. The concept is a derivative of the airline/manufacture maintenance planning documents, MSG-2 and MSG-3, published under the auspices of the Air Transport Association." Additionally, DoDI 4151.22, MIL-STD1798B, AFI-63-101 all have multiple references comparing RCM and MSG-3. Based on this, will USAF approved RCM programs be accepted as Very Relevant Past Performance?

Answer: See answer to question 14.

16. In the L-900 Instructions to Offerors, para. E. (6) several references are made to “Past/Present Performance Questionnaire(s) or questionnaire(s)”. Within L-900

Attachment #3, there does not appear to be a Past/Present Performance Questionnaire. Would you please direct us to the questionnaire or provide one if omitted from the current package?

Answer: Attachment #3 was mistakenly left out of Section L in the RFP. A new revised Section L has been attached through Amendment 0001. In this Section L, the questionnaire has been inserted as attachment #3 and the transmittal letter was renamed to attachment #4.

17. In the L-900 Instructions to Offerors, Attachment #3 “Subcontractor/Teaming Partner consent Form…etc. (pg.15 bottom of the page), and “Transmittal Letter for Government Sources…etc.” bottom of second page (pg. 17), there are footer references that appear to be misformatted. Should the last notes on the bottoms of pgs. 15 and 17 become the headers of pgs. 16 and 18 thereby making the “Client Authorization Letter” Attachment #4?

Answer: Formatting errors have been corrected in the attached revised Section L.

18. Ref Section M, paragraph 2.C, the link provided for DoD Small Business Goals only shows goals through FY2011. Shall we assume the Small Business Goals for this FY2012 requirement to be the same as those provided for FY2011?

Answer: An incorrect link was provided in Section M, paragraph 2.C. Please disregard that the previous link and use the one provided below.

http://www.acq.osd.mil/osbp/index.html

Once at this link, click the tab “for Government”. Then click “Program Goals & Performance” in the drop-down menu. Under the Program Performance section, click on the link “SB Program Goals”.

19. In PWS paragraph 4.8.1.1, what are the anticipated level of effort each month given the FFP requirement for the following statements?

a. “The Contractor shall support the C-5 ERR by investigating reliability deficiencies that are identified throughout the fleet”

Answer: Monthly levels are unknown. There is a requirement to review at least 20% of the approximately 2765 maintenance tasks each year.

b. “ (6) Accomplish other tasks within the scope of this requirement as determined.”

Answer: Unknown. The intent of this effort is to provide support for the C-5 scheduled maintenance program. Any additions in scope would be negotiated before inclusion into the contract.

20. In PWS paragraph 4.8.1.6, what are the anticipated level of effort each month given the FFP requirement for the following statements? “As required, the Contractor shall update the Bill of Materials (BOM) to support the maintenance program implementation.”

Answer: If changes are required as part of the maintenance task or other tech data reviews, the BOM’s shall be updated. Monthly levels are unknown, yearly levels are 20% of the 2765 maintenance tasks.

21. PWS paragraph 4.8.1.8 states “The Contractor shall integrate, update, and sustain a comprehensive training program to ensure successful implementation and acceptance of the program.” Who are the anticipated trainees (field and PDM maintainers and SPO engineers)? Does WRALC want a CBT course, a TO manual format, or both? What type of measureable metrics are used to determine if the training program is successful?

Answer: The anticipated trainees include any person working with relation to the C-5 community. Disciplines include supply personnel, logistics specialists, engineers, maintenance chiefs, mechanics, technicians, program managers, etc. The Government requirement is not for a formal training program, but for an exchange of information to those previously mentioned. It is up to the Contractor to determine the most appropriate method.

22. For PWS paragraphs 4.8.1.11.1 and 4.8.1.11.3, what are the anticipated number of analyses per month?

Answer: Monthly levels are unknown. The Contractor can expect to perform analyses of parts and non-parts requirements associated with 20% of the 2765 maintenance tasks on a yearly basis. New parts requirements are generated as part of the day to day management of the C-5 fleet. Future levels of new requirements are unknown, however approximately 60 new items were input last year.

23. Section M Item C Small Business Concern Participation Factor: This Factor is rated “acceptable” or “unacceptable”. To receive an acceptable rating does the government expects the Prime to meet all the DOD goals for each sub economic category or is meeting the overall small business goal and some of goals established for the sub groups acceptable?

Answer: In order to be deemed “acceptable” the offeror must have achieved some of the subcategory goals.

24. In Section L, Paragraph D under Sub-factor Three: IDE Support there is a reference to PWS Paragraph 4.8.3. We cannot find this paragraph in the PWS.

Answer: The correct paragraph number referenced should be 4.8.2. This change has been made in the revised Section L.

25. In “The Schedule Section B Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs”, under Item No, 0001, 1001 and 2001 it indicates Associated Document(s) FD20601231240, This refers to the Section C PWS. What do Line Item(s) 0001, 0002, and 0003 refer to? Similarly on other Items No. in Section B, reference is made to Line Items X004 through X010. What do these line items refer to?

Answer: The CLIN numbers under the Associated Document section is for Government use only. This correlates the RFP CLINs to the CLINS on the Purchase Request document for funding purposes. These CLINs have no bearing on a contractor’s proposal. Also for clarification, the sentence refers to two separate documents, the PWS and Appendix C, which are separate attachments to the RFP.

26. Section M, Paragraph D Cost/Price Factor. For “:The Schedule Section B Supplies or Services and Prices/Cost”, Travel and Per diem and Contractor Furnished Parts/Materials are priced reimbursable items, yet there is no estimate of how much travel will be required nor is there an estimate of what parts and materials will be required to be purchased? Should these items have been designated as “Not Separately Priced”? If not, can the government provide estimates so that we can develop a cost estimate for these items?

Answer: The Government does not require the Travel (CLINs X002) or Contractor Furnished Parts/Materials (CLINs X003) to be priced as part of the proposal as both are to be cost reimbursable no fee CLINs. These CLINs will not be included in the total evaluated price and will be funded as necessary upon award.

27. PWS 4.8.1.6 PDM Bill of Materials (BOM) Update. As required, the Contractor shall update the Bill of Materials (BOM) to support the maintenance program implementation (CDRL A001, DI-MGMT-80368A/T, Status a Report). This PWS requirement infers that the contractor will be responsible for maintaining the C5 BOM. Please clarify who will be responsible for maintaining the C5 BOM --government material planners or contractor planners, or will it be a shared responsibility.

Answer: It is the Government’s requirement that the contractor be responsible for maintaining the C-5 BOM.

28. PWS 4.8.2 Are any systems currently in the development phase, or are they all in sustainment?

Answer: The Government has initiated the accreditation process. If accreditation is not completed by contract award, the successful offeror will be responsible for oversight.

29. PWS 4.8.2.1 Do we need to administer a project tracking tool to monitor risk, cost, schedule (e.g., MS Project)? Or do we provide one for the customer's access? We have an existing database, which this paragraph asks them to keep updated and make changes to as required and as new info is provided. If they need to use MS Project to help accomplish this, so be it. We will not dictate that they have to, but we are requiring that the data be available (this goes under the scientific and technical report CDRL).

Answer: There is no particular format required by the Government. The Government’s requirement is that the data be tracked and available. The contractor can propose their approach.

30. PWS 4.8.2.2 indicates that the contractor use state-of-art tools sets to support deployed applications. We these tool set be provided by the government. If not what systems and languages will be required to support. What type of modification will be required as the source code for some of the applications listed may not be readily available for a contractor to modify.

Answer: The existing software along with the source code will be provided to the successful offeror as the Government owns the software and the code. Specific modifications required are unknown at this time, but will include changes to the how the software appears to the user and/or the content it displays. The following code will be modified for languages:

The current Form 107 system software language is .NET 1.1 and SQL Server 2003, the new server will be .NET 3.5 and SQL Server 2008

AIDE and MIMS– The front-end code is Microsoft .NET C# version 3.5 and the database is MS SQL Server 2008

Techsight/X is XML and XSL-T and XSL-FO for Render-X

31. PWS 4.8.2.2 - For supportability, how many IT staff or how many hours are currently allocated to IT support? Can the government provide historical information about the rate/duration of trouble tickets?

Answer: The contractor shall include their approach as part of the proposal.

32. PWS 4.12.3 Are security clearances required for IT administration privileges?

Answer: A security clearance (secret, top secret, etc.) is not required, but the successful offeror will be required to pass a background check and gain system access though a Form DD 2875.

d. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

Request for Proposal FA8525-12-R-31240-0001

PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS, AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

SECTION J

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Form Number Description/File Name Date Number of Pages Section L - Instructions to Offerors 03MAY2012 23