Responses_to_Industry_Questions_on_the_Draft_RFP.pdf

Responses to Industry Questions on the Draft RFP

SECTION L Q&A

1Q. Request for Clarification, Section L: The two sentences in the first paragraph disagree. The first sentence says minimum cross-referencing between volumes, but the second states if not found in a designated volume, then it will be assumed to have been omitted. Please clarify if cross-referencing between volumes is acceptable, and if so, will cross-referenced information not found in its designated volume be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal.

1A. Cross-referencing between volumes is NOT permitted. Section L has been revised to reflect this.

2Q. Request for Clarification, Section L: The specified Word document extension differs from what is listed in 3.1.2 (“.doc” vs. “.docx”). Please clarify the Word document format required.

2A. ".docx' is the required format. Section L has been revised to reflect this.

3Q. Section L: Will the current MACC be provided to the Contractor to support proposal development?

3A. The Government will provide the T-6A ADS-B (Out) Certification Basis in the RFP. All references to the MACC have been removed from the RFP.

4Q. Questions, Section L: Where in the model contract should the contractor’s proposed CWBS be provided? Should this be included in Section J Attachments?

4A. Change in Section L has been made to reflect the CWS should be provided in Section J.

5Q. Section L: With a Technical Volume limit of 30 pages, inclusion of a Systems Engineering

Management Plan (4.2.4), a detailed draft FAA certification plan (4.2.5), and an airworthiness plan (4.2.6) will likely exceed the allowed page count. Recommend these documents be provided as appendices to the Technical Volume, not subject to the page count.

5A. Section L has been revised to list the Systems Engineering Management Plan, draft FAA certification plan, and airworthiness plan to the table of contents in the appendix section thereby allowing unlimited pages.

6Q. Section L: With the use of the PPI tool, does the Government expect the data entered into the PPI tool to be replicated in the Past Performance Volume?

6A. The information input into the PPI tool will be replicated in the Past Performance volume.

7Q. Section L: What escalation factor should be used for determining “Then Year” dollars?

Recommend identification of a specific factor or recommend use of current year dollars, which the Government can escalate in determining the TEP.

7A. Escalation rates are a business decision for the Offeror and should be included in the

Offeror's price volume.

8Q. Section L: Is the top-level IMS included in the Technical Volume page count or as a separate appendix?

8A. The IMS is to be included in the appendix and the page count is unlimited.

9Q. Section L: It is not clear if 11 x 17 fold out pages count as two pages?

9A. 11x17 fold out pages count as ONE page.

10Q. Section L: Recommend allowing fonts to go no smaller than 8 point for tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics; at least for those not being used in an 11x17 fold out. The 12 font requirement for inserted graphics generally makes them unusable due to the excessive space they consume.

10A. Section L has been revised to state, "For tables, charts, graphs, and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 8 point."

11Q. Section L: Under Volume III, it is not clear what is intended by the "Max 6 Pages per contract" statement.

11A. Section L has been revised to provide greater clarity. The maximum of 6 pages per contract applies to each contract submitted to the PPI Tool.

12Q. Section L: Is there a reason why section 5 Past Performance is not labelled as section 4.3 under Proposal Organization? Or should section 4 be titled Executive and Technical Volumes?

12A. It was an oversight. Section L has been renumbered.

13Q. Section L: It is not clear what the overall intent is for the Past Performance Volume. It is clear, that the intent is to use the PPI tool but that does not explain what constitutes the overall

PP Volume in terms of how page count, number of contracts, timeframe, etc. is being limited/structured.

13A. The past performance section of Section L has been reorganized and revised for clarity.

14Q. Section L: It is clear that a significant effort has been appropriately placed on past performance. In order for that effort to have the appropriate significance, recommend use of the

PPI tool but also require a more clearly defined and structured Past Performance Volume.

14A. The past performance section of Section L has been reorganized and revised for clarity. The

PPI Tool will be used as well as some additional information to be included in the past performance volume.

15Q. Section L: This section does not provide instruction on how Subcontractor Past

Performance is to be or can be used. Recommend that only Major Subcontractors, defined as a minimum of 10% of labor cost, be allowed. Also, recommend the primary focus and emphasis be on the Prime's Past Performance.

15A. Subcontractor past performance has been added and defined as “10% percent or more of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price or perform aspects of the effort the Offeror considers critical to overall successful performance.”

16Q. Section L: Using the downloading instructions, the PPI tool was not available for review.

16A. The PPI Tool has been posted to FBO under our solicitation. It will be reposted with the

RFP as well.

17Q. Section L: The Past Performance Matrix shows an appropriate emphasis on PP however, this section lacks definition in order to understand what is required/allowed to write this volume: 1) there is no timeframe identified for which PP is applicable, 2) no statement of how many PP citations are allowed and by Prime/Subcontractor.

17A. The Past Performance Matrix is an internal Government document that will be used to evaluate Offerors’ proposals. The Matrix has been revised and will not be part of the RFP.

Offerors need not complete or submit a Past Performance Matrix. Recent past performance is defined is five (5) years from release of the RFP. No more than five (5) contracts total (prime contractor and subcontractor contracts) can be submitted for past performance.

18Q. Section L: Please provide the JPATS Prime Item Product Function Specification referenced in section 4.2.4 in order to perform the required flow-down of requirements for the proposal effort. Only providing limited access (two representatives for six hours & only handwritten notes) to this document in a physical bidder’s library at the JPATS program office isn’t sufficient for preparing the proposal. A hardcopy or preferably a searchable electronic copy of this document is needed in order to prepare the proposal.

18A. The PIPFS will be available after contract award. The Government does not believe the

PIPFS is required to prepare the Systems Engineering Management Plan for proposal purposes.

19Q. Section L: Please provide the Modified Airworthiness Certification Criteria (MACC) document referenced in section 4.2.6 in order to prepare this section of the proposal. Only providing limited access (two representatives for six hours & only handwritten notes) to this document in a physical bidder’s library at the JPATS program office isn’t sufficient for preparing the proposal. An electronic copy of the MACC spreadsheet is preferred in order to prepare the best possible proposal.

19A. The certification basis will included in the final RFP. All references to the MACC have been removed from the RFP.

20Q. Section L: Please provide the JPATS Ground Based Training System Program Unique

Specifications Document referenced in SOW paragraph 3.13.1 in order to prepare the section

4.2.8 item c portion of the proposal. Only providing limited access (two representatives for six hours & only handwritten notes) to this document in a physical bidder’s library at the JPATS program office isn’t sufficient for preparing the proposal. A hardcopy or preferably a searchable electronic copy of this document is needed in order to prepare the proposal.

20A. This document will be released to the awardee after contract award. The Government does not believe this document is necessary for proposal preparation.

21Q. Section L: Please provide the section 5.1 Past Performance Information (PPI) tool referenced in Attachment 1 as being available for download at FedBizOpps

(https://www.fbo.gov/).

21A. The PPI tool is an Access database that's available for download on our FBO listing. It was posted on 14 January 2016 and will be reposted with the RFP.

22Q. Section L: Please provide Attachment 10 notional execution schedule and Delivery

Schedule referenced in sections 7.1.3 and 7.1.5, respectively. Attachment 10 was not included in the files posted to FBO.

22A. The Government’s notional execution schedule will be included in the final RFP.

23Q. Section L: This section reads as if the overall intent of the Technical Volume is to place more emphasis on identifying and managing risks versus describing the actual technical approach. Is that the intent?

23Q. The title of the paragraph is “Technical/Risk" and line 28 specifically says, “In the

Technical/Risk volume, address your technical solution for meeting the Government’s minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical subfactor.” A sentence has been added to Section M to indicate that technical risk is the most important factor.

SECTION M Q&A

1Q. Comment, Section M: Attachment 1 is the SOW, but the referenced matrix is not included in the SOW. Question: Is there an attachment to Section M?

1A. Yes there is an attachment to Section M; veribage in Section M has been corrected to clarify this.

2Q. Section M: In order to evaluate the relevancy of past performance, the Government will use the tailored past performance matrix in Attachment 1. Comment: Attachment 1 is the SOW, but the referenced matrix is not included in the SOW. Question: Is there an attachment to Section

M?

2A. The past performance relevancy matrix was intended to be an attachment to Section M. The

Government will not include a relevancy matrix in the RFP. As a result, Section M will not have any attachments.

3Q. Section M: Please clarify that the systems engineering plan on page 3 under Subfactor 1:

Systems Engineering is the same as the System Engineering Management Plan in section L paragraph 4.2.4.

3A. Yes, it is the same. Section M has been revised to clarify this.

4Q. Section M: Should the ADS-B (Out) specification on page 4 Subfactor 1: Systems

Engineering item a Measure of Merit be the JPATS Prime Item Product Function Specification referenced in section L paragraph 4.2.4 item a.

4A. Yes, the verbiage in Sections L and M has been updated for clarification purposes.

5Q. Section M: Please clarify that the Attachment 1 past performance matrix referenced on page

7 item (ii) Relevancy Assessment is the Draft Past Performance Evaluation Matrix provided on

FBO and identified in the draft RFP cover letter as Attachment 4.

5A. Yes, it the same document.

6Q. Section M: Section 3.2.3 states, "The Contractor shall obtain authorization for radio frequencies required in support of this contract. Any experimental, developmental, or operational equipment for which the appropriate frequency allocation has not been made, the

Contractor shall provide the technical operating characteristics of the proposed electromagnetic radiating device to the Contracting Officer during the initial planning, experimental, and developmental phase of contract performance. The Contractor shall use DD Form 1494, Application for Equipment Frequency Allocation, and the Equipment Location-Certification

Information Database formats to obtain radio frequency authorization.

Any 1090ES transponder selected will still be using the same standard 1090MHZ to transmit and 1030MHZ to receive as the current transponder. With that said, is USG requiring the contactor to have the equipment verified via the DD Form 1494 even though the frequencies are already established? The selected systems will be COTS, TSO’d and will be

DO-260B compliant.

6A. Yes, the Contractor will be expected to submit a completed 1494 to the Government so the

Government can receive spectrum certification and frequency authorization for the T-6A.

SOW Q&A

1Q. SOW/CDRLs: How long will the US Government have to review and either provide concurrence, comments, or questions on all deliverables?

1A. The Government will have a minimum of 30 days to review and provide comments, concurrence, questions, or disapproval on all deliverables unless tailored in the specific DD

Form 1423-1. Check each CDRL in the RFP for specific information.

2Q. SOW: PIPFS is not included in acronym list.

2A. PIPFS has been added to the acronym list.

3Q. Request for Confirmation, SOW: Please confirm that the Contractor will own the STC after the modification.

3A. Yes, the Contractor will own the STC.

4Q. SOW: What takes precedence if there are conflicts between the Military and Civil certification requirements?

4A. The military certification will use the civil certification as a baseline. We anticipate the military certification will be based 100% on the civil certification. However, if there is a difference between the two, the military certification takes precedence.

5Q. SOW: Will the USG make available the use of their hazardous waste disposal system for residue/excess hazardous materials generated by work performed at Government facilities?

5A. Yes, the Government hazardous waste disposal system will be available for approved items.

To view a list of material stocked in T-6 COMBS inventory please visit the bidder's library at

WFAFB and reference SOW para 3.12.2 for further explanation on the Government providing consumables. If an item of concern is not on the list and is a hazardous material it will need to be identified and approved prior to accessing a Government facility. As part of the approval process, the bases will determine disposal of residue/excess material. If it's approved, there shouldn't be a problem with disposal.

6Q. SOW: Where will the PMRs be held?

6A. PMRs will be held at the Contractor's facility; the SOW has been updated to reflect this.

7Q. SOW: Where will the Post-Award Conference be held?

7A. The Post-Award Conference will be held at the Contractor’s facility; the SOW has been updated to reflect this.

8Q. SOW:

1) Does Government concurrence coincide with the award of optional CLINs for the procurement of kits? How many kits are associated with the two CLINs for Aircraft Kit procurement?

2) Request for Confirmation, SOW: Please confirm all installs are to be performed at the locations specified in Table 1.

8A.

1) Yes, Milestone C is the Government’s concurrence. The number of kits is driven by the

Offeror’s schedule. The total number of kits to be procured through the options for kit procurement is 486 for aircraft and 87 for ATDs. 1 aircraft kit and 1 ATD kit will be procured and installed during development.

2) Yes, the installations are to be performed at the locations specified in Table 1.

9Q. SOW: Based on the completion date of 01 January 2020 and the descriptions in CLINs

0006 and 0008, there are only 15 months to complete all of the aircraft installations listed in

Table 1. Is it correct there are only 15 months to complete all of the aircraft installations listed in

Table 1?

9A. The pricing matrix was revised to allow Offerors to price all CLINs according to their proposed execution schedule.

10Q. SOW: Is a field modification required at Randolph AFB, Texas, or can the install be performed at the Contractor’s facility?

10A. Yes, the field modification will be required at Randolph AFB. The decision is based on an assumption that Contractors are not able to remove and store ejection seats per Government regulations.

11Q. SOW: Should the reference to CDRL A0039 be CDRL A039?

11A. Yes, it has been corrected.

12Q. SOW: How does the Contractor price the spares CLINs if prior Government approval is required?

12A. Refer to the Pricing Matrix in the RFP. The Government will evaluate pricing bands completed by the Offeror. The pricing bands are designed to allow the Government flexibility on the exact number of spares to be purchased. The number of spares to be priced for the Total

Evaluated Price is listed in the Pricing Matrix.

13Q. SOW: Will a list of GFP inventory at JPATS COMBS be provided to the Contractor to facilitate pricing?

13A. The list of items in the COMBS inventory is included in the Bidder’s Library.

14Q. SOW: Should the Contractor propose an installation schedule, or will an installation schedule be provided by the Government?

14A. Offerors may propose their own execution schedule as part of their IMS. The Government’s notional execution schedule will be included in the RFP and Offerors may choose to use that for their IMS.

15Q. SOW: The Contractor needs to know the number of aircrew members to be trained to price the operator’s manuals. How many aircrew members will be trained?

15A. Section 3.14 of the SOW now references CDRL A034, which states that 45 CDs are to be provided by the Contractor.

16Q. SOW: How soon after contract award will an aircraft be made available? Can the aircraft be located at the Contractor’s facility?

16A. SOW paragraph 4.1 was updated to state that an aircraft will be provided to the Contractor at Randolph AFB one month after contract award.

17Q. SOW: How much office space will be provided at each base location?

17A. Per the base support agreement, the host base will provide GFP furnishings for use by

Contractor personnel to perform duties under this contract. The exact square footage is not available. These furnishings include, by way of example:

a. Desk, table, and chairs

b. Work benches with accessories and stools as required

18Q. SOW: Please provide additional information on where the SIL is located, who controls access to the SIL, etc.

18A. The SOW has been revised to state that, “The contactor shall develop or utilize an existing

SIL that will allow the contractor to test the functionality of the combined ADS-B Out components. The SIL shall be under the contractor’s control and can be located at the contractor’s facility or at a commercial facility of the contractor’s choice.”

19Q. SOW: For the aircraft modification, to what extent can the System Integration Lab (SIL) be used to verify functional performance?

19A. The Contractor can use their discretion to verify functional performance in the SIL. The

Government recommends using the SIL to the maximum extent possible.

20Q. SOW: The discussion of requirements for the ATDs is not appropriate in this section that discusses Aircraft Testing and Certification (applies to 3.8.2.2 and all subparagraphs).

Recommend these paragraphs be moved under paragraph 3.13 Simulators.

20A. The Government agrees and has moved the ATD technical reviews to the ATD section.

21Q. SOW: FAA AC 20-165B was released. Will the requirement change as well?

21A. All requirements will be based on the current version, which is now FAA AC 20-165B.

22Q. SOW: Recommend the Government provide the aircrew for flight test and FCF pilots to conduct flight testing for the first article? Considering the DCMA 8210.1 FOP/GOP requirements it does not seem reasonable for a contractor to establish the necessary FOP for this small flight test effort.

22A. The SOW and TEMP now instruct that Government pilots will serve as the Pilot-In-Charge.

DCMA 8210.1 is a requirement of the Ground Flight Risk clause.

23Q. SOW: Do the complete initial 2 kits have to be delivered prior to integration of the first article? Exact quantities of fasteners, brackets, wire lengths, etc. may not be known until completion of the first article.

23A. Yes, the two kits have to be delivered prior to integration of the first article. However, the kit consumables (fasteners, brackets, wire lengths, etc.) can be modified after integration of the first article based on lessons learned.

24Q. SOW: "The FFRR shall include a presentation on the outcome of the FAA Certification and discrepancies identified during the FAA certification process and the actions taken to resolve those discrepancies." FAA Flight testing IAW AC 20-165 is required prior to receiving the STC.

So the FFRR would need to occur well prior to certification.

24A. The TEMP, which will be posted with the RFP, shows the correct timeline. The SOW has been corrected.

25Q. SOW: "Contractor shall procure the identified PSE and provide it to the USG prior to the start of the retrofit effort." "This material shall be provided to JPATS COMBS and the appropriate contract modifications shall occur to document the transfer of material." Please clarify what is intended by "contract modifications."

25A. Contract modification means the Government would have to modify its existing COMBS contract to take receipt of the identified PSE not currently in COMBS inventory.

26Q. SOW: "The Contractor shall furnish all consumable items required for testing while the aircraft is in their custody." Since the first article will be accomplished on a military base, it would be impractical for the contractor to provide fuel, oxygen, nitrogen, etc. for the aircraft.

Will fuel have to be purchased off base and transported on base and to the flight line? Where will the contractor store the compressed and flammable gases--separate from the government's storage? Recommend that the government provide consumables to avoid introducing several logistical hurdles that will add to the total cost of the effort. Recommend further clarity on what consumable item types are required from the Contractor and what is expected to be GFE.

26A. The SOW has been updated to state that possession of the aircraft will not change; the

Government will provide maintenance as required, including provision of consumables, to maintain and operate the aircraft.

27Q. SOW: Recommend adding to section 2.1.2 all the T-6A aircraft technical data including documents, drawings, publications, specifications, and manuals being used to operate, maintain, and sustain the T-6A aircraft similar to the three listed for the Ground-Based Training

System (GBTS)/Aircrew Training Devices (GBTS Program Unique Specifications Document, BC

25301 Rev B; JPATS Aircrew Training Device Operator Manual; and JPATS Aircrew Training

Device Maintenance Manual).

27A. These documents will be reviewed for inclusion. The T-6A Prime Item Product Function

Specification was already included.

28Q. SOW: Recommend adding to section 2.1.2 any additional documents, drawings, publications, specifications, and manuals being used to operate, maintain, and sustain the T-6A

GBTS/Aircrew Training Devices.

28A. These documents will be reviewed for inclusion. The maintenance and operator manuals were already included.

29Q. SOW: Please provide the requirements for the JPATS certification basis and the military certification basis document referenced in section 3.2.2.2.

29A. All references to the JPATS certification basis have been removed from the requirements documents. The certification basis will be provided with the RFP.

30Q. SOW: Please provide the JPATS System Safety/Environmental Management Plan

(SSEMP), the Test and Evaluation Master Plan, and the USG-provided MACC referenced in section 3.4.3 as soon as possible in order to support estimating the effort for this SOW tasking, development & integration of proposed ADS-B Out solutions, and execution of the program.

30A. The Test and Evaluation Master Plan and certification basis will be added to final RFP.

The System Safety/Environmental Management Plan will be provided after contract award.

31Q. SOW: Sections 3.8.2.2 Technical Meetings and Reviews (ATDs), 3.8.2.2.1 ATD SRR, and

3.8.2.2.2 ATD CDR that are specific to the ATDs seem to be out of place under section 3.8

Aircraft Test and Certification. These sections would seem to be more appropriate under section

3.13 Simulators.

31A. These sections were reorganized to distinguish between the aircraft and the ATDs.

32Q. SOW: Should the section 3.8.2.2.2 ATD CDR reference to PDR in the last sentence be changed to the ATD SRR since there is no ATD PDR requirement specified in the SOW?

32A. There was a mistake, and the reference to PDR has been deleted.

33Q. SOW: Please provide the existing T-6A aircraft and ATD baseline drawings referenced in section 3.12.3 as soon as possible in order to support estimating the effort for this SOW tasking, development & integration of proposed ADS-B Out solutions, and execution of the program.

33A. The Offeror selected for award will receive baseline drawings after contract award. The

Government believes adequate information is available for proposal preparation. Watch our

FBO postings for any additional documents to be made available.

34Q. SOW: Please provide all the existing T-6A technical publications including flight manuals, operator manuals, maintenance manuals, work cards, and checklists referenced in section 3.12.7 as soon as possible in order to support estimating the effort for this SOW tasking to change existing pages, add the newly developed ADS-B Out proposed solution integrated into the aircraft, and execution of this program.

34A. Most technical publications are already available through the Bidder’s Library. Watch our

FBO postings for any additional documents to be made available.

35Q. SOW: Please provide the Package, Handling, Storage, and Transportation requirements referenced in section 3.12.11 as soon as possible in order to support estimating the effort for this SOW tasking.

35A. The SOW section has been revised to require best commercial practices.

36Q. SOW: Please provide all the existing ATD technical publications including operator manuals, maintenance manuals, and COTS manuals referenced in section 3.13.6 as soon as possible in order to support estimating the effort for this SOW tasking to change existing pages, add the newly developed ADS-B Out proposed solution integrated into the ATDs, and execution of this program.

36A. COTS manuals are to be provided by the Contractor during contract performance. If additional existing ATD publications are to be made available, Offerors will be notified via FBO.

37Q. SOW: The section 3.15.4.2 T-6A Avionics System CS Controls reference to CDRL A033

Configuration Audit Plan doesn’t seem correct for documenting the controls and any changes implemented in the system design.

37A. The Government is revising the SOW to reflect cybersecurity requirements and delivery dates.

38Q. SOW: Section 3.3.2.1 states, "The Contractor shall develop and maintain a resource loaded master IMS (including subcontractor’s IMS) by logically networking detailed program activities, to include subcontractor activities." Does USG have a specific program in mind which will be required to be used to develop the IMS?

38A. Yes, the program is MS Project.

39Q. SOW: Section 3.7 states, "The Contractor shall perform the integration efforts required to incorporate ADS-B (Out) into one T-6A aircraft located at Randolph AFB, TX and conduct ground and flight testing to validate and verify that the modification meets all T-6A ADS-B (Out) requirements." (a.) Does USG expect the contractor to have the required personnel to perform ground runs and flight test the T-6 or will this be handled by current Air

Force personnel? The impression is being given in this section as well as section 3.8.2 and other sections thatthe contractor will be conducting ground and flight tests. (b.) If this is the responsibility of the contractor, can USG provide the full requirements of the personnel to be approved by USG to perform these operations?

39A. The Government will provide personnel to serve as the pilot in command during ground and flight test. However, the Contractor shall provide qualified ground and flight personnel to obtain the FAA STC.

40Q. SOW: Section 3.7, table 1 shows two separate locations (KS & Pax River) with one aircraft at each location. Will USG relocate these aircraft to one of the 6 locations where mod teams will already be set up and working on multiple aircraft?

40A. The Government intends that the aircraft at KS will be flown to Randolph AFB and the aircraft at Pax River will be flown to NAS Pensacola for retrofit.

41Q. SOW: Section 3.12.3 states, "The Contractor shall develop and deliver a flight test modification drawing package for the first flight test aircraft to be modified." Does USG plan for the first flight test aircraft to be the STC prototype aircraft?

41A. Yes, only 1 aircraft will be modified for development work that will lead to the STC.

42Q. SOW: Section 3.12.5 states, "The Contractor shall identify and provide a list of Peculiar

Support Equipment (PSE) IAW CDRL A002 prior to CDR for flight test, initial fleet introduction, and Life Cycle Sustainment of the new configuration." (a.) Can USG provide a list of the existing PSE and SE being used? Some manufacturers have upgrade paths for

ADS-B testing on older equipment and this could provide cost savings to USG. Also, (b.) can

USG verify that GPS repeaters are being used in the hangars for testing?

42A. a) A list of existing PSE and SE is in the Bidder's Library at WPAFB. b) No, there are no

GPS repeaters in the hangars. The signal in the hangar should be sufficient to conduct testing.

43Q. SOW: Section 3.13.6 states, "The Contractor shall revise the JPATS ATD Operator Manual and Maintenance Manual, as required by CDRL A016. The Contractor shall describe each operation and maintenance task in detail and in logical, systematic steps for the work to be accomplished." Can USG provide native/editable files for all existing tech pubs for this effort?

43A. O&M manuals along with IOS manuals are available in PDF format included in the

Bidder’s Library. These files will be provided to the awardee in MS Word format after contract award for editing purposes.

44Q. SOW: Section 3.13.7.1 states, "The Contractor shall provide all necessary equipment, standard tools and test equipment required to install and operationally test the system." Will

USG provide all HAZMAT consumables needed on base? If not, will USG provide the means to transport HAZMAT consumables on to the base and disposal

(example: Sealants).

44A. The Government will provide HAZMAT consumables that are normally stocked in the

COMBS inventory. To view a list of material stocked in T-6 COMBS inventory please visit the

Bidder's Library. Refer to SOW paragraph 3.12.2 for further explanation on the Government-provided consumables. If it is not on the list of items currently stocked, then the next statement applies. If it the consumables are in our inventory, the Government will handle transportation and disposal.

45Q. SOW: Section 4.1 states, "The Contractor shall obtain Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA) Experimental Type Certificate status for the GFE aircraft during the flight testing. In addition, the Contractor will modify the GFE and maintain continued airworthiness during flight testing." Is USG expecting the contractor to perform scheduled and/or unscheduled maintenance on the aircraft?

45A. No. The SOW now reads as follows: All maintenance needed to operate and maintain the aircraft shall be performed by the Government throughout the period of the contract.

46Q. SOW: Section 4.1 states, "The Contractor shall furnish all consumable items required for testing while the aircraft is in their custody." What does this include? Will the contractor be required to supply fuel, oil, hydraulic fluid, etc.?

46A. The SOW was updated to state that possession of aircraft will not change and the

Government will provide maintenance as required, including the provision of consumables to maintain and operate the aircraft.

47Q. SOW: It appears that the initial development work will take place @ Randolph. Will this be conducted on an ATD concurrently with the first article modification?

47A. Yes, it is expected that the ATD and aircraft development will take place concurrently.

SOW Section 3.13.8 has been updated to clarify this for the ATD modification.

48Q. SOW: Can the initial development stage be done at the contractor’s facility?

48A. Development work can take place at the Contractor's facility. However, the aircraft itself will remain at Randolph AFB during development. This decision is based on assumption that the Contractor is not able to remove and store ejection seats per Government regulations.

49Q. SOW: "First Article Qualification Test Plan Qualification Test Plan". Rephrase. (CDRL

A050).

49A. The title of the CDRL in the SOW was corrected to read "First Article Qualification Test

Plan."

PRICING MATRIX Q&A

1Q. Pricing Matrix: Recommend adding a CLIN for FY2018 installations to allow for the possibility of installations in that year. It is possible that field installations could begin as early as FY18.

1A. CLINs have been added to accommodate varying schedules. Offerors will only price CLINs required by their execution schedule for the Total Evaluated Price.

SRD Q&A

1Q. SRD: Para. 1.2 indicates the “…Global Positioning System (GPS) navigation receiver on the

T-6A are not compatible with ADS-B (Out) functionality”. All ADS-B (Out) technical solutions must account for the current GPS navigation receiver remaining in the aircraft and functional…”

Para 3.2.2 calls for, “An AC 20-165A compliant Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) GPS that is FAA-approved for unrestricted navigation in the National Airspace System shall be used for ADS-B functionality.”

The middle clause implies the GPS navigation receiver is to remain on the aircraft while the first and third clauses imply the receiver needs to be replaced. Please clarify.

1A. The KLN-900 will remain in the aircraft and will continue to provide the navigation solution for the aircraft. The Offeror’s system shall provide ADS-B (Out) GPS functionality independent of the KLN-900 GPS.

2Q. SRD: Does the Government plan to provide an ADS-B Out compliant transponder to replace the current transponder, or will the Government work with the current transponder OEM to upgrade the transponder, or are the decisions related to the transponder strictly left to the systems integrator?

2A. SRD para 1.2 states, " All ADS-B (Out) technical solutions must account for the current GPS navigation receiver remaining in the aircraft and functional while the current transponder must be upgraded to ADS-B (Out) capability or replaced with an ADS-B (Out) capable transponder. "

The Government will not work with the current transponder OEM or provide a transponder.

3Q. SRD: "All avionics equipment utilized to support the ADS-B (Out) effort shall have an FAA

Technical Standard Order Authorization (TSOA) for the intended function if required to obtain an ATC or STC." Does this mean that a TSOA is not necessarily required, if an avionics component is certified as part of the STC by another method?

3A. All avionics LRUs used in the ADS-B Out technical solution must be TSO'd; there is no alternative means for certification.

4Q. SRD: If needed, is a TSOA required prior to contract award, or prior to the first delivery of the first production delivery?

4A. No, however, if the proposed solution is not TSOA'd, it may increase risk in the technical evalution. The longer that the TSOA process takes, the more schedule risk increases.

5Q. SRD: Please give a distinct location for the NSRP and the Aircrew Member's Forward Vision

Line?

5A. The NSRP and Aircrew Member’s Forward Vision Line have been removed from the SRD as they are not requirements for this acquisition.

6Q. SRD: Section 1.2 references that all technical solutions must comply with the aircraft’s existing Prime Item Product Function Specification (PIPFS). Only providing limited access (two representatives for six hours & only handwritten notes) to this document in a physical bidder’s library at the JPATS program office isn’t sufficient for preparing the proposal. An actual hardcopy or preferably a searchable electronic copy is needed in order to prepare the best possible proposal, especially any pricing for any FFP CLINs.

6A. The Prime Item Product Function Specification will be provided after contract award to the award winner for use during execution.

7Q. SRD: Section 3.4.5.1 item (e) needs a reference to an aircraft specification, MIL-STD, etc in order to specify quantitative levels for vibration, acoustics, thermal, shock, and ultimate load factors.

7A. The ADS-B Equipment needs to be environmentally certified IAW RTCA-DO 160

Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment.

8Q. SRD: Section 3.5.2 Usability requires that the installed system shall not degrade operator workload in comparison to the current system. Adding the ADS-B Out capability could be accomplished without increasing the operator workload. However, requiring the aircrew to enter the Flight ID/call sign in sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.3 will be increased workload over that of the current system. ADS-B Out does not require the aircrew to enter the Flight ID/call sign. In particular, AC 20-165A paragraph 3-7 Pilot Interface item c (1) states that “If pilot-selectable, the call sign/flight ID should be readily apparent to the flight crew”. If this isn’t currently being performed then adding this requirement is over and above what is required for ADS-B Out and will increase workload as well as program costs, schedule, and risks.

8A. It is a USG requirement to enter flight id/call sign. The USG does not view the entry of flight id/call sign as degrading operator workload as long as entry is similar to current squawk entry method.

9Q. SRD: Should the section 6.2 Table 2 Specification Reference for the second 3.1 System

Requirements of 14 CFR 21 be 14 CFR 23? The JPATS-Specific Requirement Details for this item needs to include the “if required to obtain an ATC or STC” as stated in section 3.1?

9A. The SRD was updated as suggested and table 2’s reference was corrected to 14 CFR 23.

10Q. SRD: Should the section 6.2 Table 2 Specification Reference for the 3.6.7 Human

Performance be changed from FAA CFR Section 91.225 to MIL-STD-1472 sections 4, 5.1 through

5.5, 5.9, and 5.13?

10A. The reference has been changed as suggested.

11Q. SRD: Please provide the document or define the requirement for compliance for the section

6.2 Table 2 Specification Reference of JPATS Requirement used for the 3.5.2 Usability, 3.6.5

Controls and Displays Compatibility, and 3.7 Regulatory and Certification Requirements.

The above referenced are listed as "JPATS Requirement"

11A. The table in the Systems Requirement document has been updated to provide the best

Specification Reference. For clarification:

For 3.5.2.Usability, Military Standard 1472 is the best reference. Additionally, other than the entry of Flight ID, the JPATS Program office requires that the system not require any additional work for the pilots beyond that which is already required.

For 3.6.5. Controls and Displays compatibility, Mil-Standard-1472 is referenced. In addition, Air Force Instruction 11-301 Aircrew Flight Equipment Program dictates Nomex Flight gloves must be worn from Engine Start to Engine Shutdown and all selected cockpit controls must be compatible with their wear during flight.

For 3.7 Regulatory Certification Requirements, we’ve deleted the verbiage in the SRD paragraph

3.7 with respect to regulatory requirements as 14 CFR 91-225 has already been addressed elsewhere in the document.

12Q. SRD: 3.4.5.1 Expected Operating Environments

The aircraft with the installed system shall be capable of performing all missions including ground servicing at the expected environments at the planned operating locations except as otherwise specified herein. The expected operating environments shall be as defined below.

Ground and flight temperature, humidity, solar radiation, in-flight icing, and lightning requirements are as follows:

a) The extreme ambient temperatures for ground operations shall be -9°F to 109°F dry bulb. External heaters and coolers are not permitted in this temperature range.

b) The extreme ambient temperatures for in-flight operations shall be -65°F to 109°F dry bulb.

c) The extreme ambient relative humidity for ground and flight operation shall be 12% to 95% relative humidity.

d) Lightning protection shall be in accordance with FAR 23 section 23.1306

e) The installed system shall perform under all environmental conditions of vibration, acoustics, thermal, and shock experienced by the aircraft, systems, and equipment.

The statement above is from the draft SRD page 13 and is also stated in the SRD page 24 section

6.2 Table 2 under requirement 3.4.5.1. However, part C of that same part calls out humidity to range from 12% to 100% were as above calls out 12% to 95%.

Can the temperature requirments be reduced for a more standard temp of -45 degrees F and keep the 95% humidity?

Our solution is TSO-166B and DO-160G as per the requirments of the SRD yet the ranges of the current specification are greater then the equipment we plan to propose as shown below.

Also, some of the existing equipment in the T-6A have temperature ranges less then the product we plan to propose. The existing KLN-900s have a low side temerature range of -40 degrees C for example.

Is the USG willing to change the PIPFS from -65 degrees F for the low side temerature to -45 degrees F?

12A. The -65 F temperature reflected in paragraph 3.4.5.1 ‘Expected Operating Environments’ and Table 2: ‘Test and Verification Requirements’, JPATS-Specific Requirement Detail (b) is the correct lower limit for extreme ambient temperatures for in-flight operations. The transponder selected for the T-6A ADS-B Out technical solution must be environmentally certified to RTCA

DO 160G. Because the T-6A service ceiling is 31,000 feet and the avionics compartment on the aircraft is non-pressurized and non-temperature controlled, the ADS-B Out transponder (and

GPS if embedded) must be certified to operate in temperatures from -55 degrees C to 70 degrees

C.

SRD CORRECTION: The correct requirement for the upper limit of relative humidity is 95% and not 100% as erroneously reported in the draft SRD. The error in the draft SRD occurs in

Table 2: ‘Test and Verification Requirements’, Requirement ‘3.4.5.1 Expected Operating

Environments, JPATS-Specific Requirement Detail (c). The SRD issued with the RFP will reflect an upper humidity level requirement of 95% throughout the entire document.”

BASE SUPPORT AGREEMENT Q&A

1Q. Base Support Agreement: What Utilities (including internet access) will be provided?

1A. Development and retrofit work will take place in a fully functional aircraft hangar where current maintenance activities routinely take place. No internet access will be provided. The

Government assumes the Contractor will provide their own internet access.

2Q. Base Support Agreement: What about electrical/light carts and associated fuel?

2A. It is not anticipated that electrical/light carts will be needed as work will be performed in a well-lit aircraft hangar.

3Q. Base Support Agreement: The Base Support Agreement describes USG support in regards to facilities, aircraft maintenance, etc. Will USG provide support equipment such as ladders, compressors, stands, etc.?

3A. The Base Support Agreement was revised to state, “The host base will provide USG GFP furnishings for use by Contractor personnel to perform duties under this contract. These furnishings include, by way of example:

a. Desk, table, and chairs

b. Work benches with accessories and stools as required

c. 1 stand to access the cockpit per aircraft

d. 1 ladder (NAS Pensacola, FL NFO only) per aircraft

e. Shop Air”

4Q. Base Support Agreement: Item (a.) says "ramp space." Are all modifications to be conducted outside on the ramp?

4A. The Base Support Agreement has been modified to state that modifications will take place in a hangar. Two (2) hangar spots will be devoted to retrofit at each modification base.

MODEL CONTRACT Q&A

1Q. Model Contract: Recommend including AS9100 to replace the '?????'. Given the overall

Scope of this effort to include impacting the entire fleet of T-6A aircraft, a properly registered

AS9100 Quality Management System should be required.

1A. The Government determined that AS9100 is the necessary higher level quality requirement.

The RFP will reflect this.

2Q. Model Contract: Draft RFP Section I Part II Contractor Clauses section B Defense Federal

Acquisition Regulation Supplement Contract call out 252.242.7006: Can the USG elaborate on whether an approved DCAA accounting system is needed and more details on possible alternate acceptable types of systems if so required?

2A. An approved accounting system is required for progress payments. If an Offeror's accounting system is not approved, financing will be changed.

3Q. Model Contract: Draft RFP Part I Section B Supplied or Services and Prices/Cost: The installation CLINs (0006, 0007, 0008) do not list contract type. If these are not FFP, can the USG provide the contract type?

3A. All CLINs are FFP.

4Q. Model Contract: The Contractor shall design, develop, and build two complete T-6A ADS-B

(Out) modification kits to include all necessary hardware.

Questions: Should all development, test, and manufacturing costs be included in the CLIN?

Can the Contractor propose progress payments as part of the proposal, or will they be negotiated after award?

4A. Yes, the costs should be included in the CLIN. The Government plans to use progress payments.

5Q. Model Contract: The Contractor shall procure aircraft retrofit kits IAW Attachment 1

“JPATS Statement of Work For Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (Out) For The T-

6A Aircraft (SOW).”

Question: How many kits should be proposed for each option?

5A. 486 (does not include 1 development kit); see the pricing matrix in the RFP for instructions on option pricing.

6Q. Model Contract: The Contractor shall execute a retrofit program to install ADS-B (Out) capability on the T-6A aircraft IAW Attachment 1 “JPATS Statement of Work For Automatic

Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (Out) For The T-6A Aircraft (SOW).”

Model Contract, A. Federal Acquisition Regulation Contract Clauses in Full Text, 52.211-08

Time of Delivery (Jun 1997): (a) The Government requires delivery to be made according to the following schedule: See Attached Execution Schedule. Comment: The above-referenced

Execution Schedule is not attached. Will it be provided?

6A. The Government’s notional execution schedule will be included with the RFP.

7Q. Model Contract: Question: What differentiates Spares Buy 1 from Spares Buy 2?

7A. Spares buy 1 is our initial sparing level to support mission requirements; spares buy 2 will be based on empirical data to support the required sparing level for continued operations.

8Q. Model Contract: All Measurement Units in all documents presented to the Air Force shall be in Metric format (or as proposed by the contractor).

Questions: Is the Contractor required to use metric units on all documents?

8A. The RFP has been revised to change that from metric to imperial measurements.

9Q. Model Contract: (a) The following documents are a part of this contract: (1) Statement of

Work entitled JPATS Statement of Work For ADS-B (Out) For The T-6A Aircraft, see

Attachment 1 dated ____ (2) DD Form 1423, Contract Data Requirements Lists apply, see

Exhibit A, dated ____ (b) Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM) will take place on the follow date(s) as specified in the SOW and location(s) as specified in the SOW

Question: What are the dates for the above highlighted requirements?

9A. Those details will be in the final RFP.

10Q. Model Contract: The following contract clauses pertinent to this section are hereby incorporated by reference: A. Federal Acquisition Regulation Contract Clauses: 52.246-11

Higher-Level Contract Quality Requirement (Dec 2014): Title, number (if any), date, and tailoring (if any) of the higher-level quality standards: “____”

Question: What are the title, number, date, and tailoring of the higher-level quality standards for the above highlighted blank?

10A. The higher standard selected by the Government is AS9100C, Quality Systems - Aerospace

- Model for Quality Assurance in Design, Development, Production, Installation and Servicing, SAE International, 15 January 2009.

11Q. Model Contract: (d) PROCESSING STATUS. Any inquiry as to the processing status of a payment request or receiving report should be made to the following office: _____.

Question: What office should be filled in for the above highlighted blank?

11A. The payment office will be determined prior to contract award.

12Q. Model Contract: (a) The Government requires delivery to be made according to the following schedule: See Attached Execution Schedule ITEM NO. QUANTITY WITHIN DAYS

AFTER DATE OF CONTRACT

Question: What are the quantity and days for the above highlighted?

12A. The Government’s notional execution schedule will be included in the final RFP. Offerors may provide their proposed schedule with their proposals. The quantity and days will depend on the schedule used.

13Q. Model Contract: The Government will evaluate equally, as regards time of delivery, offers that propose delivery of each quantity within the applicable delivery period specified above.

Offers that propose delivery that will not clearly fall within the applicable required delivery period specified above, will be considered nonresponsive and rejected. The Government reserves the right to award under either the required delivery schedule or the proposed delivery schedule, when an offeror offers an earlier delivery schedule than required above. If the offeror proposes no other delivery schedule, the required delivery schedule above will apply. OFFEROR'S

PROPOSED DELIVERY SCHEDULE ITEM NO. QUANTITY WITHIN DAYS AFTER DATE OF

CONTRACT

Question: What are the quantity and days for the above highlighted?

13A. The Government notional execution schedule will be included in the final RFP. Offerors may provide their proposed schedule with their proposals. The quantity and days will depend on the schedule used.

14Q. Model Contract: So that the Government can determine whether or not the Contractor is achieving satisfactory technical progress, certain milestones events during the performance of this contract (including Configuration…