RFP_Questions_5-18-15.docx
DOCX document 19 KB Posted
- Attached to
- MQ-1 and MQ-9 Pilot and Sensor Operators Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8620-15-R-4005
About this file
Please find RFP Questions and Answers for Pilot Sensor Operators attached. Additional questions have been received and we are working on answers. Responses will be posted as soon as they are available. Please send future questions to John.Purcell.3 us.af.mil and Stephanie.Sanchez.5 us.af.mil.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 41
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Responses to FA8620-15-R-4005 RFP Questions
Q: ITO 7.1 requests "signed copy of the Model Contract, and Sections A through K", however ITO 2.2, Table 2.2 states the Vol 5 page limit is 32. The attachments to Section J put the volume over the limit. Please advise which portions of the model contract you would like attached to Vol 5:
Section A-J: 23 pages Section J, Exhibit A: 11 pages Section J, Attach 1 (PWS): 47 pages Section J, Attach 2 (ITO): 32 pages Section J, Attach 3 (EC) 8 pages Section K: 7 pages
TOTAL: 128
A: Section L paragraph 2.2 has been revised to allow for all contract documentation to be submitted per ITO 7.0 Q: CLIN 0001 maps to PWS paragraph 3.2.5, “Contractor shall provide sufficient current and qualified aircrew for nine (9) ATP events per month (average).” What constitutes an “ATP Event?”
A: Acceptance Test Plans (ATPs) are the previously approved test plans that are used to check out the system as part of the DD250 process.
Q: Do the baseline contract requirements in PWS paragraph 2 and 3.1.4 encompass both the Development Test Services and the Production Acceptance and Test Services?
A: Yes, ATPs are the production acceptance and the Developmental tests are the bulk of the effort.
Q: Do the baseline contract requirements in PWS paragraph 2 and 3.1.4 encompass both the Development Test Services and the Production Acceptance and Test Services?
A: Yes, PWS paragraph 2 and 3.1.4 encompass both the Development Test Services and the Production Acceptance and Test Services.
Q: RFP paragraph 3.2.5 identifies nine Acceptance Test Procedures (ATPs) per month as an average requirement, and PWS Para 2 identifies the number of sorties and ground tests to be performed on a daily basis. Is the nine ATPs per month requirement a part of the daily requirement in PWS Para 2, or is it separate from and additive to the baseline and surge requirement?
A: Yes, it is part of the baseline requirement.
Q: Volume V – Contract Documentation solicitation instructions requires offerors to “submit the completed Proposed Compliance Documents as a separately bound document”. Please clarify. (Please review Q&A on Past Performance Tool, Attachment 3)
| (1) | Are the five Section L Attachments listed below the instructions to be provided as a separately bound document, possibly a separately bound appendix to Volume IV? If so, please clarify page count. |
| (2) | It appears several of the Section L Attachments are included in other proposal volumes. For example, Attachment 5 is included in the Volume IV – Cost/Price (paragraph 6.3); Attachment 2 is referenced in 4.2.3.1 under Volume II – Technical Volume; Attachment 1 (paragraph 3.3) in Volume I – Executive Summary; and Attachments 3 and 4 in Volume III – Past Performance. Please clarify if offerors are to include the Attachments ONLY in the requested volume OR in the request volume AND in a separately bound document to Volume IV. |
A: The page count will be amended.
Q: The solicitation (paragraph 7.1) states an “offeror’s proposal shall include a signed copy of the Model Contract, and Sections A through K.” Paragraphs 7.1.1 requires Section A, the SF33; 7.1.2 requests a complete Section B; and 7.3.3 requires Section F. Please confirm the Government requests offerors to provide a complete Model Contract with all Sections, not only A, B, and F but also including sections C, D, E, G, H, I, J, and K. If so, please review the page limit on Volume V.
It appears a complete Section B is included both in the Volume IV (6.2) and in Volume V (7.1). Should a completed Section B be included with both volumes? Please review page count of both volumes.
A: The page count will be amended.
Q: The solicitation indicates there are blanks in Section F. Please review Section F. It appears there are no blanks in Section F of the original solicitation or Amendment 0001.
A: 7.1.3 Section F - Deliveries or Performance will be amended.
Q: Paragraph 7.3.3 requires offerors to provide the labor surplus area designation. It appears Edwards AFB (Kern County) is not designated as a labor surplus area (LSA). If an Offeror’s corporate office is also not in a LSA, is it appropriate for the Offeror to just state “Not Applicable”? Why is the labor surplus area designation requested?
A: If you contractor’s corporate office is not in a Labor Surplus Area, LSA is not applicable.
Q: In ITO section 7.3.4.1 regarding the GFP, please confirm the quantity stated in the table “1 per Contractor Employee”. Is there a maximum number the Government will provide?
A: At this time, the government has enough GFP to support historical manning levels.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .