Questions from Industry Post-RFP 6 April 2012.pdf

F-15 TDAS

Solicitation No. FA8621-12-R-6259

Questions From Industry Post-RFP

Questions Answers

Regarding the TFE-2 Conversion GFAE file provided by the Government on Bidder's Library disk #2: will the Government supply the GFAE listed in Column H? If not, does (Y) in the required GFAE column (H) mean the parts must be real aircraft parts?

The government will not be supplying GFAE listed in Column H. The parts with a (Y) in column H are required to be real aircraft parts.

The IMP/IMS Instructions included with the Final RFP states that contract award is October 2013. Is this the official date, or is this date an error? This is an error. The anticipated contract award date is October 2012.

The IMP/IMS Instructions included with the Final RFP calls out a requirement for EVMS. There is no requirement for EVMS in the PWS, Section L, or the Draft Contract Document. Also there is no requirement for EVMS reports in the CDRL requirement document (i.e. CPR, CSSR, CSFR, etc.).

This is error. There is no requirement for EVMS as the current IMP/IMS

Instructions state. EVMS will be removed from para. 3.

In the PWS under paragraph 3.1.4.2 Monthly Activity Report it states the following; "The contractor shall submit monthly activity reports not later than (NLT) seven business days after the first of the month that shall address the following…." There is a requirement in CDRL list for CDRL

A013, Contractor's Progress and Status Report, due 30 days after the completion of Transition and then monthly by the 10th of the month. Are these the same report? Also, please note there is no reference to the CDRL

A013 in the PWS.

PWS para. 3.1.4.2 has been changed to state the following, "The contractor shall submit monthly activity reports not later than (NLT) seven business days after the first of the month, or as stated in the CDRL, that shall address..." Also, CDRL A013 is referenced with CDRLs A012 & A018 after PWS Para 3.1.4.2.8, the CDRL numbers will be moved to the bottom of the monthly report section.

PWS paragraph 6.2.6 states that the Suite 8 OFP will include all items from a bulleted requirements list. Following the list it states that the Suite 8

OFP developed under another contract will include all items in the list.

It's understood that this OFP will be acquired. Is it the Government's intention that the features listed under the third bullet and sub-bullets will be incorporated by the contractor during the Suite 8 OFP implementation in the training devices and this bullet is not something included in the acquired Suite 8 OFP? Will the received OFP already have the items identified as sub-bullets to bullet #3?

The Suite 8 OFP will incorporate the capabilities of each bullet and sub-bullets in PWS Paragraph 6.2.6 into the aircraft programming modules. Those capabilities will need to be integrated into the TDAS devices. For instance, the

Suite 8 OFP will allow the aircraft (and by extension the devices) to carry and launch an AIM-9X Block 1 or 2 missile, but the OFP and that capability will need to be integrated into the device to simulate it properly (i.e. add fly out model, etc).

Section L, page 14, (B), please confirm the past performance questionnaire responses are due from the clients the same day as the Past

Performance Volume, 29 March 2012.

There is a discrepancy between the due date found in Section L and the due date found on Page 15 of the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). However, we do not plan to revise the PPQ because, in many cases, offerors have already sent the PPQ to respondents. As such, we request that offerors instruct respondents to submit PPQs directly to the Contracting Officer by 26 Mar 2012 but no later than 29 March 2012. We request that Past Performance Volumes be submitted by 29 Mar 2012.

Please describe the nature of the license for the "Threat Server, Multi-

Mode Radar System (MMRS)." What is the type of license - site, node locked, user, enterprise, other? What is the maximum number of clients that can use the license? Are additional licenses required to be purchased for use on IAT number 7 & 8?

This is a system server license, which is purchased for each device. This license will need to be purchased for IAT numbers 7 & 8.

Is it the Government's intention for the contractor to submit all five sections of each Past Performance Questionnaire or just the completed sections 1-3 for each?

Each offeror will complete Sections 1-3 of the questionnaire and send to POCs on the referenced contract. We expect each offeror to submit a copy of the questionnaire (with Sections 1-3 complete) directly to us as part of the Past

Performance Volume. The respondent POCs will then complete Sections 4-5 and remit to the Government.

Is it the Government's intention for the contractor to modify only 4 TFE-2, Automatic Flight Control System Trainers, as called out in the PWS (Para

6.2.2), not all 6 of the existing TFE-2 trainers? The Government plans to modify four of the TFE-2 trainers.

SOW Paragraph 5.2.1.1 IAT Facility Schedules, states; “The daily training facility schedule shall be Monday through Friday, 0700-1900 local time”.

If the 10 Hour Training window (or 12 Hour) is exercised please state the hours outside of normal training hours that the facility is available to the contractor to perform maintenance.

The offeror will have access to the IAT building and the IAT facility 24/7 to provide maintenance as needed.

SOW Paragraph 5.2.1.1 IAT Facility Schedules: Is the contractor responsible to secure the facility when all contractors vacate the facility for the day?

The offeror is required to escort facility visitors within the facility during the training day and secure facility at the end of the day.

SOW Paragraphs 5.2.3 and 5.2.4: Several operational duties are assigned to the contractor that require contractor presence during training. Is there a minimal number of personnel that are required to be in the facility during training? If so, please specify.

There is not a minimal number of personnel required to be in the facility during training as long as the requirements of the PWS are met.

Clause H104 states that ECPs are due 45 days after RFP. However, the

SOW para. 6.3 states that responses are due 30 calendar days after government RFP. Please advise on which cycle time is correct.

Typically we will expect to receive an ECP within 45 calendar days of requesting. However, circumstances may arise in which the contracting officer will require receipt of an ECP within a time period other than 45 calendar days.

As part of Amendment 0001, the PWS Para 6.3 will be revised to state that ECPs are due within 45 calendar days of the request, or within the time specified by the contracting officer.

Questions From Industry Post-RFP

In regards to the Fully Integrated Schedule, are you looking for one schedule or multiple schedules?

An Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) is not being requested as part of Section L for evaluation purposes. However, an IMS is required under the performance of this contract (see PWS Para 3.1.2). CDRL A014 also provides detail on the required format, content, and frequency of delivery (monthly). Attachment 18G incorrectly included a section titled “Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

Instructions/Formatting”. As part of Amendment 0001, this section is being removed because the Government is not instructing offerors in Section L to submit an IMS for evaluation. Note: Though an IMS is not being requested as part of Section L for evaluation purposes, Section L does instruct offerors to provide stand-alone schedules in Microsoft Project 2007. We do not expect these stand-alone schedules to be integrated with each other.

15 Is there a WBS provided for this effort? There are multiple WBS references found through-out the solicitation.

No WBS is provided for this effort. References found throughout Section L and

Att 18G are being removed as part of Amendment 0001.

In reference to the liquidated damages clause (52.211-11) presented in section F of the draft contract, please consider adding a reasonable cap to the amount of liquidated damages assessed – perhaps up to the value of the option/CLIN?

We believe the $1,000 per calendar day liquidated damages is reasonable and it is not in the best interest of the Government, or necessary, to place a cap on the total amount of liquidated damages that can be assessed.

Is the Master Table of Contents (TOC) and volume TOC counted in the page count for Volume I? Answers to Questions from Industry Site Visit

(3/2/12) question 1 refer to Volume II in stating that the volume TOC is counted. No mention is made in the answer concerning Volume I and the

Master TOC or the volume TOC.

Yes, the master table of contents and volume table of contents will be counted towards the page limitation for Volume 1 - Executive Summary.

Question and Answer # 6 from the Questions from Industry RFI-PWS

(1/19/12) referenced the F-15 TDAS Restricted Computer Software or

Technical Data Rights. The Government responded that this information was being provided by Boeing TSGC and Lockheed Martin. Please provide the pertinent Lockheed Martin facility, Division, etc.

We responded to Q&A #6 (from Questions from Industry RFI-PWS Post on 17

January 2012) with the answer, “Boeing TSGS and Lockheed Martin”. However, we would like to clarify our answer to this question: “Boeing TSGS (St. Louis, MO) and Lockheed Martin Global Training & Logistics (Akron, OH) perform work related to the F-15 platform and it may be useful for an offeror to enter into an ACA with them. However, the solicitation does not require offerors to negotiate ACAs with any one specific contractor.”

The RFP states that the contract award will be November 1, 2012. There are many CDRLs required that have a first submittal date of 30 days after contract award, which when tied to November 1, 2012 are not logical. A case in point: CDRL AO11, Contractor Field Service Report. The first submittal is 30 days after contract award and monthly submittals thereafter. December 1, 2012 is 30 days after contract award and we will be in the transition process and will not be in control or the F-15 TDAS trainers or their spares until December 31, 2012. A more logical first submittal of this CDRL would be 30 days after completion of the transition phase

Several CDRLs did not have the first submission in the correct time period. The following CDRLs have been adjusted to reflect a submission date "after completion of the transition period" rather than "after contract award." These

CDRLs are A008, A010, A011, A012, A017, A018, A019, A020, and A021. The

CDRLs package will be updated with Amendment 0002 to the Solicitation.

20 PWS paragraph 6.2.5 Advanced Display Core Processor (ADCP)-II states

“to ensure devices match the ADCP-II aircraft configuration and operate as required by the ADCP-II program requirements”. What are the ADCP-II program requirements?

Para. 6.2.5 has been amended in Amendment 0002 to the Solicitation to state;

"The contractor shall implement the following hardware and software architecture changes into the IAT, TFE-21, and TFE-24 devices to ensure the devices match the ADCP-II aircraft configuration and operation." The hardware and software changes are highlighted in Para. 6.2.5 as well.

21 Will the AF provide an estimated volume of classified material that will fit inside GSA approved containers so that the number of GSA approved containers required can be estimated?

The Government estimates the volume needed for classified material should fit into approximately 15 four drawer GSA approved containers. The classified drives for each device are removable from the devices and can be stored in these containers.

22 Will the Government list the items with quantities that will not fit inside the GSA approved container so that proper facility planning can be accomplished?

Items such as TSSC personnel PC-workstations, network equipment, printers, etc. needed for classified processing would need to be determined by the offeror.

Questions From Industry Post-RFP

FURTHER CLARIFICATION

The subject solicitation does not require offerors to negotiate Associate

Contractor Agreements (ACA) with any one specific contractor. Questions from

Industry RFI-PWS posted on 17 January 2012 to FedBizOpps (6th question down) does ask for identification of contractors with whom offerors would have to enter into ACAs. We responded with the answer, “Boeing TSGC and

Lockheed Martin”. However, we would like to clarify our answer to this question: “Boeing TSGS (St. Louis, MO) and Lockheed Martin Global Training &

Logistics (Akron, OH) perform work related to the F-15 platform and it may be useful for an offeror to enter into an ACA with them. However, the solicitation does not require offerors to negotiate ACAs with any one specific contractor.”

The solicitation does require that the successful offeror enter into ACAs for any portion of the contract requiring joint participation in the accomplishment of the Government’s requirement (see Clause H110 found on Page 41 of the

Solicitation). Section L, Para 4.e.(2)(D) states that offerors shall complete the fill-in text for Clause H110 Associate Contractor Agreement as part of the offeror’s Contract Documentation Proposal (Vol V), while remaining consistent with the Offeror’s Technical Proposal (Vol II). If an offeror has not yet entered into an ACA with any specific contractor, then that offeror would not fill in anything on Clause H110. After contract award if the successful offeror enters into an ACA, then we would expect to modify the contract to include that information in Clause H110. As part of an offeror’s proposal, only complete

Clause H110 with information from companies for which the offeror has already entered into an ACA.

FURTHER CLARIFICATION

The Technical Data Rights that the Government receives varies from contract to contract depending upon a number of variables. Included as part of the

Supplemental Bidders Library (Disk #2) is a spreadsheet entitled, “F-15 TDAS

Data Rights.xlsx” describing what level of data rights the Government has associated with each technical data package. The Government plans to provide the technical data package as Government Furnished Information (GFI) for anything listed as “Unlimited Rights”. The Government cannot obtain technical data from one contractor and provide it to another contractor if the

Government has only limited/restricted rights to the data. Offerors may not be able to obtain some technical data from contractors because that technical data is owned by them and they are unwilling to provide/sell that technical data.

The Government is not mandating that a specific technical data package from any specific company be used, only that the requirements listed in the

Performance Work Statement (PWS) be fulfilled. This may mean that a company must develop their own technical data solution for a given portion of the overall effort.

FURTHER CLARIFICATION

The PWS Para 10.1, Transition at Beginning of Contract, does not specify when the TSSC must be fully operational, only that the new contractor will “assume responsibility for the entire F-15 Training System devices during the transition period” and illustrate the “processes for assuming management of the F-15

TDAS TSSC” in their proposed Transition Plan. Except for the requirements found in the subject PWS paragraph which includes requiring that transition activities should not interfere with student training and that the physical TSSC must be out of the incumbent contractor’s facility by the end of the transition period, offerors have flexibility in determining their proposed solution. Please note that JAFAN requirements do not go into effect until 2015.

FURTHER CLARIFICATION

The Government believes that the information provided (found in the Bidder’s

Library) related to the IAT’s, MTD’s, and the suite of software associated with each trainer is adequate for an offeror to propose. The solicitation does not require procurement of aircraft parts or software licenses directly from the

Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM). If there is a piece of information that an offeror must have, that the Government has not already provided in the

Bidder’s Library, please submit that request as soon as possible so that the

Government can try to obtain/distribute the information. Though there are some parts that must be real aircraft parts, the solicitation is not requiring that those parts be purchased from a specific source. We believe that there are multiple sources of supply for these real aircraft parts. Further, the solicitation does not restrict an offeror from being able to develop their own software solutions or purchase those solutions from another contractor.

Regarding Section L, Para. 3(c), Proposal Organization Table: If the Master

Table of Contents is counted towards the limit of 10 pages in Volume I -

Executive Summary, that will leave little room for the Narrative Summary.

Will the Government consider an increase to the page limit of Volume I -

Executive Summary?

The Government will increase the page limit of Volume I - Executive Summary to 20 pages, inclusive of the master table of contents. This will be reflected in

Amendment 0003 of the solicitation which will be posted on 30 March 2012.

Questions From Industry Post-RFP

The contractors do not know when the Government will turn on certain options (ATD procurements, TFE conversions…). We understand the TEP is calculated by averaging these procurements, however, the Small

Business Participation plan shown in Section L (page 9 of 19) looks like you are requesting the participation plan by year. If we are to average the prices per year to match the TEP, what year are you wanting us to put all of these procurements in?

At this time the Government does not know when task orders will be issued for

Concurrency Upgrades, Conversions, ATD Procurement, Device Relocation, or

End of Contract Transition. The Total Evaluated Price (TEP) calculation averages the price of these items in order to have the most realistic overall TEP.

We are requesting that the Small Business Participation Plan include a table formatted as shown in Section L (Page 9) that does break out small business participation by year. The Government requests that offerors use their best judgment when completing the Small Business Participation Plan. There is no need to average the small business participation to match the TEP. However, offerors should not exaggerate/duplicate dollars/percentages over the life of the contract. For example, the Government does plan on purchasing 2 ATDs sometime in 2014 to 2016 but we do not know (due to funding availability, etc) which year(s) the task order(s) will be issued. The TEP calculation averages the price for these ATDs across the three years to come up with an average price for 2 ATDs (rather than having the TEP calculation include a total of 6 ATDs knowing we only plan to purchase 2 ATDs). Even though offerors may obtain quotes from small businesses to perform some of the work for 2 ATDs each year, we would expect offerors to only fill in small business dollars/percentages for 2 ATDs sometime in 2014 to 2016. We are leaving it up to the offerors to decide in which year to allocate the small business dollars/percentages.

Does the Government expect offerors to submit a completed Proposal

Adequacy Checklist found at Solicitation Attachment 3 at the time proposals are submitted?

No, offerors are not required to submit a completed Proposal Adequacy

Checklist as part of their proposal. The Proposal Adequacy Checklist found at

Attachment 3 of the Solicitation is included because it will be part of the subsequent contract as Attachment 3. Clause H104 (found on Pages 38-39 of the Solicitation), Para (b)(2) requires that this Proposal Adequacy Checklist be completed with each change proposal submitted to the Government after award of the contract.