FA8621-15-R-6328_-_Request_for_Clarification_1.pdf

Question Number

Question Reference (SOW, L&M, Page #s, etc.)

Question Government Response RFP Amendment?

1 Pricing Matrix Pricing Matrix – CLINs 104, 105, and 106 appear to be the exact same as CLINs 97, 98, and 99. Will CLINs 104, 105, and 106 be changed to a ‘Loadmaster’ Transition Course?

CLIN 105, 106, and 107 were incorrectly titled. Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix, has been updated. CLIN 105 should be titled "MC-130J - Loadmaster - ML - Re-Qualification/Transition (MC130J-ML-TX1) TX1", CLIN 106 should be titled "MC-130J - Loadmaster - ML - Re-Qualification/Transition (MC130J-ML-TX2) TX2", CLIN 107 should be titled "Reserved - MC-130J -Loadmaster - ML - Re-Qualification/Transition (MC130J-ML-TX) TX3 - Draft"

Yes, Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix and CLIN language updated.

Section L, page 16;

License and

Maintenance Agreement

Will the existing license and maintenance agreements be transferred to the awarded team or is the offeror expected to submit individual licensing agreements with every company provided in attachment 20? Will the USG provide previous costs for renewal prices?

Offerors shall assume non-perpetual license and maintenance agreements will expire at KDAM ATARS contract start. Perpetual license and maintenance agreements will be transferred to the KDAM ATARS awardee. The Government will not be providing previous costs for renewal prices because it is competitive information.

No

3 Pricing Matrix Where does the commercial training listed in CLIN 13, lines 1-49, take place currently?

Training currently takes place at vendor facilities. No

4 Pricing Matrix Commercial Training: Are any of the commercial training assets GFE? Will they be made available?

No commercial training assets are GFE. No

5 Pricing Matrix Commercial Training: Any syllabi available for any of these courses currently?

Syllabi are provided by the vendor. No

6 Pricing Matrix Commercial Training: What is the expected student throughput?

The government will not be providing anticipated student throughput for commercial training due to fluctuations in requirements.

No

7 Pricing Matrix Commercial Training: Will the price need to include transportation of students to the training location?

Government travel is not the contractor's responsibility. No

8 Pricing Matrix Commercial Training: How shall we differentiate the prices that are for crews vs those for individual students?

Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix, has been updated to include column H "Unit of Measure". Price for each course shall be provided based on the unit of measure indicated in column H.

Hours added as a unit of measure to Section J, Attachment 04, Section M , Part II Para 4.e.5.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 04, Section M and Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix and Pricing Matrix Instructions updated.

9 Other

New Mexico currently has a gross receipts tax on ALL services in the state.

A) Will the government consider a cost reimbursable (NO OH/GA/or Fee) for all offerors to submit the gross receipts tax due?

B) Should all offerors include the gross receipts tax on services within their fully burdened price?

C) Can the government provide a waiver for the taxes due on services?

The government will not consider a cost reimbursable CLIN or waiver for gross receipts tax. Offerors shall include applicable gross receipts tax as part of Firm Fixed Prices proposed.

No

10 Item 3 of the RFP Cover Letter

Item 3 of the RFP Cover Letter states "The Government requests all Past Performance Information be submitted by 1300 (EST) on 24 July 2015."

Please clarify whether the government is looking for the whole Past Performance Volume to be submitted on 24 July, or just the PPI output (in pdf format) from the PPI Tool.

Per Section L, Part 2, Para (d), the entire Past Performance Volume is requested by 24 Jul 15.

No

11 Does a syllabus exist for the following courses and if so, does the government intend to supply them?

See 11 a through m below See 11 a through m below a CLIN 22 - CV-22 - Pilot - FP/MP - Initial Qualification (CV22-FP/MP-IQ) – other than the SGTO

No. Utilize SGTO syllabus as provided in FBO Bidder's Library Document posted 23 Jun 15, CV-22 Syllabi, AETC Syllabus CV22-

FP/MP-IQ (SGTO).

No b CLIN 55 - Reserved - HC-130J - Pilot - MP - Re-Qualification/Transition (HC130J-MP-TX) TX2 - Draft

As indicated within Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix, this is a reserved CLIN and shall not be priced at this time

No c CLIN 56 - Reserved - HC-130J - Pilot - MP - Re-Qualification/Transition (HC130J-MP-TX) TX3 - Draft

As indicated within Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix, this is a reserved CLIN and shall not be priced at this time

No d CLIN 67 - HC-130J - Loadmaster - L - Initial Qualification (HC130J-L-IQ) Yes. HC-130J-L-IQ utilizes the syllabus titled HC/MC130J-L/SMA-IQ.

See FBO Bidder's Library Document posted 23 Jun 15, HC-130J Syllabi , AETC Syllabus HC/MC130J-L/SMA-IQ .

No e CLIN 81 - Reserved - HH-60G - Special Missions Aviator - SMA - Transition/Re-Qualification (HH60G-SMA-IQ) TX2 - Draft

As indicated within Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix, this is a reserved CLIN and shall not be priced at this time

No f CLIN 82 - Reserved - HH-60G - Special Missions Aviator - SMA - Transition/Re-Qualification (HH60G-SMA-IQ) TX3 – Draft

As indicated within Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix, this is a reserved CLIN and shall not be priced at this time

No g CLIN 88 - MC-130J - Pilot - MP - Mission Qualification (MC130J-MP-MQ) Yes. MC130J-MP-MQ utilizes the syllabus titled MC130J-MP-MQ (SGTO). See FBO Bidder's Library Document posted 23 Jun 15, MC- 130J Syllabi, AETC Syllabus MC130J-MP-MQ (SGTO).

No h CLIN 91 - Reserved - MC-130J - Pilot - MP - Re-Qualification/Transition (MC130J-MP-TX) TX3 - Draft

As indicated within Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix, this is a reserved CLIN and shall not be priced at this time

No i CLIN 96 - MC-130J - CSO - MN - Mission Qualification (MC130J-MN-IMQ) Yes. MC130J-MN-IMQ utilizes the syllabus titled MC130J-MN-IMQ (SGTO). See FBO Bidder's Library Document posted 23 Jun 15, MC- 130J Syllabi, AETC Syllabus MC130J-MN-IMQ SGTO

No j CLIN 106 - Reserved - MC-130J -CSO - MN - Re-Qualification/Transition (MC130J-MN-TX) TX3 - Draft

As indicated within Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix, this is a reserved CLIN and shall not be priced at this time Attachment 5, Pricing Matrix has been updated to reflect the correct title for this CLIN, see response to question #1 above.

Yes, Section J, Atachment 05, Pricing Matrix k CLIN 109 - AC-130J - Pilot - FP - Initial Qualification (MC130J-P-IQ) Yes. AC-130J pilot initial qualification utilizes the syllabus titled HC/MC130J-P-IQ. See FBO Bidder's Library Document posted 23 Jun 15, AC-130J Syllabi, AETC Syllabus HC/MC130J-P-IQ.

No l CLIN 110 - AC-130J - CSO - N - Initial Qualification (MC130J-N-IQ) Yes. AC-130J CSO initial qualification utilizes the syllabus titled HC/MC130J-N-IQ. See FBO Bidder's Library Document posted 23 Jun 15, AC-130J Syllabi, AETC Syllabus HC/MC130J-N-IQ.

No

CLINs

KDAM ATARS: FA8621-15-R-6328

Response to Questions m CLIN 111 - AC-130J - Special Mission Aviator - SMA - Initial Qualification

(MC130J-SMA-IQ)

Yes. AC-130J SMA initial qualification utilizes the syllabus titled HC/MC130J-L/SMA-IQ. See FBO Bidder's Library Document AC-130J Syllabi, AETC Syllabus HC/MC130J-L/SMA-IQ.

No

12 Is there a specific CLIN associated with the following courses? See 12 a and b below See 12 a and b below a UH-1N Instructor Flight Engineer Upgrade Qualification (UH1N-FE-IUQ) No. No b UH-1N Mission Flight Engineer Transition Course / Requalification (UH1N-

MF-TX/RQ)

No. No

13 Is CLIN 30 intended to be course CV-22 - Senior Officer Course (CV22-SOC) (TRACK A) and CLIN 31 CV-22 - Senior Officer Course (CV22-SOC) (TRACK B)?

No. CLIN 30 is for CV-22 SMA upgrade qualification utlizing AETC Syllabus CV22-IP/F-UQ, as stated. CLIN 31 is for CV-22 SOC utilizing AETC Syllabus CV22-SOC for both Track A and Track B.

No

14 Is CLIN 53 intended to be course HC-130J - Pilot - MP - Mission Qualification

(HC130J-MP-MQ) (SGTO)

HC-130J - Pilot - MP - Mission Qualification course utilizes the syllabus titled HC130J-MP-MQ (SGTO).

No

15 Is CLIN 61 intended to be course HC-130J - CSO - MN - Mission Qualification

(HC130J-MN-IMQ) (SGTO)

HC-130J - CSO - MN - Mission Qualification course utilizes the syllabus titled HC130J-MN-IMQ (SGTO).

No

14 Is CLIN 68 intended to be course HC-130J - Loadmaster - ML - Mission Qualification (HC130J-ML-MQ) (SGTO)

HC-130J - Loadmaster - ML - Mission Qualification course utilizes the syllabus titled HC130J-ML-MQ (SGTO).

No

15 General Question Is there a most probable expected student throughput or projected PFT for each of the years of the solicitation?

All available information has been provided. No

16 General Question Is there an expected level of effort for contractor simulator and in-flight instruction as a % of the overall effort?

No. Simulator and in-flight instruction requirements for each course are outlined in the course syllabus.

No

17 General Question What is the level of effort required for Observation Flights?

The level of effort required for Observation Flights varies and will be done in conjunction with the course syllabus.

No

18 General Question Is there a separate, specific CLIN associated with Kirtland CRM training? See Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix, CLIN 0129 No

19 CLIN 0128

Is there a specific timeframe associated with CLIN 0128 Training Device Relocation?

The CLIN can be exercised at any point during each respective annual period of performance and can be exercised multiple times per annual period of performance. The duration of the relocation shall be included within each respective option exercise. The Government expects, once the option is awarded, for the work to be diligently and continuously executed until final acceptance by the Government.

Yes, CLIN language updated

20 PWS 3.a.ii The OFP definition in PWS 3.a.ii reads “Operational Flight Profile”, should it read “Operational Flight Programs”?

Yes. Section J, Attachment 01, PWS updated.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 01, PWS updated

21 SOO Exhibit A SOO Exhibit A reference document is not provided in the RFP. Please provide guidance.

See FBO Explicit Access Document, Exhibit A to Section J, Attachment 06, posted to FBO 16 Apr 15.

No

22 SOO Exhibit B SOO Exhibit B reference document is not provided in the RFP but is provided in the DRFP. Is the DRFP version to be used with the RFP?

See FBO Explicit Access Document, Exhibit B to Section J, Attachment 06, posted to FBO 16 Apr 15.

No

23 SOO 3.3.1

SOO 3.3.1 Scope states “The Offeror shall deliver an updated Systems Specification for the OFT only.” The requirement does not specify the schedule for the specification to be delivered. Are the bidders required to submit the system specification with the proposal? If so, where in the proposal should this document be placed and is there a page limitation?

The updated System Specification shall not be delivered with proposal.

No

24 CDRL TOC

There is no CDRL Data Item in the CDRL Table of Contents (Exhibit_A) for the “Interface Control Document DI-CMAN-81248A” referenced in the concurrency modification CDRL (Exhibit C of Attachment 6 – KDAM SOO).

What is the 1423 reference for this?

Section J, Attachment 06, Exhibit C, Concurrency Modification CDRLs, has been updated to remove reference to Interface Control Document DI-CMA-81248A.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 06, Exhibit C updated

25 PWS 5 b)

PWS paragraph 5 b) states “The Contractor shall ensure maximum reuse and sharing of MDS courseware as applicable.” Will content currently in use on ATARS II across MDS’ outside of KDAM ATARS (AC-130, MC-130, CV-

22) be made available to support the KDAM ATARS sustainment/development efforts?

Yes No

26 PWS 5.1 d)

PWS paragraph 5.1 d) states “The Contractor shall ensure all courseware is delivered in HTML5 or the most current version (as coordinated with the Government), and unclassified courseware is executable on Government- PMO-approved mobile devices.” Can the Government provide a list of the current Government-PMO-approved mobile devices?

The Mobility Program is constantly evolving. The following devices are currently offered: iPhone, iPad, Galaxy, Note Pro 12.2, Galaxy Tablet, and Windows based products are anticipated if Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) is allowed.

No

27 PWS 5.2 b)

PWS paragraph 5.2 b) states “The Contractor shall utilize the Government approved KeneXa LMS for administration, documentation, tracking, reporting, and delivery of all (classroom and distributed learning) courseware. The Contractor shall ensure the LMS is current IAW Table 6:

TCP Prioritization Matrix.” We assume the Government is referencing Table 5 and not 6. Can the Government please expand on how the TCP prioritization Matrix relates to currency of the LCMS as written?

Section J, Attachment 01, PWS, has been updated to correct the Table Reference. The intent is as the TCPs are closed and accepted by the Government there is no lag in the updates being incorporated into the LMS.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 01, PWS updated

28 Section J, Attachment

Syllabus List indicates syllabi in support of TH-1H training (Courseware Only). Assuming that this content for use at Ft Rucker, AL at the 23 FTS, are there any additional courseware staffing requirements to support sustainment efforts at Ft Rucker?

The Government has no expectation for staffing at Ft. Rucker, however, each offeror shall determine their own means and methods for accomplishing the requirement.

No

29 General Can the Government provide a history of the number of courseware TCPs processed each year by MDS?

Available history is provided within the bidders library. No

30 General RFP Cover Letter states that the RFP response deadline is “1300 (EST) on 24 August 2015.” Shouldn’t the time be Eastern Daylight Savings Time (EDT) rather than Eastern Standard Time?

The response deadline is 1300 Eastern Time (ET) on 24 August 2015. No

31 RFP p. 149, Preamble of Section I

The preamble mentions “the Air Force Materiel Command FAR Sup.”

Shouldn’t this reference be deleted since the Air Force Materiel Command FAR Supplement was abolished by the Air Force?

Noted, this is standard language within the contract writing system. No

32 FAR 52.215-21 (RFP p.

150)

Should the referenced electronic media be “Microsoft Excel 2010” for consistency with Paragraph III.11 of Section L of the RFP? Same comment for FAR 52.215-20 on p. 1 of Section L.

Model contract updated to reflect 2010. Yes, Model Contract updated

33 FAR 52.219-14 (RFP p.

150)

Which limitation of subcontracting in FAR 52.219-14 applies to this contract—subsection (c)(1) services or subsection (c)(2) supplies. It is unclear which limitation applies because a manufacturing (i.e., non-services) NAICS is designated (336413) for this acquisition, yet the RFP also includes Service Contract Act clause, FAR 52.222-41, which only applies to contracts with a principal purpose of providing services. Please identify which limitation (supplies or services) that the Air Force will use for the evaluation of proposals compliance with the limitation of subcontracting requirement.

Since the potential exists for the contract to swing from supply to service and vice versa in any given period of performance depending upon the magnitude of requirements, Offerors shall utilize both Service and Supply subsections of the Limitation of Subcontracting clause (FAR 52.219-14). When performing Services subsection (c)(1) will apply and when performing Supply actions subsection (c)(2) will apply. Both FAR 52.222-41 and FAR 52.222-20 apply to this contracts services and supply CLINs respectively.

No

FAR 52.242-03,

Penalties for

Unallowable Costs (RFP p. 152)

This clause should include the following qualifier: “Applies to Cost CLIN(s) only.” Please add FAR 52.246-24, Limitation of Liability—High Value Items.

The Government does not agree that this clause only applies to cost CLINs. FAR 52.246-24 has been added to the contract

Yes, Model Contract updated

35 General Recommend that DFARS 252.215-7004 be deleted because the Canadian Commercial Corporation is not eligible for award. See Section L.II.1

Clause has been deleted Yes, Model Contract updated

DFARS 252.235-7004,

Protection of Human Subject (RFP p. 155).

Recommend this clause be deleted under the criteria set forth use of this clause at DFARS 235.072(e)

Clause has been deleted Yes, Model Contract updated

Reference Section L – Instructions to

Offerors, Part IV, Proposal

Organization, 3, Volume III – Price h.

“Table Rate values shall be rounded to the nearest 1/10th of a dollar.”

Would the Government please clarify if the reference requires the bidders to round up, for example a rate of $45.26 to $45.30, or should the requirement be to round to the “nearest 1/100th of a dollar” allowing the offeror to have a rate of $45.26?

The Government does not wish to change to 1/100. No

Section L, 4. Volume IV - Contract

Documentation, H.2 License and

Maintenance Agreements requires the contractor to provide each agreement for Government review to ensure agreements do not contain terms and conditions prohibited by Federal Laws. The required License and

Maintenance agreements are identified within

Section J, Attachment

Can the Government please clarify what is required for proposal submittal?

We have contacted some of the referenced providers and they will not provide their "standard agreement" without purchasing the product/service.

If the vendor will not provide said agreement, make a statement as such and submit all other agreements.

No

Section L describes two section to submit our technical response: Subfactor 1 and 2. Answering these two subfactors would not address all of the areas/work covered in the PWS

Does the Government want respondents to address only sections L and M or are we required to address all items in the PWS?

Section J, Attachment 03, Section L and Attachment 04, Section M establish the instructions and evaluation criteria for the source selection. The Government will strictly adhere to these.

No

Section J, Atch 21, paragraph 1

Is “training mission” synonymous with “event” used elsewhere in the OPFOR PWS and as used in the OPFOR Pricing Matrix? If not, please explain difference.

No. Events support training missions. Numerous events may be required to fulfill syllabus training missions.

No

Section J, Atch 21, paragraphs 1, 1.3.3, 1.8.2.2, and 1.8.2.6

Please clarify who provides pyrotechnic expendables for OPFOR and downed aircrew simulations. During the ’09-’12 contract period the Government was unable to provide pyrotechnics. During the ’12-current contract, all pyro has been CFE. Does Attach 21, paragraph. 1, “procurement of expendables” refer to drawing expendables from magazine for daily use or something more? According to paragraph.

1.3.3, will the Government provide all “threat simulators”, “munitions”, and “rockets”? Does paragraph 1.8.2.6 “GFE pyrotechnics” refer to all pyrotechnics used on the contract? Does paragraph. 1.8.2.2, “GFE munitions” refer to all munitions and pyrotechnics?

All pyrotechnic expendables will be provided by the Government. No

Section J, Atch 21, paragraph 1.8.2.2

In reference to the statement, "Contractor shall transport and use GFE munitions class 1.4, 1.3, 1.2.2”, does transport include transport on public roads, or just on base? Can you confirm that the Government wants the contractor to transport class 1.3 and class

1.2.2 explosives on public roads?

Section J, Attachment 21, Kirtland AFB OPFOR Requirements updated to remove class 1.3 and class 1.2.2 explosives.

Yes, Attachment 21, Kirtland AFB OPFOR Requirements updated

Section J, Atch 21, paragraphs 1, 1.4.3.1, and 1.7

Paragraph 1.4.3.1, “static load training on average 24 hours/week or average of 3 days/week” and paragraph 1.7 “typical static-load training event requires 2-3 hours of driver operating the 10K AT.”

seem to conflict in describing the duration of a static-load training event. When a task only takes “2-3 hours”, should we assume the Government will normally assign additional tasks to make an “average duration of each training mission...8 to12-hours,” as described in paragraph 1?

Each typical static-load training event takes 2-3 hours. There may be one or numerous events scheduled on a given day. Over the course of a week, cumulative typical static-load training events average 24 hours. Response to second question on additional tasks is no.

No

Filename: Atch_05_- _KDAM_ATARS_Pric ing_Matrix_v3.xlsx sheet: Opposing Forces Bands

Kirtland

Reference Pricing Matrix, sheet labeled "Opposing Forces Bands Kirtland", Bands A, B, C & D, should we price these bands for “10”, ”20”, “30”, “50” events per year as a number of events that would be added to subsequent bands, for example to order 230 events in a year? Because of the disproportional fixed costs incurred with very small levels of production, the price to provide “10” total events in a year would be significantly higher than providing “10” additional events added to the “100”, “200”, “300”, etc. bands. If the Government requires both prices—10, 20, 30, 50 total per year as well as 10, 20, 30, 50 added to subsequent bands, can the Government please add price bands to specify the difference?

Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix updated to reflect the bands for quantities up to 10, 20, 30, and 50 are to be priced as additive to the higher quantity bands and will not be exercised as a standalone quantity.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix updated

Section J, Atch 21, paragraph 1

Referencing Paragraph 1, last sentence “Support includes but is not limited to,” can the Government describe the complete requirement in the PWS? For example, the list of support in paragraph 1 does not include Alternate Insertion Extraction, or Fast Rope, which has been included in the recent contract and has unique costs.

Section J, Attachment 01, PWS adequately addresses the requirement for KDAM ATARS.

No

Section L.IV.2.c, pg.

A Subcontractor Performance Matrix is listed as a requirement in the "Past Performance Volume Organization" table of Section L. Can the Government please define the requirements of this matrix?

Section J, Attachment 03, Section L updated to remove this requirement. The original intent was for each offeror to provide a matrix identifying each subcontractor and their respective percentage of work, this information is already included within the PPI Tool.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 03, Section L updated

Section L.III.12 pg 7 (Tab 1);

L.IV.2.k pg.11 (Tab 4);

L.IV.2.j pg.11 (Tab 6);

L.IV.2.n pg.12 (Tab 7)

Volume II Past Performance includes details for content of Tabs 1, 4, 6, 7. Does the Government have content requirements for Tabs 2, 3, and 5 which are not currently assigned in the RFP?

Section J, Attachment 03, Section L has been updated to provide clarity.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 03, Section L updated

Filename: Atch 16- KDAM_ATARS_Cros s_Reference_Matrix

_v11.xlsx

Attachment 16 includes columns labeled "REQ DOC" and WORK REQ".

Can the Government please define what is required in these columns?

Section J, Attachment 16, Cross Reference Matrix has been updated.

Yes, Attachment 16, Cross Reference Matrix updated

49 PWS 1.30

PWS 1.30 indicates contract instructors will occasionally be permitted to participate in flights. Will the Government provide any/all life support equipment and associated training (e.g. personal & life support equipment training, egress training, emergency procedures training)?

The Government will provide necessary equipment (on a short-term basis) and required training for instructor in-flight participation.

No

50 PWS 5.2/5.2.1

The contractor is directed to use KeneXa LMS. Will the Government provide the LMS or is this a contractor responsibility?

The Government will provide the LMS. The Contractor is responsible for all licenses required to operate.

No

Attachment 12- Collective Bargaining

Agreements

Attachment 12 contains Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) for Kirtland and Davis Monthan AFBs and a Wage Determination (WD) Sheet covering Moody AFB. However, there is no CBA or WD information provided for Andrews AFB. Can the government provide a revision to Attachment 12 which includes wage and benefit information for Andrews AFB?

There is no CBA for Andrews. The WD for Andrews is forthcoming. Yes, pending

Attachment 12 page

24 of 91, Article 7

Under the table showing wages for the different labor positions, there is a note: **Full-time Contract Instructors on payroll as of October 1, 2013 shall receive a three percent (3%) cash payment in lieu of a wage increase, payable the first full pay period following October 1.

There is no ** referenced in the table. Is this intended to mean that new Contract Instructors are hired at the table rates, but existing employees receive a 3% cash payment each year and are still paid the 2013 rates? If this is the case, how are Offerors to price Contract Instructors?

The CBA is clear on how to establish the base pay rate. No

Model Contract page 15; Section L.III.12 pg 5.

Section I, clause 52.215-21 required use of 2007 whereas Section L.III, paragraphs 6 and 11 stipulate the use of Office 2010 products, including Excel. Can the Government please clarify?

See response to question #32 above. Yes, Model Contract updated

54 Asset List Please confirm that console operation is required for CV-22 devices while CLS is not required for these devices

Yes, console operation is required for CV-22 devices. No

Attachment 12 page

24 of 91, Article 7 SMEs are referenced in this section, but no pay rates are provided.

Are SMEs part of the CBA or excluded from the CBA?

Section J, Attachment 12, Collective Bargaining Agreements, page 24 of 91 shows the SME rate.

No

56 Attachment 12 WD or CBA for JB Andrews appear to be missing, although 2 different WDs are provided for Georgia. Can the Government please clarify?

See response to question #51 above. Yes, pending

57 Exhibit A - CDRLs CDRL A025 requires the submission of the draft transition plan with the proposal. Please clarify how this document is to be submitted.

Exhibit A, CDRLs updated to remove requirement for draft plan with proposal.

Yes, Exhibit A, CDRLs updated

Attachment 13 -

Base Support Agreements

The provided Base Support Agreement for Moody AFB is marked "Draft". Can the Government please provide the final agreement?

If there is no final agreement, can Offerors assume support will be not less than identified in the Draft document?

Agreement is not finalized, final agreement will be the same as included within RFP, just waiting on signatures

No

Section J, Attachment 01:

Paragraph 8.2

For the simulators located at Kirtland AFB associated with this contract, what is the status of the CAF DMO accreditation?

Kirtland AFB is not CAF DMO accredited. No

Section J, Attachment 01:

Paragraph 8.2

For the simulators located at David - Monthan AFB associated with this contract, what is the status of the CAF DMO accreditation?

Davis-Monthan AFB is not CAF DMO accredited. No

Section J, Attachment 01:

Paragraph 8.2

For the simulators located at Andrews AFB associated with this contract, what is the status of the CAF DMO accreditation?

Andrews AFB is not CAF DMO accredited. No

Section J, Attachment 01:

Paragraph 8.2

For the simulators located at Moody AFB associated with this contract, what is the status of the CAF DMO accreditation?

Moody AFB is not CAF DMO accredited. No

Section J, Attachment 01:

Paragraph 6

Are there current SSPs/ATOs at each site to update and maintain, or will these be new packages?

There are SSPs/ATOs at each site that will need to be maintained, as well as additional SSPs/ATOs that may need to be developed in the future. Please reference information posted in bidder's library 16 Apr 15.

No

Section J, Attachment 01:

Paragraph 6.1.1.1

What are the types and quantity of platforms to require Platform IT accreditation packages?

Reference, Section J, Attachment 07, Asset List. No

Section J, Attachment 01:

Paragraph 6.1.1.5

Will the Government provide the architecture of the information systems so the Offerors may determine boundaries and complexity of the system in order to estimate the level of effort in the C & A package?

All available information has been provided. No

66 PWS 4.1, pg. 43

PWS 4.1 states "The Contractor shall provide and maintain an area for student CBT refresher training and self-study at Davis-Monthan AFB and Moody AFB." Will the computers be provided by Government or is this a contractor requirement?

Yes, computers will be provided by the Government. No

Section J, Attachment 05, Paragraph 2, pg 3 of

Paragraph 2 under the heading Table Rate Specific Instructions states “Table rates submitted shall be utilized for all Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs) without exception."

The following paragraph is in direct conflict with this statement saying “…if the competitively priced table rates are determined to not be in the best interest of the Government, they will not be utilized for any future ECP(s), until such time that they are re-determined to be in the best interest of the Government.”

Can the Government please clarify?

Unless the Government subsequently determines, based upon the analysis described, the Table Rates are not in the government's best interest, Table Rates shall be utilized for all ECPs without exception.

No change to the RFP.

No

Section L.IV.1.b(4)

Subfactor 1

Section L, Technical Solution - Subfactor 1 requires the Offeror specifically address the PWS areas of CLS, training management, and Cybersecurity; however, Section L does not include guidance of addressing the other PWS areas such as TSSC, Courseware, DBGS, DMO, and CM. Does the Government intend the Offeror to include these aforementioned areas within the technical solution? If so, would the Government consider including ITO guidance and additional page count to support this addition?

See resposne to question #39 above. No

Section M, Exhibit A

Relevancy Matrix

To achieve a rating of "Relevant" or above for TSSC, the PP citation must have “…involved hardware and software system modifications to include performing change management, baseline control, testing, DR/DCCRs and minor mods on a DoD aircrew training system AND Involving more than 1 site and more than 1 MDS. “

No small business prime has ever been awarded an aircrew training system contract with a TSSC that has multiple MDSs. We believe that ATARS may be the only WP program that includes TSSC support of multiple MDS. As such, Lockheed Martin is the only contractor with a performance to be assessed at "Very Relevant" in this category. With current Section M criteria, the most a small business could be rated is "Somewhat Relevant". As KDAM is a small business set aside and Lockheed Martin cannot compete as Prime, would the Government consider changing the "Highly Relevant" criteria to a requirement “Involving more than 1 site and 1 MDS”?

The Government will not change the relevancy matrix. The criteria is not limited to a WPAFB contract.

No

70 Site Visits Are offerors still allowed site visits now that RFP has been released? Yes, in accordance with Section J, Attachment 17, DD 254. No

71 Item 2: Subcontractor Performance Matrix

Expected contents & format of this matrix. See response to question #46 above.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 03, Section L updated

No “Non ATD” assets listed for Moody AFB, GA

Is this correct? Please clarify.

This is an ATARS II nomenclature and does not carry forward to

KDAM ATARS

No

73 CDRL A025

Likelihood of timing indicated being possible – will the Government provide comments on Prelim version submitted with proposal, during the evaluation period – to allow for two (2) additional submissions (Draft and Final) by 30 days post Contract award?

See response to question #57 above. Yes, Exhibit A, CDRLs updated

74 OPFOR Requirements Section 1, parag. 1

Does this refer to drawing expendables from magazine for daily use or something more?

This refers to daily use. No

75 OPFOR Requirements Section 1, parag. 1

During the ’09-’12 contract period the Government was unable to provide pyrotechnics. During the current (’12) contract, all pyro has been CFE.

Please clarify – this will affect how offerors need to price proposed services.

The Government has no expectation for the contractor to provide.

No change to requirements

No

76 OPFOR Requirements parag. 1.3.3

Not clear whether Government will provide all “threat simulators”, “munitions”, and “rockets”

The Government will provide all threat simulators, munitions, and rockets.

No

77 OPFOR Requirements, parags. 1.4.3.1 & 1.7

a. “static load training on average 24 hours/week or average of 3 days/week” & b. “typical static-load training event requires 2-3 hours of driver operating the 10K AT.” These two paragraphs appear to conflict in describing the duration of a static-load training event. When a task only takes “2-3 hours”, should we assume the Government will normally assign additional tasks to make an “average duration of each training mission...8 to12-hours,” as described in paragraph 1?

See response to question #43 above. No

78 OPFOR Requirements, parags. 1.8.2.2

“GFE munitions” Does this refer to all munitions and pyrotechnics?

See Section J, Attachment 21, Kirtland AFB OPFOR Requirements Para 1.8.2.2.

No

79 OPFOR Requirements, parags. 1.8.2.2

Can you confirm whether the Government wants the contractor to transport class 1.3 and class 1.2.2 explosives on public roads?

See response to question #41 above. No

80 OPFOR Requirements, parags. 1.8.2.6

Does this refer to all pyrotechnics used on the contract? Yes No

OPFOR Requirements Section 1, parag. 1 last sentence

The list of support in paragraph 1 does not include Alternate Insertion Extraction, or Fast Rope, which has been included in the recent contract and entails unique costs. Can the Government describe the complete requirement in the PWS?

See response to question #45 above. No

82 Pricing Matrix and Instructions

If the Government requires both prices—10, 20, 30, 50 total per year as well as 10, 20, 30, 50 added to other bands, could additional price bands be added to specify the different application of price bands for less than 100 events per year?

See response to question #44 above. Yes, Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix updated

83 X013 – Commercial Training:

If the Government does not provide details on the requirement, on what basis is pricing to be developed? Please clarify.

A list of companies currently providing commercial training is attached.

No

Reference Section J, Attachment 16-Cross

Reference Matrix

Attachment 16 shows two Cross Reference Matrixes (CRM), Proposal Cross Reference Matrix and PWS Cross Reference Matrix. Are both required?

Considering that the PWS CRM is the most comprehensive, including PWS tasks that are not included in the Proposal CRM or in Section L &M, will the offeror’s Technical Proposal be evaluated on all of the PWS tasks cited in the PWS CRM? Also, pls clarify what is required in the two left hand columns of the PWS CRM, i.e., “REQ DOC” and WORK DOC.

Section J, Attachment 16 updated to refine Solitication matrix and remove CLIN/PWS matrix. See response to question #39 above for proposal evaluation information.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 03, Section L and Attachment 16, Solicitation Cross Reference Matrix updated

85 Pricing Matrix, Commercial Training

Is fuel cost included as part of the price?

Yes. Reference Section J, Attachment 05 Pricing Matrix Instructions for Commercial Training, "all administrative, ancillary, consumption, etc., fees and costs" shall be included in pricing. Section J, Attachment 05 Pricing Matrix, Commercial Training updated to clarify.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 05 Pricing Matrix, Commercial Training updated

86 PWS, Para 13, Services Summary

For SS-05, is 4.k the correct PWS reference?

No. Section J, Attachment 01, PWS Para 13, Services Summary updated to reflect correct PWS reference.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 01, PWS updated

87 PWS, Para 1.15 DI-MGMT-81238/T, Contract Field Status Report is listed as a deliverable for for FSRs, but is not included in Exhibit A - CDRLs, is this required?

No. Section J, Attachment 01, PWS updated to remove all references to DI-MGMT-81238/T, Contract Field Status Report

Yes, Section J, Attachment 01, PWS updated

88 PWS, Section 6

It is our understanding that the JMATS procurement contract currently provides Cybersecurity for all C-130J variant devices. Does the Government intend for the KDAM contract to also provide Cybersecurity for the C-130J variant devices?

No. Section J, Attachment 01, PWS Section 6, System Security has been updated to clarify KDAM ATARS contractor responsibilities regarding C-130J variant devices.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 01, PWS updated

89 Pricing Matrix,PWS References

Are the PWS references provided in the pricing matrix to be considered when developing the pricing for each CLIN?

Each CLIN shall be priced in accordance with the referenced PWS sections encompassing the respective requirements of each respective CLIN. Offerors shall account for all PWS requirements within their CLIN pricing.

Yes, Section J, Attachment 05, Pricing Matrix updated

COMMERCIAL TRAINING PROVIDERS

Provider Aircraft

SIMCON / S3 PC-12

Baslo Turbo BT67/DC3TP

CAE DO328

Flight Safety International (FSI) MC-12/King Air 350 Proline

Vertol Systems Company (VSC) UH-1H

S3 MD-530F

Flight Safety International (FSI) Q200

Flight Safety International (FSI) Twin Otter

Concord XXI / Vertol Systems Company (VSC)

MI-17/18

Clarification Attachment 1 - Commercial Training Providers