ABS QA for FBO 8 Mar 10.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 39 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Airborne Sensor Program (ABS)
- Solicitation number
- HQ0147-09-R-0006
- Issued by
-
DOD Missile Defense Agency
About this file
ABS Q A. Tech question 47 updated.
View the file
Other files
Show all 41
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Technical Questions
| Number | Doc/Ref | Question | Response |
| 1 | H | The four ABS aircraft are considered public use aircraft. What standards are being applied for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance for these aircraft? | The WASP is maintained on a FAA approved manufacturers maintenance program per DC-10 Maintenance Specification Document #MDA10-10. The HALO aircraft are maintained on a FAA approved manufacturers maintenance program, utilizing Gulfstream Computerized Maintenance Program (CMP). |
| 2 | SOW, 2.1.4 & 2.1.8 | Will the four ABS aircraft maintenance logs be available for review during Industry Day? We will need these in order to be able to accurately determine maintenance requirements / costs. | The ABS aircraft maintenance logs have been added to the bidders library. |
| 3 | SOW | Is the ABS Mishap Plan provided as a reference or a separate document? Is it the same as reporting public use aircraft incidents? | The ABS Mishap Plan is included in the Bidders Library. The plan delineates required notifications following a mishap involving MDA aircraft. This reporting is specific to MDA. |
| 4 | SOW | What is the expected mission optempo? Would this past year's tasks be indicative of what to expect this year? | As stated in SOW 3.3, Reliability, Maintainability and Availability, "for planning purposes, a nominal data collection mission load is 10 data collects per aircraft per year." Furthermore, the mission load for the next 10 years, based on the current MDA Integrated Master Test Plan (IMTP), is depicted in Section L, 6.0 Volume IV Cost/Price and Contract Forms, of the Final RFP. |
| 5 | ABS RFP Synopsis May 2009 | Will real-time data processing, target tracking, sensor pointing optimization, etc be considered and scored as a core capability as any improvements to the sensor systems in these areas would leverage their data collection capabilities, maximize the quantity and quality of data collected, and maximize the probability of satisfying mission objectives. | The baseline contract resulting from this competition is for operation, sustainment and mission support using the existing ABS assets. While incremental improvement and modernization may be required duing the course of this program, we are currently not planning major changes to the existing system. |
| 6 | You state that “At the time of award, all aircraft will be certified airworthy”. Will the WASP be certified airworthy with the viewing port in the fully open position? | Yes | |
| 7 | Are all the current prime and subcontracts, such as aircraft and sensor maintenance and data reduction activities, going to continue past the award date. One month transition is not likely to be sufficient, given the inspections that need to be completed. Will this period be extended? We recommend 90 days for a transition period with check list. | MDA recognizes the need for a transition period; therefore, the current contracts will extend past the award date. As stated in Section L, 4.2 Management Subfactor 2 - Transition, offerors will be required to provide a transition plan as part of their proposal. | |
| 8 | SOW | Section 2.1.10 discusses security arrangements and procedures. In particular part b) states that the contractor shall obtain classified electronic connectivity to the MDA CNet.” Will MDA ensure that the contractor will be provided access to the necessary secure computing and network assets in a sufficiently timely manner to satisfy the transition schedule? In addition, will the contract support access to compartmented data as needed? | MDA recognizes the need for CNet access during the transition period and will sponsor the winning bidder throughout the process for gaining access; however, it is the contractor's responsibility to meet the access requirements. At this time there is no requirement for access to compartmentalized data; however, if it is required MDA will sponsor the contractor through the access process but it is the contractor's reponsibility to meet the requirements for access. |
| 9 | SOW | Section 3.4.1 states “The contractor shall design, develop, integrate, validate, document, and maintain ABS software and data.” What is the current state of the baseline software development, integration, and validation? | All ABS software is mature and operational. The contractor is required to maintain and operate the software; however, at this time no development is planned. During the course of the contract I&M efforts may require modification to existing software and the bidder must demonstrate the ability to meet the requirements of SOW 3.4.1. |
| 10 | SOW | Section 4.1.4.1 (Quick Look Assessment) describes the quick look assessment a contractor must provide very quickly after conducting a mission. The lettered items following this paragraph (a, b, c, and d) appear to be data products that are provided after the quick look report (e.g. all mission reports and data required by the MRD) and are not part of the quick look assessment. Is that a correct interpretation? | This interpretation is correct. |
| 11 | Are the unique sensor support requirements, such as liquid nitrogen, and guest sensors logistics provided as GFE under this contract? | Consumables, such as liquid nitrogen, are not provided as GFE. | |
| 12 | Are upgrades and obsolescence going to be addressed as change orders as they arise or as pre-planned activities established at the start of this contract? | Obsolescence should be planned into the proposed operation and sustainment approach. Improvement and modernization of existing systems will be addressed as the need arises. | |
| 13 | Will the following be provided in the bidder’s library for each sensor? Radiometric and angular measurement calibration and performance histories; Aero-optical analysis documentation; Optical prescription and point spread function; Focal plane detector format; Element-by-element spectral transmittance/reflectivity/responsivity; Algorithm description documentation for real-time and post flight processing of sensor data; Maintenance procedures and histories; Latest Operator’s manual for sensors in each aircraft | The existing information is either currently in the bidders library or will be compiled and provided as an update to the library. | |
| 14 | Please identify any restrictions or waivers to the operating certificate for each airplane and their performance limitations in the bidder’s library? | This information is currently in the bidder's library in the airworthiness sections. | |
| 15 | SOW, 4.2.1 | SOW Para. 4.2.1 says the governing document for airworthiness is DCMA Instruction 8210 Contractors Flight & Ground Ops, with the “intent” of FAA regulations required. Is there general FAA flight operational certification guidance under which each aircraft is to be flown? | DCMA Instruction 8210 only addresses operation and maintenance, not airworthiness, as stated in SOW 4.2.1 g. While the intent is to follow FAA airworthiness guidence, MIL-HDBK-516b is the airworthiness certification standard. |
| 16 | What level of maintenance is required? FAA Regulations Parts 121, 135 or other? Please provide the correct FAA Regulation Part reference(s) and any deviations thereto. Also how are modifications to the aircraft covered in the RFP documented? | FARs such as 91, 121,135 and 145 are used depending on such criteria as life limited parts, engine type, and flight |
characteristics to name a few of the items covered under each. Aircraft modifications are documented in the bidder's library on the ABS Program Doc DVD Disk-1, the HALOs Disk - 1 and the WASP Disk - 1, in the TDP and Airworthiness folders.
| 17 | How do the unique aircraft modifications affect flight characteristics and associated operational deviations from the generic OEM flight manuals? | WASP is limited to 250 KIAS when the PAW door is open. Flight into known icing conditions is prohibited on HALO-II. This information is included in the bidder's library in the airworthiness sections. | |
| 18 | Will the current maintenance and repair histories for both aircraft and sensors be provided as GFE? Will the current spares inventory and utilization rates for both aircraft and sensors be provided GFE? | Current maintenance and repair histories will be provided with the GFE. All spares will be provided as GFE along with a deficiency data base documenting deficiency rates. | |
| 19 | Will any pre-mission table top timeline reviews as well as any airborne dry runs be included in the SOW? | No. The current Mission Development process is described in Section L, 3.1; however, it is up to the bidder to propose alternate processes. | |
| 20 | Will the algorithm description, calibration data, executable and source code for the existing planning and tools suite be provided to the winning bidder as GFE to perform the mission planning and data analysis? | Yes. | |
| 21 | Will the technical description for the GFE software be provided in the bidder’s library? | Yes. | |
| 22 | We believe that additional information is needed in order to adequately address the Japan #1 scenario. Specifically, the mission requirements documentation, aircraft inertial position accuracy, sensor platform pointing accuracy, and a sample MSP package are needed. Please provide this information in the bidder’s library. | Information provided in the scenario should be used as the mission requirements document. Sample Mission Support Plans, aircraft inertial position accuracy, and sensor platform pointing accuracy are included in the bidder's library. | |
| 23 | Please provide characteristics of existing communications capability of each aircraft in the bidder’s library. | All onboard communications systems are standard aircraft or DoD communication equipment. It is listed in the GFE list and in various documents in the bidders library. | |
| 24 | Will Aircraft fuel be provided as GFE or should it to be priced in the proposal? | Fuel will be covered under the Materials CLIN. | |
| 25 | If the aircraft fuel estimate is provided by the contractor, what is the scoring scenario for a representative mission? | The sample mission proposals will be evaluated according to Section M of the RFP. | |
| 26 | Please provide the last 12 months of post mission reports for each of the aircraft and the future mission schedule for 2010/2011. | A representative sample of post mission reports is in the bidder's library. The future mission schedule is depicted in Section L. | |
| 27 | What are the requirements and procedure for certifying unique safety critical hardware such as the HALO aircraft optical windows? | This information is included in various documents in the bidders library. | |
| 28 | As we understand it, these windows need to be certified for safety. Is this handled by the Government or by the contractor? | The windows will need to be certified by the contractor. The procedures are in the bidders library. | |
| 29 | Please provide the most recent inspection results in the bidder’s library | All current information is in the bidders library. | |
| 30 | How will the future emerging design and resultant modification requirements be taken into account for mission schedules given that the aircraft need to be available 100% of the time? | The aircraft are not required to be available 100% of the time. They are required to be available for scheduled missions 100% of the time (SOW 3.3). Mission schedule will be considered if future improvements and/or modifications are approved and negotiated. | |
| 31 | What is the Government’s intent regarding release of aircraft drawings to the bidders prior to or at release of the Final RFP? | The aircraft drawings are in the bidders library. | |
| 32 | Will the documentation of the existing aircraft modifications contain the following: Design, analysis and test results of modifications; Mechanical and electrical drawings and schematics; Current and historical FAA Certification and Waiver activity | Documentation is provided in the Bidder's Library, in the TDP and airworthiness folders, of the existing aircraft modifications including design, analysis and test results of modifications; mechanical and electrical drawings and schematics; and FAA Experimental Certification. There are no waivers. | |
| 33 | SOW, 3.3.1 | We understand the need for 100% aircraft availability for mission (s). However, do you have a required minimum fleet Fully Mission Capable (FMC)/Mission Capable (MC) rate that the contractor will be measured against? | No. |
| 34 | SOW, 3.3.2 | We understand the need for 100% mission systems availability for mission (s). However, do you have a required minimum fleet Fully Mission Capable (FMC)/Mission Capable (MC) rate that the contractor will be realistically measured against? | No. |
| 35 | SOW, 4.1.3.2 | What is your expected lead time to transition from a single 5 day a week shift to 24/7 operations? Will the RFP provide assumptions for bidding this requirement? | The requirement is to provide flexible mission support operations. It is up to the contractor to determine when 24/7 operations are required to meet mission requirements. |
| 36 | Will this lead time spin up be an add on Delivery Order priced at time of execution? | No. See 35. | |
| 37 | DD 254 | Can you please define the skill set and clearance level for each position by type, i.e. SAP/SNF? | Minimum clearance level is Secret. |
| 38 | What are the expected security requirements for a/c and equipment plus A&P, AV technicians, and aircrew, etc? | Aircraft and equipment are unclassified, with the possible exception of a guest sensor on WASP. Minimum personnel clearance level is Secret. In operation, computer systems are loaded with classified software and are therefore in a classified mode up to SECRET and must be protected as such. All aircraft contain COMSEC equipment including JTIDS on WASP. The associated KEYMAT is classified up to SECRET. When loaded with KEYMAT, the COMSEC equipment must be protected accordingly. | |
| 39 | For aircraft modifications how many agencies have you, or do you expect are required for airworthiness coordination and approval? | MDA is the airworthiness certifying agency. MDA utilizes Air Force technical expertise from Air Force Materiel Command (ASC/EN) to determine airworthiness. | |
| 40 | Are there any preferences to main operating base locations for the aircraft fleet? | No. | |
| 41 | SOW, 2.1.4 | For bidding purposes, is a notional aircraft utilization or test activity schedule available for the Period of Performance? | The mission load for the next 10 years, based on the current MDA Integrated Master Test Plan (IMTP), is depected in Section L, 6.0 Volume IV Cost/Price and Contract Forms, of the Final RFP. |
| 42 | SOW, 2.1.7 | As a basis for estimating, has a minimum list of TIMs, conferences, symposiums, etc, the offerors will be expected to participate in, been identified? | No minimum list of meetings is provided. Mission planning and data review meeting support are typically required of mission support. These meetings are discussed in the Mission Development process described in Section L, 3.1, and in Atch 15 - ABS Mission Support Pricing Instructions. |
| 43 | SOW, 2.2.5 | For the purpose of bidding, is there a notional list of technical and contractual documents the offerors are expected to creat, review and comment on over the Period of Performance? | This information is included in the CDRL List. |
| 44 | SOW, 3.2 | Will there be an Appendix C to DCMA INST 8210, or additional environmental, safety and health items required by the contract? If so, please identify. | There will not be an Appendix C to DCMA Instruction 8210. The contractor is required to comply with all Federal, State, and Local laws applicable to environmental, safety, and health issues. |
| 45 | SOW, 3.3.2 | How does the Government intend to measure the requirement of "100% of the time" for the 4 ABS aircraft, all onboard sensor systems, and all airborne and ground support systems? | The aircraft and data collection systems are required to be available for scheduled missions 100% of the time to meet data colletion requirements as described in the mission/test specific Mission Requirements Document. |
| 46 | SOW, 3.4.1; M, 6.2.c.6 | There are 3 references to CMM Maturity Level 3 in the DRFP. 1) Para 3.4.1.a states eight (8) specific CMMI Level 3 Process Areas for software engineering functions, 2) Para 3.4.1.b states the requirement for "independent certification" of CMMI Level 3 compliance, and 3) Sect M, para 6.2.c.6 states software will be developed and maintained "commensurate with" CMMI Level 3 "or greater". Please clarify the desired CMMI Maturity Level 3 Requirement. | The minimum requirement is CMMI Level 3. |
| 47 | Will MDA permit the use of contractor proprietary software to perform any of the ABS tasks? | At this time, MDA does not intend to permit the use of proprietary software to perform ABS tasks. Please see SOW paragraph 3.4.1. | |
| 48 | Mission Sample Task | Spectroradiometers and Radiometers are listed in millimeters. Should this be microns? | Yes. Nomenclature has been corrected. |
| 49 | Mission Sample Task | The chosen filter rotation is detailed in Figure 2-2. Does Figure 2-2 actually refer to Table 2.2 on page 8? Please clarify. | Yes. Table 2-2 is the correct reference and the correction has been made in the RFP. |
| 50 | Mission Sample Task | Reference: WASP requirements are identical to those given in the preceding section for the HALO II with the following exceptions. After intercept (if it occurs), one platform should track the largest piece of debris, while the other should track the overall debris cloud, both to loss of signal. Given that from page 4 paragraph 3: 1) HALO II and WASP are equipped with identical EO sensors with multiple filter bands and fields of view all imaging via a single pointing system. Question: Does this mean that HALO II and WASP are considered the 2 platforms (one and the other) or does WASP have a second sensor platform? If this refers to a second WASP sensor platform, what are the sensor specifications for the second WASP sensor platform? | HALO II and WASP are considered the 2 platforms |
| 51 | Mission Sample Task | Reference: Appendix B lists sensors available for the HALO-I, HALO-II and WASP in support of the mission requirements. Question: Will offeror's MSP be constrained to use only those sensors listed in Appendix B or all currently available HALO-I, HALO-II and WASP sensors? | The sensors listed in Appendix B of the Mission Sample Task are to be used. |
| 52 | SOW | 4.1.4.1 Post-Mission Activities |
a) The contractor shall process/reduce collected data into radiometric calibrated test data, photo documentation data, engineering parametric information, or other forms required by the user.
| Question: This statement indicates that under this contract the contractor will be responsible for processing/reducing data for all on-board sensors. Is this correct? | This is correct for all sensors for which the contractor is responsible under the contract. There may be guest sensors whose operation and data processing/reduction is not the ABS contractor's responsibility. | ||
| 53 | SOW | 3.4.1 Software |
c) The Contractor shall establish, maintain, and report monthly a software change request schedule depicting the contractor’s plan (by software release) to resolve, implement, and verify any outstanding software change requests.
d) The Contractor shall resolve, implement, and verify any outstanding software change requests only after Government approval to do so.
e) The Contractor shall only maintain existing software. The Contractor shall not develop any new software variants of the existing software or develop any new software without Government approval. No proprietary systems or software shall be developed as part of the ABS system.
| Questions: Some of the statements in this section appear conflicting – a requirement to maintain a software change request (SCR) schedule is identified but then it is stated only to maintain software. Is the SCR process limited to software deficiency reports (DR)? What is the scope software maintenance? | This section of the SOW has been clarified. | |||
| 54 | SOW, 4.3 | Is it MDA's intent to provide a list of Improvements and Modernizations that will be "open / uncompleted" by contract award so that they can be included in the Offeror’s Transition Plan? | MDA does not expect there to be any open I&M efforts at the time of transition. | |
| 55 | Can you demonstrate the tools and processes you use for mission planning? | No. Information is included in the bidders library. | ||
| 56 | Can you demonstrate the tools and processes you use for post-flight data analysis and mission performance assessment/improvement? | No. Information is included in the bidders library. | ||
| 57 | What ground support equipment will be provided with the aircraft? | This information is included in the GFE list. | ||
| 58 | Is there any ground support equipment you currently use to support the aircraft and mission systems that will not be included? | All available ground support equipment is included in the GFP list in the bidders library. | ||
| 59 | Can you show us the facilities that are used to remove, repair, maintain, and modify the sensor systems? | This was done during the Industry Days. | ||
| 60 | Can you point out all the communication and recording systems that are currently used on-board the aircraft, in ground support equipment, and other facilities that support missions, operations, and maintenance. | This was done during the Industry Days. | ||
| 61 | Can you show us a set of typical mission data products. | Mission data products are delivered to the Missile Defense Data Center (MDDC) or other locations specifed in the mission specific IDMP and are the property of the test program, element, etc. A sampling of post mission reports are in the bidders library. | ||
| 62 | Can you walk us through the process of how ground test and flight test data is used on a typical mission to determine the radiometric and goniometric calibration data that is used for final post-flight data analysis? Same question for real-time and quick-look data. | This information is included in the bidders Library in the TDP Section on the following disks: ABS Program Doc DVD DISK 1, HALOS DVD DISK 1, and WASP RFP DVD Disk-1. | ||
| 63 | Can you show us typical on-board displays during a mission? | This information is included in various documents, depending on the system and aircraft, in the bidders Library in the TDP Section on the following disks: ABS Program Doc DVD DISK 1, HALOS DVD DISK 1, and WASP RFP DVD Disk-1. | ||
| 64 | Can you demonstrate the various modes used to point the sensors during target acquisition, viewing, stellar calibration, etc? | This information is included in various documents, depending on the system and aircraft, in the bidders Library in the TDP Section on the following disks: ABS Program Doc DVD DISK 1, HALOS DVD DISK 1, and WASP RFP DVD Disk-1. | ||
| 65 | Will UAVs and associated payloads be included in this solicitation? | No. | ||
| 66 | What are the procedures for calibrating the sensors at the Tulsa facility and in the field? | The sensor calibration information is included in the bidders Library. | ||
| 67 | Are the instruments and equipment used in the calibrations GFE? | Yes. | ||
| 68 | Is there a service tower and/or cleanrooms for the aircraft? Are they GFE? | The service towers are GFE. There are no GFE clean rooms. | ||
| 69 | What ground support equipment is required in the field (GPU, Gases nitrogen, LN2, etc)? | Ground support equipment requirements are those typical for operation of jet aircraft. In addition, LN2 is required for HALO-I and HALO-III and ground compressed air is required for HALO-II and WASP. | ||
| 70 | What aircraft instrumentation is required to support the sensors (INS, GPS, etc)? | Equipment typical of operation of aircraft and EO/IR sensor systems. | ||
| 71 | How much power is available for payloads on each aircraft? | This information is included in the bidders Library in the TDP Section on the following disks: ABS Program Doc DVD DISK 1, HALOS DVD DISK 1, and WASP RFP DVD Disk-1. | ||
| 72 | What are the power specs (115vac, 28 dc, etc)? | This information is included in the bidders Library in the TDP Section on the following disks: ABS Program Doc DVD DISK 1, HALOS DVD DISK 1, and WASP RFP DVD Disk-1. | ||
| 73 | Are the tug/tow vehicles GFE? | No. | ||
| 74 | What systems are interchangeable and common between the aircraft? | This information is in the bidders library. | ||
| 75 | What operating systems are used in the computer systems? | This information is in the bidders library. | ||
| 76 | Is any of the operating system written in-house and who wrote them? Is the source code GFE or proprietary? | No, operating systems are COTS. Source code is GFE. | ||
| 77 | What spares are required in the field and at the home facility? Do you have a list of current spares showing each type and location? | The Required Spare Parts List is in the bidder's library. The location and staging of spares is to be determined by the offeror's logistics approach. | ||
| 78 | Can the spares be transported on the aircraft? | Logists concepts should be part of the offeror's proposal. | ||
| 79 | On a typical deployment, how many personnel are required for each aircraft? | Operational concepts should be part of the offeror's proposal. | ||
| 80 | How many have to fly commercial and how many can fly on the aircraft for the ferry flight? | Operational concepts should be part of the offeror's proposal. | ||
| 81 | What is the time frame for a typical mission planning cycle for each aircraft? | Typical mission timeline information is given in Section L 3.1.2. | ||
| 82 | What languages are the software written in? | This information is included in the bidders Library. | ||
| 83 | What simulation capabilities does ABS have to train the mission crews? | This information is included in the bidders Library. | ||
| 84 | Are both the flight and mission crews required to take survival and altitude chamber training? If so how often? | Training requirements are addressed in MDA/DT Policy Memo No. 13, Airborne Sensor Training Requirements for Flying Personnel, 16 Sep 2008. The Policy Memo will be added to the ABS Bidders' Technical Library. | ||
| 85 | If all 4 aircraft are deployed what is the maximum number personnel required if they are all based from the same location. | Number of personnel required is specific to each Offeror and should be addressed in proposal. | ||
| 86 | Have the current contractors implemented a tailored version of the MDA Assurance Provisions (MAP) and has their Mission Assurance Implementation Plan (MAIP) been approved for the current contract(s)? | The current ABS Program has a tailored version of the MDA Assurance Provisions (MAP) specific to our current contract. The requirement for a Mission Assurance Implementation Plan (MAIP) is a new requirement. The MDA/DTR MAP Requirements Applicability Matrix For Airborne Sensors (ABS) Program will be added to the bidders library. Note that MDA approval of this document does not mean it is necessarily the optimal tailoring of the MAP for ABS. | ||
| 87 | The Section L case study doesn’t seem to identify how the missions are really operated. Should the bidders note this in their response to the Sample Task? | The mission requirements and ABS assets are provided. It is up to the Offeror to propose how the ABS assets will be used to meet the mission requirements. | ||
| 88 | Are we correct in assuming that the aircraft will be considered Government owned while it is flying a mission? | Yes | ||
| 89 | What had the deployment schedule been for the WASP? Number of deployments, length and number of sorties/flight hours? | The anticipated usage rates are contained in the final RFP, Attachment 15, Airborne Sensor (ABS) Program, Mission Support Pricing Instructions. | ||
| 90 | Please describe and calibration equipment that is required to prepare the sensors for test data collection. Is this deployed with the aircraft? | Calibration Equipment and procedures will be provided as an update to the Bidders Tech Library | ||
| 91 | What is the total time on each HALO? | Information is contained in the Bidders Tech Library | ||
| 92 | What is the total landings on each HALO? | Information is contained in the Bidders Tech Library | ||
| 93 | What is the total engine time and cycles on each engine on each HALO? | Information is contained in the Bidders Tech Library | ||
| 94 | What is the aircraft inspection interval on each HALO? | Information is contained in the Bidders Tech Library | ||
| 95 | What vendor provides the Maintenance and Inspection tracking, i.e. Gulfstream CMP or CAMPS ot whomever? (IAW FAR 91.409 Subpart E (f)) | Gulfstream Computerized Maintenance Program (CMP) for the HALOs, Daniel Computerized Aircraft Maintenance Program (CAMP) for the WASP. | ||
| 96 | Will those records maintained in the question above be available? (IAW FAR 91.417 Subpart E (a,b)) | Yes, Current MX records will be provided in an update to the bidders library. | ||
| 97 | Are the HALOs currently registered IAW FAR Part 21-191(a), Experimental Research and Development? | They are currently registered IAW FAR Part 21-193 | ||
| 98 | Which FAR regulations govern operations? 120 for the WASP? 125 for the HALOs? | HALOs and WASP both operate under FAR Part 91 | ||
| 99 | Are there any P3I planned for the WASP and HALOs? | No | ||
| 100 | Who provides the POL for the aircraft? | Petroleum, Oil, & Lubricants (POL) is the contractor's responsibility. | ||
| 101 | Can defective parts be replaced with servicable parts? | Yes, with appropriate documentation, i.e. FAA Form 8130 or DoD equivalent for Gov't stock | ||
| 102 | Are the current flight operations manuals transferred to the new contractor? | Yes | ||
| 103 | Does the Government own data rights to the modified DC-10 and G2s? | The Government owns the data rights to all modifications. | ||
| 104 | Are there any OEMs on contract to the Government? | No | ||
| 105 | What is the scope of the environmentally-controlled hangar? | Environmentally Controlled is to be construed as suitable hangar space whereby the aircraft are protected from the environment and can be prepared for mission test/conduct. | ||
| 106 | Are maintenance records available for the aircraft (i.e. the last 6 months)? | Yes, MX records will be provided in an update to the bidder's library. | ||
| 107 | Are the aircraft under progressive or phased maintenance? | Phased | ||
| 108 | Are there any outstanding mandatory service bulletins or airworthiness directives? | MDA is aware of no outstanding mandatory service bulletins or airworthiness directives. | ||
| 109 | How soon after contract award will the contractor be required to support a mission? | This is dependent on the mission schedule at the time of award and the successful offeror's transition proposal. | ||
| 110 | Is the schedule of missions for the next year available for use in preparing the offeror's response to the RFP? | The expected mission load for the next 10 years, based on the current MDA Integrated Master Test Plan (IMTP), is depicted in Section L, Para 6.0 Volume IV: Cost/Price and Contract Forms, of the Final RFP. | ||
| 111 | What is the scope of software development for the ABS contractor? | Mature software will be provided, some level of development may be required for any I&M or future upgrades | ||
| 112 | Is there any proprietary software? | No | ||
| 113 | Who maintains configuration of hardware, software and aircraft? | The operating contractor with Gov't oversight | ||
| 114 | How much time (days) is available for transition? | As stated in Section L, 4.2 Management Subfactor 2 - Transition, offerors will be required to provide a transition plan as part of their proposal. | ||
| 115 | After integration of the test and sensor equipment, who is responsible for equipment maintenance? | The successful offeror | ||
| 116 | Please identify the governing regulation(s) for airworthiness. | 49 U.S.C.A. § 40102 | ||
| 117 | Will the Government provide aircraft special tools (e.g., AGE) as GFE? | All current equipment and tools that are GFE will be transferred to the successful offeror as GFE | ||
| 118 | Are aircraft spare parts GFE or CFE? If CFE, what is the estimated value? | Aircraft spare parts will be reimbursed under the Materials CLIN. | ||
| 119 | Is mission equipment supported only by surplus GFE? | No | ||
| 120 | What are the operational limits on HALO-II with respect to weather conditions (e.g., icing)? | Data is contained in the Airworthiness section of the HALOs Disk1, (HALO-II), in the bidders library. | ||
| 121 | What is the average utilization of the aircraft (days/months/flight hours) per year? | The aircraft are 100 % dedicated to the MDA Airborne Sensors Program. As stated in SOW 3.3, "A nominal data collection mission load is ten (10) data collects, per aircraft, per year. | ||
| 122 | When will we receive manuals, documentation, and procedures for the custom-made software and ground test/calibration equipment? | Upon award of the contract | ||
| 123 | What is the current FTE manning for the program? By labor category? By location? | It is to be proposed by the successful offeror |
Acquisition Questions
| Number | Doc/Ref | Question | Response | |
| 1 | M, 3.0 | A failure to clearly state the number and type of contracts to be awarded will detract from contractor offerings in that individual contractors will work to respond in manner that is not necessarily in governments best interest. Having a single contract will provide government a means to reduce overall program costs through common program management, program planning, and aircraft maintenance facilities. Multiple contracts will be more costly to the government and stretch an already thin government management staff further. Multiple contracts can be construed also that it is the intent of the government to continue with existing incumbents. | Section L will be changed to allow the submission of (1) a proposal for the HALO effort, (2) a proposal for the WASP effort, (3) a proposal for the entire ABS effort, or (4) any combination of the above. Section M will be changed to explain the evaluation methods relative to the receipt of multiple proposals. | |
| 2 | H-09 | The wording in the OCI section can be interpreted by some to mean that if a company works as the ABS contractor, they cannot do any development work for MDA. Is this the intent? Does MDA intend to allow ABS companies to provide mitigation processes so that they can provide the test resources of the ABS contract and still allow other elements of their company to continue/ pursue development work? | OCI situations are very fact specific. Other than referring you to the MDA OCI policy, we are unable to provide responses that would generally apply to all situations. If you would like, you may submit OCI disclosures in advance of your proposals, and we will provide more specific guidance that applies to your situation. Otherwise, OCI reviews will be conducted during the proposal evaluation process. | |
| 3 | RFP | May we contribute further questions both before and after industry day? | Directions for how to submit questions will be issued with the final RFP. | |
| 4 | M | Is the date (JUL 1990) correct? | Yes, the date is correct. JUL 1990 is the date of FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options, and is correct | |
| 5 | N/A | Under the awarded contract will meeting or achieving less than estimated fuel usage be rewarded? | The awarded contract will be incentive fee for cost and award fee for schedule and technical performance. | |
| 6 | N/A | Will the final RFP evaluation criteria reward the bidder for reduction of total cost of ownership for the ABS Program to the Government? | Evaluation criteria are outlined in Section M of the final RFP. | |
| 7 | WASP extension | What information and what is the time line for release of information relative to airworthiness sole source award for this overall ABS RFP? | Information has been released in FedBizOps. | |
| 8 | L, 3.1.5 | When bidding both WASP and HALO the sample task must be completed for both aircraft types. Since the MSP pages count in the overall page count, bidding on both aircraft types would appear to have a page count penalty. When bidding both aircraft, will one sample task MSP (and BOE's) satisfy your evaluation requirements? | Section L has been corrected to reflect that the page count is applicable to each individual proposal. | |
| 9 | L, 3.3.2 | Is the Technical Sample Task in this section the same as sections L 3.1.5? | No. | |
| 10 | L | Will the Government entertain oral presentations of the Offeror's proposals? | No. | |
| 11 | B, CLIN 0001 | Is the 60% fee that is transferred 60% of the negotiated target fee or 60% of the actual fee for the completed task order? | Sixty (60) percent of the negotiated target fee will be transferred to the Award Fee CLIN. | |
| 12 | B, CLIN 0001 | Is the share ratio only applied to the 40% of the fee remaining on the CLIN or will it also include the fee transferred to the award fee CLIN? | The share ratio will only apply to the O&S CLINs. It will not include any fee that has been transferrred to the Award Fee CLIN. | |
| 13 | B, CLINs 0005, 0008, 0013 | Will a single Award Fee evaluation apply to all CLINs, or will each CLIN receive its own award fee evaluation? | Yes, a single Award Fee evaluation will apply to all CLINs. Award Fee will be determined at the contract level. | |
| 14 | E | Does the Government intend to impose higher level Quality Assurance requirements and, if so, should FAR 52.246-11 be added to the RFP requirements? | No. | |
| 15 | H-09 | Can the Government provide the MDA OCI policy, Attachment X? | The MDA OCI policy will be provided as an attachment to Section J with the final RFP. | |
| 16 | H-14 | Would the Government consider limiting the Section H-14 a. requirement to be the Program Manager and Contracts Manager? | The Government has determined that the key staff positions listed in H-14 will not be changed. | |
| 17 | I | Would the Government consider adding the following standard FAR clauses to the RFP? 52.227-11, Patent Rights - Ownership by the Contractor (Dec 2007), 52.248-1, Value Engineering (Feb 2000), 52.246-25, Limitation of Liability - Services (Deb 1997) | Applicable clauses have been added to the final RFP. | |
| 18 | L, 1.1 | How do the proposal page count requirements apply to those offerors that may be bidding separate contracts? For example, does an offeror bidding only one aircraft have the same page count restriction as an offeror bidding all aircraft? Please clarify. | Please see 8 above. | |
| 19 | L, 1.1 | The Section L requirements do not include an Executive Summary. Would the Government consider adding an Executive Summary, with appropriate page limitations? | Executive Summary requirements have been added to Section L. | |
| 20 | L, 1.3 | How do offerors show synergy savings for all aircraft types related to "a separate and discretely priced proposal for each effort"? | Please see 1 above. | |
| 21 | L, 1.3 | Section L instructions do not instruct offerors to exclude CLINs optional mission and I&M CLINs (e.g., 1005-1010, 1012; 2005-2010, 2012, etc). Are offerors to exclude there prices from its Section B submittal similar to the base contract CLINs? | Section L has been corrected to include all applicable CLINs. | |
| 22 | L, 1.12, 3.3.2 | Para 1.12 states that no cost data will be included in technical materials, whereas para 3.3.2 states BOEs will be included as an attachment to the Technical Proposal. Please clarify whether BOEs are in fact to be included as an attachment to the Technical Proposal. | Yes, BOEs are to be included as an attachment to the technical proposal. BOEs will be evaluated for the purpose of understanding the sample tasks. BOEs submitted with the technical proposal will not be evauated as cost data. | |
| 23 | L, 3.3.2 | Is the intended reference to HALO-I or HALO-II? | HALO-II | |
| 24 | L, 4.1.2 | Does the training and certification pertain to qualified mission support personnel for flight only or include training/certifying mission support personnel to perform mission tasks/functions? | Traning and certification applies to all personal involved in mission support. | |
| 25 | L, 6.7.4 | Is it the Government's intent to execute the incentive fee adjustment at contract completion (i.e., at the five year point for the base contract), or delivery order completion, or in phase with the award fee plan? Would Incentive Fee determinations be made on a total contract, annual, or other basis? Please clarify. | The initial O&S task order(s) will be for five years. The incentive fee adjustment will be made at the end of each O&S task order. | |
| 26 | M, 3.0 | Section L and Section M indicate that the Government may award one or more contracts in response to the solicitation. However, section M does not specify how the Government intends to evaluate offerors with partial responses (e.g., HALO or WASP only) versus full offers. For example, if Offeror A only provides a response for HALO and Offeror B only provides a response for both. Will Offeror A's technical evaluation be reduced since it does not provide a WASP response? What if Offeror B's technical evaluation is downgraded due to its WASP solution and not its HALO solution? What is the weighting between HALO and WASP? | See 1 above. | |
| 27 | M, 4.1 | Since cost data is restricted to the cost volume, how will cost advantages be discussed in the technical or management volume? How can the Government perform best value evaluations if the technical / management evaluations are not the same solution as contained in the cost volume? | The cost volume should reflect the approach that had been submitted in the technical and management volumes. Submitting a technical and management proposal that does not contain the same solution as the cost volume raises a fundamental issue of the Offeror's understanding of the program management and resources required to perform the contract and may form the basis for rejection of the proposal. | |
| 28 | M, 9.3 | How will the Government perform a best value determination without assessing each offeror's Sample Task and mission cost based on a notional mission set per year? | Sections L and M have been changed to include submission and evaluation of sample tasks using notional mission numbers. | |
| 29 | M, 9.3 | Is it the Government's intent to only evaluate CPIF line items as stated in paragraph 9.3 or include other Contract cost items in the bast value assessment? | No, all CPIF , CPFF, Cost, and CPAF CLINs will be evaluated in the best value assessment. | |
| 30 | DD 254 | Is it the Government's intent that ABS aircraft be under the protection of trained and armed security guards on a 24/7 basis or can an intrusion alert system be used in lieu of armed guards? | The requirement is specified in the DD254, paragraph 11.d, which references the definition in NISPOM Chapter 5 for Closed/Controlled Areas. The SOW does not require armed guards on a 24/7 basis. However, aircraft deployment locations may necessitate the requirement for 24/7 armed guards. This will be considered on an as needed basis. | |
| 31 | Cost Format A | What date should Contractors use for the start of the CFY10 period? Does the base program include a full five years? | The base O&S program will be a 5-year task order. For the purposes of the proposal, Offerors should use 1 July 2010 as the contract start date. | |
| 32 | Mission Sample Task | Is the Mission Sample Task page count relevant to each separate response (HALO or WASP) or the combined response (HALO and WASP)? | Yes, the Mission Sample Task page count is relevant to each separate proposal. | |
| 33 | Mission Sample Task | Reference: the responders may provide as an annex to the MSPs, a simulation of the program and calibration data that would be collected, a summary of the geometry of data collection, and any relevant situational awareness concerns - particularly with regard to solar exclusion and range-safety keep-out zones. Question: Will this simulation be counted in the page count? Can this simulation be a video and, if so, how does that count against the page count? | Yes, simulation will be included in the page count. A video will not be accepted/evaluated. | |
| 34 | Mission Sample Task | Reference: The contractor is invited to supply a simulation of the program and calibration data which illustrates mastery of the Mission Sample Task and facilitates the Government's evaluation of these requirements. Question: Does this allow the contractor to also provide an electronic file with the simulation video? Will this annex to the MSPs be excluded from the page limitations of the proposal? | No, an electronic file with the simulation video is not allowable. All submission will be included in the page count. A video will not be accepted/evaluated. | |
| 35 | L, 1.12 | L 1.12 states that “pages shall be one and one half spaced. | ||
| Question: Can tables, charts, and figures, be single-spaced? | Section L has been changed to allow single spacing on tables, charts and figures. | |||
| 36 | L, 6.2 | Section L 6.2 states that the Offeror shall submit electronic copies on DVD-R. | ||
| Question: Can CDs be submitted instead? | Section L has been changed to allow the submission of CDs. | |||
| 37 | L, 6.5 | Section L 6.5 indicates that we should “provide a summary description of your standard estimating system or methods, current policies, and/or new policies.” Section L 6.8.2 indicates that we should “provide a description of the estimating system…” |
Question: This seems duplicative. Please clarify.
| Section 6.5 refers to the Offeror's estimating system, methods and policies as a company. Section 6.8.2 refers to the Offeror's estimating system and methods for the proposal submitted in response to the RFP. | ||
| 38 | L, 6.8.5 | Section L 6.8.5 directs to “submit cost summaries by CLIN by CWBS…” |
Question: At what level of the CWBS should this information be provided?
| See Section L. paragraph 4.1.3 | ||
| 39 | Atch 4 | Past Performance Information, Attachment 4, Page 2, Paragraph L. – Typically for past performance citations, the PPIS is all about the citation being referenced. Paragraph L integrates information about the ABS (proposed contract). More and complete information about the “L” subject is contained in other, better suited, areas of the proposal (e.g. past performance summary). |
Question: We recommend removal of paragraph L from the PPIS requirements in favor of putting this information in the Past Performance Summary.
| Noted. | ||||
| 40 | Section B | CLINs X009 and X010, and their application to all contract line items. | ||
| Question: In reviewing these CLINs, it is unclear whether or not fee will be able to be applied to travel and material. They are identified in Section B as cost reimbursable line items; however, Section L.6.3 establishes provisions for fee on these line items. Also, Missions (CLINs X005 through X008) include base and award fee. For example, fuel is a major element of the cost of missions. Travel is also a significant contributor to contract costs. It would seem reasonable that offerors be given the opportunity to propose fee on these and all costs, which would be consistent with the provisions of FAR 15.9. The Government could then assess and evaluate the reasonableness and realism of profit proposed. Will MDA please clarify this? | No fee will be applied to CLINs X009 or X010. Section 6.3 states: "The Offeror shall not submit proposed cost and fee for CLINs X009-X010…" | |||
| 41 | Section B | CLIN X010, Material includes the statement, “This Not to Exceed CLIN will be used to reimburse the contractor for all material in support of, and associated with, the attached Statement of Work.” | ||
| Question: Will CLINs X005 – X008 include material and fuel costs or will these costs solely be reflected in CLIN X010? | Material and fuel costs will be solely reflected in CLIN X010. | |||
| 42 | Section B | CLIN X013, Award Fee. | ||
| Question: Will the maximum award fee for HALO I, II, II and WASP Missions be solely reflected in CLINs X005 – X008, when Task Order proposals are solicited and awarded. If so, is CLIN X013 only relevant for the 60% negotiated fee amount for CLINs X001 – X004? | CLIN X013 will be used to obligate the Award Fee on mission task orders, and on the O&S task order. The Award Fee pool, as negotiated on the mission task orders, will be based on the mission effort. The Award Fee pool, as negotiated on the O&S task order will be based on 60% of the negotiated target fee. | |||
| 43 | Award Fee Plan | Award Fee Plan, Paragraph 2.1.6. | ||
| Question: What will be the award fee periods for this contract? | Award Fee periods will be annual. | |||
| 44 | Award Fee | Award Fee Plan, Paragraph 8.0 and CLIN 0013. | ||
| Question: The award fee plan states that there will be a 0 Base Fee, while CLIN 0013 provides for a Base Fee. It would appear reasonable that some base fee be provided under the contract. Please clarify this. Will the standard award fee be provided in this paragraph in the final RFP? | We do not plan to negotiate/award any base fee on the award fee CLIN. The sole purpose of CLIN X013 is to allow MDA to separately identify and fund Award Fee. Section L has been changed to provide instructions on how to calculate the proposed Award Fee for evaluation purposes. | |||
| 45 | Period of Performance | Period of Performance states, “The Period of Performance for CLINs 0001 through 0013 is 5 years (60 months) from the effective date of the contract. The Period of Performance for the Option CLINs, if exercised, is 1 year (12 months) each, and as stated in the option modification. | ||
| Question: For pricing purposes, what is the anticipated contract start date (CLINs 0001-0005)? | Please see 31 above. | |||
| 46 | H-09 | Clause H-09, in general is consistent with FAR 9.5. Given the promises of confidentiality that Contractors are required to make under H-09, it appears that Section c (2) is not necessary. Will MDA please clarify this? | Section c(2) of clause H-09 has been corrected. | |
| 47 | H-09 | The OCI policy is not included in the draft RFP. Please provide a copy of the current MDA OCI policy as soon as possible prior to release of the final RFP? | The OCI policy will be provided with the final RFP. | |
| 48 | H-14 | Paragraph (a) H-14, Personnel Qualifications. Section L, Para 4.1.1 says, and “Only provide resumes for personnel filling your identified ‘key positions.’ Section H-14 says "Key staff positions are defined as: Program Manager, Chief Engineer, Contracts Manager, Pilot, Co-pilot, and Flight Engineer". | ||
| Question: The offeror may have more than one pilot, co-pilot, and flight engineer. Will submission of one representative resume for each key position (e.g. Chief Pilot) meet MDA's requirements? | No, offerors shall submit resumes for all proposed personnel intended to fill key positions, as identified in the RFP. | |||
| 49 | N/A | If multiple contracts are awarded will the awardees be permitted to bid on any/all subsequent task order solicitations (CLINs) under this IDIQ even if the initial award is limited to discrete CLINs (e.g., HALO or WASP only)? | No, if multiple contracts are awarded. The awardee of each contract will perform all task orders for that contract. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .