Q A_Spreadsheet_(28MAY2015).xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 54 KB Posted May 29, 2015

Attached to: C-130J Minotaur Missionization
Solicitation number: HSCG2315R2DA002
Issued by: Department of Homeland Security US Coast Guard

About this file

From the source

Q A Rev 2

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
CIM_13020_3A.pdf	PDF	May 29, 2015
Attachment_J-9_Pricing_Sheet_Amend_2.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	May 29, 2015
Attachment_J-10_CDRLs_Amend_2.docx	DOCX document	May 29, 2015
GFR_clause.doc	DOC document	May 29, 2015
Attachment_J-11_PPQ.docx	DOCX document	May 29, 2015
Attachment_J-1___SOW_(15MAY).docx	DOCX document	May 29, 2015
Attachment_J-1___SOW_Amend_1.docx	DOCX document	Apr 23, 2015
Q A_Spreadsheet_(23APR2015).xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Apr 23, 2015
Attachment_J-4_GFEGFI_Amend_1.docx	DOCX document	Apr 23, 2015
Attachment_J-10_CDRLs_Amend_1.docx	DOCX document	Apr 23, 2015
Attachment_J-9_Pricing_Sheet_Amend_1.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Apr 23, 2015
Attachment_J-5_MPCs.pdf	PDF	Mar 9, 2015
Attachment_J-9_Pricing_Sheet.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Mar 9, 2015
HSCG2315R2DA002_TDP_Paint_Spec_Instructions.docx	DOCX document	Mar 9, 2015
Attachment_J-8_DD250.pdf	PDF	Mar 9, 2015
Attachment_J-7_TCTO_List.pdf	PDF	Mar 9, 2015
Attachment_J-12_AssetMaintSystem.pdf	PDF	Mar 9, 2015
Attachment_J-11_PPQ.docx	DOCX document	Mar 9, 2015
HSCG2315R2DA002_RFP.pdf	PDF	Mar 9, 2015
Attachment_J-4_GFEGFI.pdf	PDF	Mar 9, 2015
Attachment_J-10_CDRLs.pdf	PDF	Mar 9, 2015
Attachment_J-1___SOW.pdf	PDF	Mar 9, 2015

Show all 22

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

AMEND1

HSCG23-15-R-2DA002 QUESTION AND ANSWERS. VENDOR INFORMATION HAS BEEN REDACTED.
NUMBER	PAGE	REFERENCE	QUESTION	ANSWER	ACTION?
1	12	J-1	In accordance with Attachment J-1, Statement of Work, Page 12, Paragraph 5.14, Government Technical Data Access, VENDOR is unfamiliar with the process for gaining access to TMAPS and respectfully requests the government provide the access procedures.	Contractor access to TMAPS will be facilitated by the COR following contract award.
2		J-7	What Time Compliance Technical Orders (TCTOs) are due on each Tail number specific Aircraft? And when are the TCTOs actually due?	For planning purposes, the Contractor shall assume that all TCTOs listed in Attachment J-7 will be incorporated for aircraft inducted for full missionization (CLIN 00001A-00001D). The Contractor will not be responsible for incorporating TCTOs for aircraft inducted for Minotaur retrofit (CLIN 00002A-00002G)
3		J-7	Is the TCTO Materials Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) or Contractor provided?	TCTO material and labor shall be provided by the Contractor.
4			Will 3-D models and Computer Aided Design (CAD) drawings in native format be provided with the Tech Data package upon award to support Technical Data Package (TDP) consolidation?	For planning purposes, the Contractor should assume that CAD drawings will not be provided upon award.
5	1	Section B, Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs	Would the government be willing to revise the current option exercise plan to provide option exercise dates, per CLIN, that cover a shorter period of time, rather than at any given time over a five year period?	This is a misnomer. This is not a service contract with traditional periods. This is a hardware/install buy with end result being a modified aircraft. The Government already has a master plan for 5 years. The Government request the Contractor to propose "its plan". The Government did not dictate EXACT dates due to the various "potential" deliveries based on various Contractor solutions.

The Government will use the Contractor-proposed schedule for evaluation/award price purposes (full or retrofit) per Page 2 of Section B, and induction dates when the GFE aircraft was provided to contractor in Section F.

The Contractor should propose to the Attachment J-9 pricing table AS-IS. Note that all 2015-2020 years are covered in case there are contingencies. Any Contractor-proposed schedule or alternate strategy will be evaluated per technical factor in Section M.

Although the Government has historical knowledge from previous USCG C-130J aircraft modifications, we are looking at your "solution" as to how best you would propose completion of the MSS+ modifications based on the assumptions provided. Please propose an entire schedule for all 5 full missionization modifications and 7 retrofit aircraft modifications, along with proposed lead time built in, using the induction dates provided within the solicitation.

6 2 Section B, Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs Does the CLIN table (years 2015-2020) represent the Government's intended award of options by calendar year for pricing purposes? Yes, for pricing and evaluation purposes, as well as the determination of the awarded contract amount. The Contractor shall present their "best" pricing to fit this pricing strategy for award purposes. The pricing chart will be utilized by the Government at base/option award. Option award(s) will be via unilateral modification based on prices presented from the proposal selected for award.

For example: The period-of-performance (PoP) may be as follows: 9/2015-9/2016, 9/2016-9/2017, 9/2017-9/2018, 9/2018-9/2019, 9/2019-9/2020 (that is 5 years). Award will then be at the Firm Fixed Price price for 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019.

Another example: If the Government awards the contract on 12/31/15, the Government still intends the award at a firm-fixed price price using the proposed 2015 price, with options at 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 prices that was proposed. So price accordingly! Also, please justify rationale if special pricing circumstances exist based on your proposed solution/schedule.

The Government is also interested in any cost savings/discounts/quantity breaks, if applicable.

Final example: If the Government awards the contract on 1/1/2016, the Government may still use 2015 - 2019 prices for award purposes, but will execute a modification after award to adjust the 2015 to 2016 price since the actual event start is 2016 and now 2 aircraft will be expected in 2016. If there is a special change such as this, a bilateral mod will follow (such as applicaton of quantity discounts, if applicable).

7	1	Section D, Packaging and Marking	When will this section that is currently marked “Reserved” have specific information provided?	Since the DD-1149 is on a "per-aircraft" basis, packaging or marking for "a fully modified" aircraft is not anticipated. If excess GFE or other parts need to be shipped to the Contractor at later date, then direction will be provided of the expected packaging and crating/shipping address provided via modification as well as withhold amounts (if applicable).
8	1	Section E, Use of Contractor’s Inspection Equipment	When does the Government anticipate using Contractor’s gauges and measuring and testing devices?	Contractor gauges, measuring, and testing devices may be utilized as required by USCG on-site representatives for the purpose of quality assurance (QA) and hold-point inspections.
9	1	Section E, Acceptance of Modified Aircraft	How many personnel are needed to assist the USCG in conducting System Acceptance Tests (SAT) on each MSS+ modified aircraft and for how long?	Specific number of personnel are detailed in Attachment J-1, Paragraph 4.1.3. Duration will be dependent on the length of time required to complete the sequences specified in the Test Plan.
10	1	Section F, Deliveries	When is the Government’s last intended option exercise in order to allow for acceptance of aircraft within 5 years after notice to proceed?	The Contractor is expected to provide a fully modified aircraft per the "notional" schedule as indicated in Section B. As long as the last option is "obligated" within 5 years after notice to proceed, performance beyond the 5 years is permitted.

It is recommended that the Contractor provide realistic schedules that accounts for long lead time procurements, account for Government aircraft induction dates, and deliver a schedule that supports their proposed solution (if different from the "notional" schedule provided in Section B).

Per Section B, last option for full aircraft could be awarded by 12/31/2019 and last option for retrofit could "potentially" go out to 12/31/2020 based on overall base contract award date.

11 1 Section H, Special Contract Requirements When will this section that is currently marked “Reserved” have specific information provided? No special "H" clauses are expected unless the Contractor has specific special terms and conditions that must be incorporated to the final contract. Unique meaning specialty metal restrictions, import/export international trade data that must be incorporated if applies, etc.

The Government assumes that most sections of the contract can accomdodate other terms that are not "truly unique" in nature that require legal approval and scrutiny.

12	5	Section I, Contract Clauses, para I.3 – 52.246-18 (b)(2)	Within the latitude given by FAR 46.710 to vary the terms and conditions of clauses, would the Government be willing to remove the evergreen provision of the clause?	If it is in the best interest for the Government, it may be considered, however the Government will require rationale from Contractor justifying such a need.
13	3	Section I, Contract Clauses, para I.3	What are the specified periods of performance for the exercise of option CLINs (0001B-00001D) and option CLINs (00002A-00002G)?	See #6 and #10
14	8	Section L, Instructions to Offerors, para L.2.C.2 – Volume II – Price Proposal	Does the pricing requested for 2016-2020 in Attachment J-9 allow options to be exercised differently from the table in Section B, page 3?	The Government pricing table under Attachment J-9 asks for 2015-2020 prices. The table was built for the purpose of allowing the Government maximum option exercise flexibility (although the Government understands it is alot of upfront work to price out all years). See #6 and #10.

The answer is yes if the Contractor plans on presenting an alternative schedule or pricing. The Government recommends the Contractor to propose AS-IS and send alternatives as supplements to the proposal with any price backups if the new vendor strategy changes the price table.

The Government is interested in efficiencies or any cost savings proposed as long as the Contractor responds to exactly was the Govt has aschedule in our RFP. The Government is trying not to put the Contractor into an unresponsive state, if a tangent is determined unsupportable.

15 3 Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award What is the Government definition of “unbalanced pricing”? An example of unbalanced pricing is if contract pricing seems front year loaded, middle or back year loaded, and does not align with the proposed Contractor schedule or BOEs, or that doesn't take into account the Government requirements.

Another example would be proposing minimal or excess Full Time Equivalents that do not support the labor presented in the Contractor's proposal or match the Government's requirements.

A final is example is hardware or parts procurements whose pricing doesn't alignwith the quantities presented in the requiremens or escalation.

16	7	J-1 Para 4.1	How does the USCG Statement of Work address emergent diminishing manufacturing source (DMS) issues that impact production and/or retrofit (Class I & Class II changes)?	DMS issues should be communicated to the Government as they are discovered. The Government and Contractor will work together to develop a solution.
17	7	J-1 Para 4.1.3	What is the timeline and coverage period required for the three Subject Matter experts (SME) to support and observe Government testing of the MSS+ installation IAW the Government Furnished Information (GFI) Test Plan and Test Procedures?	Duration will be dependent on the length of time required to complete the sequences specified in the Test Plan. For planning purposes, the Legacy MSS Test Plan and Test Procedures will be provided to the Contractor (a revised Test Plan reflective of the MSS+ configuration will be provided after Contract award). In addition to this document, the Contractor should assume that three people for up to 30 days will be required for ground testing, and 3 people for up to 60 days will be required for flight testing.
18	7	J-1 Para 4.1.3	When will the GFI Test Plan and Test Procedures be available that will be used to support Government test of the MSS+ installation?	For planning purposes, the Legacy MSS Test Plan and Test Procedures will be provided to the Contractor (a revised Test Plan reflective of the MSS+ configuration will be provided after Contract award). In addition to this document, the Contractor should assume that three people for up to 30 days will be required for ground testing, and 3 people for up to 60 days will be required for flight testing.
19	7	J-1 Para 5	Are there airworthiness and/or TEMPEST requirements that affect General Requirements?	There are no airworthiness requirements imposed on the Contractor that affect fulfillment of the General Requirements as currently written. The Government will perform TEMPEST testing as required, however the Contractor shall provide support for this testing.
20	8	J-1 Para 5.3.2	Has the Government identified the desired "hold points" during the production and installation process for complete and accurate production proposal planning?	Historically, the Government has identified 40-50 hold points during the missionization modficiation. These hold points include, but are not limited to: zonal inspections before panel closure, barcode and serial number identification before install of non baseline equipment, and general FOD checks. The actual number of, and specific hold points to be identified under this contract will be dependent on the Contractor's developed installation process for the MSS+ modification.
21	8	J-1 Para 5.3.7	Does the Government plan to provide the labor and material to install pre-award USCG TCTOs on aircraft inducted for MSS+ modifications? If so, how much production time is required for the production planning of these installations?	TCTO material and labor shall be provided by the Contractor.
22	8	J-1 Para 5.3.7	If the Government does not plan to provide labor and material to install pre-award USCG TCTOs, will the Government provide additional detail on the pre-award TCTOs to make a complete and accurate estimate?	TCTO material and labor shall be provided by the Contractor.
23	8	J-1 Para 5.3.8	How many post-award TCTOs will the USCG incorporate? Will the USCG provide labor and material for these changes? Will post-award TCTOs be handled as engineering change proposals?	Post-award TCTOs will not be incorporated by the Contractor.
24	9	J-1 Para 5.4.1	What are the contractual timing and Government requirements for the Preliminary Design Review and the Critical Design Review after contract award?	These reviews should be process-driven and completed in accordance with the Contractor's Systems Engineering Plan. The timing of these reviews should be recommended by the Contractor based on their preparedness level.
25	9	J-1 Para 5.4.1	How many Technical Interchanges Meetings are required?	The number of required Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM) are described in Paragraph 5.4.1 of the SOW. Historically, the Government has averaged two TIMs per year.
26	9	J-1 Para 5.4.1	What are the timeframes for all technical and programmatic meetings and the anticipated locations of the meetings?	Frequency of programmatic and technical meetings are detailed in Paragraph 5.4.1 of the SOW. Historically, the locations for these meetings have been either the Contractor's facility or USCG Aviation Logistics Center, Elizabeth City, North Carolina. However, the actual locations for each meeting will be at a location agreed-to between the Government and the Contractor.
27	9	J-1 Para 5.4.1	What is the expected meeting content for the annual Integrated Logistics Review?	The Contractor is responsible for addressing all 12 Logistics Elements as they pertain to the installation, documentation, and resolution of logistics issues during the performance of the MSS+ installation. Specific topics of discussion and reporting to the government during the meeting shall include but are not limited to topics such as, DMS issues, parts and or configuration changes/issues, TCTO issues/discrepancies, ECP statuses, data management and documentation status, as well as any emerging logistics issues.
28	12	J-1Para 5.11.1	The current MSS+ TDP is marked “preliminary.” When will the Government furnish a final MSS+ TDP?	The TDP will not be deemed "final" until production of the MSS+ has been completed by the Contractor and the resultant TDP has been validated.
29	12	J-1 Para 5.11.3	Will changes to the posted TDPs be treated as engineering change proposals?	Any changes made to the TDP will be incorporated through the USCG Configuration Control Process.
30	15	J-1 Para 5.17.1	When does the USCG plan to provide the Attachment 4 functional ground tests for which the contractor is responsible to conduct after completion of INCO testing?	For planning purposes, the Legacy MSS Test Plan and Test Procedures will be provided to the Contractor (a revised Test Plan reflective of the MSS+ configuration will be provided after Contract award). In addition to this document, the Contractor should assume that three people for up to 30 days will be required for ground testing, and 3 people for up to 60 days will be required for flight testing.
31		J-5	Where is the applicability of the Maintenance Procedure Cards defined?	See J-1 Paras 5.16.4 and 5.16.7.
32		J-7	Does this TCTO list represent all pre-award USCG TCTOs described in SOW para 5.3.7?	Yes
33		J-7	When will the Government provide the Technical Data Package with the description of each TCTO for Production Planning purposes?	FORAC: Determine distribution method
34	N/A	J-9	There is no parts list for the new (MSS+) mission system procurement. Is the new Minotaur system supplied as GFE?	New Minotaur specific equipment is identified in Tab 4 of the referenced document. The Contractor shall notify the Government if discrepancies on the material list are discovered.
35	Tab 1 Overall Price	J-9	If Minotaur equipment is not provided as GFE, have the tabs on Attachment J-9 for Missionization A-Kit and B-Kit captured all new material requirements?	New Minotaur specific equipment is identified in Tab 4 of the referenced document. The Contractor shall notify the Government if discrepancies on the material list are discovered.
36	Tab 1 Overall Price	J-9	Does this RFQ assume that all listed parts are procurable throughout the five years of program execution?	DMS issues should be communicated to the Government as they are discovered. The Government and Contractor will work together to develop a solution.
37	Full Missionization B-Kit	J-9	If the Star Safire system is GFE, why are there also items on the price sheet for FLIR?	Aircraft inducted for Minotaur retrofit (CLIN 00002A-00002G) will arrive with an existing EO/IR turret which shall be replaced the GFE FLIR 380HD unit. Aircraft inducted for full missionization (CLIN 00001A-00001D) will require the Contractor to procure the EO/IR turret specified in Attachment J-9. Attachments J-4 and J-9 will be modified to reflect this change.
38	Full Missionization B-Kit	J-9	What is the expectation of the FLIR warranty?	The line item for FLIR Warranty was inserted in error. Attachment J-9, Tab 3 will be modified to reflect the removal of this warranty. Warranty provisions for procured FLIR components shall be provided in accordance with FAR 52.246-18.
39	Tabs 2,3, and 4	J-9	Does the USCG consider the parts lists for full and retrofit Missionization to be complete and accurate for the Legacy Mission System and the MSS+ configuration?	The Contractor shall notify the Government if discrepancies on the material list are discovered.
40			What Time Compliance Technical Orders (TCTOs) are due on each Tail number specific Aircraft?	See #2
41			And when are the TCTOs actually due?	See #2
42			Is the TCTO Materials Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) or Contractor provided?	TCTO material and labor shall be provided by the Contractor.
43			Will 3-D models and Computer Aided Design (CAD) drawings in native format be provided with the Tech Data package upon award to support Technical Data Package (TDP) consolidation?	For planning purposes, the Contractor shall asume that CAD drawings will not be provided upon award.
44			Referencing the Past Performance Section of Paragraph C.1, located on Page 8 of Section L: Will the Government allow Offerors to include past performance references, as part of the five maximum requested, for subcontractors whose facilities will be used during program?	Knowing that past performance is an evaluation factor to this best value award, it is up to the Contractor to propose to the best manner that makes their proposals competitive.

If a proposed subcontractor is seen as crucial to the Contractor's solution, it may be in the Contractor's best interest to convince the Government that the partnership can provide best value and augment the Contractor's proposal.

Reminder: Privity of contract is with the Prime Contractor only, and the Government will not be communicating with any presented subcontractors. Also, the opposite may occur, where negative past performance from the proposed subcontractor evaluation may also affect final ratings. The Contractor shall exercise judgment accordingly.

45			Referencing Page 1 of Section F, Item 2: Will the Government (aka USCG) allow Partial Missionization (Retrofit) activities to occur in conjunction with PDM activities?	No
46	8	J-1 Paras 5.3.7-5.3.9	Referencing SOW Paras 5.3.7 through 5.3.9, on Page 8 of Attachment J-1, regarding TCTO performance: Should Offerors bid the costs of performing TCTOs as part of the proposal given that the scope of work for implementing TCTOs and performing aircraft maintenance are undefined/unknown at this time? If so, what CLIN(s) should be used for these costs. Will the USCG consider adding a Cost-type CLIN to allow Offerors to address the unknown requirements of maintenance activities and TCTO implementation? Also, can the Government provide an estimate of schedule impact (e.g. two weeks, one month, etc.) to accomplish TCTO implementation tasks. This ensures all bidders use the same baseline.	CLIN 0003 is being added to account for new TCTOs that may originate after the aircraft has been accepted by the Contractor for MSS+ installation. The Contractor shall address the incorporation of the existing TCTOs listed in Attachment J-7 into their Firm Fixed Price proposals. Any TCTOs originating after aircraft induction will be handled under CLIN 0003.
47	3	Section I-3	Referencing the statements in Paragraph I.3, on Page 3 of Section I regarding "Option CLIN Exercise": It appears that Government reserves the right to exercise any Optional CLIN at any time during the five-year contract period of performance. Will the Government consider rewording this statement to allow the contract exercise to the Contractor to occur with enough lead time to order materials prior to aircraft induction? Rationale is that if Government waits until the last year of contract Period of Performance to exercise any optional CLIN, and there is a "longest lead time for material of one year" (as stated in Section F), then material to perform MSS+ full missionization or retrofit could not be completed prior to contact end date.	See #6 and #10. Again, the emphasis is on the schedule proposed and the reasonableness of delivery schedule. Pricing from 2015- 2020 should cover contingencies.
48	8	J-1 Para 5.4.1	Referencing Para. 5.4.1 on page 8 of Attachment J-1, Statement of Work: Can the Government confirm that the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and Critical Design Review (CDR) meetings are related only to the development of the combined Technical Data Package (TDP) as defined in SOW Paragraph 4.1.1 on Page 7? If not, please clarify government's intended purpose for PDR/CDR events.	PDR and CDR events are established to address development of the combined TDP.
49		J-1 Paras 2.1.4.3 and 2.1.5.	The SOW refers to an improved DF-430 as part of the Legacy MSS in par. 2.1.4.3, but section 2.1.5 references a DF-500 as part of the Legacy MSS external sensors. Can the USCG please clarify the incoming DF equipment located on the Retrofit aircraft and the final configuaration of the MSS+?	Aircraft arriving for Minotaur retrofit (CLIN 00002A-00002G) will arrive with either the DF-430 or DF-500 installed; those aircraft arriving with the DF-430 shall have those units replaced with the GFE-provided DF-500. Aircraft arriving for the Minotaur full missionization (CLIN 00001A-00001D) will require procurement and installation of the DF-500. The GFE List (Attachment J-4) will be modified to reflect these changes.
50	Tabs 3 & 4	J-9	Tab-4-Retrofit Material lists part number 597-2377-001 DF-500 Antenna, qty 1. Our understanding was that all external sensors were already installed on Retrofit aircraft. Also, Tab 3 does not call out this same part for the Full Missionization B-kit. Can the USCG please clarify?	Full Missionization B-KIT should have called out the DF-500. The Government will correct J-9 to reflect this change
51	Tab 2	J-9	The naming of Tab 2 (Full Missionization A-kit) would indicate that Tab 2 contains all the Group-A items needed to convert a "green" aircraft to it's final configuration? Is this a correct assumption or is the contractor also expected to bid additional Group A material based on review of the two (2) Tech Data Packages?	Correct. However, any additional items not reflected in the Tab but are needed in order to perform the modification should be bid by the Contractor
52	Tab 3	J-9	The naming of Tab 3 (Full Missionization B-kit) would indicate that Tab 3 contains all the Group-B items needed to convert a "green" aircraft to it's final MSS+ configuration, when combined with the Government GFE/GFI list? Is this a correct assumption?	Correct. However, any additional items not reflected in the Tab but are needed in order to perform the modification should be bid by the Contractor
53	Tab 4	J-9	The naming of Tab 4 (Retrofit Material) would indicate that Tab 4 contains all the Group-A & Group-B items needed to convert a MSS aircraft to it's final MSS+ configuration, when combined with the Government GFE/GFI list? Is this a correct assumption?	Correct. However, any additional items not reflected in the Tab but are needed in order to perform the modification should be bid by the Contractor
54	8-9	J-1 Paras 5.3.2 and 5.15.1	The USCG refers to "hold-points" in the production and installation process to provide for Government inspection. As these are necessary for adding to the IMS and to provide common requirements for reviewing offeror's schedules, does the customer have a set number of "hold-points" to be included in the IMS as well as reasonable durations for these events?	Historically, the Government has identified 40-50 hold points during the missionization modficiation. These hold points include, but are not limited to: zonal inspections before panel closure, barcode and serial number identification before install of non baseline equipment, and general FOD checks. Hold points will be completed in a timely manner by the Government on-site representatives with minimal delay to the Contractor's work schedule.
55		J-2 and J-3	Some of the TDP drawings are marked "preliminary". When does the customer plan to provide released copies of the TDP's that currently contain preliminary drawings?	The TDP will not be deemed "final" until production of the MSS+ has been completed by the Contractor and the resultant TDP has been validated.
56		J-2 and J-3	In looking at the drawings, it appears that the TDP did not contain drawing number 41413M1101 which should be the top level Minotaur (MSS+) MSO console mods. Could the customer confirm this and supply this as part of the TDP if that was their intent?	Correct; This drawing will be provided to the Contractor.
57		J-2 and J-3	In looking at the drawings, it appears that the TDP did not contain drawing number 41413M0000 which should be the top level Minotaur (MSS+) Mod drawing/Parts List. Could the customer confirm this and supply this as part of the TDP if that was their intent?	Correct; However this drawing will be provided at a later date.
58		J-2 and J-3	In reviewing the TDPs contained in Attachments J-2 and J-3, it appears that the J-2 actually is the Legacy MSS TDP and the J-3 is the MSS+ TDP. Can the customer confirm?	Attachment J-2 contains the legacy MSS TDP, of which numerous elements will be incorporated onto the aircraft for Minotaur full missionization (CLIN 00001A-00001D). Attachment J-3 contains the Minotaur specific modifications, to include removals of selected material reflected in Attachment J-2.
59			Modifying the C-130J aircraft in conjunction with Periodic Depot Maintenance can save the customer both cost and overall schedule to the program. Can the offeror propose a Periodic Depot Maintenance (PDM) service to coincide with the MSS+ effort or do we provide the MSS+ upgrade price independent of PDM?	No
60	8-9	J-1 Para 5.4.1.	Often times the Production Readiness Review (PRR) is held after completion of an initial installation, or Trial Installation. Is it the customer's intent to hold the PRR after completion of the first "green" aircraft upgrade? Or would the customer intend to have this meeting prior to start of the first upgrade? Please define your desire for when the PRR should occur to provide the most benefit to the Minotaur program.	PRR shall be conducted prior to induction of the first aircraft for MSS+ modifications.
61	12	J-1 Para 5.11.3	Is the format of the contractor TDP prescribed via CDRL? And if so, at what level of detail? Is it digital or handwritten?	The TDP formats that shall be delivered to the Government are prescribed in CDRL A006.
62	13	J-1 Para 5.15.3	Is the contractor expected to request approval from the government for prescribed levels of effort, or in all cases? Please confirm whether this is intended to mean approval of repair activity, or approval of inspection.	The Contractor shall request approval for any non-standard repair (repair not documented in an existing USCG publication). The Contractor shall provide notification to USCG on-site representatives for all repairs conducted on the aircraft (includes standard and non-standard repairs). The Contractor shall stop work for previously agreed-to hold point inspections. Any work the Contractor believes is beyond the scope of the contract shall be directed to the Governement for disposition.
63	12	J-1 Para 5.11.3	Is the contractor at liberty to change the format of the TDP to suit the contractor's CDP? Is there a preferred set of artifact formats that USCG requires?	The Contractor may change the format of the TDP to suit their own processes, however the TDP formats that shall be delivered to the Government are prescribed in CDRL A006.
64	13	J-1 Para 5.15.5	Are you requesting that there be special dispensation to photograph each step of the installation process? Do photographers need to be notified prior to installation of, for example, permanent or semi-permanent guards and/or covers?	The intent is for USCG on-site representatives to be able to take pictures of all work completed under this contract at their discretion, to include (but not limited to) major milestones, damage to aircraft, or unexpected discrepancies found during MSS+ install.
65	12	J-1 Para 5.11.3	To which CDRL does this correspond? CDRL A006?	Correct. The SOW will be modified to accurately reflect this.
66	13	J-1 Para 5.16.1	Sections only allow for an agreement and documentation of issues. In cases where the aircraft is deemed unacceptable for induction, is there recourse to the contractor for the "rejection" of aircraft prior to induction? This could occur, for sake of example, if an environmental condition exists that prevents the safe transfer, or if the aircraft has issues that prevent immediate modification.	There is a pre-acceptance process and the DD-1149 to show proper transfer of the aircraft from the Government to the Contractor.

Although the "potential" is highly unlikely that the Contractor will reject an aircraft, the Contractor cannot be forced to do work and would not need to sign off the DD-1149 if the Contractor intends on rejecting the aircraft.

However, the Contractor not accepting work could lead to contract Termination for Default or Convenience if the Government determines necessary.

	67	17	J-1 Para 6.2.2.vi	Please confirm that the USCG office is the onsite Government office in section 6.2.2 and not a separate USCG facility.	Yes
	68	5	J-1 Para 2.1.5	Will the government provide an interface description document IDD for terrestrial-aircraft communications?	No
	69		J-10 CDRL A006	Is there a CDRL for this notification, or should an updated CDRL A006 be used to report on status?	CDRL A006 calls out the notification requirements.
	70		J-10 CDRL A006	This schedule is confusing. Please update this line and provide the specific timeframe for TDP delivery.	Initial TDP delivery timeframe is stated in CDRL A006. Incremental submissions shall be delivered to the Government as TDP changes are made by the Contractor.
	71		J-10 CDRL A006	This is ambiguous. Can contractor request there be a USCG review of the final TDP draft prior to final submission?	Yes, the Contractor may request a USCG review of the final TDP draft prior to formal submission under CDRL A006.
	72		J-10 CDRL A006	Will the Government provide a digital TDP for the modernization tasks? Will it expect the updated formats to match the original formats?	The Government does not expect to provide any additional TDP formats other than those already provided to prospective offerors.
	73	2	J-1 Scope	Is there a full description of the MSS+ system that provides detailed components and an overview of the installation besides what is written in the SOW?	The full description of the MSS+ system is detailed in the TDPs provided Attachments J-2 and J-3. Installation procedures for the MSS+ system is the responsibility of the Contractor.
	74	8	J-1 Para 5.3.2	How much time should be planned for the government hold points in production?	Government hold points will be completed in conjunction with the Contractors quality assurance (QA) process. The USCG on-site Government inspections will be completed with minimal delay to work performed by the Contractor.
	75	8	J-1 Para 5.3.7	What is the scope of the pre-production TCTOs and will they be supplied as GFE? The attachment only provide the total list.	TCTO material and labor shall be provided by the Contractor.
	76	8	J-1 Para 5.3.8	How much time should be included to support the post production TCTOs and will the USCG provide the complete installation packages?	For planning purposes, the Contractor shall assume that all TCTOs listed in Attachment J-7 will be incorporated for aircraft inducted for full missionization (CLIN 00001A-00001D). Incorporation of post-production TCTOs will not be the responsibility of the Contractor.
	77	8-9	J-1 Para 5.4.1	Is it up to the contractor to schedule the PDR and CDR events within the schedule or does the USCG expect to see these at a certain time within the program? Can these be combined events since the primarily purpose is to review the final combined TDP?	The Contractor may propose the PDR and CDR event schedules (to include combining both events), however final schedule is subject to Government approval.
	78	8-9	J-1 Para 5.4.1	What is the purpose/scope of the Integrated Logistics Meeting on this program?	The Contractor is responsible for addressing all 12 Logistics Elements as they pertain to the installation, documentation, and resolution of logistics issues during the performance of the MSS+ installation. Specific topics of discussion and reporting to the Government during the meeting shall include but are not limited to topics such as, DMS issues, parts and or configuration changes/issues, TCTO issues/discrepancies, ECP statuses, data management and documentation status, as well as any emerging logistics issues.
	79	12	J-1 Para 5.14	Will the government supply access to the TMAPS system during the proposal process so that the contractor can understand the information on TCTOs/MPCs/PG?	Contractor access to TMAPS will be facilitated by the COR following contract award.
	80	13	J-1 Para 5.15.5	Please describe the expectations for the photographic support during installation?	The intent is for USCG on-site representatives to be able to take pictures of all work completed under this contract at their discretion, to include (but not limited to) major milestones, damage to aircraft, or unexpected discrepancies found during MSS+ install.
	81	15	J-1 Para 5.17.1	When will the government provide the MSS+ test procedures as listed on the GFE list?	For planning purposes, the Legacy MSS Test Plan and Test Procedures will be provided to the Contractor (a revised Test Plan reflective of the MSS+ configuration will be provided after Contract award). In addition to this document, the Contractor should assume that three people for up to 30 days will be required for ground testing, and 3 people for up to 60 days will be required for flight testing.
	82		J-4	The MSS TDP is listed as Preliminary. Is there a later update that provides the final design package?	The TDP will not be deemed "final" until production of the MSS+ has been completed by the Contractor and the resultant TDP has been validated.
	83		J-9	This pricing sheet contains some items that are listed on the GFE list. Is this pricing sheet considered to be 100% complete for the A/B/Retrofit lists?	The Contractor shall notify the Government if discrepancies on the material list are discovered.
	84		J-9	What is the process used to modify the pricing list is components are determined to either be no longer available or have changed by the supplier?	DMS issues should be communicated to the Government as they are discovered. For proposal submission purposes, the Contractor should highlight the affected component(s) within the applicable Tab in Attachment J-9 and their disposition.
	85		J-9	Are the Minotaur components listed on the pricing sheet for either the A/B kits?	Minotaur specific equipment (A-Kit and B-Kit) is identified in Tab 4 of the referenced document.
	86		J-7	Will the government supply the entire TCTO package to the bidders for the proposal evaluation?	Attachment J-7 has been revised to include the TCTOs as listed.
	87		J-7	Are the components listed in the TCTOs supplied GFE?	No
	88	12	J-1 Para 5.11.3	Will the Government please clarify what documentation will be delivered as GFI and in what format(s) it will be provided?	The vendor shall combine all TDP elements as required by the missionization work. The combined TDP shall be delivered to the Government IAW CDRL A006.
	89	8	J-1 Para 5.4.1	Is it the Government's intent that the 20 business day delivery requirement include TIMs which are not scheduled and may be urgent?	Should the need for an urgent TIM arise, the 20 business day delivery requirement for TIMs may be waived by the Government on a case-by-case basis.
	90		J-10 Para 5;
CDRL A002, A004, A011	Will the USCG consider modifying their review requirement to 45 days unless stated otherwise in the CDRL, and reducing the USCG review period in the special cases described above?	Should urgent requirements arise, the review requirement time periods may be waived by the Government on a case-by-case basis.
	91		J-10 Pg 3	Is the requirement for contractor revision and resubmission 30 or 45 days?	The requirement is 30 days for resubmission of CDRLs requiring revision. Attachment J-10 will be modified to remove this ambiguity.
	92		J-10 Pg 5, Para 5	Will the government please clarify which notifications are being referenced in this paragraph?	Attachment J-10 will be modified to remove this sentence.
	93	10	J-1 Para 5.7.2	With the baseline configuration for each aircraft be provided by the Government as aircraft are input into the program, and if so, in what form(s) with the configuration baselines be provided?	There are only two aircraft configurations being modified under this Contract: The basic "green" C-130J aircraft, and the HC-130J aircraft with the legacy Mission System Suite installed. No other technical drawings will be provided reflective of the aircraft configurations.
	94		J-4 Para 1	Are the material lists provided in Attachment J-9 to the RFP in tabs 2,3 and 4, when taken with the items included in the GFE attachment, complete for Full Missionization A-Kit, Full Missionization B-Kit, and Retrofit Materials respectively?	Yes. However, the Contractor should notify the Government If any discreps noticed, Contractor should notify Gov't.
	95		J-10 CDRL A004	Is the older DID the intended requirement?	The newer DID is the intended requirement. CDRL A004 will be corrected to reflect this.
	96	Tabs 2-4	J-9	Does the Government require that listed suppliers be used as the source for each item?	No, however the Contractor should request a deviation from Government if they intend to use a source that differs from the listed supplier.
	97	7	J-1 Para 4.1.4	What will be the paint condition for C-130J aircraft input into the program for Full Missionization?	For planning purposes, the Contractor should assume that all aircraft undergoing Full Missionization (CLIN 00001A-00001D) will arrive unpainted with only a temporary exterior protective coating.
	98	Tab 5	J-9	Is it the Government's intent that the entries in the J-9 Tab 5 worksheet be only for Installation Tasks as defined in the Technical volume, or should they be inclusive of support labor as well?	The Government has a schedule for support and install task (see Section L, Page 7), the more critical install task has a worksheet specifically for completion.

Any extra detail is up to the Contractor. Recommend that the Contractor provide what they deem best to provide the best value proposal that substantiates any hours/pricing.

	99		J-2	Will the Government be providing the data referenced as input to the modification contractor?	For planning purposes, the Contractor shall assume that referenced data will not be provided.
	100	8-9	J-1 Paras 5.3.3, 5.4.1	The two referenced paragraph appear to be in conflict. Will there be one PCA per aircraft or one PCA per hold point or both?	One PCA per aircraft
	101		Section L, Instructions to Offerors, para L.2.C.2 – Volume II – Price Proposal	Are the three spreadsheets referenced to be included in the hardcopy material and, if so, do they count against the total Volume 1 page count? Or is everything provided in Tab C, including the spreadsheets, exempt from the Volume one page count?	Price proposals or spreadsheets that support it have no limit per Section L, Page 4.
	102	2	Section B, Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs	Can we assume the years are calendar years or should we price them with the USCG Fiscal Year?	The contract is written per Calendar year per the assumptions provided in Section G, Page 1.
	103	16-17	J-1 Para 6.2	What level of physical security is required for the Government office area?	Security requirement is specified in Section 6.2.2 of the SOW.
	104	18	J-1 Para 6.3.8	What level of physical security is required for the aircraft?	Security requirement is specified in Section 6.3.8 of the SOW.
	105	8	J-1 Para 5.3.7	In response to requesting access to TMAPs to support bidding the TCTOs in RFP Attachment J-7 we were advised "Contractor access to TMAPS will be facilitated by the COR following contract award.". Will the Government provide copies of the details of the TCTOs referenced in Attachment J-7 to support proposal responses? If not, should bidders assume that the TCTO's provided in J-7 apply to all aircraft?	Attachment J-7 has been revised to include the TCTOs as listed.
	106	8	J-1 Para 5.3.8	Is it the Governments position that TCTOs that originate (as opposed to recur) after contract award have an estimate of time for incorporation included in the proposed schedule?	Yes
	107	6	J-1 Para 3	Will the Government accept that TCTO's originating after the proposal submission and/or after contract award be handled as over and above for bidding purposes.	See #46
	108	7	J-1 Paras 4.1.1
J-2, J-3	Is Attachment J-2 actually the Legacy MSS installation and not a full up MSS+?	Yes
	109		J-2	Will the Government provide rights to use these drawings under any resulting contract?	Yes
	110		J-3	When does the Government expect the MSS+ TDP for legacy aircraft conversion to be finalized?	The TDP will not be deemed "final" until production of the MSS+ has been completed by the Contractor and the resultant TDP has been validated.
	111		Section L, Instructions to Offerors, para L.2.C.1	Is it the Government's intent that, to be excluded from the Tab C page count, all photos / diagrams under this tab be on separate pages from the text, thus allowing the text page count to be separately tracked from the photos/diagrams? In this case, would photos on the same page with text be counted in the Tab C page count?	Section L, Page 6 states that photos do not count toward the 150 page limitation to Volume 1.
	112	15	J-1 Paras 5.17.1, 5.17.4	Will the Gonverment please clarify which document is being referenced by the two referenced paragraphs?	For planning purposes, the Legacy MSS Test Plan and Test Procedures will be provided to the Contractor (a revised Test Plan reflective of the MSS+ configuration will be provided after Contract award). In addition to this document, the Contractor should assume that three people for up to 30 days will be required for ground testing, and 3 people for up to 60 days will be required for flight testing.
	113		J-10 CDRL A011	What is the purpose of "Configuration Control (CC)." in that context?	The intent is to provide documentation upon which to judge future changes to the physical hardware and software items for the MSS+.
	114		J-10 CDRL A011	Is it the Government's intent that the work breakdown structure be developed IAW MIL-HDBK-881?	Yes
	115		J-10 CDRL A011	Is it the Government's intent that the work breakdown structure be developed IAW MIL-HDBK-881?	Yes
	116		Section L	In advance of receiving the Governments responses to the RFP questions, respectfully request a copy of the Test Procedures in order that we can review in the preparation of our proposal response.	For planning purposes, the Legacy MSS Test Plan and Test Procedures will be provided to the Contractor (a revised Test Plan reflective of the MSS+ configuration will be provided after Contract award). In addition to this document, the Contractor should assume that three people for up to 30 days will be required for ground testing, and 3 people for up to 60 days will be required for flight testing.
	117		Attachment 4	The subject Solicitation SOW calls out "Attachment 4" in the following paragraphs and it appears that Attachment 4 should be a group of test procedures. Attachment 4 of the RFP is currently the GFE/GFI list. If possible, we would respectfully request that the Government please send us the Test Procedures attachment to the RFP?	The SOW will be modified to remove references to "Attachment 4" as the Test Procedures. For planning purposes, the Legacy MSS Test Plan and Test Procedures will be provided to the Contractor (a revised Test Plan reflective of the MSS+ configuration will be provided after Contract award). In addition to this document, the Contractor should assume that three people for up to 30 days will be required for ground testing, and 3 people for up to 60 days will be required for flight testing.
	118	8, 13	J-1 Paras 5.3.6, 5.16.1	Under Department of Defense Program solicitations and contracts the Government typically includes the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) clause 252.217-7028 Over and Above Work. Due to the inevitability of some additional work being required, even with new aircraft, (i.e. new TCTO's released during the period of induction, required maintenance cycle items etc.) that are not included in the basic modification work, where this clause would provide a streamlined approach to contract changes. Recognizing that the Coast Guard may not have comparable special provisions, and rather than require change proposals for each of these types of Over and Above taskings, would the Government consider adding Time and Material rates to the solicitation , which would allow for this same flexibility?	CLIN 0003 is being added to account for new TCTOs that may originate after the aircraft has been accepted by the Contractor for MSS+ installation. The Contractor shall address the incorporation of the existing TCTOs listed in Attachment J-7 into their Firm Fixed Price proposals. Any TCTOs originating after aircraft induction will be handled under CLIN 0003.
	119	12	J-1 Para 5.14	The SOW discusses Contractor access to USCG data items on TMAPS. Will this access be provided to Contractors to support the bidding process? If so, would you please provide contact information for the Government COR?	Contractor access to TMAPS will be facilitated by the COR following contract award.
	120		J-2, J-3	Does the government have a drawing tree for the MSS and MSS+ TDP?	For planning purposes, the Contractor shall assume that a drawing tree will not be provided.
	121		J-2, J-3	Attachment J-2_MSS+ is a PDF file containing over 1900 sheets. After reviewing the package it seems that it is actually the MSS package and the other 2 folders provided (electrical, Mechanical) are for the MSS+ install. Could you please confirm this is correct?	Yes
	122	Tab 2	J-9	The following quantities do not appear correct in the data provided. Can the USCG validate or update quantities for the following?

Part Number Description OEM/Supplier Qty 1901FP Video Monitor Dell 1.5 801GF Video Generator Quantum Data 0.5 LP-410A-FN +5V Dimmer Lambda 0.5 SD-3990 DVD Player Panasonic 1.5

These parts were inserted into the pricing sheet in error. Attachment J-9, Tab 2 will be modified to remove these components.
123	Tab 2	J-9	Can the USCG provide the correct Unit of Measure (UOM) for the following items? Typically these items are purchased in quantities such as Linear Inch (LI), etc.

Part Number Description OEM/Supplier Qty

82A0811-4-9 WIRE, ELECTRICAL JRH ELECTRONICS LLC 87

82A0811-6-9 WIRE, ELECTRICAL JRH ELECTRONICS LLC 60

82A0811-8-9 WIRE, ELECTRICAL JRH ELECTRONICS LLC 232

M17/65-RG165 CABLE, RADIO FREQUENCY ELECTROSPEC INC 42

M22759/16-0-9 WIRE, ELECTRICAL SUMMIT AEROSPACE SUPPLY, INC. 18

M27500-22SD1V73 CABLE ALLIED WIRE & CABLE, INC. 133

M27500-22SD2V73 CABLE SUMMIT AEROSPACE SUPPLY, INC. 18

M27500-24RC4S06 CABLE, ELECTRICAL -- 4 SUMMIT AEROSPACE SUPPLY, INC. 3

M27500C20SB2T23 CABLE, ELECTRICAL SUMMIT AEROSPACE SUPPLY, INC. 102

M27500C22SB1T23 WIRE, ELECTRICAL AB OPTICS, INC. 2130

M27500C22SB2T23 CABLE, ELECTRICAL LH4 ASSOCIATES LLC 6893

M27500C22SB4T23 CABLE, ELECTRICAL LH4 ASSOCIATES, LLC 295

M27500C22SD2V73 CABLE, ELECTRICAL LH4 ASSOCIATES LLC 446

The unit of measure (UOM) for all components listed in this question are Linear Feet (FT).

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 Nov 14, 2017.