Synopsis Posting_22Sept09.pdf

Control # Topic Question Question Reference Response Date Released to Industry

Amendment/ Correction Required?

001 CIS Chart question Old version CIS chart had hours per week CIHWP, new chart has Type CI Req’t twice.

Please verify if this chart is in error.

Attachment L-3 CI Manning Charts

The Attachment Columns in the DRAFT version are incorrect.

The Final RFP version will replace the second column with

CIHPW.

The Government may add a third and fourth column for offerors to show CI hours per month and hours per quarter in order to denote the cyclic nature of the once-per-quarter scheduled surge requirement. This element is in work.

8/7/2009 Yes

002 CIS Chart question Paragraph 2.2.1.b indicates we have to do one manning chart per LOT. Manning Chart Notes state we can combine LOTS into one chart where there are no changes. I. E. LOTS III-V.

Please verify which is correct

RFP Paragraph 2.2.1.b RFP Section L 2.2.2.b is correct, one chart is required for each Lot/FY period. The Attachment L-3 Note has been revised for issuance in the Final RFP.

8/7/2009 Yes

003 NFO Stair Step Chart 2.2.1.a-1 states 48 hrs/week for NFO. However, Appendix A does not show same hours in Table 5.2-2. Table shows 12, 24, 36 hour blocks. Please clarify which number we are to use.

RFP Paragraph 2.2.1.a and Appendix A chart 5.2.-2

The chart in RFP L 2.2.1.a will be revised in the Final RFP release. The format in the chart should have read hours per day, versus hours per week, and should have used 36 as in the associated CIS Appendix A.

The Government is working to finalize the user requirements for the late FY10 period. For purposes of this temporary Question response, the three hourly availability periods are 12, 24 and 36 hours per day. However, the Government may choose to revise both the Section L 2.2.1.a table and the CIS Appendix A to provide pricing and support for 12, 24, 36 and 48 hours per day, or change the format to represent the flexibility desired by requesting hours per week, per month and/or per quarter.

8/7/2009 Yes

004 9F2C Serial Numbers PBW shows same serial number for Cherry Point and Jacksonville for 9F2C S/N 2 Parachute-in-Water Release Trainer Please clarify Serial Number for Cherry Point and Jacksonville.

PBW 9F2A SN 2 located at Cherry Point

9F2C SN 2 located at Jacksonville SN 4 located at Norfolk

8/7/2009 No

005 Additional Instruction Section G.2 states “Additional instruction in excess of 15% per week per line item must have contractor concurrence.” The example given is 8 hr/day x 5days = 40 HPW x 15% = 6 additional hours instruction per week.

In Appendix A to Addendum B, Table 5.2-1 & 5.2-2, the Additional Instruction column exceeds the 15% on all stair steps except the 36 hr/day stair step in Table 5.2-2.

Please clarify this discrepancy. Does Section G.2 relate to the MAC and Appendix A to Addendum B tables relate only to the instant task order?

PAGE NUMBER: 23 of PARAGRAPH: Section G.2

PAGE NUMBER:

Appendix A to Addendum B, pgs A-3 & A-5 PARAGRAPH: Table 5.2-1 & 5.2-1

RFP Schedule G.2 is correct as written and applies at the MAC level. Within Appendix A to Addendum B, paragraph 5.2 and tables 5.2-1 and 5.2-2 will be revised in the Final RFP to state that they supersede the Schedule G.2 and establish the specific Additional Instruction limitations for this task order (that may be unilaterally implemented by the Government).

8/7/2009 Yes

DRAFT RFP Q&A 1 of 12 9/22/09

Amendment/ Correction Required?

006 CTT Table 2.2.1.a-1 in section L lists NFO at 48 hours/week; Table 5.2-2 shows the NFO at 12, 24, and 36 hours/day. Based on a 5 day work week, none of the hours/day shown equal 48 hours/week, 48 hours /week would equal 9.6 hours/day.

What “hours/day” should be used to build our staffing plan?

PAGE NUMBER: 98 of PARAGRAPH: L. Part B, Volume 2, Sect. 2.2.1.a PAGE NUMBER: Add. B, App A, pg A-5 PARAGRAPH: Table 5.2-2

Reference the Government’s answer in “DRAFT_RFP_003 Response”.

8/7/2009 Yes

007 CTT Table 2.2.1.a-1 in Section L lists Pilot hours/week at 20; Table 5.2-1 has 2 hours/day “bold.”

Should the 4 hours/day be “bold” to match the 20 hours/week?

PAGE NUMBER: 98 of PARAGRAPH: L. Part B, Volume 2, Sect. 2.2.1.a PAGE NUMBER: Add. B, App A, pg A-3 PARAGRAPH: Table 5.2-1

The Government did not intend to have any bold text in the Addendum B table. The Final RFP will provide correlated requirements.

8/7/2009 Yes

008 CTT Table 2.2.1.a-1 in Section L lists the PRISim device at 8.5 CTT.

Appendix M lists the PRISim device at 8 CTT.

Which is correct?

PAGE NUMBER: 98 of PARAGRAPH: L. Part B, Volume 2, Sect. 2.2.1.a PAGE NUMBER: Add. A, App M, pg M-4

PARAGRAPH: 4.1

The Appendix M is correct. Section L Table 2.2.1.a-1 will be revised in the Final RFP for 8.0 CTT.

8/7/2009 Yes

009 Provisioning Paragraph 4.12 tasks the contractor to buy new spare parts for new devices or modified devices. The statement at the end of the paragraph says the contractor is responsible for all costs associated with procurement and delivery, so we understand we are responsible for the cost.

Is it correct that the Government will reimburse the contractor?

PAGE NUMBER: Add A, page II-25

PARAGRAPH: 4.12

The Government anticipates that procurement of spares as described in SOW 4.12 would be accomplished as an Over and Above Work Request (OAWR), for which the Contractor would be funded. However, the specific process, mechanisms and funding considerations have not yet been fully developed and offerors should not assume the OAWR approach is the final position. Regardless of the process or mechanism, it is not intended for offerors to propose a price in this solicitation for anything associated with this provision.

Separate from the above response, the Government is also developing an approach to address the rapid obsolescence of spares for some COTS products, such as PC video cards. The Government is aware that the historically stable material and spares baseline established at a training device initial delivery is becoming more dynamic as COTS product increase in the overall content of the training device. The Government anticipates inserting new language, potentially within this paragraph, to define a process to maintain the Government’s inventory value as the content within the inventory changes.

8/7/2009 Yes

DRAFT RFP Q&A 2 of 12 9/22/09

Amendment/ Correction Required?

010 Contractor Responsibility

Paragraph 4.5.3.2 and 4.11 of Addendum A state that the contractor will be responsible for devices during change or modification.

Will this statement apply if the line item becomes unfunded ?

PAGE NUMBER: Add A, pg II-18

PARAGRAPH: 4.5.3.2

PAGE NUMBER: Add A, pg II-25

PARAGRAPH: 4.11

The Contractor is not required to support line items that are not funded.

9/22/2009 No

012 Experience Summary

Table Although the requirements are to include only those contracts which are relevant to the FTSS tasks which the contractor/subcontractor are going to perform, there are no time constraints set for what contracts to include in the Experience Summary Table. Should we include all contracts within the past 5, 10, or 15 years?

PAGE NUMBER: 102 of

PARAGRAPH: 3.0

While there are no time constraints, page 109 of the Draft RFP states that "in general, recent experience will be considered more relevant than older experience."

9/22/2009 No

013 Executive Summary – Offeror Summary Table

The requirement states that “the offeror should include all subcontractors and team members who will be involved with the performance or management of the program work and should list all sites where the work will be performed.”

This sounds like an FTSS MAC-level requirement vice a task order-level requirement. But until we bid on individual Task Orders and are awarded the contracts for those Task Orders, we have no idea where the place of performance will be if we are required to have personnel on site (COMS and CIS for example). Or is this requirement related to the Instant Task Order contained in the RFP?

PAGE NUMBER: 90 of

PARAGRAPH: L, PART B,

1.0(i)

The final RFP will change the table to reflect that the data provided be at the task order level. A separate table will be required at the MAC level only if the offeror proposes any teaming arrangements or other subcontractor business relationship that will carry through the life of the MAC contract.

9/22/2009 Yes

014 Mobilizing Personnel Paragraph 3.2.b Addendum A states that the contractor shall have all proposed personnel on-board no later than 10 working days prior to each CSD. If the winning bidder is hiring incumbent personnel, how would they be on board with the new contractor 10 days before the current contract ends? Could the wording be changed to offer letter acceptance showing that personnel will start on CSD as we normally do?

Paragraph 3.2.b Addendum A

Revised language for Addendum A, paragraph 3.2.b will be included in the Final RFP. The new text is shown in red below:

New: “The Contractor shall have all new proposed personnel on-board at the training site, qualified with security clearances, or with pending clearances no later than ten (10) working days prior to each training system and equipment CSD. If the Contractor uses any of the incumbent personnel to meet this requirement, evidence of planned employment can be demonstrated by providing the COR the Contractor’s Offer Letter and the planned employee’s Acceptance Letter (or candidate employee signed Offer Letter).”

9/22/2009 Yes

In Process

DRAFT RFP Q&A 3 of 12 9/22/09

Amendment/ Correction Required?

015 OHPD PRISim Device Appendix M, Contracted Training Time for PRISim specifies

8.0 OHPD

The Price Breakdown / Price Evaluation Worksheet, Task 17A lists 8.5 OHPD as does Table 2.2.1.a-1 in section L Draft RFP

pg. 98 of 129 Please clarify the OHPD requirement and start/stop times.

PAGE NUMBER: Appdx M, Page M-4

PAGE NUMBER: PBW,

Task 17A

Reference Government Control Number 008. 9/22/2009 Yes

016 OHPD PRISim Device Task 17B Specifies 10 OHPH. Can we assume that this is a typographical error that should be OHPD?

PBW, Task 17B The Offeror is correct; the PBW for Task 17B in all LOTs will be revised to read 10 OHPD.

8/7/2009 Yes

018 Past Performance Data

Requirements and Relevant Contract Data

Required information is to be provided in MS Word on a CD.

Is it the Governments intent that these CDs will be separate from the proposal volumes and price data CDs? Can the data required from both paragraph 4.2 and 4.3 be included on the same, separate CD?

PAGE NUMBER: RFP; pg

PARAGRAPH: 4.2

PAGE NUMBER: RFP; pg

PARAGRAPH: 4.3

Yes. The solicitation is clear on it's face 9/22/2009 No

019 Offeror Summary table Does this table only apply to the Offeror’s team members and subcontractors for the Instant Task Order?

PAGE NUMBER: Section L, Page 90, PART B PARAGRAPH: 1.0 i

See answer to control #13 9/22/2009 Yes

DRAFT RFP Q&A 4 of 12 9/22/09

Amendment/ Correction Required?

020 Past Performance proposal instruction

Section L4.4 requires information identified (by Section L paragraph numbers 4.4.1 through 4.4.4) to be “organized by contract”. This instruction contradicts Section L 3.0 that states “Proposal information must be structured such that its paragraph number/letter is identical to the Proposal Instructions paragraph number to which it is responding”.

Section L4.4 requires organization as shown;

4.4 Evaluation

4.4.1 Contract #1

4.4.1.1 Contract #1 Relevancy

4.4.1.2 Contract #1 Past Performance Information

4.4.1.3 Contract #1 Demonstrated Systemic Improvement

4.4.1.4 Contract #1 Small Business Concerns

4.4.2 Contract #2

4.4.2.1 Contract #2 Relevancy

4.4.2.2 Contract #2 Past Performance Information

4.4.2.3 Contract #2 Demonstrated Systemic Improvement

4.4.2.4 Contract #2 Small Business Concerns

Section L3.0 requires organization as shown;

4.4 Evaluation

4.4.1 Relevancy

4.4.1.1 Contract #1 Relevancy

4.4.1.2 Contract #2 Relevancy

4.4.2 Past Performance Information

4.4.2.1 Contract #1 Past Performance Information

4.4.2.2 Contract #2 Past Performance Information

4.4.3 Demonstrated Systemic Improvement

4.4.3.1 Contract #1 Demonstrated Systemic Improvement

4.4.3.2 Contract #2 Demonstrated Systemic Improvement

4.4.4 Small Business Concerns

4.4.4.1 Contract #1 Small Business Concerns

4.4.4.2 Contract #2 Small Business Concerns

Which instruction takes precedence?

PAGE NUMBER: 86

PARAGRAPH:L 3.0

PAGE NUMBER: 107

PARAGRAPH: L 4.4

Instructions for L4.4 is correct as is your interpretation of what is desired in accordance with L4.4. Section L.3.0 will be revised to add the words "unless otherwise stated." Note that L4.4 is the only place where there needs to be some deviation from the L3.0 instructions.

9/22/2009 Yes

DRAFT RFP Q&A 5 of 12 9/22/09

Amendment/ Correction Required?

021 Parts Consumption Data

Does NAVAIR plan to provide parts consumption and repair data for FTSS III training devices and support equipment? The following specific information would be helpful in estimating the cost of spares and repairs.

a. 6-12 months of maintenance action forms detailing what maintenance repairs were required and the corrective action.

b. A listing of equipment in the maintenance support package.

c. A listing of tools and support equipment that is to be supported under the E-2C contract.

d. A list of spares for any modified equipment.

REFERENCE: Addendum

A – E-2C COMS SOW

PAGE NUMBER:

PARAGRAPH 4.3, pages II- 15 through I-16

a. The Government is making available a one-year history of maintenance actions performed, as recorded by the incumbent.

This data is planned to be provided at each site during the site visits phase. It may be posted later in the Government’s solicitation Technical Library.

b. The Government is making available the most recent material, spares, tools & test equipment and Government Furnished Equipment inventory in the format required by CDRL on the current contract. This data is planned to be provided at each site during the site visits phase. It may be posted later in the Government’s solicitation Technical Library.

c. See item b above.

d. See item b above.

9/22/2009 No

022 Requested Submittal Date of Volume 3, Experience, and Volume 4, Past Performance

During Industry Day, it was mentioned that volumes 3 and 4 of the FTSS III proposals would be requested two weeks prior to the proposal submittal date. However, the draft RFP states that NAVAIR requests submittal of the volumes two weeks after the final RFP is issued. Please confirm the requested submittal date.

REFERENCE: Draft RFP PAGE NUMBER: Section L, Paragraph 4.0, page 89 of

Please comply with Page 89 of the draft RFP which states that Volumes 3 and 4 are requested 2 weeks after RFP release.

9/22/2009 No

023 Tech Req Page 98 of the solicitation states 20 hours / week versus hours / day. Please provide clarification of this requirement.

N/A Please see the answer to control number 3. 9/22/2009 Yes

024 PBW Possible Error The solicitation states that a PBW Format error must be reported to Government; contractor cannot fix. It appears that SLINS 18c & 18D of PBW for Norfolk 1H177 are missing total price calculation for all years. Please clarify.

N/A The offeror is correct; Tasks 18c & 18D of the E-2C COMS/CIS PBW for Norfolk 1H177 are missing total price calculation for all years. This will be corrected in the final RFP.

9/22/2009 Yes

026 PPIRS The solicitation states that the “Past Performance Information

Reporting System (PPIRS) shall be the primary, paperless, method used when conducting evaluations and / or source selections.” What is this system? Does the contractor team have access to it? Please provide additional information and guidance.

N/A Per PPIRS.gov, "PPIRS is a web-enabled, enterprise application that provides timely and pertinent contractor past performance information to the Department of Defense and Federal acquisition community for use in making source selection decisions.

Contractors may view only their own data. A contractor must be registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) system and must have created a Marketing Partner Identification Number (MPIN) in the CCR profile to access their PPIRS information."

9/22/2009 No

DRAFT RFP Q&A 6 of 12 9/22/09

Amendment/ Correction Required?

027 Small Business The title of paragraph 2.1.5 (Unrestricted MAC Task Order Small Business Participation Strategy and Subcontract Plan) would lead you to believe that all the subparagraphs that follow apply to the Unrestricted competitors only and do not apply to the small business competitors. Yet, subparagraph 2.1.5(a) indicates in bold that all competitors both large and small must submit a Small Business Participation Plan. Which is correct?

Also, under Section M paragraph II.A, Technical, there is no mention of a Small Business Participation Plan being evaluated.

Only the Small Business Plan is being evaluated for the Unrestricted MAC.

PAGE NUMBER: 94 and 95

PARAGRAPH: 2.1.5

PAGE NUMBER: 125

PARAGRAPH: II.A

If a small business is proposing to the Unrestricted MAC, that small business must provide a Small Business Participation Plan as indicated in paragraph 2.1.5.(a). Paragraph 2.1.5 does not apply to the Small Business Set Aside MAC. Section L, Paragraph 2.1.5(a) will be clarified to reflect "Small Business Participation Strategy."

Section M, paragraph IIA will be clarified to reflect "Small Business Participation Strategy" is being evaluated.

9/22/2009 Yes

030 Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Section L, Paragraph 3.0 discusses the submission of information in Annexes, to include plans. The instructions also limit Annexes to the two shown in the Table on pages 86 and 87 (Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Task Order Manning/Staffing).

Throughout the instructions for Volume 2 – Technical, there are requirements for numerous “plans”: e.g., Personnel Resources (2.1.2), Cross Training (2.1.2), Training and Retention (2.1.2), COMS Back-up Support (2.2.2.1a), COMS Operations and Maintenance Support Plan (2.2.2.1a), CIS Back-up Support Plan (2.2.2.2a), CIS Instruction Services Plan (2.2.2.2b), Mobilization Plan (2.2.2.3), and Transition Plan (2.2.2.3).

Please clarify if any of these plans, or any additional plans presented to substantiate our approaches, can be provided as Annexes with unlimited page count.

REFERENCE: Section L

PAGE NUMBER: 86

PARAGRAPH: Part A, 3.0

PAGE NUMBER: 91

PARAGRAPH: Part B, 2.0

The only 2 Annexes are as stated. References to "plans" in Volume 2 and throughout the RFP (unless referencing the Annexes) will be changed to "approaches" to avoid confusion.

These "approaches" will not be provided as Annexes.

9/22/2009 Yes

031 Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors / Evaluation Factors for Award

Paragraph 2.1.2 states:

2.1.2 Personnel Resources – Provide a plan for the instant Task Order and a plan for future Task Orders.

a. Approach to retaining a stable workforce, and maintaining workforce proficiency and expertise.

Is it the Government’s intent that the offeror provide two separate plans to satisfy the requirements of paragraph 2.1.2?

REFERENCE: Sections L & M

PAGE NUMBER: 93

PARAGRAPH: 2.1.2

PAGE NUMBER: 125

PARAGRAPH: II.A

As stated in Control #30 above, "plans" will be changed to "approaches" (unless referencing an Annex). Paragraph 2.1.2 shall be clarified in the final RFP. The intent of this paragraph is to demonstrate the linkage from the overall approach described, how that approach is tailored to the instant task order, and then how the approach is applied in paragraph 2.2.1 (Manning/Staffing).

Paragraph 2.1.3 shall also be modified to clarify the intent to connect the approach to paragraph 2.2.1 (Manning/Staffing).

9/22/2009 Yes

In Process

DRAFT RFP Q&A 7 of 12 9/22/09

Amendment/ Correction Required?

032 Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

With respect to the contents of Annex B – Task Order Manning/Staffing:

The table in Paragraph 3.0 (Part A) shows the suggested page limit for Annex B to be unlimited.

Paragraph 2.2.1 (Part B) states: Manning/Staffing – Information provided in accordance with this paragraph should be provided in a separately bound book as Annex B.

Please confirm that all information provided in response to

2.2.1 (subparagraphs a, b, c, d; including the rational, illustrations, substantiation, manning charts, etc.) is considered part of Annex B and has no page count limitation.

REFERENCE: Section L

PAGE NUMBER: 87

PARAGRAPH: 3.0

PAGE NUMBER: 96–100

PARAGRAPH: 2.2.1a through 2.2.1d

Yes, the offeror is correct – all of an offeror’s response to paragraph 2.2.1 and its sub-paragraphs will be contained in a separate Annex B.

9/22/2009 No

033 Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Request the page count for Volume 2 – Technical, be increased to 150 pages to accommodate the content necessary to respond completely to the three different aspects of the program (i.e., MAC, Instant Task Order, and Future Task Order).

REFERENCE: Section L

PAGE NUMBER: 86

PARAGRAPH: 3.0

The Government has re-evaluated and the suggested page counts shall be revised as follows:

Volume 2 (Unrestricted) suggested page count: 90 pages Volume 2 (SBSA) suggested page count: 60 pages Section L paragraph 2.1.5 in its entirety shall be included in Annex A

9/22/2009 No

036 Past Performance See Note 1 to the table under paragraph 4.3 (Place of

Performance should be the same as being proposed in this solicitation. If different please include an explanation.). What does “same as being proposed in this solicitation” mean? The way we read this only the Unrestricted and SBSA instant task order incumbents would qualify for this and everyone else would have to include an explanation.

PAGE NUMBER: 106 and

107 PARAGRAPH: 4.3,

Relevant Contract Data

The phrase “same as being proposed in this solicitation” is intended to capture that the past performance information provided is from the same offeror location (i.e. CAGE code) as the offeror performing the work. The Government will re-phrase this sentence to clarify it’s meaning.

9/22/2009 Yes

037 Device 15F8H Days of Operation

Appendix B indicates Monday - Friday as CTT; however the paragraph above the CTT chart indicates Monday - Thursday.

Request clarification on which is correct.

REFERENCE: (SOW,

SCHEDULE, ETC.)

Appendix B

PAGE NUMBER: B-5

The Appendix shall be revised in the final RFP to state Monday - Friday in both locations.

9/22/2009 Yes

038 Device 2F166 Location Appendix G indicates the 2F166 device is located in building SP-366; however the device is physically located in SP-362.

Please clarify.

REFERENCE: (SOW,

SCHEDULE, ETC.)

Appendix G

PAGE NUMBER: G-3

The devise 2F166 is located in SP-362. Appendix G will be revised accordingly.

9/22/2009 Yes

In Process

DRAFT RFP Q&A 8 of 12 9/22/09

Amendment/ Correction Required?

039 Site Visits In reference to the Draft RFP paragraph below, will we be able to visit the Norfolk and Pt. Mugu sites after the official RFP release or should we make our request before the official RFP release?

5252.237-9509 INSPECTION OF SITE (NAVAIR) (JAN

1992) Offerors or quoters are invited to inspect the site where services are to be performed for each MAC. For appointment call TBD prior to official RFP release.

N/A All offerors were presented with the opportunity to visit each site during the planned site visits in August. No further site visits are planned. Clause 5252.237-9509 will be removed from the final RFP when it is released.

9/22/2009 Yes

040 E2-C COMS NS

Norfolk CBA

The E2-C COMS Collective Bargaining Agreement at NS Norfolk expired 31 July 2009 Does the government intend to include the latest agreement between Fidelity and the IAM Union in the RFP?

N/A The latest effective Collective Bargaining Agreements will be included with the final official RFP when it is released.

9/22/2009 Yes

042 CPAR Questionnaires Section L, Part B, 4.0 Volume 4 – Past Performance asks if

CPARs are recent (within the past six months) on the Past Performance Data Requirements and Contract Data table and asks for the specific CPAR completion date on row 10 of the Relevant Contract Data table. Past Performance Attachment 1 (PPA-1) CPARS Update Questionnaires are to be submitted for any CPAR older than six months.

Is it acceptable for contractors to simply submit PPA-1’s on all contracts that have had CPARS at some time in the past?

REFERENCE: (SOW,

SCHEDULE, ETC.) Section L, Part B, PAGE NUMBER: 103

PARAGRAPH: 4.0 Volume 4 – Past Performance

No. As stated in Section L, for contracts that have CPARs that are more than 6 months old, i.e., the completion date is more than 6 months before the due date for this proposal, the offeror will forward a copy of Attachment PPA-1.

9/22/2009 No

044 11H177 CMS Status According to App L for the 11H177, the device is listed as

CMS in para 3.1.1. However, in para 4.1, it states that the contractor is to respond to maintenance support within one minute. In addition, the contractor is responsible for power up, checkout, daily readiness testing, initial prep, post op readiness testing and power down. The contractor shall perform all preventive maintenance according to the PM schedules.

Should this device be listed as COMS vs CMS?

PAGE NUMBER: L-5

PARAGRAPH: 3.1.1

PAGE NUMBER: L-5

PARAGRAPH: 4.1

This device is correctly listed in Appendix L as CMS. 9/22/2009 No

In Process

In Process

DRAFT RFP Q&A 9 of 12 9/22/09

Amendment/ Correction Required?

046 Proposal Paragraph Numbering

Do we need to follow the paragraph lettering as shown in Section L, or can we use paragraph numbers for the topics shown? (reference page 91: after “2.1.1 Management Approach” there are a number of topics listed from a. to e.; can we substitute “2.1.1.1” for” a.”, etc.?

REFERENCE: (SOW,

SCHEDULE, ETC.) RFP

Section L

PAGE NUMBER: 91

PARAGRAPH: Part B, 2.1.1

Page 86 states that : ”Proposal information must be structured such that its paragraph number/letter is identical to the Proposal Instructions paragraph number to which it is responding, although the Offeror may add lower tier sub paragraphs”.

9/22/2009 No

069 Tools and Test

Equipment Who is required to provide calibration of test equipment? REFERENCE: SOW

PARAGRAPH: 4.3.1

The successful offeror will be responsible for this task. 9/22/2009 No

071 Missing FAR Clause Section I inadvertently excluded FAR Clause 52-219-4 (Notice of Price Evaluation Preference for HUBZone Small Business Concern s (July 2005).

Request the Government included this FAR Clause in the final solicitation.

REFERENCE: (Section I – Clauses Incorporated by Reference.)

PAGE NUMBER: 49 of 129

Per the prescription in FAR 19.1308(b), FAR Clause 52.219-4 will be added to Section I in the final official RFP when it is released. The clause is only applicable to the full and open (unrestricted) MAC and is not applicable to the Total Small Business Set Aside MAC.

9/22/2009 Yes

In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process

In Process

In Process In Process

DRAFT RFP Q&A 10 of 12 9/22/09

Amendment/ Correction Required?

075 Missing FAR Clause Section I included (Prompt Payment) but then inadvertently excluded FAR Clause 52-213-1 (Fast Payment Procedure).

Request the Government included this FAR Clause in the final solicitation.

REFERENCE: (Section I – Clauses Incorporated by Reference.)

PAGE NUMBER: 51 of 129

FAR Clause 52.213-1 is not applicable for this procurement, per the prescription contained in FAR 13.404.

9/22/2009 No

076 Missing FAR Clause Section I included (Prompt Payment) but then inadvertently excluded FAR Clause 52-216-7 (Allowable Costs and Payment).

Request the Government included this FAR Clause in the final solicitation.

REFERENCE: (Section I – Clauses Incorporated by Reference.)

PAGE NUMBER: 51 of 129

FAR Clause 52.216-7-1 is not applicable for this procurement, per the prescription contained in FAR 16.207(a). If a cost-reimbursement task order is contemplated in the future, it will be included in the individual task order solicitation.

9/22/2009 No

In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process In Process

In Process In Process

In Process In Process In Process In Process

In Process In Process

In Process In Process In Process In Process

In Process

DRAFT RFP Q&A 11 of 12 9/22/09

Amendment/ Correction Required?

101 Section L, paragraph

2.1.1 (subparagraphs c.

d. and e.

There is exceptional redundancy among these paragraphs.

Section c requires a highly detailed analysis of the bidder’s organization structure including who the subcontractors are, placement within the organization, use and responsibilities of subcontractors. Section d requires identification of sub Each of these subparagraphs requests the bidder to provide detailed information on responsibilities, use on Task orders and possible future subcontractors. Section e again seeks information on the subcontractors within the organizational structure.

These redundant requirements are excessive and necessitate either extensive re-elaboration of already provided material or, at a minimum, extensive cross-referencing with the section itself. This does not serve the SSEB well. In addition, it is not possible to currently identify unknown future subcontractors until the nature of whatever the future TO might be. We cannot predict whom we might call upon to respond. Bidders may not even respond to a particular future task order and therefore such a requirement is mote.

The Government’s future requirements cannot be forecast.

In the interest of developing a better solicitation which is the purpose of the “Draft” request the Government restructure Section 2.1.1 to eliminate confusion and redundancy.

REFERENCE Section L

PAGE NUMBER: 92-93

PARAGRAPH: 2.1.1

The Government will review the draft RFP and make changes as necessary prior to final RFP release.

9/22/2009 Possible

DRAFT RFP Q&A 12 of 12 9/22/09