QA_Set_One.pdf

1. Question: The narrative describes CPFF line items in the CLIN structure, but Section B includes both FFP and CPFF CLINs. Can the government clarify?

Answer: The Government intends for this contract to be primarily CPFF with FFP and Cost (no fee) CLINs.

2. Question: Draft Section B only shows base year. Is it correct to assume that subsequent years will be the same with the exception of the transition CLIN? Also, will the Government provide a standard ODC amount in Sections B and L for use by all offerors?

Answer: The notional strategy is to have an IDIQ base contract will have a duration of seven years. The task order structure will be put on contract for the first year. The Government will provide a standard ODC amount.

3. Question: Section L-Factor 4 Cost/Price (Appendix A) and (Attachment X): Appendix and

Attachment were not included with draft documents. Will Government provide draft appendix

A/attachment X?

Answer: Yes. Cost/Price is now factor 5.

4. Question: Section L Factor 3, Performance Confidence Assessment. The PPQ included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror and its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for this factor. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. 1) If a project/contract submitted for past performance already has a Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) on file with the government, is a PPQ still required? 2) This section states “the completed PPQS should be submitted with your proposal” then it says “Questionnaires shall be submitted directly tousarmy.orlando.peo-stri.list.uas@mail.mil <mailto:usarmy.orlando.peo-stri.list.uas@mail.mil > prior to proposal closing date”. These instructions appear to be in conflict. Typically PPQs are submitted directly to the government. Can the government clarify the requirement for submission of PPQs? 3)

Will the government consider posting an example PPQ prior to the DRAFT RFP?

Answer: After further consideration the requirement to submit PPQ’s has been removed from the draft solicitation.

5. Question: Section M-Past Performance – “In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be rated as unknown confidence (neutral), having no favorable or unfavorable impact on the evaluation.”: Will the Government please clarify why an Offeror whose “past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned” is a viable offeror to perform this highly complex training program requirement? Recommend if an Offeror cannot demonstrate meaningful past performance within the past 3 years be eliminated from the competition as incapable of understanding and meeting requirements UAS training.

Answer: In accordance with Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures, 1 April 2016, Paragraph 3.1.3.3 an offeror's lack of past performance must be evaluated as Unknown

Confidence (neutral).

6. Question: Section M-Factor 3 Performance Confidence Assessment: "Projects that include UAS

Flight Instruction Experience equal to or greater than DoD UAS group 3 (Maximum weight is less than 1,320 lbs., Operating Altitude is less than 18,000 Mean Sea Level, Air Speed is less than 250 knots) will be evaluated as more relevant." Will the Government please clarify why UAS Flight instruction experience equal or greater than DoD UAS group 3 (Maximum weight is less than

1,320 lbs., Operating Altitude is less than 18,000 Mean Sea Level, Air Speed is less than 250 knots) would be evaluated as more relevant?

Answer: This factor has been revised and is now Factor 4.

7. Question: Section L, Factor 3. Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ). It appears the completed PPQ (by the Contractor) should be directly submitted to ACC Orlando. However, an earlier statement indicates “completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal.” Please provide guidance on the correct handling of completed PPQs.

Answer: After further consideration the requirement to submit PPQ’s has been removed from the draft solicitation.

8. Question: Draft Section L, Factor 3, Para 2, Performance Confidence Assessment.

This requirement as written limits competition to those very few companies with large contracts including UAS instructional experience. Since there are no small companies doing UAS training on this scale today, the requirement strongly favors the small companies that the incumbent large businesses will team or form joint ventures with to pursue this contract. We believe that aviation experience, in particular aviation training, is the key element and provides a more competitive field. Will the government modify the experience requirement to remove the words “Similar in scope is defined as contracts with substantial efforts for self-performed tasks involving UAS Flight Instruction?” and replace with words requiring experience performing aviation training?

9. Question: Draft Section L, Factor 3, Performance Confidence Assessment. The Government states: “The offeror shall provide descriptions for at least two and no more than four projects that are within the past six years from date of solicitation issuance for projects that are similar to this project in scope. The offeror may include projects of subcontractors.”

These words do not require a small business prime to have even a single relevant past performance example. As written, this leaves open the door for a small business prime contractor with absolutely no experience managing any contract at all to use the past performance of subcontractor(s) or JV partners to meet the requirement. This is very unusual;

we have never seen an RFP of any scope (outside 8(a)) that does not require the prime contractor to present some examples of its own past performance. It appears to unduly favor a small company or Joint Venture, perhaps formed only for the purpose of this pursuit, and which has on its team one of the current large business performers. Will the government require all prime offerors (to include all members of a Joint Venture) to provide examples of their own past performance to prevent manipulation of the requirement in favor of an incumbent? In Section

M it appears this may be the intent but it is not clearly articulated here.

Answer: The factor has been revised and is now Factor 4.

10. Question: Section M, Factor 3, Performance Confidence Assessment. The Government states:

“Projects that include UAS Flight Instruction Experience equal to or greater than DoD UAS group

3 (Maximum weight is less than 1,320 lbs., Operating Altitude is less than 18,000 Mean Sea

Level, Air Speed is less than 250 knots) will be evaluated as more relevant.” - Unclear;

recommend “Weight between 55 and 1320 lbs., operating altitude no greater than FL 180, and maximum airspeed below 250kts.”

Answer: The factor has been revised and is now Factor 4.

11. Question: Sections L/M-Resume of Program manager [PM]: Section L does not mention “key personnel”, whereas Section M mentions the PM and “any additional key personnel”. Will the

Government require key personnel beyond the PM, or will the Government allow the Offeror to determine key personnel? Will any/all resumes be counted against page count? (Recommend they not be counted).

Answer: The only key personnel the Government is requiring is the Program Manager. However, each offeror is permitted to submit resumes for anyone they deem to be key personnel. Yes, resumes will be counted toward the page limitation.

12. Question: Section L-Transition Plan: Will the transition plan be included as part of the Technical and/or Management Volume or be a stand-alone document to be submitted with the proposal?

(recommend stand-alone plan)

Answer: The Transition Plan is part of Factor 3 Task Order 0001 so it will be part of Volume III.

13. Question: Sections L/M-Risks: Identification and mitigation of “performance risks” (Section M) is required. Why is the Government limiting risks to performance? (Recommend requiring a comprehensive Risk Management Plan be submitted as part of the proposal which covers all risk areas).

Answer: The Government deems Performance a major risk factor.

14. Question: PWS Paragraph 2.3: "The Contractor shall provide a Program Management Office structure and organization to manage the requirements of this contract." Does the government expect the contractor to establish an off-base Program Management Office or is the government providing office space? If the government is providing office space, can the government clarify the amount of space, offices, or cubicles that will be provided, as well as the type of infrastructure support (computer, phone, fax, internet service) that will be provided?

Answer: The government will not be providing corporate office space. Contractor personnel, who perform at the task order level at the Government site, shall be provided with work spaces.

Currently 168 on site work stations are currently allocated for contractor use. A number of them are utilized by more than one person (shared). Below is a breakdown of the number of work stations by course/mission supported:

15E Gray Eagle Training: 10

15E Shadow Training: 34

15W Common Core Training: 8

15W Gray Eagle Training: 49

15W Shadow Training: 38

Instructor Operator Training: 4

UAS Warrant Officer Training: 3

Flight Operations and Mission Support: 2

Ground Flight Observer Support: 2

Logistics Support: 7

Information Technology Network Administration: 4

Special Training Material Support: 2

Training Support: 5

Program Management: 1

Total: 168

15. Question: PWS Paragraph 2.4.3: "The Contractor shall provide Employee Individual Training File that contains each employee’s certifications." Does the government expect the contractor to provide individual training files every month as an attachment to CDRL 0004 for each contract employee?

Answer: The Contractor is responsible for having an "on-site" Training File for each employee.

The file should contain all training certifications. The file is not required to be submitted monthly with the MSR, however, an excel spreadsheet depicting all employee's training certifications (dates) will be required monthly as part of the MSR.

16. Question: PWS Paragraph 6.3 Higher Level Task 2: IT Network Administration. What days of the week and hours of operations does the government expect IT support?

Answer: Mon-Fri 0730-Midnight. The revised PWS section 1.8 "Hours of Operations" has been revised to reflect this change.

17. Question: PWS Paragraph 6.4 Higher Level Task 3: FLOMS. Duties will typically include ground flight observer operations, participation in downed aircraft recovery teams, securing ranges, Petroleum, Oil and Lubricant (POL) support, site maintenance, and minor construction. 1) Can the government provide additional details for the scope of work, number of people, and frequency of events for participation in downed aircraft recovery teams? 2) Can the government provide additional details of what it means to “secure ranges?” For example, how many people are needed, what labor categories are required, how many days per week, what time of day the ranges will be secured? 3) Can the government expand on the requirement for

POL support? For example, how many people, and what exactly is expected in the support of

POL, such as how many fueling operations per day, how many oil servicing actions per day, etc.?

4) Can the government quantify how much, how often, and what type of site maintenance and minor construction is needed?

Answer: 1. A minimum of two FLOAMS personnel will participate in the downed aircraft recovery team (DART). Semi-annual drills are conducted. Actual DART events are random in frequency and number. 2. Two FLOAMS personnel secure the range. Securing consists of closing 18 gates and putting up two flags on Ft Huachuca's East Range. 3. POL support consists of: Monitoring the status of fuel in operational generators daily and fueling as required.

Ensuring 5 gallon fuel cans for operational support are full and ready for use. Monitoring the unit's fuel storage points to ensure there are enough supplies on hand to complete the mission and scheduling bulk fuel deliveries (JP-8) as required. 4. Site maintenance includes light building maintenance (touch up paint, hanging wall signs, replacing floor tiles, installing walkway pavers, and replacing light bulbs, etc.). Site maintenance is conducted on an "as needed" basis.

18. Question: PWS Paragraph 6.4.3: "Contractor will, under general supervision, perform a variety of, self-help type maintenance, modification and repair activities." Is the government providing the general supervision referenced in this paragraph?

Answer: No, see revised PWS Section 6.4.3.

19. Question: PWS Paragraph 6.4.3: "May perform a variety of maintenance tasks, depending upon experience and level of certification." 1) Can the government explain what type of certifications are expected? For example; does the contractor have to have licensed electricians, plumbing, carpenters, etc. 2) How many people with each certification must be on shift at any given time?

3) Is the support for facility maintenance tasks required 24/5?

Answer: 1. Refer to Minimum Qualifications in PWS 6.4.3 Mission Support, Subtask 3. 2. There is only one shift for facility maintenance. 3. Mon-Fri 0730-1600

20. Question: PWS Paragraph 1.3. 1) Will USG disclose the additional CONUS potential locations that work will be performed in the final solicitation? 2) Will this support be temporary or permanent? 3) Will travel in support of this requirement be cost reimbursable?

Answer: See revised PWS Paragraph 1.3. 1) No. Travel location will be provided upon determination of need. 2) This will be temporary travel. 3) Travel has been identified as a cost reimbursable CLIN.

21. Question: PWS 1.6.7 "All Contractor employees shall require a minimum of SECRET security clearance" Only certain positions require a SECRET Clearance. 1.10.2 Some tasks may not require a clearance but all positions shall require investigation for duties and access to U.S.

Government systems and technical information. Will all positions require a Secret clearance?

Answer: PWS Paragraph 1.6.7 has been updated regarding security clearance requirements.

22. Question: PWS 6.2.2 UAS Unmanned Ground School (UGS) Common Core Instruction, Subtask 2.

Minimum Qualifications. The previous draft PWS had a requirement of 4 years, what is the basis for the government reducing the requirement to 2 years’ experience, adding risk to small business ability to recruit and retain qualified instructors. Will the government change this require back to 4 yrs? (recommend to change to retain skilled instructors)

Answer: The requirement is 2 years' as established section 6.2.2 of the most recent version of

PWS.

23. Question: PWS 6.2.4 Minimum Qualifications. Minimum of 4 years’ experience operating or maintaining a Shadow 200 System. This limits to individuals holding a 15W and/or 15 E MOS qualification. Will the government include comparable career paths in other military service branches or DoD elements in the Aviation Community or UAS Civilian Industry to minimum qualifications?

Answer: IAW with PWS paragraph section 6.2.4, the requirement is 4 years' experience operating or maintaining a Shadow 200 system (in accordance with AR 95-23. There is no comparable experience. However, it is not a requirement to hold the Army MOS of 15W or 15E

24. Question: PWS 6.2.5 Minimum Qualifications: Must have at least 200 flight hours and 4 years’ experience on Shadow 200 and/or Gray Eagle UAS. Will the Government allow other UAS

Platforms to be used for experience/Flight Hours…. I.E Hunter, Warrior A, Predator?

Answer: No.

25. Question: PWS 6.4.3 Mission Support, Subtask 3: How does the USG define “semi-skilled”?

Answer: See revised PWS Paragraph 6.4.3.

26. Question: 1.6.7 Personnel Security Clearances. Section 1.10.2 contradicts paragraph 1.10.2 which states All Contractor employees shall require a minimum of SECRET security clearance.

Can the Government provide clarification as to which positions require what level of security clearance? In addition, with the current backlog experienced by DSS in processing clearances, could there be an authorized extension to the 90-day requirement for an Interim to SECRET clearance being obtained?

Answer: Section 1.10.2 does not contain this information. Please clarify the question.

27. Question: Does the government anticipate this being an SCA-covered contract? If so, will government release the Wage Determinations and Labor Categories for the labor associated with this contract?

Answer: Yes, there are some SCA covered positions. This information will be provided in the draft solicitation.

28. Question: What is the anticipated period of performance of the contract?

Answer: The current notional strategy of procuring this requirement is a seven year base ordering period, with Orders anticipated to be awarded on an annual base period plus option periods until November 2025.

29. Question: Draft Section L/M. Will the Government share its intended weighting methodology now to assist offerors in preparing for RFP release?

Answer: This will be provided with the draft solicitation.

30. Question: Does USG anticipate releasing a “final” draft solicitation and if so, what timeline could be expected for its release?

Answer: Yes, a draft RFP was released in June 2017

31. Question: UAS IMS Draft Eval Criteria 10 APR 17; Section L Factor 3 Performance Confidence

Assessment Section L Factor 3 Performance Confidence Assessment states that, "The offeror shall provide descriptions for at least two and no more than four projects that are within the past six years from date of solicitation issuance for projects that are similar to this project in scope." The section further refines this restriction by stating that, "[s]cope is defined as contracts with substantial efforts for self-performed tasks involving UAS Flight Instruction."

By limiting potential Prime offerors (all of whom will be Small Businesses), as well as subcontractors, to only past performance that involves UAS Flight Instruction, the USG is severely restricting the candidate pool. There are many Small Businesses that provide high-quality aviation (other than UAS) training support to multiple DoD customers on contracts that meet or exceed the size and complexity of the FHU UAS contract. There are also Small

Businesses that have recent, relevant experience managing large business subcontractors on

IDIQ contracts similar in form to that expected on the FHU UAS contract. Additionally, while the main focus of the FHU UAS contract is UAS Flight Instruction, there are multiple contract requirements that involve tasks other than Flight Instruction, i.e. IT Network Administration;

Special Training Material Support; and Logistics Support. Would the government consider modifying the requirement to, "[s]cope is defined as contracts with substantial efforts for self-performed tasks involving aviation training and/or support functions associated with aviation operations?"

32. Question: Section L, Factor 3. Performance Confidence Assessment. Scope Similarity. The

Government’s definition for scope similarity (UAS Flight Instruction) unnecessarily restricts offerors and provides substantive advantage to the incumbent team. In fact, both manned and unmanned flight training and procedures rely on the same set of Department of Defense (DoD) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations (DCMA 8210.1/AR 95-20), and many of the tasks/sub-tasks specified throughout this PWS are analogous to manned flight training, additionally requiring workforce qualifications/ certifications that are identical, regardless of the manned or unmanned application. Further, multiple discussions with Government representatives prior to these draft documents’ publication emphasized the TRADOC schoolhouse nature of this work. Further, although there is obvious difference between manned and unmanned flight instruction, the similarities are sufficient that any organization involved in

(1) TRADOC instruction or (2) flight instruction would be more than capable to offer to this effort. Questions associated with this requirement include: 1. Would the Government consider replacing “UAS Flight Instruction” with “Flight Instruction?” 2. Would the Government consider replacing “UAS Flight Instruction” with “TRADOC Instruction?” 3. Were the Government to sustain the verbiage, recommend the Government define “UAS Flight Instruction?” 4. Given the

UAS maintainer training efforts captured in the PWS, would the Government further generalize the similar in scope statement to “UAS Instruction” from “UAS Flight Instruction?”

33. Question: PWS 2.1(1) 2.1 (1) “Shall perform the services described herein as independent

Contractors, not as employees of the Government.” Please consider rewording the statement to replace “independent contractors” with “contractor employees”. Two reasons: (1) use of the term Independent Contractors (ICs) carries connotations that are controlled by the Department of Labor (DOL) and other Federal laws and regulations, and (2) any Offeror proposing the use of

ICs as instructors is in violation of DOL guidelines.

Answer: PWS paragraph 2.1(1) has been revised to reflect "Contractor employees".

34. Question: PWS 2.2 Phase-In “… staffed at the sufficient level to assume the service scope”

Please clarify what “sufficient level” equates to. The Offerors will have proposed X number of personnel or hours per CLIN or TO. Anything less than that should be considered insufficient.

Recommend revision to “proposed level”.

Answer: PWS paragraph 2.2 has been revised to remove "at the sufficient level".

35. Question: PWS Student Throughput & Instructor-Student Ratios Notably missing from the current version of the PWS are Attachments G&I from the previous draft PWS. Was this an oversight to be corrected with the final RFP, or does the Government intend to have Offerors determine that number of instructors required, perhaps in violation of TRADOC and local regulations?

Answer: This was provided with the draft solicitation.

36. Question: PWS All Minimum Qualifications: All Higher level tasks minimum qualification sections are listed as either 2 years or 4 years minimum experience. Will the Government include a tier system in order to maintain the high level experience currently on staff?

37. Question: PWS CDRL A004: This should be CDRL A003 vice A004.

Answer: PWS has been updated.

38. Question: PWS 6.2.3 Minimum Qualifications: Minimum of 4 years’ experience in Aviation

Reconnaissance and Surveillance. UAS experience preferred. This limits to individuals with

“Aviation” Reconnaissance and Surveillance experience. Will the Government include other comparable career paths such as any 35 consolidated management field (CMF), 150/350

Warrant Officer CMF or in the MI Officer area of concentration (AOC) to minimum qualifications?

39. Question: PWS 6.2.5 Minimum Qualifications for Shadow and Gray Eagle: Graduate of US Army

Instructor Operator Course or DES equivalent. Is having the IO Course a condition for hiring or can the individual complete once hired?

Answer: PWS paragraph 6.2.5 qualifications has been updated to remove this requirement.

40. Question: PWS 6.2.9 Minimum Qualifications: Completion of the 15W UGS. Minimum of 2 years’ experience as an instructor in an Aviation field. Must be Gray Eagle Instructor Operator

Qualified IAW 4.1.5. IFR Minimum experience is 2 years, however must be a Gray Eagle Qualified

Operator which has a 4 years’ experience minimum, what will be the requirement? Minimum requirements for IFR Instructor do not include Private Pilot with Instrument Rating, will these instructors teaching IFR be required to have an IFR Rating?

Answer: PWS paragraph 6.2.9 qualifications has been updated to increase the minimum years' experience to 4 years of IFR or Military rating/equivalency

41. Question: PWS 6.4.4. Contractors Driver’s License Training Program. We assume all vehicles and equipment listed will be provided to the Contractor free of charge for training drivers. Is our assumption correct?

Answer: Yes, correct assumption

42. Question: Draft PWS Page 5. “1.6.1.1 If one or more of the key personnel, for any reason, becomes or is expected to become unavailable for work under this contract for a continuous period exceeding 30 calendar days, or is expected to devote substantially less effort to the work than initially anticipated or proposed, the Contractor shall, subject to the concurrence of the

Contracting Officer, promptly replace personnel with personnel who possess equal or better qualifications as the original employee.” - Only one key person is identified in the draft PWS. Is the above reference to “one or more” key personnel a typo, or is it the government’s expectation that offerors will identify and propose others?

Answer: PWS paragraph 1.6.1.1 has been revised to remove "If one of more of the".

43. Question: Draft PWS Page 46. “Note: A sample of the Training support requirements are listed in the bidder’s library for Contractor information purposes.”- This statement does not appear to apply to the paragraph immediately above nor to the overall Section 6. Please clarify its intent or remove.

Answer: This statement has been removed from the PWS.

44. Question: IDIQ + TO Structure and Final Solicitation Documents. • Does the Government intend to publish an awardable TO with the final solicitation documents? • If so, would the

Government consider announcing what portions of the work described by the PWS would be covered in the awardable TO?

Answer: Task Order 0001 PWS and Section B will be posted with the draft solicitation.

45. Question: Reference: • Bidder’s Library, Paragraph 1.2, Paragraph 6.0, Paragraph 1.11.9, and

Paragraph 6.2.1. Bidder’s Library. A bidder’s library is referenced once in the PWS, but would be particularly useful in offeror responses to the final solicitation. Request the Government publish the following documents as part of the “library”: 1. Training Support Requirements as referenced in PWS paragraph 6.6.2. 2. Appropriate regulations, directives, and Standard

Operating Procedures sufficient to provide all offerors the same level of insight as is currently enjoyed by the incumbent contract team (level the playing field). 3. Course Outlines and Lesson

Plans for all PWS-covered UAS training courses (this would enable detailed analysis in order to determine where contractor manpower might be used to accommodate other tasks). 4.

Commanding General Intelligence Oversight Program, 25 Sep 2015. 5. 2ND Battalion, 13TH

Aviation Regiment Instructor Certification Standing Operating Procedures

Answer: No, a bidder’s library will not be published. All reference support documents will be provided with the solicitation.

46. Question: Paragraph 1.6. Day-to-Day Government Support for PWS Tasks. Request the

Government identify numbers of uniformed and full/part-time Government civilians involved in

PWS-specified tasks daily. Numbers of Government cadre cross-walked to specified PWS task/sub-task numbers would be helpful. This information would only be known to the incumbent team and is critical to developing the BOE necessary to establish a Firm-Fixed Price

(FFP) bid and to appropriately negotiate specified PWS tasks.

Answer: This will be provided with the draft solicitation.

47. Question: Paragraphs 1.6.7 and 1.10.2. Security Clearances. We acknowledge the security clearance requirements outlined in paragraph 1.6.7 of the PWS. However, as the Government is aware, the system is experiencing long-term backlogs that are, in many cases, impacting work.

Consequently, it would be helpful for the Government to specify which positions require clearances and at what level with final solicitation documents. This enables our avoiding these backlogs by integrating security clearance screening into the hiring process.

Answer: PWS Paragraph 1.6.7 has been updated regarding security clearance requirements.

48. Question: In reference to the 120-day transition period, will alternative proposals be allowed to allow for lower risk innovative solutions?

Answer: Alternative solutions are allowed as long as the lower risk innovative solution does not exceed 120-day transition period.

49. Question: Can the Government explain the rationale for using 1920 hours when the standard man-hour year equals 2080 hours? (L 1.2.6)

Answer: 2080-(10 federal holidays + 2 weeks’ vacation) = 1920

Some questions received thus far are being worked and will be addressed on or before the final solicitation posting.