AF_UH-60A_QA_20180626_W900KK-18-R-0004.pdf

Questions from Industry

Solicitation #: W900KK-18-R-0004

Afghanistan Air Force (AAF) and Special Mission Wing (SMW) UH-60A

1. CLINs 0006 through 0016 are all Options. What are the Option exercise dates permitted for each?

ANS: See attached amendment.

2. The CLINs 0010 through 0016 all appear to reference associated CLINs that are incorrect. For example, CLIN 0010 is for “New Equipment Training” for CLIN 0012. Correct reference, we believe, should be for CLIN 0009. Same are apparent errors in the CLIN references contained in CLINs 0011, 0012, 0013, 0014, 0015 and 0016.

ANS: See attached amendment.

3. The CLIN 0006 for CLS references one-year duration. Compare RFP Sec F (2 years) and SOW Sections 1.0 and 3.3.1 (2 Years). Please clarify.

ANS: CLS is for 2 years. Adjustment has been made within Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) 0006. CLS options are two years. CLIN 0006 (Option) in the proposal should state 2 years for 24 unit months. CLIN 0014 is for the option FTD CLIN 0009.

4. RFP Section L8.7 references FAR 52.232-16, Progress Payments and requires Offerors to demonstrate in their Proposal a need for contract financing. Section I (Contract Clauses) does not incorporate 52.232-16, nor does it incorporate 52.232-32, Performance Based Payments. We have the following questions:

Assume that Contractor, in accord with L8.7 may propose that Progress Payments should be included in the resulting contract, and that if awarded, the contract will include FAR 52.232-16.

Please confirm or if not, clarify. FAR 52.232-16 and FAR 52.232-32 has been added.

Is it permissible to Propose Milestone/Performance Based Payments for CLINs 0001, 0005, 0009 and 0013, in lieu of any Progress Payments for the entire contract? ANS: Yes

ANS: Yes, FAR clause has been incorporated.

5. RFP Sec L.5.0, Subfactor 1.1 requires the Offeror to provide a detailed explanation how its solution will support a “non-collimated” display……”

System Specification Section 3.6, second paragraph, says: “The visual system shall support a non-collimated display…”, but also says, at the end of the same paragraph, “Collimated displays are acceptable”. Please clarify this apparent contradiction.

ANS: Non-collimated display is the Government requirement. System Specification document Section 3.6, second paragraph has been modified and the "Collimated displays are acceptable” statement has been removed.

6. RFP Section L Table L-1 requires each Volume to be submitted as “1 Paper, 2 Electronic Submissions (MASTER). Is the MASTER Electronic submission 1 of the 2 or additional to the 2?

ANS: The MASTER Electronic submission is considered one the submissions of the two

(2).

7. RFP Section L.1.14 states:

Security Clearance Requirements: Contractor employees working under the resultant contract must have a Secret Security Clearance issued by the U.S. Government.

There is no reference to this requirement in the SOW. As far as we can determine there is no such security requirement related to UH-60A aircraft and no classified data to be provided to the Contractor for this Program. Is this reference sited above in L.1.14 an error? If not, does it apply to all contractor, subcontractor and consultant personnel working on the Program, or only to personnel who travel to the installation site in Afghanistan?

ANS: Contractor employees working under this contract do not require a security clearance.

8. The System Specification, Section 3.1 requires the FTD to be built to FAA Level 6. It also requires the contractor to provide a “flight model derived from class of helicopter” and “validated against the class of helicopter data package”.

The referenced FAA Appendix D (01 Jan 2012) requires, for Level 6 FTD’s: “aerodynamic program…that is representative of the simulated helicopter throughout its…flight envelope…” It also specifies, for Level 6: “the FTD must provide for proper effect of aerodynamic changes for the combinations of drag and thrust normally encountered in flight. This must include the effect of change in helicopter attitude, thrust, drag, altitude, temperature and configuration….and changes in gross weight and center of gravity.”

There is no definition if the FAA Appendix D (or Appendix F definitions) of “Class of Helicopter”.

Since the above FAA standard requires (and must so require to provide effective training) a flight/aero model derived from a UH-60A (the simulated helicopter), we presume the requirement from the System Specification that the flight model be derived from “Class” of helicopter means from the UH-60A. Please confirm.

ANS: Yes, flight model must derived from the UH-60A Class of Helicopter. Government will not provide actual UH-60A flight data.

9. RFP Section B, CLINs 0001, 0005, 0009 and 0013 (For the FTDs and the Spares) Cite FOB Origin, with a ship to address of Kandahar AFB. Section E, Inspection of these Items is at Destination. Section F, Delivery of these items is the same, 12 Months after contract. We have the following questions:

Is the contractor responsible for shipment of the FTDs and spare parts to Kandahar AFB?

ANS: Yes, Contractor responsible for shipment of the FTDs and spare parts to Kandahar.

Where is FOB: Origin (Shipping Point): Contractors facility in the U.S. or elsewhere?

ANS: FOB is Destination.

If not responsible for the shipping to Kandahar, will the Contractor turn over the FTDs and Spare parts, packaged for shipment, to the Government after FAT, at its facility, and then it becomes the Government’s responsibility, including risk of loss?

ANS: FOB is Destination.

If it is the Contractor’s responsibility to ship the FTDs and Spares to Kandahar, and assuming they arrive by air, will the Government be responsible for shipment from arrival point in Kandahar to the simulator facility. If not will the Government provide assistance in the form of equipment/trucks to accomplish transport to the simulator facility?

ANS: Government will provide Support Equipment for transportation of the simulators to the simulator facility. Depending awarded contractor and packaging requirements, PEOSTRI, in coordination with base logistics, will provide requested support equipment (flatbed, scissor lift, forklift) for transportation of the simulators into the simulator facility in Afghanistan. Specific SE is based on contractor needs and packaging.

10. Is the requirement for Delivery of the FTDs 12 months for Acceptance in Kandahar; or 12 months for Acceptance (FAT) at Contractor’s facility?

ANS: Delivery of the UH-60 FTDs is 12 months After Contract Award (ACA), and the systems are deemed Ready for Training (RFT) in Kandahar after Site Acceptance Test (SAT) is completed. Systems must meet the exit criteria outlined in the SOW Appendix A for SAT.

11. SOW Section 3.1 calls for the FTDs to have the unique Afghanistan aircraft configuration…in use by the AAF. Page 17 of the SOW identifies particular AAF UH-60A configuration items, related to Navigation, Communication and Engines, among other items. Can other, clearer pictures of the cockpit be provided; and or any other AAF UH-60A specific documentation? (Beyond page 17 and the documents specified in SOW 2.2.1)

ANS: Final Cockpit configuration will be provided ACA and finalized from System Requirements Review (SRR) through Critical Design Review (CDR).

12. Section B Item 0001 states as a reference LOA W5-B-UBE, Line 004 and Item 002 states as a reference FMS Case W5-B-UBE, Line 004. Will this LOA/FMS case line 004 information be provided? Please Clarify.

ANS: Government will not provide country Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Letter of Agreement (LOA). Reference is for internal Government funding profile mapping.

13. The answer to Question 1 of the Government Responses to Industry Draft Solicitation Questions stated: “A bidder’s library containing what technical documentation the Government possesses with respect to the most current UH-60A-10 design and Afghan-unique configuration will be provided to each Offeror”. When will this information be provided? Please Clarify.

ANS: Final Cockpit configuration will be provided ACA and finalized from System Requirements Review (SRR) through Critical Design Review (CDR).

14. Exhibit A - Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) for SOW-2017-053 (DD Form 1423-1) is missing from the RFP Documentation. Should Exhibit A from the Draft solicitation (AF_UH60_CDRLs.pdf ) be used? Please Clarify.

ANS: Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) for SOW-2017-053 (DD Form 1423-1) was left off erroneously and has been uploaded as an attachment within fbo.gov labeled Exhibit A_AF_UH60_CDRL_20180131.

15. a) USFOR-A FRAGO 10-200 – “all shipments into and out of CJOA-A be coordinated trough

DTS..”. Can we understand that PEO STRI will ship the materiel by the Defense Transportation

System? If not, then the prime contractor will be responsible and eligible to coordinate shipment via DTS?

ANS: PEOSTRI will not ship devices and spares utilizing DTS. Contractor is responsible for shipment of the FTDs and spare parts to Kandahar. Contractor is not eligible to coordinate shipment through DTS.

b) Required Customs Documents, paragraph “1) The U.S Ambassador Afghanistan diplomatic note guarantees that the USG shipments are exempt from Afghanistan Customs duties and taxes.” Integration and FAT will be in sub-contracting party (foreign country). Shipment will be from this foreign country to Afghanistan, can still be considered as USG?

ANS: UH-60A FTD is a U.S. Government contract. Goods are considered U.S. Army until transferred to country.

c) Exports: Military and dual-use goods are under Export license procedures. Valid End User

Certificate will be required. Who will issue this document? U.S Government or Afghanistan?

ANS: PEOSTRI coordinates EUC for all devices shipped to Afghanistan through IPO and country. PEOSTRI will obtain EUC once contractor is identified.

16. The system specification makes no reference to control loading, normal or abnormal flight conditions. It only states ‘typical forces, moments and velocities’. The specification references

Level 6 FTD so we must assume that the device must fly and the fly model and forces must be accurate to a UH-60A.

a. Question - Does the FTD device need to fly in both normal and abnormal/emergency conditions? ( eg- hydraulic failure or boost off condition)

ANS: The UH-60 FTD will need to operate for normal, abnormal, and emergency conditions.

17. The solicitation Page 61 reads:

L.1.14 Security Clearance Requirements: Contractor employees working under the resultant contract must have a Secret Security Clearance issued by the U.S. Government.

Question: As the provision of the equipment and subsequent training does not demand for a Secret Security Clearance to be in place for it to be carried out effectively, is it possible to remove this clause?

ANS: Contractor employees working under this contract do not require a security clearance.

18. Is the delivery schedule of 12 months require that the device be on site 12 months ARO or is that shipped by 12 months? Is 12 months ARO absolute or will extended delivery schedules be considered?

ANS: Delivery of the UH-60 FTDs is 12 months After Contract Award (ACA), and the systems are deemed Ready for Training (RFT) in Kandahar after Site Acceptance Test (SAT) is completed. Systems must meet the exit criteria outlined in the SOW Appendix A for SAT.