F-16 FINAL QA 419

47 KB Posted Apr 22, 2009

Attached to: F16 Weapons Systems Simulator Training & Support Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number: W9133L-09-R-0010
Issued by: Department of the Army National Guard

About this file

From the source

These are the questions submitted and all responses.Posted 22 April 2009

Text of this file

Sheet1

Question No.	Document	Page	Section	Topic	Question/Comment	General	Springfield	Lackland	Tucson
1	RFP	62	PWS	6.1.20, 6.1.21, 6.1.22	The PWS refers to a Training Development and Management Plan (TPDMP) in 6.1.20, a Quality Control Plan (QCP) in 6.1.21, and a Contractor Training and Certification Plan (TCP) in 6.1.22 as plans to be submitted in response to the RFP, and become part of the contract.

Section L Item A), Factor 1, does not refer to any of these plans. Are the TPDMP, the QCP, the TCP, a Security Plan, and resumes to be included in the 150 page limit?	These plans are to be submitted within 15 days of contract award. The contractor will coordinate with the government until they are final.
	2	RFP	62,
105	PWS and Section L	6.1.20 and Section
L A)	Section L A) refers to a comprehensive Project Management and Oversight plan or Management Plan. The PWS refers to the TPDMP.

Are these two separate plans?	Yes, these are two separate documents
	3	RFP			DD254	Will the customer be providing a DD254 for security guidance?	This security will be iniated by the contracting office after award.
	4	RFP	103	Section L	Volume II CDs	L.2.4 …submit one softcopy of volume II and one softcopy of the Auxiliary Cost Data.
What comprises the Auxiliary Cost Data since this is the only reference to the document?	The reference to "auxiliary Cost date" should be deleted, it does not apply.
	5	RFP	102, 103, 106, 107	Section L 2.1, L.2.2, L.D),
M 1.2 (a)	References to Technical Proposal and Specification	Guidelines indicate that "The Government will incorporate the Technical and Management proposal and PWS into the award." The proposal content listed in L.2.3 does not include a Technical Proposal. Please clarify.	This should have stated Technical Proposal. Technical Proposal includes Management Plan, Past performance, and Key Personnel.
	6				References to Technical Proposal and Specification	Paragraph 2.2 states: "However, the offeror shall state assumptions, conditions, and any exceptions that the offeror relied upon as a basis for the Technical and Specification proposal or the Price proposal." The proposal content listed in L.2.3 does not include a Technical Proposal or Specification. Please clarify.	This should have stated Technical proposal.
	7				References to Technical Proposal and Specification	D) Factor 4 (e) - Instructions state that "The price proposal shall include a basis of estimate, describe the rationale, and relate cost to the technical and specification proposal." A technical and specification proposal are not required; please clarify.	Should have stated Technical Factor.
	8				References to Technical Proposal and Specification	M 1.2(a) - The "Technical and Management Factor" is referenced. Should this be the "Management Plan and the Key Personnel Factors are" - please clarify reference.	This should state Management Factor.
	9	Section L		M 2.0 A) (d)	SOW Task to match Section M Criteria	We have not been able to identify a PWS task that corresponds to the criteria in M.1.(d) "research and analyze... marketing opportunities, as well as perform market analysis". Please clarify.	"Emerging Technologies" refers to information Technology (IT)
	10	PWS	52	2.4.2.1	GFE Availability	Please clarify the availability of PEX as GFE.	PEX is a government software program what will be made available via .mil access
	11	Proposal Worksheet and PWS	PWS 68	5.0	School Registrar	Three appears to be inconsistency between the Pricing Worksheet and the PWS with respect to the School Registrar. The Proposal Worksheet references the School Registrar in for Kelly, Lackland, in CLIN 0001 Training Support: "School Registrar, Security Management IAW SOW Para 5.0" and in Springfield, CLIN 0003 Training Support: "School Registrar, Security Management IAW SOW 5.0."

PWS paragraph 5.0 relates to Security Management - Protection of Resources and does not reference the School Registrar. The revised PWS does not include the previously published paragraph 2.4.2.4 entitled Registrar. Please clarify the requirement in the Pricing Worksheet.	The requirement for School Registrar has been removed at all three sites in the amended PWS. The reference to School Registrar in the Kelly and Springfield Proposal Worksheets should have been deleted.	IAW Appendix 2, Springfield does not request the contracted services of a Registrar. A military member is performing these duties. In looking at Appendix 5a, para 3, Registrar is still listed as well. These services are not required at Springfield.	The requirement for a School Registrar is no longer needed, hence the removal from the PWS. Proposal worksheets - CLINs 0001 and 0003; Training Support will be corrected to remove school registrar.
	12	PWS Appdx 3c	3	5.2	LMS	Please identify the LMS to be used at the site(s).		N/A for Kelly Annex, Lackland AFB, refer to Tucson since this is only site with this requirement.	NxTrain
	13	PWS Appdx 3c	3	5.2	LMS	Will the LMS that is going to be used be available as GFE?		N/A for Kelly Annex, Lackland AFB, refer to Tucson since this is only site with this requirement.	Yes, LMS is GFE.
	14	PWS Appdx 3c	3	5.2	LMS	If an LMS is going to be used and is not provided as GFE, is the contractor to provide an LMS?		N/A for Kelly Annex, Lackland AFB, refer to Tucson since this is only site with this requirement.	No. LMS will be GFE
	15	RFP	90	Sec. I	FAR 52.222-41	With the inclusion of FAR 52.222-41 Service Contract Act of 1965, should a clause be included which allows for adjustments to contract prices as wage determination rates change, such as FAR 52.222-43 Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Contract Act Price Adjustment (Multiple Year & Option Contracts)?	Clause 52.222-43 has been added
	16	CBAs			CBA	The Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) were included with Amendment 0001; however, for positions not covered in the CBA, please provide the applicable Service Contract Act (SCA) Wage Determinations or the SCA identification numbers, revision number and date for each site.	For portion not covered in the CBA, the contractor is to determine those positions. Not the government.
	17	PWS	Appx
4a	28	Lackland Contract Estimates - FY09	The Data in the “Sim Evt Yr”, “Sim Hr Yr” and “Pre/Post Brief” columns are calculated by multiplying the data in the “Sim Evts Stud” times “Number of Students/Yr” times “Number of Class/Yr”.

Should the “Number of Stud/Yr” column be “Number of Stud/Class” or are the totals incorrect? (This is inconsistent with the format of the other two sites.)		Lackland Appendix 4a "Contract Estimates - FY09" are correct as indicated.	No. The columns are correct. The # of Class/Yr is used as a multiplier for Acad Evts/Yr and Acad Hrs/Yr. If you have one student in a class or five students in class you only plan to teach a lesson once per class. The # of Stud/yr is a multiplier for Sim Evtrs/yr and Sim Hr/yr because each student will conduct the event individually.
	18	Appendix 4a	Pg 28	The Total Lackland Contract Instruction Estimate for Academics and Simulator instruction based on BEQ only allows for 200 I/SME hours for the increased Block 30 courseware effort. Please verify		The Lackland BEQ is adjusted for expected courseware revision requirements
	19	Appendix 5a	Pg 47	The Total Springfield Contract Instruction Estimate for Academics and Simulator instruction is considerably higher than the Hours for BEQ on the Proposal Worksheet. Are Springfield BEQ hours consistent with current instructors required?	Appendix 5a pg 47, total Springfield Contract Instruction estimate for Academics and Sim instruction vs BEQ hours on the Proposal Work Sheet. The Appendix 5a was based on the absolute worst case scenario (every slot being filled that is available. This has never occurred at Springfield. The BEQ level that was selected (4300 Instructional hrs)is a more accurate estimate of what will actually occur at Springfield next year.
	20			The hours for Contract Instructors at Tucson appears to be calculated for Academic and Training Devices, but no factor for the Subject Matter Expert (SME) work for the Courseware effort. Are we to assume that the hours for I/SME courseware support are in addition to the 11,700 hr Legacy and 3,810 UAE BEQ CLIN at Tucson? Should the SME courseware effort be included in the Courseware CLIN? Does this BEQ calculation include peak as well as average instructor load?			I/SME effort for Courseware should be accounted for in CLIN 0002 AA (ANG)/0006 AA (UAE), Courseware Maintenance Revision and Courseware Structural Revisions. On the Proposal Worksheet, the “Courseware Development” part of CLIN 0002/0006 AB should have been removed. AB is specific to Academic/Platform/Simulator Instruction and Operations to support flying training.
	21			Does the Computer Systems Analyst(CSA)/Computer Software Developer (CSD) requirement, RFP para 1.3.8, calls for three (3) CSAs that are currently on Site? There isn’t a tasking in the RFP that measures the amount of effort. We desire the number of CSAs required as full time level of effort or Full Time Equivalents (FTE’s)		Kelly Annex - not able to provide information. Contractor must determine level of effort required base upon workload identified in PWS and appendixes	The tasks are specified in the RFP.
	22			The hours for Contract Instructors at Kelly appear to be calculated for Academic and trainers with no allowance for the Courseware effort. Are we to assume that the hours for I/SME courseware support are in addition to the 4,000 hours BEQ at Kelly and should fall under the Courseware CLIN?		See question #20
	23		Para 5.1.1.2.1	Is there an estimated volume and type of classified materials to potentially handled by the Security Manager(s)?			Reference the MTI (appendix 3d, 4d & 5d) and RFP (Para. 8.2, Publications).
	24			Is Para 5.1.1.2.1 applicable to all sites		No, Kelly Annex - Lackland will not require contractor to store classified material.
	25			Please define “Conditions of Performance” and how it relates to this solicitation. FACTOR 3 PAST PERFORMANCE

(d) Brief description of the contract work, location(s), and

conditions of performance;	Conditions in relation to that particular contract and the type of work if not exact then analogous; In relation to the responses obtained from surveys on performances; .
	26	The 0001, 0002, and 0003 AB series CLINs, Academic Instruction, states SME Courseware Review is to be performed under these CLINs	this has been updated
	27	The Proposal Worksheets for these CLINs further indicate I/SMEs proposed per the BEQ are to be responsible for Courseware Development in addition to their instructor/operations duties.	this has been updated
	28	The worksheets reference SOW Para 2.2 only. PWS Section 2.2, Training Device Instruction, does not address I/SME Support of Courseware development at all, while Section 2.5, Courseware Development, states only that the contractor shall supply SMEs to courseware development.	this has been updated
	29	The issue is further confused in Appendix 3a, 4a, and 5a, identifying Estimates for Academics and Simulator instruction, that when compared to the BEQ, provides for some SME time available for courseware support, but not enough to perform to the MTI revision rates identified. Rephrasing our questions: Are the I/SME Hours identified by the BEQ for the AB Series CLINs intended to provide all I/SME support hours to include Courseware development, or are additional I/SME hours to be proposed separately under AA Series CLINs to provide for Courseware development support?	Since this is a PWS, it is up to the contractor to submit proposals based on their research and information. i.e. if you determine you need more time state so in your proposal and show where you made this deduction.

&LQ/A 4/19/09&C&P

&C&P

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to F16 Weapons Systems Simulator Training & Support, newest first.
File	Type	Posted
QUESTIONS 43009.doc	DOC document	May 7, 2009
APPENDIX 4d UpdatedMAY7.doc	DOC document	May 7, 2009
APPENDIX 5a attached.doc	DOC document	Apr 30, 2009
RFP Price Proposal Worksheet FINAL 42809.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Apr 29, 2009
Proposal Worksheet FINAL419.xls	XLS spreadsheet	Apr 22, 2009
AMENDEMT 2.doc	DOC document	Apr 22, 2009
AMENDMENT ONE.doc	DOC document	Apr 7, 2009
WSSCAPPENDIX2TO9_amended_final2.doc	DOC document	Apr 7, 2009
PROPOSALWORKSHEET FINAL.pdf	PDF	Apr 7, 2009
W9133L09R0010_amended_final2.doc	DOC document	Apr 7, 2009
Springfield CBA.doc	DOC document	Apr 7, 2009
Kelly 2006 CBA.pdf	PDF	Apr 7, 2009
ANG Questions and answers 040209.doc	DOC document	Apr 7, 2009
Tucson 2006 CBA.pdf	PDF	Apr 7, 2009
Conference.doc	DOC document	Mar 11, 2009
W9133L09R0010.doc	DOC document	Mar 10, 2009
WSSCAPPENDIX2TO9.docx	DOCX document	Mar 10, 2009
PROPOSALWORKSHEET.docx	DOCX document	Mar 10, 2009

Show all 18

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

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

Try for free Login

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Nov 14, 2017.