M6785409R00070002Questions Answers Amendment 0002 Attachment by E6SquRq

VIEWS: 6 PAGES: 19

									                                                                                      Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                            Questions & Answers

                        EFV Training System Questions and Answers
                            Solicitation Number: M67854-09-R-0007
Question 1: The specifications for CLINs 0005 (Operational Trainers), 0006 (Maintenance Trainers, and 0007
(Courseware) are missing from Section J of the RFP. Is the Government going to supply specifications for these
CLINs? If not, how is the Contractor to know what level of fidelity that is required of the operational and
maintenance part task trainers (are we to use actual equipment, training device mockups, etc.)? A specification is
needed for the courseware to define the levels of courseware that needs to be provided and the courses that need to
be taught via computer based training and vs. instructor led.

Answer 1: Section J.2 Attachment 13 titled Operator Tasks Allocated Revision 2 (for use with CLIN 0005) should
be used to determine the tasks to be trained for CLIN 0005 devices. Section J.2 Attachment 14 titled Maintenance
Tasks Allocated Revision 1 (for use with CLIN 0006) should be used to determine the tasks to be trained for CLIN
0006 devices. The offeror’s solution for training these tasks shall be reflected in the estimated cost. The courses to
be developed are defined in Section J.2 Attachments 5-12. They are erroneously listed as for use with CLIN 0005.
An Amendment has been issued to correct the attachment CLIN references. The definition of "levels of courseware"
is to be proposed by the offeror. Please refer to Section L.6.3.1 Subfactor 3 - Curriculum.



Question 2: Please refer to the RFP SOO. Could the Government add a list to the SOO of the Government’s
minimum set of data items (CDRLs) for the EFV Training System program? For example, are Product Drawings
and Associated Lists (DI-SESS-81000C) required for the training devices? Some offerors may propose this in their
SOW while other offerors may not. The Government would benefit greatly if this was a mandatory CDRL because
the Government will own the production data package and they can compete future production efforts instead of
going back to the OEM sole source.

Answer 2: The SOO paragraph 5.0.c. and e. define the Governments objectives for the acquisition of data. The
proposed data will be evaluated to determine the degree to which the offeror's approach meets the defined
objectives. Providing a minimum set of CDRL's may preclude an offeror from meeting the Governments objectives
in the most efficient and cost effective manner. A minimum set of CDRL's will not be provided.


Question 3: Please refer to the table in RFP L.4.1.10, Factor 1 Technical Proposal. Should the “unlimited” page
count be on the Subfactor 1 SOW row and not on the Subfactor 2 Training Devices row, since the Factor 1
Technical Proposal row indicates 80 pages (excluding SOW and Software Development Plan (SDP))?

Answer 3: The RFP was amended to correct this error. Please refer to the corrected page count table under L.4.1.9.



Question 4: The original announcement for solicitation M67854-09-R-0007 in February noted that it was a small
business set-aside. Is that still the case? I can’t seem to verify that based on the solicitation document that was
released this week.

Answer 4: Yes, FAR clause 52.219-6 Notice of Total Small Business Set-aside is included in Section I.



Question 5: Is this solicitation full and open?

Answer 5: This is a full and open competition after excluding one or more sources, please refer to Answer 4.

                                                          1
                                                                                      Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                            Questions & Answers

Question 6: Please provide clarification to L.7.3 Subfactor 2, Past Performance, page 91 of 110: “OFFERORS
MUST SUBMIT PAST PERFORMANCEREFERENCES NOT LATER THAN 10 days after issuance of the
RFP…” Is this 10 business days with a due date of Thursday 17 September 2009 or 10 calendar days with a due
date of Sunday 13 September 2009?

Answer 6: The past performance references were due 10 calendar days after RFP issuance. The FAR defines
“days” as calendar days. However, this date has been extended via Amendment 0001 and again in Amendment
0002.


Question 7: From the previous training development effort, are any of the hardware assets available for
incorporation into this program?

Answer 7: No.


Question 8: From the previous training development effort, are there any electronic drawings or 3D engineering
drawings/models available for use in this program?

Answer 8: No.


Question 9: What are the planned Annual Student Through-put, Course Length, and Number of Classes per year
for the following:

                  EFV Operator Course
                  EFV Gunner Course
                  EFV Commander Course
                  EFV Basic Maintainer Course
                  EFV Intermediate Maintainer Course


Answer 9: Please see the charts below.



                                                                EFV-C
                                         Vehicle                Comm                        Total Crew
                              EFV- EFV- Commande                Systems                     Manpower
                 Unit          P    C      r     Driver Gunner Crewman                       Required

         I MEF                 148     13        161         161      148        13             483

         II MEF                148     13        161         161      148        13             483

         III MEF               14        2        16         16       14          2              48

         4th AA Bn Tampa        3        1        5          5         4          1              15

         4th AA Bn Little      12        1        13         13       12          1              39
         Creek

         4th AA Bn              5        1        6          6         5          1              18


                                                         2
                                                                                                    Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                                          Questions & Answers



                                                                        EFV-C
                                                 Vehicle                Comm                               Total Crew
                                      EFV- EFV- Commande                Systems                            Manpower
                        Unit           P    C      r     Driver Gunner Crewman                              Required

                Gulfport

                4th AA Bn              12        1          13           13         12          1                39
                Jacksonville

                4th AA Bn              5         1          6             6          5          1                18
                Galveston

                Enhance                24        2          0             0          0          0                 0
                Equipment
                Allowance
                Program (EEAP)

                AAS Bn                 24        2          24           24         22          2                39

                TBS                    4         0          5             5          5          0                15

                PM AAA/AVTB            2         1          3             3          2          1                 9

                MPS1                   98        8          0             0          0          0                 0

                DMFA                   22        3

                Total                 523        50                                                          1206



                        FY13   FY14     FY15         FY16   FY17        FY18   FY19      FY20       FY21   FY22       FY23   FY24   FY25

# of Platoons
Delivered                        2          1         3         3        4      4         3          4       4         4      4      4

Cumm Platoons                    2          3         6         9        13     17        20         24     28         32    36      40

EFV Transition
(NET) Training
Input Plan (TIP)

1803 @ 3 Plt                     6          5         9         9        12     12        9          12     12         12    12      12

1834 @ 51 per Plt              104          86        153   153         204    204       153        204     204       206    204    204

2148 @ 12 per Plt                24         20        36     36          48     48        36         48     48         50    48      48




                                                                    3
                                                                                    Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                          Questions & Answers



                        FY13   FY14   FY15   FY16   FY17       FY18   FY19   FY20   FY21   FY22   FY23   FY24    FY25

Cumulative MOS
Population

      1803                      10     15     24     33         45     57     66     78     90    102    114     126

      1834                     104    190    343    496        700    904    1057   1261   1465   1671   1875    2079

      2148                      24     44     80    116        164    212    248    296    344    394    442     490



EFV NET TIP by
Course

    1803 Amphib
Assault Officer                 6      5      9      9          12     12     9      12     12     12     12      12

    1834 Basic
Crewman                        104     86    153    153        204    204    153    204    204    206    204     204

   1834 Vehicle
Commander @ 33%                 35     29     51     51         68     68     51     68     68     68     68      68

      1834 Gunner @
33%                             35     29     51     51         68     68     51     68     68     68     68      68

    1834 Unit
Leader @ 10 Plt                 20     10     30     30         40     40     30     40     40     40     40      40

    1834 Master
Gunner @1 Per Co                1      3      1      2          1      2      1      3      3      5      0       0

     1834
Communication
System Crewman                  2      4      3      3          5      5      5      5      5      5      0       0

2148 Basic
Maintainer                      24     20     36     36         48     48     36     48     48     50     48      48

2148 Intermediate
Maintainer @18%                 5      8      15     21         30     39     45     54     62     71     80      89

EFV NET Classes
by Course per Year

1803 Amphib
Assault Office (6 Cl)           1      1      2      2          2      2      2      2      2      2      2       2




                                                           4
                                                                                 Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                       Questions & Answers



                     FY13   FY14   FY15   FY16   FY17       FY18   FY19   FY20   FY21   FY22   FY23   FY24    FY25

    1834 Basic
Crewman (45 Cl)              3      2      4      4          5      5      4      5      5      5      5       5

         Commander
1834 Vehicle
@ 33% (18 Cl)                2      2      3      3          4      4      3      4      4      4      4       4

1834 Gunner @ 33%
(10 Cl)                      4      3      6      6          7      7      6      7      7      7      7       7

1834 Unit Leader @
10 Plt (18 Cl)               2      1      2      2          3      3      2      3      3      3      3       3

1834 Master Gunner
(5 Cl)                       1      1      1      1          1      1      1      1      1      1      0       0

1834 Communication
Systems Crewman
(10 Cl)                      1      1      1      1          1      1      1      1      1      1      0       0

2148 Basic
Maintainer (40 Cl)           1      1      1      1          2      2      1      2      2      2      2       2

2148 Intermediate
Maintainer @18%
(16 Cl)                      1      1      1      2          2      3      3      4      4      5      5       6



EFV Accession TIP
(AAS Bn)

1803 Amphib
Assault Officer              0      0      6      5          9      9      12     12     9      12     12      12

1834 Basic Crewman           0      0     104     86        153    153    204    204    153    204    204     206

# of Platoons
Delivered                    2      1      3      3          4      4      3      4      4      4      4       4

Cumm Platoons                2      3      6      9          13     17     20     24     28     32     36      40

   1834 Vehicle
Commander @ 33%              0      0      35     29         51     51     68     68     51     68     68      69

1834 Gunner @ 33%            0      0      35     29         51     51     68     68     51     68     68      69

1834 Unit Leader             0      0      20     10         30     30     40     40     30     40     40      40




                                                        5
                                                                                 Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                       Questions & Answers



                     FY13   FY14   FY15   FY16   FY17       FY18   FY19   FY20   FY21   FY22   FY23   FY24    FY25

1834 Master Gunner           0      0      1      3          1      2      1      2      1      3      3       5

1834 Communication
Systems Crewman              0      0      2      4          3      3      5      5      5      5      5       5

2148 Basic
Maintainer                   0      0      24     20         36     36     48     48     36     48     48      50

2148 Intermediate
Maintainer @18%              0      0      5      8          15     21     30     39     45     54     62      71

EFV Accession
Classes by Course
per Year

1803 Amphib
Assault Officer (6
Cl)                          0      0      1      1          2      2      2      2      2      2      2       2

1834 Basic Crewman
(45 Cl)                      0      0      3      2          4      4      5      5      4      5      5       5

1834 Vehicle
Commander @ 33%
(18 Cl)                      0      0      2      2          3      3      4      4      3      4      4       4

1834 Gunner @ 33%
(10 Cl)                      0      0      4      3          6      6      7      7      6      7      7       7

1834 Unit Leader @
10 Plt (18 Cl)               0      0      3      2          4      4      5      5      4      5      5       5

1834 Master Gunner
(5 Cl)                       0      0      1      1          1      1      1      1      1      1      1       1

1834 Communication
Systems Crewman
(10 Cl)                      0      0      1      1          1      1      1      1      1      1      1       1

2148 Basic
Maintainer (40 Cl)           0      0      1      1          1      1      2      2      1      2      2       2

2148 Intermediate
Maintainer @18%
(16 Cl)                      0      0      1      1          1      2      2      3      3      4      4       5




                                                        6
                                                                                                              Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                                                    Questions & Answers



                        FY13     FY14         FY15      FY16      FY17          FY18      FY19      FY20      FY21      FY22      FY23      FY24      FY25

AAV Accessions TIP

     1803 Amphib
Assault Officer @ 9          2
per class/19 Max        4            24        24        23        22            21        20        19        18        17        16        15        14

      1833 Basic
Crewman @ 45 per             4
class                   64       430          396       379       328           277       209       141        90        22        0         0         0

     1833 Unit
Leader @ 18 per              3
class/ 18 Max           6            35        35        33        31            28        25        23        20        17        14        11        8

     2844 3rd
Crewman @ 15 per             4
Class                   5            43        42        39        36            32        28        25        21        17        13        9         5

     2141 Basic
Maintainer @ 40 per          2
class/                  40       226          219       198       177           149       121       100        72        44        16        0         0

      2141
Intermediate
Maintainer @ 16 per          4
class                   8            47        47        46        45            43        41        40        38        36        34        32        30



# of Classes per Year

1803 Amphib
Assault Officer              3            3         3         3         3             3         3         3         3         2         2         2         2

                             1            1
1833 Basic Crewman      1        0                  9         9         8             7         5         4         2         1         0         0         0

1833 Unit Leader             2            2         2         2         2             2         2         2         2         1         1         1         1

1833 3rd Crewman             3            3         3         3         3             2         2         2         2         2         1         1         1

2141 Basic
Maintainer                   6            6         6         5         5             4         4         3         2         2         1         0         0

21418 Intermediate
Maintainer                   3            3         3         3         3             3         3         3         3         3         3         2         2




                                                                            7
                                                                                        Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                              Questions & Answers

Question 10: What is the budget for this acquisition?

Answer 10: The Government will not disclose the budget for this acquisition; however EVMS will apply if Offer is
more than $50 million



Question 11: Reference: Section B of the RFP, CLIN 0005 (p. 4, 10, 11) refers to Operational Trainers and in
Section F (p. 15) of the RFP CLIN 0005 is referred to as Part Task Trainers and Communication/Navigation Trainer.
What is the correct requirement for CLIN 0005?

Answer 11: See Section J.1 Exhibit 2 on page 54 of the original solicitation for a list of the Operational Trainers to
be included in CLIN 0005 and the Maintenance Trainers to be included in CLIN 0006. Amendment 0002 revised
Section F Delivery schedule to identify Part Task Trainers (PTT) as CLIN 0005 and 0006 deliverables (based on the
type of PTT; operational or maintenance) and the Communication/Navigation Trainer as a CLIN 0005 deliverable.



Question 12: Reference: Section B of the RFP, CLIN 0006 (p. 4, 10, 11) refers to Maintenance Trainers and in
Section F of the RFP CLIN 0006 (p. 15) refers to Maintenance Trainers, Intermediate Maintenance Course, and
Basic Maintainer Course. (a) Question: The RFP does not include a Performance Specification for Maintenance
Trainers; nor does it specifically address the numbers of devices desired or required. What are the performance
requirements for the maintenance trainers? (b) Question: What is the number/configuration of maintenance training
devices desired?

Answer 12: The specifications available have been provided in the solicitation. See Section J.1 Exhibit 2 page 54 of
the original solicitation for a list of the Operational Trainers to be included in CLIN 0005 and the Maintenance
Trainers to be included in CLIN 0006. Performance requirements are included in Section J.2 Attachment 13 for
CLIN 0005 and Attachment 14 for CLIN 0006.



Question 13: Reference: RFP Section F (p. 15) shows destinations for the trainers, and identifies Camp Pendleton
as the delivery destination for all. Attachment 18 (EFV Training System Diagram) shows one of the two MEFTs
associated with the 2nd Assault Amphibian Battalion in Camp Lejeune NC. Question: Are both MEFTs to be
delivered to Camp Pendleton?

Answer 13: Section F is correct. Attachment 18 has been revised.



Question 14: Reference: Section I – Contract Clauses; Clauses Incorporated by Reference (p. 30): The RFP
incorporates by reference FAR 52.219-6, Notice of Total Small Business Set-Aside. Under FAR 19.508 (c) which
states in part, clause 52.219-4, Limitations on Subcontracting shall be inserted in solicitations and contracts for
supplies, services and construction, if any portion of the requirement is to be set aside for small business and the
contract is expected to exceed $100,000. Question: We do not find any reference to FAR 52.219-4 in the RFP.
Should this clause be incorporated by reference, and if so, is the submission of an offer and execution of a contract,
subject to performance under subparagraph (1) Services (except construction) or (2) Supplies (other than
procurement from a non-manufacturer of such supplies)?

Answer 14: FAR 52.219-14 - Limitations on Subcontracting has been included in the solicitation viaAmendment
0001.



                                                           8
                                                                                       Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                             Questions & Answers

Question 15: Reference: Section J.1 (p. 54) lists the operator trainers and maintenance trainers for CLINs 0005 and
0006. Question: Where is the supporting information that provides a description of the functionality of these
devices?

Answer 15: The training tasks to be supported are listed in Section J.2, Attachments 13 and 14.



Question 16: Reference: Section J.1 (p. 54) lists five operator trainers. The last one, (e) Com/Nav is not listed in
Attachment 18, or elsewhere in the documentation. Question: Is a Com/Nav Operator Trainer still a requirement?
If so, what is the functionality of the trainer?

Answer 16: Yes, a Com/Nav Trainer is required. Attachment 18 has been updated and marked REVISED on the
NECO website. The training tasks are defined in Section J.2 Attachment 13.



Question 17: Reference: RFP, Section J – List of Documents, Exhibits and other Attachments (p. 55) Exhibit 2
states the following Operator Trainers for CLINs 0005 and 0006:

        a. CDP
        b. GCP
        c. Radio
        d. Gun, Main
        e. Comm/Nav
Question: The first four are shown on the very left hand side of the EFV Training System diagram; however,
“Comm/Nav” is not shown; please correct or complete the Exhibit to include e. Comm/Nav

Answer 17: Attachment 18 was updated on the NECO website and marked “REVISED”.



Question 18: Reference: Item 14 of Section J of the RFP (page 56) is the Maintenance Tasks Allocated in support
of CLIN 0006. In review of the Maintenance Tasks it is noted that only the Engine and Electrical Systems have
“X’s” delineated for specific tasks. (a) Question: Are the tasks with “X’s” the only tasks to be trained for these
systems? (b) Question: Is it an accurate approach to consider that all other systems (HSU, A/C, PTM, Transmission,
etc) have no tasks to be trained?

Answer 18: Attachment 14 was updated on NECO and marked “REVISED”.



Question 19: Reference: L.5.3 Section B - Prices/Cost (p. 84).This paragraph contains the statement "SF 1411 is a
cover sheet and for use by Offerors for the submission of the Cost/Price Proposal." However, SF 1411 was not
included as an attachment nor identified in the body of the RFP. Additionally, according to the Defense Acquisition
University website:

                  "…The deletion of the requirement for Contractors to use a SF 1411 when providing certified cost
                  and pricing data is supported by the Paper-work Reduction Act. Commercial contracting
                  procedures also eliminate the need for using the form. …

                  NOTE: The SF 1411 is no longer listed in FAR Part 53."

Question: Is there another form or format that the Government would prefer offerors to submit in lieu of SF 1411?

                                                          9
                                                                                       Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                             Questions & Answers

Answer 19: Amendment 0002 of the solicitation removed the SF 1411 requirement. See L.5, Paragraph L.5.3,
subparagraphs L.5.3.1 through L.5.3.7 for additional Cost/Pricing requirements added by Amendment 0002.



Question 20: Reference: Section L – Subsection L-5.6 Financial Responsibility (p. 85): This subsection requires
subcontractors to provide information to support a determination of financial responsibility. Question: For
clarification, may such information be submitted with a subcontractor’s cost/pricing data directly to the Government
independently, under separate cover?

Answer 20: No, this information must be submitted by the Prime Contractor’s financial responsibility information.



Question 21: Reference: RFP Section L.4.1.6 (p. 83) states “cross referencing within a proposal volume is not
permitted.”Question: Is this correct? In other words, if we have a graphic on page 10 and want to refer to the same
graphic on page 20, we must repeat the same graphic again on page 20 – within the SAME volume?

Answer 21: Cross referencing within a proposal volume is not permitted. For the example given, the graphic is
required to be repeated.

Question 22: Reference: L.4.1.10 Disposition of Proposals,

      Table L-1 – Layout (p. 83).Title                               Page limit
      General Information                                            Unlimited
      Executive Summary                                              2
      Technical Volume Requirements
      Factor 1 Technical Proposal                                    80 (excluding SOW and Software Development
                                                                     Plan (SDP))
               Subfactor 1 Statement of Work (SOW)
               Subfactor 2 Training Devices                         Unlimited
               Subfactor 3 Curriculum
      Factor 2 Management Proposal                                   40 (excluding CDRL)
               Subfactor 1 Program Management
               Subfactor 2 Management Structure
               Subfactor 3 Management Controls
               Subfactor 4 Quality Control
               Subfactor 5 Contract Data Requirements List (CRDL)   Unlimited
      Factor 3 Past Performance
               Subfactor 1 Corporate Experience VOLUME I            Unlimited
               Subfactor 2 Past Performance VOLUME II               Unlimited
      Business– Standard Form of Contract, all Amendments,
      cost/price VOLUME I
      Factor 4 Cost/Price and Administrative Proposal                Unlimited


(a) Question: The table includes an entry for “General Information” with an unlimited page count, but does not list it
within either of the volumes, and no instructions/guidance is provided for the content. Would the Government please
state where the “General Information” should be placed and provide a description of what is desired in this section?

(b) Question: The table allocates 2 pages for the Executive Summary. Section L.4.2 states:

         Executive Summary/Letter of Transmittal. This section shall include the Offeror’s Letter of Transmittal,
         along with a brief summary of the Offeror’s capability to accomplish the requirements of the contract.

                                                             10
                                                                                         Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                               Questions & Answers

Please clarify whether the letter of transmittal is included within the 2 pages or in addition to them.

(c) Question: The Executive Summary is not listed within either of the volumes. Would the Government clarify
where this section should be placed?

(d) Question: Factor 1 Technical Proposal is allocated 80 pages, excluding the SOW and SDP. The SDP is a
subsection within Subfactor 2 Training Devices, all of which is shown as Unlimited in page count. Would the
Government please clarify if all of Subfactor 2, not just the SDP, is in fact exempt from the 80 page limit for the
Technical Proposal?

(e) Question: In the referenced Table L-1, Technical Volume Requirements Factor 3 Past Performance includes
Subfactor 1 Corporate Experience but shows Volume I beneath it. Within Section L.7 Technical Proposal
Requirements, L.7.3 Factor 3–Past Performance Subfactor 1- Corporate Experience contains the detailed
requirements for Corporate Experience. Please verify that Corporate Experience is to be in Volume II, per the
detailed instructions in L.7.3 Factor 3.

Answer 22: (a) “General Information” is not included in either volume. It should be placed in front of the
Executive Summary. A description of “General Information” will not be given. (b) The letter of transmittal shall
be included within the 3 page limit for “Executive Summary/Letter of Transmittal” section. (c) The Executive
Summary is not included in either volume. It should be placed after the “General Information” section as organized
in table L-1. (d) Please review the revised table L-1 in the amendment for clarification. (e) See Answer 23.


Question 23: Reference: L.4 FORMAT AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL (p. 82)
Volume I – Business - Standard Form of Contract, Cost/Price Proposal, and Past Performance
Volume II – Technical - Technical, Managerial, and Corporate Experience
Reference: L.5 VOLUME I – BUSINESS - STANDARD FORM OF CONTRACT/PRICE PROPOSAL/PAST
PERFORMANCE - EXECUTED REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (p. 84)
The Volume titles in the above referenced sections are inconsistent with L.7.3 Factor 3 – Past Performance, which
gives detailed instructions for including Past Performance within Volume II and including these two subfactors:
Subfactor 1 - Corporate Experience:
Subfactor 2 – Past Performance:
Question: Will the Government please revise Volume titles to ensure correct naming and consistency with the
required content?

Answer 23: Information related to Subfactor 1 – Corporate Experience shall be included in Volume II. Information
related to Subfactor 2 - Past Performance shall be included in Volume I. The solicitation and section L.4 have been
amended accordingly via Amendment 0002.



Question 24: Reference L.4.1.9 Organization/Page Limits states: The proposal shall be in Times New Roman 12
font. Question: Will the Government allow a smaller font for text within graphics, captions, and tables?

Answer 24: No, the proposal shall be in Times New Roman 12 font.



Question 25: Reference L.7.3 Subfactor 2 – Past Performance (p. 90):

A list of 7 categories for past work is given, in order of precedence (although 8 are thereafter referred to). The
instructions state:

An Offeror with four (4) or more contracts in categories one through four (1 – 4) need not provide information under
categories five through eight (5 – 8). However, if an Offeror elects to include data in an additional category, for
                                                          11
                                                                                        Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                              Questions & Answers

example, category six (6), all contracts within that category must be identified for the elected category.
Additionally, all contracts in categories above the elected category must be completely identified.

Question: Please clarify what is meant by the statements: “… if an Offeror elects to include data in an additional
category, … all contracts within that category must be identified for the elected category. Additionally, all contracts
in categories above the elected category must be completely identified.” This leaves an infinite amount of Past
Performance examples for a given category.

Answer 25: This language means that all past performance provided must be identified with a category (1-7).
Section L.6.5.1 Subfactor 2 language has been revised to cite only seven categories in Amendment 0002.



Question 26: Reference: L.7.3 Factor 3 – Past Performance, Subfactor 1 - Corporate Experience (p. 89): Three
areas of Experience are listed: a) Development Experience, b) Software Development Process Experience, and c)
Software Development Experience. The instructions for the Corporate Experience content are all given only under
a) Development Experience. Question: Please clarify that the same instructions apply to all three (a, b, and c) areas
of experience.

Answer 26: The information required is different for subparagraphs a), b) and c). The required information for each
subparagraph is correct.



Question 27: Reference: M.3.4.3. Corporate Experience/Past Performance Subfactor 2 - Past Performance (p. 106).
The section states: Past performance of significant subcontractors (anticipated to perform 25% or more of the overall
dollar value of the contract) will be considered to the extent warranted by the subcontractor’s involvement in the
proposed effort. Question: This limits the number of subcontractors whose past performance can be submitted to
one. Will the Government revise the definition of “significant” to allow more teammate past performances to be
used? Or will the Government allow the prime Contractor to decide if they consider the sub’s involvement to be
“significant”?

Answer 27: Section M.3.4.3 Subfactor 2 has been revised in Amendment 0002 to change the percentage from 25%
to 20%.



Question 28: Reference: L (p. 80), third paragraph states: Offerors are instructed to indicate in Block 12 that the
proposal is valid for a minimum of 180 calendar days. L.4.1.2, p. 82 states: The offeror shall make a clear statement
in their proposal that the proposal is valid for no less than 120 calendar days from the date of its offer. Question:
Please clarify which is correct length of time.

Answer 28: 120 calendar days is correct. The solicitation has been modified.



Question 29: Reference: L.6.1 (p. 86). The last sentence of the paragraph states: A crosswalk between the Offeror’s
proposal and SOW is requested. Question: Is a “crosswalk” a cross reference matrix?

Answer 29: The solicitation has been corrected to reference a cross-referencing matrix between the Offeror’s
proposal and SOW. This is self-explanatory.




                                                           12
                                                                                       Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                             Questions & Answers

Question 30: Reference: Section J, Attachment 20 EFV Training System WBS (p. 57). Question: Is Attachment 20
EFV Training System WBS the required WBS structure?

Answer 30: Section J.2 Attachment 20 is the summary level of the WBS. Further breakdowns within this WBS
structure shall be provided by the Offeror in accordance with your solution.



Question 31: Reference: Section L. (p. 81) Statement of Objectives: The last sentence of the paragraph states: Each
specific data requirement shall be selected from DoD 5010.12-L and specified on DD Form 1423. Question: DoD
5010.12-L is no longer available. Will it be provided or will the reference be changed?

Answer 31: DoD 5010.12-M is available. The solicitation has been modified via amendment 0001.



Question 32: Reference: Attachment 18 (EFV Training System Diagram) shows an Embarked Staff Trainer under
the Operator Trainers, and identifies its location as Marine Corps Base Quantico. Question: This is the only
reference to the Embarked Staff Trainer that we can find. Is it a requirement? If so, what are the specifications or a
description of the requirement?

Answer 32: Attachment 18 has been revised via Amendment 0001.



Question 33: Reference: MAASTS 3.2.16.2.2.2 Federation Object Model (p. 18): The MAASTS training software
shall be able to switch FOMs without requiring MAASTS training software, MPA software, C&D software, C2PC,
or FC software changes. Question: Is this the bounded list of required tactical software integration?

Answer 33: Yes.



Question 34: Will the Government require the Contractor to be located in close proximity (with in 2 miles) to the
EFV Technology Center in Woodbridge, VA. in order to facilitate quick access to an off-site electronic classroom,
multimedia design and development studio?

Answer 34: No.



Question 35: Will the Contractor be required to man multiple locations? If so, what are the locations?

Answer 35: Place of performance is at the Contractor’s discretion except for CLINs x009.



Question 36: As addressed in the Aug 2007 FBO release, will there be any interaction with the Air Force 309th
Software maintenance Group?

Answer 36: The requirements for contract performance are defined in the solicitation. The interactions
contemplated in the August 2007 FBO are not part of the solicitation.




                                                          13
                                                                                    Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                          Questions & Answers

Question 37: Will EFV components be available for the development of simulators?

Answer 37: The GFE to be provided is listed in Section J.2 Attachment 15. Additional EFV codes will be provided
to the successful offeror.

Question 38: In addressing hardware and software design and development, will the Government require periodical
up-grades?

Answer 38: Baseline updates will be addressed under the Changes Clause if required.



Question 39: Is there a requirement to interact with Marine Corps Training Information Management System
(MCTIMS)?

Answer 39: SOO paragraph 3.0.m defines the LMS Objective. MCTIMS interaction is not required.



Question 40: Is there a published list of approved software for the use of development?

Answer 40: No.



Question 41: Section L, Subfactor 3 Curriculum, paragraph a. second part: In addition to a description of analysis
and development processes, please clarify exactly what is required to be presented in the table provided?

Answer 41: The Government wishes to see the vendors approach to design in general and Media Analysis
Specifically. A general estimate of course hours for the courses and media is desired in the table.



 Question 42: Does the Government have, and can they provide, the courseware hours for the 6 courses with no
hours listed in Section J attachments? (Learning Management System, Communication System Crewman Course,
Embarked Staff Course, Master Gunner Course, Intermediate Maintenance Course, Basic Maintainer Course) and
for 1 course with no Section J attachment (Ancillary Course)?

Answer 42: This will be a function of the Contractor design. The Government is not going to provide its estimate
as part of the RFP. The Learning Management System is not a course.



Question 43: Which courses listed in section J are ICW and CAI, and what are the Levels of Interactivity
(LOI)/Levels of Learning (LOL) for the courseware?

Answer 43: The Government expects the Contractor’s Design activities to determine the appropriate mix of media
to include Levels of Interactivity (LOI)/Levels of Learning (LOL) for the courseware.



Question 44: Does the USG expect a Front-End-Analysis to precede development of each course of instruction
listed in section J?

Answer 44: The Government intends to complete analysis and design activities through selection of Learning
Objectives. This analysis effort is not a function of this contract.
                                                            14
                                                                                         Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                               Questions & Answers



Question 45: Is there a breakdown of hours that are ICW and CAI, and which deliverables (courses) specifically
are ICW and CAI?

Answer 45: No. The breakdown of ICW and CAI hours would be a result of Contractor design decisions.



Question 46: What are the Levels of Interactivity (LOI)/ Levels of Learning (LOL) for the courseware?

 Answer 46: The Government expects the Contractor’s Design activities to determine the appropriate mix of media
to include Levels of Interactivity (LOI)/Levels of Learning (LOL) for the courseware.



Question 47: See Section J list of attachments – CLIN numbers on pdf file names do not exactly match the
CLIN0007 deliverable names: example CLIN0007 Crewman Course = Basic Crewman Sequenced Learning
Objectives dated 06/02/2009 for CLIN 0005? Just want to make sure we have correct files associated as in attached
spreadsheet?

Answer 47: Section J list of attachments file names are correct with the exception of # 9 and # 14 which should
read::#9 Master Gunner Task List dated 12/23/08 which should state it is for CLIN 0007. #14 Maintenance Tasks
Allocated (for use with CLIN 0006 & 0007). Offerors should match the Section J attachment number to the NECO
attachment number to obtain the correct attachment rather than relying on file names. These solicitation changes
were included in Amendment 0001.



Question 48:

a. Need to know how many hours of courseware there are for 4 courses with no hours listed?

b. Need to know contents/Learning Objectives and hours for 1 course that does not have any info.

c. We show the following tally for CLIN0007 (see spreadsheet)

                              i.     6 courses total 816.25 hours

                              ii.    4 courses do not have any hours listed/associated

                              iii.   1 course has no associated file contained in Section J.

Answer 48: The Government expects the Contractor’s Design activities to determine the appropriate mix of media
to include Levels of Interactivity (LOI)/Levels of Learning (LOL) for the courseware, and Course Hours. Learning
Objectives will be provided as the Governments design activities develop them.



Question 49: See Section J, List of Attachments, 19. AASBn Facility Drawings. When attending the site visit it
was determined that the facility drawings required several changes to match the current facility configuration. Will
updated facility drawings be provided?

Answer 49: No. The USG will not update the drawings to align with the room titles.


                                                          15
                                                                                      Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                            Questions & Answers

Question 50: Is the Contractor required to deliver computers/displays for the electronic classrooms? a. If so, how
many classrooms, and seats per classroom are required? b. If not, what are the specifications of the computers on
which the courseware will be installed?

Answer 50: No. a. N/A b. The computers will be compatible with Marine Net standards. MarineNet is a virtual
Intranet that physically rides on the Marine Corps Enterprise Network.



Question 51: In section L of the RFP, page 82 of 110, Section L.4.1.2 states offer should be valid for 120 days,
while the Section L introduction, page 80 of 110, and the SF33 state it should be 180 days. Please clarify the
proposal validity required.

Answer 51: Solicitation has been amended to 120 days by Amendment 0002.



Question 52: In section L of the RFP, page 83 of 110, Section L.4.1.6 reads “Cross-referencing within a proposal
volume is not permitted.” This appears to be inconsistent with the rest of the paragraph. Should this read “cross-
referencing within a proposal volume is permitted”?

Answer 52: See Answer 21.



Question 53: In section L of the RFP, page 83 of 110, Section L4.1.10, there is a table that discusses page limits.
Under Factor 1 Technical Proposal it says “Unlimited” for Subfactor 2 Training Devices. Should this be deleted and
placed on the line above Subfactor 1 Statement of Work (SOW)?

Answer 53: This was corrected via Amendment 0001.



Question 54: In section L of the RFP, page 83 of 110, there is a table that discusses page limits. Under Factor 3
Past Performance it says Volume I “Unlimited” for Subfactor 1 – Corporate Experience.

         a. Should Subfactor 1 - Corporate Experience be in Volume I or II?

         b. On page 89 of 110 under Volume II Subfactor 1 - Corporate Experience it says the following: “The
         Offeror shall adequately support their stated capabilities to accomplish the work defined in the RFP by
         annotating corporate experience accomplishments. A minimum of three (3) detailed summaries of work
         similar in size, scope, and/or complexity to the program should be provided. These summaries should
         identify specific work accomplished during the past three (3) years, and shall not exceed one (1) page each.
         Detailed summaries must address the following…” The data requested appears to exceed one (1) page per
         summary. Do you intend to delete this page limit and go with unlimited for the page count as stated on page
         83?

Answer 54: a. The page limit table on page 83 was corrected via Amendment 0001. b. The page limit referred to
in Table L-1 refers to information related to the entire Subfactor. However, the three (3) detailed summaries of
work similar requested under Subfactor 1 – Corporate Experience IS UNLIMITED.




                                                         16
                                                                                      Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                            Questions & Answers

Question 55 a: In section L of the RFP, page 86 of 110, Section L.6.1 – is the cross walk between the proposal and
the SOW the same as the cross reference matrix required in L.4.1.10?

Answer 55a: Yes. The solicitation has been amended to clarify verbiage in Amendment 0002.



Question 55b: In section L of the RFP, page 87 of 110, Subfactor 2, (e), Training Systems Hardware Design, the
only training system mentioned is for the MAASTS. Is the MAASTS the only training system's hardware design that
will be evaluated, or are hardware designs for the other training devices required as part of the bidder's proposal?

Answer 55b: Section L requires information for the MAASTS for technical evaluation; the MAASTS will be the
only device that will be reviewed in the technical evaluation.



Question 56: In section L of the RFP, page 89 of 106, Section L.7.2, the title “Factor 2 – Management Approach”
appears to be missing.

Answer 56: The Section L numbering scheme and titles are corrected in Amendment 0002.



Question 57: In section L of the RFP, page 90 of 110. Section L.7.3, for Subfactor 2 - Past Performance, it says the
following, "An Offeror with four (4) or more contracts in categories one through four (1 – 4) need not provide
information under categories five through eight (5 – 8)." There are only seven (7) categories listed. Is one missing?

Answer 57:    No, there are only seven categories. This is corrected via Amendment 0002



Question 58: In section L of the RFP, page 91 of 110, Section L.7.3, the due date for “PAST PERFORMANCE
REFERENCES” appears to be prior to the due date for intent to bid. Please provide an updated due date.

Answer 58: Past Performance references was extended in Amendment 0001 and as the result of percentage change
made within the solicitation by Amendment 0002 the Past Performance Date has been extended through 14 October
2009.



Question 59: In section L of the RFP, page 106 of 110, Section M 3.4.3 Subfactor b, it states, “Past performance of
significant subcontractors (anticipated to perform 25% or more of the overall dollar value of the contract) will be
considered to the extent warranted by the subcontractor’s involvement in the proposed effort. Only past performance
of the prime and significant subcontractors shall be considered, not past performance of individual personnel.” This
appears to be a very high percentage for a contract with significant material dollar content. Should this be 25% of
total labor dollars?

Answer 59: The solicitation was amended via Amendment 0002 to reduce the percentage from 25% to 20% of the
overall dollar value. See answer 27.



Question 60: In document 02_MAASTS Spec_FINAL_20090522.pdf, pg. 16, Para. 3.2.12 Semi-Automated Forces
(SAF), “The Training System shall support a minimum of 5000 simultaneous entities.” How many simultaneous


                                                         17
                                                                                        Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                              Questions & Answers

entities will be required to be displayed in the visual display / image generation system? The same question also
applies to the 03_MEFTS Spec_FINAL_20090522.pdf and 04_MFRTS Spec_FINAL_20090522.pdf.

Answer 60: The quantity of entities in the visual display/image generation system is that required to support the
training tasks listed in the performance specification. The quantity of entities in the visual display/image generation
system is that required to support the training tasks listed in the performance specification.



Question 61: The MFRTS Performance Spec states that the MFRTS training device consists of one driver station,
one turret station, and one IOS. Para 3.1.4.a.iii states, “The MFRTS supports concurrent Independent Driver Station
and Turret Station operation when using the IOS.” While the chart in section 3.1.4 indicates that the Driver Station
OR (not AND) the Turret Station can be used in Independent mode. Please clarify if one IOS is required to support
both the Independent Driver Station and Turret Station operations simultaneously.

Answer 61: The requirement is defined on page 6 of the specification, Figure 1.



Question 62: The MEFTS Performance Spec states that the MEFTS training device consists of two Drivers
Stations, two Turret Stations, and two IOS. Para 3.1.4.a.iii states, “The MEFTS supports concurrent Independent
Driver Station and Turret Station operations when using both IOSs”. Since only two IOS are required for 4 total
stations (2 Driver, 2 Turret) then in Independent mode are 2 of the 4 stations idle, or is each IOS required to control
more than one station simultaneously in independent mode?

Answer 62: The requirement is defined on page 6 of the specification, Figure 1.



Question 63: Please confirm the MEFTS quantities. The MEFTS Performance Spec states that each MEFTS
consists of two Driver’s Stations, two Turret Stations, and two IOSs within an ISO type container. CLIN 0002
specifies a total quantity of 2 MEFTS, thus two ISO type containers, each with two Driver’s Stations, two Turret
Stations, and two IOSs are required; please confirm.

Answer 63: The capabilities for each MEFTS are defined in the specification. Two (2) MEFTS devices shall be
provided as defined in Section B.



Question 64: If each MEFTS is to contain two Driver’s Stations, two Turret Stations, and two IOSs, is more than
one ISO container acceptable to house the associated equipment?

Answer 64: The requirement is defined in the specification paragraph 3.7 inclusive.



Question 65: Solicitation Status: Is the solicitation a draft or final?

Answer 65: Final.




                                                           18
                                                                                       Amendment 0002 -Attachment
                                                                                             Questions & Answers

Question 66: RFP vs. Quote Request: The notice on the NECO website (under the Date/Time Reference section)
indicates that this is a request for a quote; however, Section L of the RFP states that the response should be for a
complete proposal. Which is correct?

Answer 66: This is a Request for Proposal



 Question 67: RFP, Section J (List of Documents, Exhibits, and other Attachments), Page 61: One of the
attachments provided as a .PDF document appears to be missing File A-202 within Document #19, AASBn Facility
Drawings. Should this document appear within the solicitation or has it just been mislabeled?

Answer 67: All attachments listed in Section J are uploaded to NECO and numbered the same as in Section J. All
have been tested and all are accessible.




                                                         19

								
To top