ASC/YWK, Bldg 11, 2240 B St., Ste 7, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7111

69 -- F-15C MULTI-STAGE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (MSIP) FOUR SHIP SIMULATION & AERIAL COMBAT ENHANCED SIMULATION (ACES) SOL n/a DUE 072497 POC Richard Stem, Contracting Officer (937) 255-7414 ext. 417, fax (937) 656-7538 This is amendment 01 to Request for Proposal (RFP) F33657-97-R-0025 for the F-15C Multi-Stage Improvement Program (MSIP) Four Ship Simulation and Aerial Combat Enhanced Simulation (ACES) Program (herein referred to as F-15C ACES). This RFP was released in two parts as a combined synopsis/solicitation on 24 Jun 97 in the Commerce Business Daily (CBD) under Special Notices. Part 1 CBD Cite # is W-175 SN088411 and Part 2 CBD Cite # is W-175 088461. Copies of the solicitation can be obtained from the CBD or on the below noted Internet address. The RFP is for commercial services prepared in accordance with the format in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information located on the world wide web at the following Internet address, http://www.pixs.wpafb.af.mil/pixs/pixslibr/ACES/ACES.asp. Both announcements constitute the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. This procurement is using an electronic bulletin board for the bidders library in an effort to streamline the communication process between the Government and industry and is accessible through the World Wide Web as noted at the above Internet address. For questions concerning operation of the PIXS system contact the system administrator, Mr. Johnny Harshbarger, at (937) 255-2739. All addenda referenced herein that are located on the bulletin board will be noted as "(on PIXS as "document name", dated xx)." Address all requests for solicitation and communication concerning this acquisition to ASC/YWI, Bldg. 11, 2240 B Street Suite 7, Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7111, ATTN: Mr. Richard E. Stem, Contracting Officer, (937)255-7414 ext.417, fax (937) 656-7538. As stated in the RFP, Part 1, the offeror will be responsible for system operation; system maintenance; product baseline management; training system modification and upgrade; and some basic instruction for contract and Air Force instructors in the operational use of the simulation equipment as well as keeping the training devices concurrent with the changing configuration of the fielded F-15C aircraft and inserting new capabilities as they become available. Additional information is provided to assist the offeror in addressing concurrency in their proposal (on PIXS as F15C_OFP.exe, dated 07 Jul 97). Under the provision at FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors -- Commercial Items, the date, time and place for submission of proposals, Volumes I, II, III and IV, remains the same as set forth in the RFP. Based upon the lottery to establish dates for oral presentations and demonstrations, Volume V shall be submitted by 3:00PM on 20 August 1997 to ASC/SYG, Attn: F-15C ACES Source Selection (Dick Stem), Building 125, 2335 Seventh St. Room 5, WPAFB OH 45433-7111. The outside shipping container should be marked with the RFP number (F33657-97-R-0025) and that volume V is contained therin. The "original" hard copy paper volume shall be identified and addressed to the Procuring Contracting Officer andshall contain all original signed documents and shall be labeled "Original". The original will be two-hole punched at the top center of each page. In addition, provide one paper copy each to the Cognizant DCMC Office and the Cognizant DCAA Office. Be sure to advise the ACO and DCAA for prime and subcontractors that the proposal is "For Official Use Only" and "Source Selection Information (See FAR 3.104)". Under Volume V instructions, a suggested pricing matrix is provided on the PIXS. The pricing matrix incorrectly included the CLIN for Simulation Upgrade Evaluation Rate / Hour at each site. This CLIN is only intended for the ACES Center at Eglin AFB. An updated sample pricing matrix is provided (on PIXS as PriceMat-1.xls, dated 7 Jul 97) in Microsoft Excel 7.0 format. Oral Proposal/Demonstration Rules of Engagement: Additional information is provided (on PIXS as Demo-Guidance.doc, dated 7 Jul 97) regarding the demonstration procedures. Under the provision at FAR 52.212-2. The RFP states; "To arrive at best value the various components of the proposal will be evaluated for consistency, both within the proposal, and with this solicitation and supporting documents." In order to clarify the Government's position regarding proposed enhancements, the following is added: The SCRD (on PIXS as SCRD.doc, dated 24 Jun 97) identifies the required minimums and does not include any "desired enhancements." The ACC operational requirements type document (on PIXS as ACES SRD.doc, dated 4 Jun 97) includes objectives that are "desired enhancements." The Air Force reserves the right to evaluate and give evaluation credit for proposed features that are either in addition to the stated required minimums and "desired enhancements" or that exceed the stated "desired enhancements." The RFP identified Specific Evaluation Criteria and General Considerations to be applied in the evaluation of offerors proposals. This amendment identifies the associated standards and a discussion on how price will be evaluated potential total contract value. For ease of understanding, the following blends together a restatement (no change from the RFP) of the criteria and considerations with the standards and discussion of the price evaluation. For information purposes, a matrix of the same is provided (on PIXS as RFP-Factor-Std_matrix.xls, dated 7 Jul 97). Technical Area (a) Simulation Utility: The Offeror's proposed technical approach will be evaluated for supporting F-15C full combat tactical training throughout the contract period of performance. Standard 1: The standard is met when the proposed simulation service, as documented in the proposed specification, supports all the SCRD requirements with quantitative performance requirements where appropriate. The element is met when the proposed service incorporates high fidelity simulations, including avionics, weapons, controls/displays, and aerodynamics, of the F-15C in support of the F-15C Master Training Task List (MTTL), operating as part of a networked system. The element is met when the proposedservice incorporates a visual display system that provides the simulation user with a real world, detailed, visual environment, including a full field-of-view out-the-window display system that fully correlates with sensor systems, and which supports F-15C mission training. The element is met when the proposed service incorporates visual databases that supports local and contingency training locations, and correlates with sensor databases and real world navigation aids. The element is met when the proposed simulation service provides the 4-ship simulation system users with a comprehensive, high fidelity simulated threat environment that supports a full range of mission scenarios through the use of constructive and interactive threat entities, provides manual control of such entities, and which includes the effects of passive and active countermeasures. The element is met when the proposed service supports networking and interoperability of up to four of the proposed F-15C simulators per site, and long-haul networking that supports interoperability of F-15C four ship systems between sites. The element is met when the Offeror's service includes a means to incorporate evolving simulation, training and networking technologies. The element is met when the proposed service includes a comprehensive means for previewing, viewing and reviewing mission events as seen by the simulation users in conjunction with briefing/debriefing and teleconferencing functions. The element is met when the simulation service incorporates a flexible Instructor Operator Station (IOS) which provides a means for managing simulator sessions for the local 4-ship, provides communications and instructional features to facilitate training of the F-15C Master Training Task List (MTTL), and manages mission scenarios for local and long-haul networked simulation operations. Standard 2: The standard is met when the Offeror defines a method for verifying the simulation service will satisfy the proposed specification prior to, or in conjunction with, IOC.(b) Data: The offeror's approach for data collection and aircraft concurrency will ensure the timely and accurate implementations of aircraft simulations necessary to successfully provide the training capability. Standard 1: The standard is met when the Offeror proposes an effective plan to obtain, validate, track and manage aircraft/threat/weapon data. Standard 2: The standard is met when the proposal addresses a concurrency approach that will deliver aircraft upgrades between 60 and 0 days prior to the change being implemented in the home station aircraft. (2) Schedule Area The Offeror's proposed approach will be evaluated to determine ability to provide specified F-15C simulation services with an IOC of March 31, 1999. Standard 1: The standard is met when the proposed plan incorporates appropriate activities that are planned out in a logical sequence with practical duration. Price Area The government will evaluate proposed prices in terms of the potential total contract value to include all sites for up to a 15 year period of performance (e.g. 2012). The evaluation methodology for the potential total contract value is to multiply each CLIN by a nominal number of hours for each of the 15 years. The same number of hours by CLIN (as representative of the pricing matrix located on the PIXS) will be applied to all offerors proposals. The Simulation Training CLIN will be multiplied by 2,430 hours / year for each four ship site and 1,215 hours / year for each two ship site. The Simulation Training Surge CLIN will be multiplied by 500 hours / year for each four ship site and 250 hours / year for each two ship site. The Simulation Evaluation Upgrade CLIN will be multiplied by 400 hours / year for the Eglin AFB site. Three values will be calculated. The initial contract term with a fixed price value will be added to the Award Term NTE value to equal a potential total contract value. Prices will be evaluated for reasonableness, realism, and completeness as defined in AFFARS Appendix AA-309. A Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) evaluation preference will be evaluated by adding a factor of ten percent to the price of all offers, except in accordance with DFAR 252.219-7006. The ten percent factor will be applied on a total price basis. Other evaluation factors described in the solicitation will be applied before application of the ten percent factor. The ten percent factor will not be applied if using the preference will cause the contract award to be made at a price which exceeds the fair market price by more than ten percent. Any proposal that is materially unbalanced as to the price for the basic contract period/sites, and Award Term will be considered deficient. Realism, reasonableness, and completeness shall be determined IAW the procedures at FAR 12.209. General Considerations General considerations will include the offeror's compliance with RFP terms and conditions. Failure to comply with RFP terms and conditions may result in an offeror being removed from consideration for award. The government may also conduct a pre-award survey and the results thereof will be considered in the evaluation process. IAW FAR 15.605(b)(1) the specific evaluation criteria, general considerations and price are in descending order of importance. Therefore, specific criteria and general considerations, when combined, are significantly more important than price. Under the discussion of risk assessments, subparagraph (2) the sentence, "The offeror furnished data of the contracted versus actual deliveries of similar simulation services / devices will be used in arriving at a performance risk assessment for the technical and schedule risk area." is replaced with "In assessing this risk, the Government will use both data provided by the offeror and data obtained from other sources." Under the provision at 52.212-4, The following question was submitted: "It is our understanding that when commercial items/services are procured, to the extent that it does not conflict with any laws, the terms and conditions in the resulting contract can be tailored to customary terms that govern the commercial sales of the supplies or services. In this case, the model contract could include Advance, Interim and/or Delivery payments if these are customary. If financing is to be provided, the clause at 52.232-29 and a separate contractor proposed clause, tailored to the specific financing to be employed, are to be included in the resultant contract. Is it your intent to offer the clause at 52.232-29?" Answer: No, it is not the intent of the Government to offer the clause at 52.232-29. This clause, TERMS FOR FINANCING OF PURCHASES OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS, would be appropriate if the Government was providing financing. The Government is not providing financing. The clause in the RFP, FAR 52.212-4, addresses payments. The offeror may choose to submit a clause tailored for delivery payments to meet customary commercial terms. (0189)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0352 19970710\69-0001.SOL)