GovernmentResponse_DraftRFPQuestionsxlsx.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 23 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Draft Request for Proposal (RFP): CBP IDIQ - Aircraft Support Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 20144424
About this file
This document is a draft Request for Proposal (RFP) for an IDIQ contract to provide aircraft support services for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency. The contract will cover aircraft maintenance, modification, and depot-level activities for various airframes including Blackhawk, AS350, DHC-8, and P-3 aircraft. The contract is set aside for small businesses under NAICS code 336411.
Key details include:
- Estimated ceiling value of $100M with a period of performance from 01/01/2025 to 12/31/2030.
- Contract types may include firm-fixed-price, time-and-materials, labor-hour, and cost-reimbursable orders.
- The government is seeking feedback on the draft RFP, including the labor categories listed in the pricing template, prior to releasing the final solicitation.
- Responses to the final RFP will be evaluated using a best value trade-off approach, with past experience and technical approach as the primary non-cost factors.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| DRAFT_Attachment 1 - Statement of Work_May2024.pdf | ||
| Draft RFP.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 4_Draft RFP IDIQ Question Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| DRAFT_Attachment 3_Pricing Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| DRAFT_Attachment 2 - Appendices_May2024.pdf |
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
Text version
Q&A
| Document | Reference Section | Question/Comment | Response |
| Draft SOW | Quality Assurance | Will the Government revise the QMS requirement in the Draft SOW to include an AS9110C - ISO 9001:2015 QMS certificate as acceptable? A requirement to hold an AS9100D QMS will disqualify some offerors. | The Statement of Work (SOW) will be updated to revise the certification requirements. |
| Draft SOW Draft Attach 3 Pricing Template Draft RFP | Will the Government clarify and make consistent the various references to "Program Manager" in the Draft RFP documents? There are three (3) Program Managers in the Draft Attach. 3 Pricing Description tab. The Draft SOW states the "Program Manager" shall possess a Bachelor’s Degree in Engineering. Is this educational requirement specific to the overall IDIQ Program Manager as described to be a "business professional" in the Draft Appendix 3? The offeror believes a Bachelor's Degree in Engineering is too restrictive for the overarching IDIQ PM, but is appropriate for the Engineering Program Manager. Can the Government please clarify? | The SOW will be updated to revise the experience requirements. | |
| Draft SOW Draft Attach 3- Pricing Template | A position for a Task Manager is referenced in the Draft SOW. This position is not listed on the pricing matrix - nor is there a description of this position and qualifications in the Draft RFP release. Can the Government please clarify? | The SOW will be updated to provide additional clarification. | |
| Draft SOW | Will the Government provide the IDIQ Contractor with access to MAXIMO for required tail # maintenance information and other necessary? | The Contractor will not have access to the Government databases; however, all necessary information will be provided accordingly. | |
| Draft SOW | Please clarify whether aircraft OEM Technical Publications subscriptions will be Government-Furnished or Contractor-furnished? If it is Contractor-furnished, are the costs reimbursable for the Contractor? | The SOW will be updated to address the OEM technical documents further. | |
| Draft RFP | Would the Government consider allowing G&A to be used on material purchases? This is a common industry and Government allowance. | G&A can be included within the invoiced amount; the Government will set a Not-to-Exceed amount for each task order. | |
| Draft SOW | Will the Government please format the Draft SOW with paragraph Headings and page numbers? | Page numbers will be added. | |
| Draft RFP | Would the Government please confirm this IDIQ effort is a 336411 Total Small Business set-aside contract opportunity? | This requirement is set-aside as total small business under the 336411 NAICS. | |
| Draft RFP | Section 3 - Financial Capability Page 61 | Reference to "Financial Capability" on page 61. Respectfully, the Offeror believes the stated requirements for the Contractor and subcontractor are unreasonable when the total value of the subcontract is greater than $550,000. The offeror believes providing (the Government) annual financial statements including CPA certified balance sheet, profit/loss statement and statement of retained earnings covering each of the Offeror's last three annual accounting periods is not standard and not needed. This requirement is not suitable, especially for private businesses. | The financial capability section will be revised. |
| Draft SOW | Will the Government provide Ground Support Equipment or tooling for any task orders including P-3 depot maintenance? | Depending on the task, the Government may be able to provide tooling; however, GSE will not be provided. | |
| Draft SOW | Can the Government provide additional detail regarding material support and procurement? Is the Contractor responsible for providing all task order parts, equipment and materials? | Yes, the Contractor will be responsible for purchasing all materials and parts related to the task order effort. The Government will provide GFE as needed. |
The Government also may require the Contractor to purchase a stand-alone part such as sensor that will be delivered to the Government directly.
| SOW | Place of Performance and Period of Performance | Are aircraft required to be inside a hanger during aircraft maintenance and modifications? Particularly the P-3 and Dash 8? | The SOW has been updated to clarify the requirements for storage of the aircraft. |
| SOW | Technical Manuals | Will both military and commercial manuals be maintained for each aircraft? | Yes, they will be maintained. |
| SOW | Monthly Meetings | The SOW states "after the issuance of each task order, the contractor shall submit monthly progress reports to the Government" Does each task order require a sperate MSR addressed and sent to each task order PM or can a single MSR address all task orders and be shared with all PMs? | The SOW will be updated to clarify the requirements. |
| SOW | Monthly Meetings | first monthly report shall be due no later than 30 calendar days, or at a frequency specified in the task order, from the date of order issuance, and each report is due 30 calendar days thereafter until the modified aircraft and mission systems and all required data are delivered to the Government. | The SOW will be updated to clarify the requirements. |
| SOW | Contractor Personnel | The SOW States "the Program Manager shall have the following qualifications: 1. Bachelor's degree in engineering (aerospace, mechanical, systems, electrical, or software). Would an equivalent degree and 10 years of aviation-related technical programs be acceptable qualifications for a PM? | The SOW will be updated to revise the experience requirements. |
| Draft Request for Proposal (RFP) | (Pg. 55) Section III.19 General Instructions for the Preparation of Proposals | What will be the expected timeline between the Phase 1 (Demonstrated Prior Experience) Advisory Down Select, and Phase 2 (Technical Approach and Price)? | Dates will be established for Phase I in the final RFP issuance; Advisory Notifications will be issued once review is complete for Phase 1. However, only Offerors who elect to continue to Phase 2 after issuance of the advisory notification will be provided the final dates for Phase 2 submittals. |
| Draft RFP | (Pg. 56) Section III.19 General Instructions for the Preparation of Proposals | In the Final RFP, suggest excluding the required Transmittal Letter in Volume 1 from page restrictions. | The transmittal letter will be excluded from the overall page count. |
| Draft RFP | (Pgs. 61 & 63) Section III.21.c General Evaluation Information | Section III.25 "Basis of Award (Trade-off Analysis)" says the Government will use a Best Value evaluation criteria. But Section III.21.c, says award will be made to an offer "Whose proposal is technically acceptable or represents best value." The "or" in this statement (III.21.c) suggests it might alternatively be a "Technically Acceptable" evaluation (i.e., lowest price technically acceptable). Please confirm that this is a "Best Value" evaluation. | The Government will remove the "technically acceptable" verbiage from Section III.21 to state the following: |
"Whose proposal is technically acceptable or represents best value".
The Government will be utilizing Trade-Off Analysis (Best Value) evaluation methodology as noted in Section III.25.
| Draft RFP | (Pg. 59) Section 3 - Technical Approach | States that "Technical proposals submitted in response to this RFP must be prepared and tabbed in the format described below." With regards to an electronic submission, please define what the Government means by "tabbing" the listed items. | Technical proposals submitted in response to this RFP must be prepared and presented in the chronological format as described below. |
| Draft RFP | (Pg. 56) Submittal and Formatting Instructions. | Suggest the Government consider allowing 11 x 17 pages for illustrations and tables. | The 11x17 page size is not feasible in an electronic format. However, you may use either landscape or portrait for the illustrations and tables. |
| Draft RFP | General SOW / Appendices | Will the formal RFP include a "Contracts Data Requirements List" detailing the respective CDRLs? | The CDRLs list is part of the SOW document. |
| Draft RFP | General SOW | How will unscheduled/undefined work be captured? | A not-to-exceed Over and Above CLIN will be established if unforeseen items arise. |
| Draft RFP | General SOW | Will the Ground Flight Risk Clause (GFRC) 252.228-7001 be a provision within the overarching IDIQ? | The Ground Flight Risk Clause (GFRC) 252.228-7001 is not applicable to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as it is a Department of Defense (DOD) clause. CBP is a civilian agency and does not follow DFARS. |
| Draft RFP | Section II.22 (p. 26-27) and Section III.15 (p. 54) | Section II.22 says, "This is an IDIQ Hybrid contract with Firm Fixed Price, time and materials, labor hour, and cost reimbursable contract types." Meanwhile, Section III.15 says, "The Government contemplates award of a an IDIQ Hybrid contract with Firm Fixed Price contract resulting from this solicitation." Please clarify what type(s) of contract will be used. | This is a hybrid IDIQ type contract which includes firm fixed price, time and materials, labor hour, and cost reimbursable task/delivery orders. The RFP will be revised to reflect this statement. |
| Draft RFP | General SOW | The SOW states, "After acceptance by the Government, the aircraft and mission system alteration shall have, as a minimum, a 24-month or 2,400-hour warranty against design defects or part failures, excluding normal maintenance and routine inspections." Can you please clarify what the warranty specifically covers? | The SOW will be updated to clarify the warranty items. |
| Draft RFP | General SOW (Labor Categories) and SOW Appendix 3 (Aircraft Maintenance Labor Categories) | With respect to Labor Categories stated in Appendix 3, we suggest consideration should be given to include a broader list of labor categories - at the very least to include Integrated Logistics Support, scheduler for Integrated Master Schedule, training, financial categories, and material handlers. | The government will review the categories. |
| Draft RFP | SOW (Contractor Personnel) and SOW Appendix 3 (Aircraft Maintenance Labor Categories) | The SOW discussion of "Contractor Personnel" states "The Government has identified the Program Manager position as key personnel for this contract" and states that this person must have a "Bachelor’s degree in engineering." Appendix 3 has listings for both a "Program Manager" and "Program Manager (Engineer)." The "Program Manager (Engineer)" category requires an engineering degree. Please clarify which of these two Program Manager labor categories is considered the "key personnel." | The SOW will be updated to revise the experience requirements. |
| Draft RFP | SOW (Contractor Personnel) | With respect to the requirement that the Program Manager must have a "Bachelor’s degree in engineering," is that an absolute requirement or could the PM hold a business degree or degree from another field of study often found among PMs? | The SOW will be updated to revise the experience requirements. |
| Draft RFP | General SOW | There is no reference to the general maintenance and preservation needs of the aircraft. How should these be accounted for? | The SOW will be updated to confirm the requirements for general maintenance and preservation. |
| Draft RFP | Section III.19 (p. 55) | The instructions state that "Each of the volumes and parts shall be separate and complete in itself so that evaluation of one may be accomplished independently from evaluation of the other." What is meant by "parts"? Is this referring to Sections? How would the parts/sections be separate and complete and evaluated independently? | The word 'parts' has been removed. |
| Draft RFP | II.30 | Question: Will the Government provide an estimate of the number and type of task orders to be issued annually for use in determining potential hangar space and staffing requirements? |
The total number of tasks are an unknown amount; however, the Government is able to forescast the DLM and C-Check schedules to the awardee.
Draft RFP III.19 Volume II, Factor 2: Technical Approach provides for a page limit that cannot exceed 15 pages.
Volume II, Section 3 - Technical Approach, Staffing Plan and Key Personnel Resume(s) requires a Program Manager resume no longer than 2 pages in length leaving only 8 pages to address the remaining Volume II requirements.
Question 1: Will the Government increase the Volume II page count to 25 pages?
Question 2: Will the Government allow the resume to not count against page limitations? Question 1: The page count will be increased to 25 pages.
Question 2: The Government will remove the page limit for the key personnel resume. Please note there is only one (1) key position.
| SOW | FAA-Approved Flight Manuals and Checklists | The document identifies delivery of hard copies and electronic copies on CD/DVD or flash drives. Are additional delivery options as directed by the Task Order acceptable in lieu of that which is stated? | Updated to remove CDs/DVDs/flash drives. The awardee and the Government can discuss further on delivery methods at time of task orders. |
| SOW | Technical Manuals | The SOW states: 'The Contractor shall make all of the required manuals available to the COR for review and approval 60 calendar days before delivery of the modified aircraft and/or mission systems.' It is common practice for us to verify TM changes as we complete the modification. Can we assume that the 60 day requirement is for a Draft of the changes and that final TM changes, with government comments incorporated, can be delivered following the completion of the mod? | The SOW will be updated for further clarifation. |
| SOW | Mission management System & Government Inspection and Acceptance | Can we assume that John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory will be contracted independently by the Government to support Task Orders, when required, under this IDIQ? | The awarded vendor is not required to establish a contract directly with JHU; however, Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) will be required if work with JHU is required. |
JHU is a CBP contractor and will be part of the overall team on certain efforts. It may be required to work alongside the JHU team; however, again, a contract is not required directly with them.
| SOW | Mission management System & Government Inspection and Acceptance | Is John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory support limited to hardware and software changes associated with the Minotaur system only? | CBP has a separate sustainment contract for software changes. The IDIQ awardee will not be required to update Minotaur system. |
| SOW | Technical Reviews- Timing | Since the task orders will be of varying complexity, is the government willing to change the SOW language for SRR, PDR and CDR to: "...shall be conducted at the Contractor’s facility IAW the requirements of the individual Task Orders"? | The SOW will be updated. |
| SOW | General/Overall | The SOW does not include a requirement for digital engineering or requirements for SSML curation using model based systems engineering tool sets. Does CBP anticipate MBSE will be required in the future to support their programs? | This is not a CBP requirement. The Contractor is responsible to determine how work is completed. |
| DRFP | II.21 | 52.219-14 (f) (1) | The scope of individual task orders is unknown and the requirements are likely to vary. DRFP clause 52.219-14 (f) (1) is currently checked per below: |
(f) The Contractor shall comply with the limitations on subcontracting as follows:
(1) For contracts, in accordance with paragraphs (c)(1), (2), (3) and (6) of this clause – [Contracting Officer check as appropriate.] [] By the end of the base term of the contract and then by the end of each subsequent option period; or [X] By the end of the performance period for each order issued under the contract.
Would the government consider changing the requirement to the end of the base term of the contract and then by the end of each subsequent option period, rather than performance period for each order? Government will update and recheck to the following:
By the end of the base term of the contract and then by the end of each subsequent option period.
| Attachment 3 | Pricing Template | Attachment 3 – Pricing Template does not include a designated area to enter overtime fully burdened rates. According to Section E on page 7 of the Draft RFP overtime rates are to be provided in the Schedule. | Overtime will not be included. Tasks should be scheduled within a normal workday timeframe. The Government will establish a Not-to-Exceed Over and Above CLIN if unforeseen maintenance issues arise. | |
| Attachment 3 | Pricing Template | Can we add Labor Categories to the pricing template? | Vendors may add their own labor category titles; however, they need to align to the Government's labor categories which is based on the Bureau of Labor Statics descriptions. If additional categories need to be added then the Government will determine them at time of task order award. | |
| Attachment 3 | Pricing Template | Do we need to include overtime rates, or is that negotiated at the task order level? | Overtime will not be included. Tasks should be scheduled within a normal workday timeframe. The Government will establish a Not-to-Exceed Over and Above CLIN if unforeseen maintenance issues arise. | |
| Attachment 3 | Pricing Template | Need clarification on the pricing worksheet rate columns. It the BASE period 2024? | ||
| • | 2024 = Dec 2024 to Dec 2025 | |||
| • | 2025 = Dec 2025 to Dec 2026 | |||
| • | 2026 = Dec 2026 to Dec 2027 | |||
| • | 2027 = Dec 2027 to Dec 2028 | |||
| • | 2028 = Dec 2028 to Dec 2029 | The anticipated start of the base period is January 2025. The dates have been revised. | ||
| DRFP | Travel | Will the USG provide expected number of trips required for contractor to travel to USG locations (minimum per annum), or will it be driven by mission needs? | The Government does not anticipate the prime contractor to travel to USG locations. However, the Government expects the prime to monitor their subcontractors. If travel is required to those locations then it will be approved as needed. | |
| SOW | Technical & Training Support Requirements | Will the USG specify warehousing sq ft requirements, minimum required, and type of inventory systems required? | There is no requirement for a warehouse. If GFE is given then storage of said item would be required at the Contractor's facility. | |
| SOW | AMO Supported Platforms | Will the contractor be given access to the Technical Order (TO) / Technical Manual (TM) libraries for each aircraft type? | The SOW will be updated accordingly to addess the technical documents. | |
| DRFP | Section L | Is there an anticipated timeline between Phase I and Phase II proposal submissions? | Dates will be established for Phase I in the final RFP issuance; Advisory Notifications will be issued once review is complete for Phase 1. However, only Offerors who elect to continue to Phase 2 after issuance of the advisory notification will be provided the final dates for Phase 2 submittals. | |
| SOW | Contractor Personnel | Will the US Government consider removing the engineering degree to be a program manager to support this effort? Our company is supporting several projects with similar scope that do not require the PM to have an engineering degree because their experience on the platform is relevant. | The SOW will be updated to revise the experience requirements. | |
| Draft RFP | Due to the type of work to be performed under this contract, will the Government add the Ground Flight Risk Clause - 252.228-7001? | |||
| The Ground Flight Risk Clause (GFRC) 252.228-7001 is not applicable to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as it is a Department of Defense (DOD) clause. CBP is a civilian agency and does not follow DFARS. | ||||
| Draft RFP | Due to the fact that the Government will have firm fixed price (FFP), cost task orders under this contract, will the Government impose any insurance requirements? | Insurance will be required as prescribed in HSAR 3052.228-70 Insurance. | ||
| Draft RFP | Page 26 - Limitation of Subcontracting | Due to the fact that large businesses may be required to support efforts involved with the P-3 and DHC-8 (Dash-8) aircraft, will the Government consider checking the block that states, "By the end of the base term of the contract and then by the end of each subsequent option period". | Government will update and recheck to the following: |
By the end of the base term of the contract and then by the end of each subsequent option period
| Draft RFP | B30-Ordering Procedures | Unless the customer provides a forecast of opportunities, it will be difficult to meet a 10-day order delivery without imposing risk to the Government as well as the Contractor. Will the Government relax the ordering period of 10 days to 21 days to allow the Contractor the ability to receive quotes from vendors and supply chains? | The requirement remains at 10-days; however, as noted in the RFP, it can be discussed/changed dependent of the complexity of the task order. |
| Draft RFP | Due to the fact that the requirements are 19 pages and the requirements stated to be explained in Phase II, will the Government consider extending the page count to 30 pages? | The page number limit will increase to 25 pages. | |
| Draft RFP | III.24 Price Evaluation | Will the Government provide minimum years of experience and minimum education requirements for exempt labor categories (those not included within the wage determination)? | The Government only designated the minimum years of experience for the key personnal: Program Manager. |
| Solicitation | N/A | We note that there are no provisions for Ground and Flight Risk, similar to that found in DFARS 252.228-7001. Inclusion of Ground and Flight Risk language is a benefit to both the Government and Contractor. The clause protects the Government through inclusion of the requirements at DCMA INST 8210-1D/NAVAIRINST 3710.1H/COMDINST M13020.3B. Further, it helps limit the insurance cost that contractors ultimately include in their bids for commercial Hangar Keeper's and similar insurance. Would the Government include addition of an H-clause similar to the DFARS 252.228-7001 Ground and Flight Risk clause? | The Ground Flight Risk Clause (GFRC) 252.228-7001 is not applicable to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as it is a Department of Defense (DOD) clause. CBP is a civilian agency and does not follow DFARS. |
| SOW | Page 4 Contractor Personnel | Are the qualifications for the Program Manager to have an engineering degree intended for the Program Manager (Engineer) labor category or the Program Manager labor category as defined in Attachment 2 Appendix 3? The qualification requirements appear to cover the Technical Project Manager requirements description under the Program Manager (Engineer) and not the Program Manager. Would customer consider requirements for the Program Manager as "Bachelors in applicable field or 15+ years of experience in project management field"? | The SOW will be updated to revise the experience requirements. |
| SOW | Page 5 System Safety | The Contractor shall report to the Government safety and injury incidents that occur to personnel in the performance of their duties under this contract. Can the USG clarify if there are special reporting requirements to the Government other than applicable OSHA, state, federal, and local laws? |
The Contractor shall follow their regulations and procedures according to their facility.
| SOW | Page 9 DOD (AED or NAVAIR) and DHS Certification | The SOW states: "The Contractor shall be responsible for preparing certification plans, certification testing, flight test, reports and substantiating data, and support for final DOD (AED or NAVAIR) evaluation and inspections." Is the intent for the contractor to perform all test and flight test requirements normally performed by RTC and AFTD on Redstone Arsenal and then to submit this data to SRD or NAVAIR equivalent for approval? | The SOW will be updated to address the testing requirements. |
| SOW | Page 10 System Requirements Review | Is the SRR requirement 15 days after award correct? The kickoff meeting is within 30 days of award and should be conducted prior to SRR. | The SOW will be updated to address the SRR and kick off meetings. |
| SOW | Multiple | The pattern of date/timeline requirements through the IDIQ applies to PDR/CDR, etc. this may result in schedules that don't align with program requirements. Would customer consider shifting language to "performed IAW approved task order schedule" or similar? | The SOW will be updated. |
| SOW | Page 13 Warranty | Can the USG further define part failures that must be covered under this warranty at contractor expense? (The specified time period/hours exceeds the warranties provided by major OEMs - warranties on OEM components also begin at time of purchase, not installation.) | The SOW will be updated to address warranties. |
| Solicitation | Section L | The page limit for Factors one and two are extremely restrictive considering the breadth of mission systems integration, DOD and/or FAA airworthiness certification, MRO activities and number/types of aircraft. This page limit may interfere with industry input that is truly reflective of strengths/benefits, full scope of applicable past performance, etc. Would customer consider a page limit of at least 20? | The page number limit will increase to 25 pages. |
| RFP+DRAFT PAGE 4 | FAR 52.227-14 | Would customer consider applying this at the task order level? We anticipate execution to require interaction with various OEMs with IP concerns. | This clause shall not be removed as this is a FAR requirement. If additional data right clauses are required later on at the issuance of a task order then the Government will determine whether it is necessary. |
| RFP+DRAFT PAGE 21 | 3052.247-72 | Could customer clarify if inspect/accept occurs at Origin or Destination? The referenced HSAR Indicates F.O.B DESTINATION. This appears to conflict with 52.212-4 which indicates inspect/accept at ORIGIN. Which is the intent? Would customer consider adding language "as required by task order"? | The orders will be FOB Destination. |
Inspection/acceptation of the aircraft will take place at the Contractor's facility.
| DRAFT+RFP | Section II.9(i)(B) | The terms state that the rates will be paid for all labor performed on the contract. Is this clause only relevant to the T&M CLINs? If not, can the government explain the method to use on the other contract types. | Yes, this clause is only relevant to T&M CLINs. |
| Draft RFP | Section III.21 (pg. 61) | In the General Evaluation Information section, the Government cites that it will use information from CPARS as part of its general evaluation. For contracts where past performance is not tracked in CPARS, and where the work performed could be considered very relevant with respect to scope, complexity and aircraft types, would the Government consider allowing for Past Performance Questionnaires to be submitted to offerors' Government and other customers to allow for inclusion of those contracts for the past experience requirement. | The Government will not consider Past Performance Questionnaires. The Government is validating an Offerors' capabilities and responsibility determination per FAR 9.104. A rating will not be assigned as Past Performance is not a factor. |
In the absence of CPARs, the Government reserves the right to utilize other available sources to obtain Contractor responsibility data.
| Draft RFP | Section II.22; III 1552.216-1 | Section II.22 states that the program will be a Hybrid contract with Firm Fixed Price, time and material, labor hour, and cost reimbursable contract types. Section III.1522.216-1 states that the contract will only be a Firm Fixed Price contract. Request Section III.1522.216-1 be updated to be consistent with Section II.22. | This is a hybrid IDIQ type contract which includes firm fixed price, time and materials, labor hour, and cost reimbursable task/delivery orders. | |
| Draft RFP | Section III.19 Volume II Section 3, Section III.22 Non-Cost | |||
| Section M Evaluation Factors | The General Instructions for Offerors (Section III.10) identifies the importance of risk identification and mitigation in the Technical approach. The Evaluation Criteria (Section II) non-cost factors (Factors 1 and 2) are evaluated with a confidence assessment, but do not include an risk rating. Would the government consider adding a risk rating for each respective non-cost factors to be consist with Instruction to Offeror requirements, and to use that risk rating in its evaluation criteria? | Risk is considered; however, it will not warrant a separate rating. | ||
| Draft RFP | Section II.30 | The stated 10 day timeline would limit the ability to fully evaluate and propose labor and material with efficiencies that would provide the back up required for KO to perform a fair evaluation of proposals. Will customer re-evaluate requested 10 day timeline and provide a forecast (post award of IDIQ) for anticipated tasks to enable contractor to evaluate potential input into timeline for proposals? | The document states "Within ten (10) working days after receipt of the task order request, unless a different period is specified, the Contractor will submit a written proposal responding to the Government's requirement." |
Depending on the requirement, the dates may change.
| IDIQ - do you anticipate multi-award or one? | The anticipated award will be a single award IDIQ. |
| Since it is a new program, is this a spin off from the overall AMO Maintenance Program? | No. This contract is not an award for daily maintenance. |
| What are the priorities for the program? | The priorities for the program are modifications and heavy maintenance activities such as a depot event or C-Check for the following airframes: Blackhawk, MEA, AS350, DHC-8, and P-3. |
| Confirm this is a small business set-aside | This requirement will be set-aside as small business. |
| Is the $100 M the anticipated contract value? | The estimated ceiling is not to exceed $100M. |
| What is the anticipated POP? | The anticipated period of performance is 01/01/2025 through 12/31/2030. However, this is dependent upon contract award. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .