FBO_Post_Q&A_RFP_70Z03818RH0000002.doc

Questions - Request for Proposal 70Z038RH0000002 USCG C-130H/J Progressive Structural Inspection (PSI)/Depot Level Maintenance (DLM)

Pg Number Section/

Paragraph

Page 32 Inquiries

Answers to questions may impact a Company's proposal; therefore, it would be beneficial to Offerors if USCG would provide answers to questions periodically, i.e., interim response on/about January 31st, by Amendment posted in FedBizOps.

Responses to questions will be posted periodically up until the cutoff date of February 15. USCG anticipates a high volume of questions at the beginning of the submission period and plans to begin publishing responses the week of January 15.

Factor 2, (1.2.1) Sub-factor A: subsection b,

11.0 PAINT

1st paragraph It appears the government requirement is for the Offeror to send a PPQ to each reference for each contract submitted as a past performance contract. Can the government please clarify the requirements?

Does the Government expect two, no more than three, references for each individual contract or for the three contract references overall?

The Government expects two, no more than three, references overall, not two to three references for each individual contract. This applies to Prime and subcontractors.

Page 33-34

Proposal Submission Can the government clarify it is requiring Offerors to provide The Schedule of Supplies/Services as part of the Technical Volume or only include it in the Price Volume?

Offerors shall submit proposed pricing using the Schedule of Supplies/Services provided as Attachment A in the Volume II Pricing Proposal only. Pricing information should not appear in Volume I.

1.2.2, last bullet

Attachments 1, 2, 3 Does the government have an HC-130H/J Progressive Structural Inspection (PSI) and Depot Level Maintenance (DLM) Specification and if so, can it be provided to the Offerors?

Please provide the associated Depot Level Maintenance Procedure Cards (DMPC) for C-130H PSI, C-130J PSI, and PSI Extension Inspection (PEI).

DMPCs, PEI Cards, and Paint drawings will be made available by written (email) request to Victoria Kocher at victoria.h.kocher@uscg.mil.

Card decks and drawings are the property of the U.S. Coast Guard and may be used for proposal preparation only. Reproduction and distribution for any other use is strictly prohibited.

Is it the government’s intent for Offerors to submit resumes for three C-130 Cell Supervisors and at least two qualified Structural Specialists?

Additionally, paragraph 5.2.5 of the SOW requires at least one Aircraft Lead Mechanic per aircraft in PSI/UDLM. Please clarify the number of Lead Mechanic resumes required to be submitted with the proposal.

Resumes should be submitted for at least the minimum number of personnel required for the labor category as specified in the SOW. RFP 1.2.2, bullet 2 - Offerors may propose a primary and an alternate for all Key Personnel.

Refer to SOW 1.0 Scope for the estimated number of aircraft expected to be in work at any one time.

1.2.1 para 2

1.1.1 Last sentence

Can the government clarify its intent / the requirement when it states, “The information shall be prepared in a format consistent with the SOW …”?

The information should be presented in a logical order consistent with the sections described in the SOW.

Pricing Proposals

Attachment 10

Para 2.2.1

Para. 1.2.2 b Is it the Government's intent to request a transition plan and schedule immediately following contract award?

If this is not the intent, will the Government please consider expanding the page count and incorporating a contract transition requirement into the Final RFP's instructions and associated evaluation factor?

Does the Government intend for Offerors to recover any Transition Costs through their Overhead?

Item 4) “acceptability of phase-in plan” is deleted. A formal transition/phase-in plan is not required. Wording is changed to: 4) the Offeror’s proposed procedures for implementing full process management, parts procurement, and training of personnel in ALC Instructions and Policy in the period in order to be fully staffed and operational by the date required in the contract. (No later than 90 days after award IAW the SOW)

Page 15 Clauses &

SOW Page 62

Para. 3 – not included in page limitation

Will the Government please consider eliminating the QCP cited in Factor 1, Sub-factor B, from page count?

Quality Program - The RFP Requires that we submit a Quality Control Plan (QCP) and current ISO Certification. Would the Government please clarify that the QCP and ISO Certifications should be included as attachments (and exempt from the stated page-count?)

Quality Control Plans and ISO Certifications have been added to the list of items not included in the proposal page limitation. See revised SOW attached to Amendment 0001

Section 2.5

1.2.2

Page 33-34, 37

21 cont.

RFP

Technical Proposals.

Can the Government clarify where they would like Subcontracting Plans, Quality Control Plan, ISO Certifications submitted - as an attachment to Volume I Technical Proposal or Volume II Price Proposal?

Where does the Government want the Subcontracting Plan, Safety and Health Program Plan, and Airworthiness And Required Certifications placed in the proposal response?

These items shall be submitted in Volume I. See revision on page 33.

FAR 52.245-1

SOW

Para. 19

Paragraph 2.5 This SOW paragraph refers to a fixed-price engineering hourly rate in the RFP Schedule.

Request the Government revise the Schedule to include a CLIN for engineering hourly support.

References to Engineering support have been deleted. There is no CLIN for Engineering hourly labor. See revised SOW attached to Amendment 0001.

Paragraph 5.5.2

Para 1.2.3

Para 22.0 The FAR defines “Subcontractor as “any supplier, distributor, vendor, or firm that furnishes supplies or services to or for a prime contractor or another subcontractor”. Will the Government define the term subcontractor in this context?

See Question 24

Para 22.0 Given that the prime contractor is ultimately responsible for the overall quality of all processes, can the Subcontractor be deemed AS 9110 certified as long as all subcontractor (specifically depaint/paint) are monitored through the Prime’s Quality Management System assuming the Prime is AS 9110 certified?

LRS is awaiting response from ALC Business Office Division.

Attachments 1 & 2 DMPC card Attachment 1 and 2 provide Revision Dates to each card.

What constitutes a deviation from these cards when cards are revised?

Who is responsible for performing the contract attachment mod as DMPC cards are updated, added or revised?

Will the DMPC card deck be frozen for each task order at time of CG-103 issue in order to print and plan the DMPC work cards?

The Contractor shall evaluate and determine if there is any impact to the time required to perform the revised card. A request for modification shall be provided to the COR. Any increase in labor hours will be negotiated, and if necessary, a modification will be issued by the Contracting Officer.

The card deck will not be frozen at time of task order issuance.

Para 11.1 & 11.2

Attachment A-Schedule

Has kit fabrication been included with in the provided hours?

Will a kitting area/space be provided?

No – USCG will be responsible for kit development and fabrication. Referenced paragraph has been deleted. See revised SOW attached to Amendment 0001.

Offeror’s should price labor categories in accordance with description provided in the SOW.

Yes – See SOW 5.3

50 cont.

SOW

Various SOW paragraph 5.3.10 titled Sr. Mechanical Technician (Aircraft Mechanic II) refers to SOW paragraph 5.5.8 however, 5.5.8 does not exist

SOW paragraph 5.2.9 titled C-130 Electrical/Avionics Leader refers to SOW section 2.1.2 however section 2.1.2 does not exist.

SOW paragraph 5.3.13 titled Aircraft Painter, Sr. refers to SOW 5.5.12 however, 5.5.12 does not exist

SOW paragraph 19.0 titled GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY refers to SOW 5.6.3 however, 5.6.3 does not exist.

SOW 5.5.8 is changed to SOW 5.3.8

SOW paragraph 5.2.9 refers to SOW paragraph 2.12

SOW 5.5.12 is changed to SOW 5.3.12

SOW 5.6.3 is changed to SOW 5.4.3

See corrected copy of the SOW attached to Amendment 0001.

Para 1.2.2a. bullet 4

RFP

Attachment A, Schedule SOW Attachment 1 The RFP includes 1,920 hour per employee as an estimate per year. Based on the Executive Order to allow for 56 per year of sick-time for Service Contract Act covered employees, shouldn’t the estimated hours be adjusted from 1,920 to 1,864 to reflect a more accurate number of billable hours per year per employee?

The quantity of productive work hours in ‘Column C’ of the file estimates 1,920 productive work hours per FTE. If a FTE is representative of an individual employee, this estimate is non-compliant with the Service Contract Act (“SCA”) requirements for holiday, vacation, and of E.O. 13706 regarding sick leave. SCA requires a contractor to offer SCA employees 27 to 37 days of combined leave per year. Assuming a work year of 2,080 total hours, and that employees utilize their annual sick leave, E.O., 13706, establishes the maximum number of regular time hours per employee to be range from 1,784 up to 1,864 hours. Total days of combined leave is made up of: (1) 7 days sick leave, (2) 10 days federal holiday, and (3) 10 to 20 days of vacation, dependent on years of service. Years of service is based on the number of years supporting the program, independent of the prime contractor.

The FTE estimated 1,920 hours per year stated on Attachment A will not change for proposal evaluation purposes. Offerors are reminded that the hours stated in the Schedule are estimates only.

Attachment A, Schedule In order to effectively price SCA-mandated vacation based on the amount of time an employee has been on the job, will the Government provide demographic data illustrating how many years each of the FTEs has been on the job? If not, will the Government provide an average per labor category currently on the job?

USCG is not able to provide the information.

Para 3.2

5.0

Para 5.2

RFP Attachment A

Para 5.2 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence states: “Key personnel shall meet the basic requirements of SOW 5.3 and the minimum requirements for each position specified below.”

Will the Government correct this SOW reference to 5.1?

Key personnel shall meet the basic requirements of SOW 5.3 reference is changed to SOW 5.1. This has also been corrected for the basic requirements referenced in 5.3 Non-Key Personnel. See corrected copy of the SOW attached to Amendment 0001.

Para 5.2.5

Para 5.3.14

Para 20.0

Page 32-24

Far 52.212-1 Using a page size is 11x17 for graphics is referred to under the Pricing Proposal instructions only. Please verify that Offeror's may use an 11x17 page for graphics in the Technical Proposal as well?

The use of a smaller font size for graphics is designated under the instructions for the Pricing Proposal only. Please verify that Offeror’s may use a smaller Sans Serif font type (e.g. Arial) for graphics in the Technical Proposal as well.

The reference to page and font size has been added to the Technical Proposal instructions. See corrected copy of the SOW attached to Amendment 0001.

Pricing Proposals

Attachment 11 RAPIDGate

Program

Pages 27-28, 42, 56

Para 1.2.3b

Para 1.0 &

Para 8.9.1

Clause FAR 52.228-15

HSAR 3052.247-72

Para 5.8 Will the Government provide necessary personnel to ensure work stoppage is avoided during night shift hours?

USCG will provide Government oversight for Contractor personnel if night shift hours are implemented.

Para 9.1

Section 1.4

11.3.3

Is it the government’s intent to re-seal the aircraft following stripping and prior to the transport of the aircraft to HMF for PSI where the wings and other structural components may be removed as it appears the SOW is directing?

Any resealing required would be performed at the ALC HMF.