26QL-202 Q-A Amendment 01.pdf

Solicitation: 70Z03826QL0000202

Title: Repair G.C.U.

Amendment 01

S.

No

Category Question Source

Reference

Government Response

1. Pricing /

Scope

The solicitation indicates it is a Firm-

Fixed Price award and the Statement of Work (SOW) defines levels of repair as both "Inspect/ Repair as necessary" and "Overhaul" (which includes replacement of OEM recommended components).

However, it does not specify which baseline offerors should use for the fixed price.

Question: Should the quoted firm-fixed price assume a complete overhaul for all units, or should offerors price a standard repair with a separate Government approval/pricing process for components requiring full overhaul?

SOW, p. 1, Item

5; Terms &

Conditions, p. 3.

This requirement is for repair not overhaul. If additional work is required, it must go through

USCG approval.

2. Subcontractin g / Work

Location

The Terms and Conditions require that any vendor repairing Coast

Guard aircraft components must perform at least fifty percent (50%) of the work at their company's FAA certified facility. However, it does not specify the metric used to calculate this 50%.

Question: Is the 50% threshold calculated based on total labor hours, overall contract cost, or another specific metric, particularly when specialized sub-tier vendors are utilized?

Terms &

Conditions, p. 3.

The threshold will be based on the total amount of work required.

3. Schedule /

Turn-Around-

Time

The SOW requires a turn-around-time (TAT) of 90 days after receipt of material, and also requires the contractor to await Contracting

Officer approval if a component is deemed Beyond Economical Repair

(BER). It does not clarify how this waiting period impacts the 90-day

TAT.

Question: If a component requires

Government disposition for a BER determination or missing parts approval, does the 90-day TAT pause

SOW, p. 1, Items 7–8;

SOW, p. 2, Item

11.

No, the TAT does not pause.

while awaiting the Contracting

Officer's written direction?

4. Beyond

Economical

Repair (BER)

The SOW states the contractor may request an item to be determined

BER after initial inspection, but only the USCG can make the final BER determination. It does not address compensation for the teardown and diagnostic efforts if the part is condemned.

Question: If the Government confirms a component is Beyond

Economical Repair, will the contractor be reimbursed for the labor, teardown, and diagnostic costs incurred during the initial inspection?

SOW Page 1

(Item 7)

Yes, the USCG will allow a test, teardown, and evaluation fee.

5. Missing Parts

/ GFP

The SOW requires the contractor to inspect for missing parts within 15 days of receipt and notify the KO in writing. It does not state how those missing parts are subsequently handled or funded.

Question: Upon notification, will the

Government provide the missing parts as Government Furnished

Property (GFP), or is the contractor expected to procure them and seek an equitable adjustment?

SOW Page 1

(Item 8)

No, the USCG will not provide GFP.

6. Teardown and

Inspection

Report (TIR)

The SOW requires submission of a

TIR within five days of inspection, detailing unit prices for replacement parts and labor hours. Given supply chain volatility, part pricing from the

OEM may fluctuate.

Question: How long must the contractor hold the replacement part and labor pricing valid on the TIR while awaiting Government approval to proceed?

SOW Page 1

(Item 9)

60 – 90 days

7. Packaging /

ESD

Compliance

The SOW requires packaging of

Electrostatic Discharge Sensitive

(ESDS) components to comply with

ANSI/ESD S541 or MIL-STD-2073, while all other items must use ATA-

300. It does not classify the specific asset for this solicitation.

Question: Does the Government classify the G.C.U. (P/N: D25-050) as an ESDS component requiring

ANSI/ESD S541 or MIL-STD-2073

SOW, p. 2, Item

14.

Yes, the G.C.U should be classified as an ESDS component.

compliant packaging, or should offerors apply the ATA-300 requirements?

8. Configuration

/ USCG

Modifications

The SOW notes that components may include USCG modifications not annotated in OEM publications, and that the USCG will provide supporting details/instructions. It does not provide these instructions in the initial solicitation.

Question: Will the Government provide the supporting details and instructions for these potential USCG modifications prior to the quotation deadline so offerors can accurately assess the scope of work?

SOW Page 1

(Item 3)

No, the USCG may provide these items to the successful offeror.

9. Labor

Standards /

SCLS

The solicitation includes Wage

Determination 2015-4547 (Rev. 33) and FAR 52.222-52 regarding exemption from application of the

SCLS for certain services. However, the solicitation does not clearly establish whether the repair services are intended to be treated as exempt.

Question: Please confirm whether the Government considers the services under this solicitation exempt from the Service Contract

Labor Standards (SCLS) under the applicable exemption provisions, or whether offerors should price the work in accordance with the included

Wage Determination and applicable

SCLS requirements?

Terms &

Conditions, pp.

3–4; Wage

Determination attachment.

The determination for exemption of SCLS will depend on the offeror. The wage determination is based on the location of the offeror.

10. Buy

American Act

/ Country of

Origin

The solicitation requires completion of Buy American certificates, but identifies the OEM as SAFRAN

ELECTRICAL & POWER

CHATOU SAS (CAGE F0296),

located in France.

Question: Given that the identified

OEM, SAFRAN Electrical & Power

Chatou SAS (CAGE F0296), is located in France, please confirm how the applicable Buy American and Trade Agreements requirements should be applied to OEM replacement parts procured from the identified OEM for performance of this repair?

Terms &

Conditions, pp.

4–7; Schedule of Supplies.

Not applicable.

11. DCMA vs.

Destination

Inspection

The SOW states the USCG reserves the right to invoke DCMA requirements, but the Terms and

Conditions explicitly state that inspection and acceptance will be performed at destination by local

USCG personnel.

Question: For pricing and logistical planning, should offerors assume inspection and acceptance will strictly occur at destination

(Elizabeth City, NC), or should

DCMA origin inspection be coordinated?

SOW, p. 2, Item

16; Terms &

Conditions, p.

11.

Strictly at destination.

12. Invoicing and

DD-250

Invoicing instructions require a completed DD-250 "(when required)" alongside the invoice submitted to the

ALC Fiscal Branch. It does not clarify if a DD-250 via WAWF/PIEE is mandatory for this specific order.

Question: Since acceptance is performed at destination, is a formal

DD-250 strictly required for invoicing, or is a standard commercial invoice accompanied by the destination-signed packing slip sufficient for payment?

Terms and

Conditions Page

11-12

The USCG does not use WAWF/PIEE. The contractor shall determine whether a DD-250 is required or not.

13. Hazardous

Decontaminat ion

The SOW requires components to be cleaned of hazardous dust

(hexavalent chromium, cadmium, lead) prior to being returned to the

ALC, and notes ALC may take random samples.

Question: Is the contractor required to provide a formal Certificate of

Decontamination with the shipping paperwork, or is adherence to the

CMM cleaning procedures sufficient to satisfy this requirement?

SOW Page 2

(Item 10)

No certificate is required. Adherence to the CMM cleaning procedures is required.