Amendment 0002 GSA FY23 CPP to 47QMCB22R0003.pdf

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

0002 See Block 16C

QMACB

General Services Administration Travel Acquisition Support Branch 1800 F Street NW 3rd Floor, Hub 3400 Washington, DC 20405

47QMCB22R0003

02/17/2022

X

X

Corey Gerst - Contracting Officer

FY23 City Pair Program Worldwide Amendment 0002 to Solicitation 47QMCB22R0003 is hereby issued to provide the Government's responses to vendor Final RFP questions and provide change pages to reflect updates made to the Final RFP.

1 15

General Services Administration City Pair Program FY23 Requirement for Scheduled Air Passenger Transportation Services

Solicitation No. 47QMCB22R0003

Attachment 7

No. Solicitation Reference Vendor Question Government Response

Section Page #

1 Our team had a relatively quick question on the technical evaluation of the service availability. The section from the FY23 Draft RFP reads:

“The technical evaluation will be conducted based on service effective for the week of July 18, 2022, through July 24, 2022, and planned service between July 25, 2022 and September 30, 2022.

No technical evaluation will be made for service scheduled to begin on or after October 1, 2022.”

Our understanding is that evaluation of minimums and other requirements will be based off of the schedule of the week beginning on July 18, 2022. However, we are unclear on the second clause of the same sentence: “and planned service between July 25, 2022 and September 30, 2022.” What does “planned service” entail, and how is this second period of time different from the first week beginning on Jul 18, 2022 in terms of service evaluated?

Technical evaluations of submitted fares will be conducted based on service effective for the week of July 18, 2022 through July 24, 2022.

However, if a carrier is submitting an offer for a line item that it does not yet provide service on, but plans to begin offering service for, the planned service must fall between July 25, 2022 and September 30, 2022.

Premium Economy Markets

Line 1587: LAXSEL – Only code share partners for any of the US airlines serve this market nonstop, and neither have a PE cabin.

For those requesting PE on this route, they would have to connect and travel on one of the US domestic carriers. Would you consider an alternative west coast market to SEL, such as SEA where there are nonstops with a PE cabin?

The Government will not be revising the requirements for the line item in question.

C3

B.2 (a) Domestic Routes

23 Do Group 3 Domestic routes only allow one connection? Are Group 2 EC markets the only ones that allow a double connection? There are several G3 markets that only have double connections such as GPT-MOT and GPT-LAN.

In accordance with the RFP C.3.B.2(a), Note 1, Group 3 has no connection time limit, extended connect offers are acceptable to meet the minimum requirement.

C.16 36 The final RFP states in C.16 “contract carrier shall make available all service on offered codeshare partner(s).” Previously, contract carriers have been permitted to offer service on codeshare partners on a line item basis—and not offer for the entire codeshare network.

This meant that a contract carrier could work exclusively with certain codeshare partners on individual city pairs. Under the final RFP, are contract carriers permitted to continue this practice and offer codeshare service for specific markets or on a line item basis rather than offering all network service by the codeshare partner?

The language in Sections B.1.2 and C.16 have been hereby changed

From:

● For domestic and international line items, the contract carrier shall make available all service on the offered codeshare partner(s).

To:

● For domestic line items, the contract carrier shall make available all service on the offered codeshare partner(s).

● For international and international business class line items, the contract carrier shall make available all service on the offered codeshare partner(s) proposed on a line-item-by-line-item basis. If a codeshare partner(s) is (are) offered but no specific line item is identified, the offeror shall make available all service on the offered codeshare partner(s) in all awarded line items where the codeshare exists.

In addition, the Government has added the following language to Section K.7. of the RFP:

In international line items only, if the offeror is offering a codeshare partner(s) by line item, the line item(s) must be identified in the following format:

C.16 36 Carriers are subject to different legal obligations based on agreements with each codeshare partner. As a result, a contract carrier may not be able to offer service to the government for all codeshare partners at a single price per line item, particularly where multiple codeshare partners may service applicable international line items. However, the final RFP states in C.16 “contract carrier shall make available all service on offered codeshare partner(s).”

To enable contract carriers to offer the most options to the government, will GSA permit a contract carrier to offer one codeshare partner for a particular route rather than all codeshare partners that may service that route? For example, codeshare partner A serves line item 1 and the contract carrier chooses to bid with them. Codeshare partner B serves line item 2 and the contract carrier chooses to bid with them. Line item 3 is served by both codeshare partners A & B. Can the contract carrier, assuming they wish to bid for line items 1 & 2, choose to exclusively serve line item 3 with only one codeshare carrier?

See the Government’s response to Question 4.

Final RFP

Attachment

5 FY23

Group 2

Line Items

Please confirm the required # of flights for Group 2 international line items. HFDFRA, HFDLON, HFDBRU, CVGPAR, DENYMQ, JAXYMQ, NYCNCE, SEABCN, SFOSDQ, BOSVIE, SATSEL, DTTYMQ, and WASQRO are markedly increased from last year.

Attachment 5 has been updated via Amendment 0002 with revised line item requirements.

7 The GSA has outlined the following options, and we would like to know more about the option highlighted that says “Has offered to participate in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet”.

Questions:

1. What constitutes officially “offering” to participate in

CRAF?

2. If we apply for ineligibility, how easy or difficult is it to reverse it and become eligible?

Vendors would need to contact the Department of Defense (DoD) United States Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) office for more information regarding the Civilian Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) participation as it is not a General Services Administration (GSA) contract. Contact information for DoD TRANSCOM can be found in Section H.5(b) of the Final RFP.

There has been an increase in markets YOY by 4% but a decrease in PAX by approximately 26% what is driving the PAX change YOY?

Per the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 16.503(a)(1) , “For the information of offerors and contractors, the contracting officer shall state a realistic estimated total quantity in the solicitation and resulting contract. This estimate is not a representation to an offeror or contractor that the estimated quantity will be required or ordered, or that conditions affecting requirements will be stable or normal. The Contracting Officer may obtain the estimate from records of previous requirements and consumption, or by other means, and should base the estimate on the most current information available.” The passenger counts referenced are estimates only and are based on the Federal Government travel data that the City Pair Program team has at its disposal which includes COVID impact on Government travel (see Section B.3. for more information on passenger volumes).

**Carrier A has seen a significant decrease in PAX level in city pairs such as SANFUK, HNLPPG what are the factors that are considered in allocating estimated PAXs?

** The vendor’s name has been redacted

See the Government’s response to Question 8

Does government imposed Covid-19 travel restrictions impact allocated PAXs amount?

See the Government’s response to Question 8

M.5 117 The title of this tradeoff consideration (“Capacity volume in Group 1 and high volume line items”) implies that all of “Group 1” will be considered for “capacity” as well as other “high volume line items” not within Group 1. However, within the paragraph, GSA indicates that “capacity” will only be considered for a subset of Group 1 line items (“high passenger volume line items within Group 1”). Please confirm which approach GSA will be using. (i.e., consideration of capacity only for high passenger volume line items, or consideration of capacity for all group 1 offerings).

The Government has removed the Capacity volume in Group 1 and high volume line items tradeoff from the FY23 City Pair Program RFP and has provided change pages as part of this amendment to reflect this update.

M.5 117 Please define “high passenger volume line items in Group 1” as used in this section and solicitation.

See the Government’s response to Question 11

M.5 117 Is there a specific quantitative cut-off between those pairs considered “high passenger volume” and those considered less than “high passenger volume”? If so, what is the cut-off? If not, what are the objective elements which make a pair a “high passenger volume” pair?

See the Government’s response to Question 11

M.5 117 How will GSA quantify an offeror’s overall proposed “capacity” for a particular line item given that offerors are not required to provide specific aircraft information for each pair to allow quantification of the number of available seats? Two offerors offering the same number of “full jet” flights on a given pair may actually be offering a substantially different quantity of available seat “capacity” depending on the respective size of the planes utilized on those pairs. Specific capacity data is readily available from all offerors.

Will GSA add a requirement that offerors provide this capacity data for each pair? If GSA does not require submission of this information, how can the evaluators possibly meaningfully compare “capacity” as part of the best value tradeoff assessment?

M.5 117 The fifth element under the Group 1 Price/Technical Tradeoff within the RFP states that “Capacity volume in Group 1 and high volume line items” will be a factor in the Group 1 Price/Technical Tradeoff.

The explanation of this tradeoff consideration notes a categorical distinction between “full jets” and “Propeller/Turboprop/Regional Jet.” How will GSA quantify “capacity” for an offeror whose capacity for a given pair is defined by a combination of “full jet” and “Propeller/Turboprop/Regional Jet” assets? For example, while “full jet” capacity (defined as 90+ passengers per RFP § B.2) will be greater than “regional jet” capacity (89 or less passengers) on a strict 1-to-1 comparative basis, an offeror with more “full jet” service on a particular pair may offer less overall daily “capacity” for that pair

(in terms of seats available for sale) than an offeror who augments a smaller volume of “full jet” service with a meaningful volume of “regional jet” service. What will GSA do to ensure that an offeror with less actual capacity is not falsely given evaluation credit for having greater “capacity” merely because of the definitional cutoff points established in the RFP? Similarly, what will GSA do to ensure that an offer with less actual capacity is not falsely given evaluation credit for having greater “capacity” because of the manner in which capacity volume is assessed for high volume line items under the fifth element?

If no such assurances can be provided, will GSA add a requirement that offerors identify overall pair capacity on a per-pair basis in its proposal? We understand that separate tradeoff credit will be afforded to “Additional Flights,” per the fourth element of the tradeoff analysis; however, this consideration does not justify GSA making inaccurate assessments of capacity for an offeror who should be favored under both considerations.

B.2 11 Section B.2 of the RFP defines a “regional jet” as “an airplane with a total capacity of 89 or less seats, including all classes of service.”

This definition is used to distinguish a “regional jet” from a “full jet,” which features 90+ seats. In footnote 2 within Section B.2, the RFP sources the definition of “regional jet” to a publicly-available FAA Aerospace Forecast document located at https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/ aerospace_forecasts/media/FY2019- 39_FAA_Aerospace_Forecast.pdf. However, this document does not provide a definition of a “regional jet.” Rather, at footnote 3 on page 11, it provides a definition of what the FAA considers to be a “regional carrier”: “Mainline carriers are defined as those providing service primarily via aircraft with 90 or more seats. Regionals are defined as those providing service primarily via aircraft with 89 or less seats and whose pairs serve mainly as feeders to the mainline carriers.” In all prior City Pair procurements, GSA has employed a commonly-used definition of “regional jet” as those with less than 70 seats. If GSA is not inclined to request specific per-pair capacity information, will GSA utilize the well-established “70 seat” definition

See the Government’s response to Question 11 https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/%20aerospace_forecasts/media/FY2019-39_FAA_Aerospace_Forecast.pdf https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/%20aerospace_forecasts/media/FY2019-39_FAA_Aerospace_Forecast.pdf https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/%20aerospace_forecasts/media/FY2019-39_FAA_Aerospace_Forecast.pdf https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/%20aerospace_forecasts/media/FY2019-39_FAA_Aerospace_Forecast.pdf https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/%20aerospace_forecasts/media/FY2019-39_FAA_Aerospace_Forecast.pdf for “regional jet” to minimize the adverse impact of making broad categorical assumptions about “full jets” versus” regional jets”?

COPS

Group 1 Column AV

When completing the COPS submission, what factor is determinative in categorizing service on a flight as a full jet (rather than a “regional jet”) when a carrier is providing connecting flight service for the “Number of outbound flights using Jets” (whether the initial segment is on a full jet; whether the final segment is on a full jet; whether the majority of time is spent on a full jet; whether the majority of miles is spent on a full jet; or some other factor? For example, ORF – LHR, on a flight from ORF to IAD on an EMB170 and then IAD to LHR on a Boeing 787, would service be characterized as a full jet or regional jet? What factor(s) would be considered in making this determination?

See the Government’s response to Question 11

COPS

Group 1 Column AW

When completing the COPS submission, what factor is determinative in categorizing service on a flight as a full jet (rather than a “regional jet”) when a carrier is providing connecting flight service for the “Number of inbound flights using Jets” (whether the initial segment is on a full jet; whether the final segment is on a full jet; whether the majority of time is spent on a full jet; whether the majority of miles is spent on a full jet; or some other factor? For example, LHR – ORF, LHR to IAD on a Boeing 787 and then a flight from IAD to ORF on an EMB170 would service be characterized as a full jet or regional jet? What factor(s) would be considered in making this determination?

See the Government’s response to Question 11

M

(also Attachments

4,5,6)

106 It appears that metro areas are used for certain US origins to international city pairs, such as NYC for EWR/JFK/LGA. This does not appear to be the case for FLL and MIA, which appear as separate line items. Can bids for international line items originating in Miami (MIA) contained in the FY23 RFP be made with operations out of Fort Lauderdale (FLL) when there is no separate line item in the RFP for FLL? (Ex. MIA-LON).

The Government uses International Air Transport Association (IATA) as a source when determining the City and Airport codes used.

Currently, MIA is not a city code that services flights originating from Fort Lauderdale (FLL).

M.3 109 In the contracting team’s technical analysis, how are frequency changes on a day-by-day basis treated? For example, if there are more flights on certain days of the week than others, and on July 18th there are 3 flights in a particular city pair in Time band 1 (5AM- 9:30AM) and from July 19th-July 24th there are 5 flights in the same city pair in Time band 1 (5AM-9:30AM), how would the GSA awards points for its technical analysis? Additionally, for the minimum service assessment, is the average number of flights per day used to assess this criteria, rounded to the nearest whole number, or simply the minimum?

In accordance with Section M.2, the Government will conduct evaluations based on the service effective week stated therein. As stipulated in Section L.3. of the FY23 RFP “The primary source the Government will use to evaluate the offeror’s scheduling information is the data provided by the offeror.”

Point allocations are listed in Section M.3 and provide Sample Distribution Profiles.

L.2 98 Can you more thoroughly define planned service? Is this simply service never offered by the airline prior, or seasonal operations?

See the Government’s response to Question 1

CPP FY23 Request for Proposal (RFP) 6

SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

B.1 Description of Services

1. The contract carrier shall furnish the services specified herein in accordance with the same services the carrier provides commercially to the general public in scheduled service, subject to the rules and procedures published in the air carrier’s tariffs on file with the Airline Tariff Publishing Company, and/or contained in the contract carrier's contract of carriage (a copy of which shall be provided to the Government upon request).

The terms and conditions included in this solicitation apply to all services provided. In any event of inconsistency between the provisions of this solicitation/contract and the rules and procedures published in the air carrier’s tariffs on file with the Airline Tariff Publishing Company and/or contained in the contract carrier’s contract of carriage, the provisions of this solicitation/contract will take precedence.

2. For domestic, international, fifth freedom of the air, and international business class line items, the contract carrier shall make available all service on its own metal (aircraft), not merely the service submitted for offer evaluation purposes. For example, if the minimum requirement is connect service, and the carrier offers both connect and nonstop service commercially, both connect and nonstop service shall be made available to the Government CPP passenger, not just the connect service.

● For domestic and international line items, the contract carrier shall make available all service on the offered codeshare partner(s).

● For international and international business class line items, the contract carrier shall make available all service on the offered codeshare partner(s) proposed on a line-item-by-line-item basis. If a codeshare partner(s) is (are) offered but no specific line item is identified, the offeror shall make available all service on the offered codeshare partner(s) in all awarded line items where the codeshare exists.

● For fifth freedom of the air line items, the contract carrier shall utilize its own metal

(aircraft) to transport travelers between two (2) foreign countries on a flight originating from or ending in the United States.

● Reservations on both contract carrier and codeshare carrier flights shall be made on the same basis as for commercial travelers and shall not discriminate in favor of commercial travelers.

B.2 Definitions

Throughout this solicitation, the following terms shall have the meanings as set forth below:

Airport Code - The three-letter International Air Transport Association (IATA) code that identifies the specific points of origin and destination airports for each line item. Compare City Code.

CPP FY23 Request for Proposal (RFP) 16

The contract carrier shall notify the Contracting Officer of any changes in the commercial fare classification code structure that affect the awarded bucket/class no later than five (5) business days after the change. The awarded bucket/class shall be revised as needed to ensure that the original proportional relationship of the awarded bucket/class to the other buckets/classes within the contract carrier’s commercial fare classification code structure is maintained. The intent is that the Government shall receive _CA fares at least 60% of the time in domestic and international line items and the Government reserves the right to audit accordingly.

Last seat (inventory) availability applies to the service on a carrier’s own flights as well as all offered domestic codeshare partner(s). On international line items, last seat (inventory) availability applies to the service on a carrier’s own flights, as well as all offered codeshare partner(s). On fifth freedom of the air line items, last seat (inventory) availability applies to the service on a carrier’s own flights.

6. All fares shall include the cost of meals and baggage handling services normally and customarily provided by scheduled carriers to the same class of commercial passengers.

7. Government Premium Economy Fares:

(a) Offers may include a Government premium economy class fare on designated international line items only in addition to the basic fare(s) offered. Premium economy class fares shall be coded as “_CP” (capacity-controlled contract premium economy fares). Premium economy class fares will only be awarded to the offeror awarded the YCA fare for a specific line item.

The FY23 Premium Economy Markets can be found in the following document:

FY23 Premium

Economy Markets.docx

(b) In those contracts that include premium economy fares for Government travelers, carriers shall provide such fares when authorized by the using agency in accordance with the Federal Travel Regulation, Chapter 301 (Travel Allowances), the Joint Travel Regulations, and the Foreign Affairs Manual.

(c) City codes may be used in conjunction with international and fifth freedom of the air

_CP line items, unless otherwise noted.

8. Government Business Fares:

(a) With the exception of international business class line items, offers may include a Government business class fare in addition to the basic fare(s) offered. Business class fares shall be coded as “_CB” (capacity-controlled contract business fares). Business class fares will only be awarded to the offeror awarded the YCA fare for a specific line item.

file://///e04bmv-CIFS01.ent.ds.gsa.gov/R12_FSS_Shares$/QM/QMA/QMACB/_City_Pairs/FY23%20Docs/Tab%2010%20-%20RFP-RFQ%20and%20Amendments/FINAL%20RFP/Final%20RFP%20Attachments/Premium%20Economy%20Markets.docx

CPP FY23 Request for Proposal (RFP) 36 agreed upon with GSA’s Transportation Audits Division, the contract carrier shall fully and promptly refund all unused and partially unused portions of any Government contract fare ticket to the activity paying for the ticket, the travel management center issuing the ticket, or the individual traveler, as appropriate.

C.14 ARRANGING FOR GROUP TRAVEL (See Group Definition)

Groups are ten (10) or more passengers traveling together on the same day, on the same flight, for the same mission requiring group integrity, and identified as a group by the travel management service upon booking. Groups are non-mandatory users of the contract fares. If the contract carrier ordinarily arranges group travel through a group desk, then group reservations are to be handled through the contract carrier’s group desk. The contract carrier shall identify its contact information for groups.

Transportation offices are the initial points of contact for resolution of questions/disputes for locally arranged group travel. If the civilian agency/DoD and the contract carrier cannot reach resolution regarding the definition of a group, the matter is to be referred to the GSA Contracting Officer.

C.15 GROUP TRAVEL CANCELLATION POLICIES AND FEES

Groups of ten (10) or more passengers (traveling together on the same day, on the same flight, for the same mission requiring group integrity, and identified as a group by the travel management service upon booking) are non-mandatory users of this contract. Groups may therefore choose the carrier that best meets their travel needs. Groups of ten (10) or more passengers will be booked through the carrier’s group booking procedures and follow that carrier’s commercial group reservation, ticketing, and cancellation policies.

C.16 CARRIERS UNDER A CODE-SHARING OR OTHER ARRANGEMENT

For domestic and international line items, the contract carrier shall make available all service on offered codeshare partner(s).

The offeror shall list in §K.7 Carriers Under A Code-Sharing Arrangement, all airlines providing service over any portion of a line item under a code-sharing arrangement relative to this offer.

The offeror shall certify in §K.7 Carriers Under A Code-Sharing Arrangement that its offered codeshare is included in the IATA Bilateral Interline E-ticketing Agreements Table (BIETA). DoD approval is required for all offerors and their U.S. air carrier codeshare partners proposed for service on offered line items prior to award.

(END OF SECTION C)

CPP FY23 Request for Proposal (RFP) 73

The offeror allows ____ (must be one (1) or greater) stopover(s) for a period of time determined by the Government but not to exceed ____ (must be seven (7) days or greater) days.

K.7 CARRIERS UNDER A CODE-SHARING ARRANGEMENT

The offeror shall list below all airlines providing service over any portion of a line item under a code-sharing arrangement relative to this offer. DoD approval is required for all offerors and their U.S. air carrier codeshare partners proposed for service on offered line items.

** In accordance with 32 CFR 861.6(b), foreign air carriers performing any portion of a line item awarded to a U.S.

air carrier under the GSA City Pair Program pursuant to a code-sharing agreement with that U.S. air carrier, are generally not subject to DoD survey and approval under Sections 861.4 and 861.5.

In international line items only, if the offeror is offering a codeshare partner(s) by line item, the line item(s) must be identified in the following format:

Line

Item No.

Origin Destination Codeshare Partner(s)

K.8 AIR CARRIER QUALITY AND SAFETY

(a) By checking the box below, the offeror proposing to serve a line item through a codeshare arrangement with a foreign air carrier represents that the offeror has reviewed the foreign carrier’s operations and maintenance and based on that review has determined that the foreign air carrier provides a substantially equivalent level of quality and safety as that provided in the offeror’s commercial practice. For purposes of this certification, substantially equivalent means that the foreign air carrier’s operations and maintenance function largely, but not wholly, in the same manner as the offeror’s operations and maintenance. To be eligible for award on

CPP Carrier Name

Codeshare Partner Name

Codeshare Partner Airline

Code

U.S. or Foreign Codeshare

Partner

DoD Safety Approval Status**

DOT OST/FAA

Foreign

Codeshare Safety Approval

Status

Codeshare is in IATA Bilateral

Interline E-ticketing

Agreements Table (BIETA) (Use “Yes” or

“No”)

CPP FY23 Request for Proposal (RFP) 117

The value of additional flights decreases as the total number of flights available increases. For example, the additional value for a third nonstop flight over a second is greater than the additional value of a seventh nonstop flight over a sixth.

The value of additional flights increases as the number of passengers for the line item increases.

For example, 6 flights per day in a B line item are more valuable than 6 flights per day in an F line item.

5. Capacity volume in Group 1 and high volume line items

In high passenger volume line items within Group 1, additional value may be given based on the capacity available (number of seats, cargo capacity, Full Jet vs.

Propeller/Turboprop/Regional Jet, etc.). Additional value will be given to service on full jet aircraft where there are full jet and propeller/turboprop/regional jet (RJ) service differences (e.g., one carrier offers all full jet and another carrier offers service on propeller aircraft). As the number of flights and flight times become closer, the relative importance of capacity volume increases.

5. Baggage Fee Consideration

When evaluating a contract carrier that imposes a first (1st) checked baggage fee against a carrier that does not impose a first (1st) checked baggage fee, additional value shall be given to the carrier that does not impose a first (1st) checked baggage fee if the proposed composite fare is within 2% (rounded to the nearest whole dollar8) of the lower priced composite fare. If an offeror indicates that it will not impose a first (1st) checked baggage fee, and that offeror is awarded a line item with that designation, the contract carrier must maintain that it will not impose a first (1st) checked baggage fee for the awarded line item throughout the entire performance period of the contract, including any option periods. If the awarded contract carrier does not maintain the waived first (1st) checked baggage fee during the performance period of the contract, the contract carrier shall provide the Government with written notice a minimum of ten (10) calendar days prior to imposing a baggage fee to the awarded line item(s). In such situations, the Government reserves the right to re-evaluate all offers and re-award the line item.

M.6 PRICE EVALUATION FOR GROUP 2 AND GROUP 3

In domestic and international Group 2 and 3 line items, the YCA and _CA fares will be solicited;

therefore, the composite fare will be the evaluated price. If no _CA fare is offered, then the YCA fare is the evaluated price.

8 If after calculating the 2% difference a composite fare has a difference of $0.49 or less, the fare will be rounded down to the nearest whole dollar (Example: $125.35 would be rounded to $125.00).

If after calculating the 2% difference a composite fare has a difference of $0.50 or above, the fare will be rounded up to the nearest whole dollar (Example: $125.55 will be rounded up to $126.00).

FY23 Premium Economy Markets

Line Item City Pair City Pair Description

1587 LAXSEL Los Angeles, CA – Seoul, Korea

1589 LAXTYO Los Angeles, CA – Tokyo, Japan

1624 SEASEL Seattle, WA – Seoul, Korea

1625 SEATYO Seattle, WA – Tokyo, Japan

1754 WASBRU Washington, DC – Brussels, Belgium

1756 WASFRA Washington, DC – Frankfurt, German

1760 WASLON Washington, DC – London, England

1762 WASMUC Washington, DC – Munich, Germany

1853 WASACC Washington, DC – Accra, Ghana

1874 WASDEL Washington, DC - Delhi

B.4 Pricing Schedule for Group 1, Group 2, and Group 3 Line Items

G.3 PRICE REDUCTION

B.4 Pricing Schedule for Group 1, Group 2, and Group 3 Line Items

G.3 PRICE REDUCTION