FA3002-13-R-0008_Vance_FOS_RFP_Q A_Responses_(29_Jan_2014).pdf

Vance FOS RFP Questions and Answers

FA3002-13-R-0008

Technical1 182 of 200

L.2.1

L.3.3.2.1

1. RFP Section L, Paragraph L.2.1 states, “The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the

Proposal Organization Table below. The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified.” The page limits for Past Performance Information are listed as follows:

Past

Performance Summary – 5 pages Past Performance Information Sheets. One (1) per contract – No more than 5 pages each Subcontractor Letters of Consent & Client Authorization Letters – 10 pages

Because page limits were not provided for the areas/requirements of Quality and Satisfaction Rating and Specific Content, is it the Government’s intent that information provided for each contract citation in support of Quality and Satisfaction Rating (letters, metrics, surveys, etc.) and Specific

Content (discussion of resolving past problems) be included in each contract citation’s 5 page limit?

Or are these areas/ requirements considered outside the 5-page limit and therefore unlimited?

Reference paragraphs L.2.1. "Past Performance Information Sheets. One (1) per contract – No more than 5 pages each" and L.3.3.2.1. Last sentence: "The following may be provided as part of the Past

Performance Information Sheet(s), as applicable:…(a) Quality and Satisfactory Ratings…(b)

Relevant Contracts…(c ) Specific Content…" These areas/requirements are limited to the specified

5 pages per contract.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Other

Technical2 182 of 200

L.2.1

L.3.3.2.1

2. Paragraph L.3.3.2.1 Past Performance Information Sheets states, “The following may be provided as part of the Past Performance Information Sheet(s), as applicable:

(a) Quality and Satisfaction

Rating: Provide any information currently available (letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, etc.) which demonstrate customer satisfaction with overall job performance and quality of completed product for same or similar type contracts.

(c) Specific Content. Offerors may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the Offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk….”

Same as above.

See response to ID 1.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Other

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 1 of 15

Technical3 181 of 200

L.1.5

RFP Section L, paragraph L.1.5 states: Other Information Required: Provide the name, title, and telephone number of the company/division POC regarding decisions made with respect to your proposal and who can contractually negotiate/obligate your company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

Where in the Offeror's proposal does the Government desire the information required by paragraph

L.1.5 to be placed?

Please place the L.1.5. Other Information Required in Volume V - Other Contracting Considerations.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Other

Technical4 181-183 of 200

L.2.1

L.2.8

Paragraph L.2.1 states: "The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal

Organization Table below." The Note at the bottom of the table states: "Page count does not include the transmittal letter, cover pages, blank pages, title pages, table of contents, lists of tables and drawings, tab dividers, glossary or acronyms, cross reference matrix, position qualifications/ descriptions, manpower matrix or Executive Summary and Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)."

Paragraph L.2.8 cites only cover pages, table of contents, list of figures, glossaries, tabs, dividers, and blank pages as being exempt from the page count.

Paragraphs L.2.1 and L.2.8 appear to be in conflict. Since paragraph L.2.1 specifically states that

"Offerors shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization table below", do we assume correctly that the guidance in the L.2.1 table takes precedence, and the items listed in the note of that table will be excluded from the page count?

All items identified in the L.2.1. Note at the bottom of the table as "Page count does not include the" and L.2.8. Pages Counted as "except the following" will not be counted for the purpose of the

L.2.7.2. Page Limitations. All items that will not be part of the page count are: transmittal letter, cover pages, blank pages, title pages, table of contents, lists of tables and drawings, tab dividers, list of figures, glossaries or acronyms, cross reference matrix, position qualifications/descriptions, manpower matrix or Executive Summary, Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), tabs, and dividers.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Other

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 2 of 15

Other XX - Other

Attachment 3, CBA

This section is marked "Draft" in the RFP

Is this really a draft or a copy of the final CBA

Draft watermark has been removed from the CBA via amendment FA3002-13-R-0008-0001.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

If this is a draft we ought to have the final to ensure accuracyConcern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Collective

Bargaining

Agreement

Other 03 - Aircraft

Maintenance

6 3.1.17

3.1.11.12

Section states: "The SP shall use the web-based application TC-Max Tool Asset Management

System. The cost of the system shall be included in the SP's price."

Is there a standard software package we are expected to purchase? Are there a minimum number of licenses we need to purchase? Are there options/upgrades in addition to the base package we are expected to purchase to meet contract requirements?

There is only one TC-Max standard package. Please see ID 17, answer for additional information.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Price

Evaluation

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 3 of 15

Technical

03 - Aircraft

Maintenance

7 3.1.16.3.1

Paragraph 3.1.10 and AFI 21-201 and AETC Supplements

Paragraph states;" Ensure personnel performing Munitions Operations Specialist

(AFSC 2W0) duties have at least two years' experience working in munitions operations and possess a secret security clearance and not be color blind."

Does the current contract have the same qualification requirements of two years experience working in munitions operations? Does the current contract require the four years experience in Munitions to be also qualified as Munitions Inspectors and Storage and Handling personnel?

1. Does the current contract have the same qualification requirements of two years experience working in munitions operations? No, one year experience in the past 3 years. 2. Does the current contract require the four years experience in Munitions to be also qualified as Munitions Inspectors and Storage and Handling personnel? 1. Munition Inspector. No, they are required to meet AFI 21-

201 & TO 11A-1-10 qualification and certification requirements and 2. Storage and Handling personnel. Yes, the PWS requires a minimum of four (4) years experience.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

03 - Aircraft

Maintenance

Technical

Evaluation 03 - Aircraft

Maintenance

8 3.1.16.5

Paragraph 3.1.10

Paragraph states; "Ensure personnel performing Munitions Storage and Handling duties (AFSC 2W0) have a minimum of four (4) years' experience in the 2W0, or service equivalent, career field and not be color blind."

Does the current contract have the same requirements for workforce qualifications?

Yes.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

03 - Aircraft

Maintenance

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 4 of 15

Technical

03 - Aircraft

Maintenance

9 3.1.16.4.1

Paragraph 3.1.10 and AFI 21-201 and AETC Supplements

Paragraph states;" Ensure personnel performing Munitions Inspection duties meet qualifications and requirements listed in AFI 21-201, MAJCOM

Supplements and TO 11A-1-10………"

Does the current contract have the same qualifications requirements of four (4) years munitions experience and two (2) years Munitions Inspector requirements?

See response to ID 7.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

03 - Aircraft

Maintenance

Contracting XX - Other 10 page 83

H.10

H-10 4. Determination of Sub-area Quarterly Percentage

What is the payment time table? Is it at the end of each Quarter or just once, annually? Sec B

(X)016 states a Quantity of 4 per year. Is it fit the 30-day pay cycle?

Performance Incentive will be paid out Quarterly. However, H-10 paragraph 2.1. states

"...disbursed quarterly with the ability to move to semiannually if deemed appropriate..." Currently, Section B and Schedule B CLINs X016 reflect Quantity: 4 and Unit: Quarter.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Performance

Incentive Plan

Contracting XX - Other 11 page 83

H.10

H-10 4. Determination of Sub-area Quarterly Percentage

How many other AETC contracts contain this same clause or a similar performance Incentive

Clause?

Historically, Vance Aircraft Maintenance and Base Operations Support Services contracts F41689-

00-C-0503, FA3002-08-C-0007 have incentivized performance similarly to the Performance

Incentive Plan clause.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Our Company does not have any actual experience with this type of contract clause. What reaction does AETC expect to this clause by the local IAM/AW Union at Vance?

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Performance

Incentive Plan

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 5 of 15

Contracting XX - Other 12 page 35

13.1 Banked Sick Leave

AETC Q&A Response (8_Oct_13), ID 31

Need clarification on the transfer of this leave liability. The government paid the current incumbent contractor a fringe rate on employees covered by the CBA and that included the CBA article 12, page 32, paid time off (PTO).

As this PTO was subsequently unused and transferred to banked sick leave IAW article 13, will the

AETC provide re- imbursement to a contractor other than the incumbent for this liability?

Also to effectively review the banked sick leave impact on manning requirements, available hours, premium payments, etc., when will the USG provide the current balance of sick leave by grade and job description?

1. The Government will not provide additional re-imbursement for accrued banked sick leave in addition to the compensation paid to the incumbent contractor. This liability is a matter between the

Incumbent Contractor, the Collective Bargaining Unit, and (if applicable) the Successor Contractor.

2. The Government will not provide the current balance of sick leave by grade and job description.

If applicable, the Government will provide the manpower seniority list at the commencement of the succeeding contract in accordance with FAR 52.222-41(n).

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

All offeror’s other than the incumbent are at a disadvantage without details on this liability that could be up to 1,200 hours per employee and for more than 400 employees that is a huge risk that would then have to be priced into all proposals except for

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Collective

Bargaining

Agreement

Other XX - Other 13 5. Schedule_B

(18 dec 13).xlsx

Planned Adjustment Sample Sheet

The T-6 and T-38 Flying Hours in the base year (10 months) are less than 10/12th of the T-6 and T-

38 hours listed for each option year.

Why are the T-6/T-38 Flying Hours in the base year (10 months) at 9/12th value vice 10/12th?

Base year flying hours are based on FY15 annual flying hours (T-1A (24,887), T-6A (42,769), and

T-38C (11,789)). The FY15 flying hours were divided by 12 months times 10 months to determine the base year T-1A (20,739); T-6A (35,641); and T-38C (9,824) flying hours.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

May erroneously lead to under pricing the maint labor support required in the base year.Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Schedule B

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 6 of 15

Technical 03 - Aircraft

With the T-38, we are dealing with a vintage aircraft that is utilized in various degrees of student training and as such has come to the point that more in-depth inspections are now necessary to ensure the platform remains both viable and safe. AETC has levied two new dash 6 requirements on

AETC units over the last two years, Engine Bay and Fatigue Critical Location (FCL) Inspections.

Since these are manpower intensive inspections, are there any workload data that the USG can provide us with, in order for use to properly calculate these requirements into our manpower staffing and pricing?

As of 14 Jan 14, the engine bay -6 inspection workcards have been revised by moving the engine bay panel removal to 1,800 hours after TCTO 870 has been completed (T-38C TCTO 870 (engine bay panel removal and inspection) will be accomplished at the Queen Bee). The FCL workload was capture in Appendices 3BBK and 3BBKA. Please note in FY14 an additional T-38 phase dock was added to support the phase flow requirements.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Technical

Evaluation

Technical 4 - Aircraft

Maintenance

The T-38 is well over 50 years old. This age factor has increased the amount of time the aircraft spends in the inspection cycle.

These new inspections requirements (Engine bay and FCL) will have a significant impact on phase flow times, hanger queens, fleet time and aircraft availability, will AETC adjust the current command’s standards for fleet time and aircraft availability to accommodate for these new inspection requirements?

No. The performance objectives & thresholds are listed in PWS, Section 3-2, Tabe 3.2.1, items A &

B.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Technical

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 7 of 15

Technical 5 - Aircraft

Engine bay and FCL inspections are very manpower intensive and USG directed inspection requirements. Adding these additional workload requirements to the unit level maintenance organizations will no doubt have a negative effect on the production effort.

How will issues such as extended ground time required to support additional aircraft dash 6 inspections requirements, 107 engineering dispositions for possible 66% spar cracks, 44% spar cracks, 125% rib cracks and flap motor mount cracks which will result in major repairs, long lead times for parts and sustained aircraft non-availability be addressed or accounted for in the quarterly

Performance Incentive Plan (quality performance objectives)? These activities will be beyond the control of the SP and result in a negative impact to T-38 PE flow and ultimately inhibited the attainment of the SP's fleet time and AA goals.

Question 1. "How will ... be addressed or accounted for in the quarterly Performance Incentive Plan

(quality performance objectives)? The quarterly Performance Incentive Plan is base on Technical

Inspections and Observation Guide Inspections. Question 2. "These activities will be beyond the control of the SP…" Please see Appendix 3BB, paragraph 3BB.5 (Maintenance Man Hour Per

Flying Hour (MMH/FH) estimate and PWS, Section 3-2, paragraph 3.2.3.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Technical

Evaluation

Technical 6 - Aircraft

Maintenance

17 page 3-1-17

3.1.11.12

In the PWS 3.1.11.12 there is a statement that addresses the implementation and management of a

Tool and Equipment Management Program. It states that the SP shall use the web-based application

TC MAX Tool Asset Management system.

Is this a new program that is not currently in use by the SP. If so, In order for SP to properly price this requirement in their proposal we would like to request that USG provide additional information on this topic. Such as the number of licenses required if any, training and installation cost, service package, etc.

This is a new requirement. For comparison purposes, Laughlin AFB has 20 licenses for 217 aircraft. This number is a good starting point but the final number will be dependent on your organizational set-up. The 1-day training option is beneficial, but comes at an additional cost. TC-

Max is a web-based program approved to be used on Air Force computers and systems. The system software and all updates are downloaded from Soaring Software Solutions (the developer). There is no cost for installation but the is an annual cost for support and updates.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

What if the included price does not meet the expectations of the Government and/or does not allow for competitive pricing?

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Technical

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 8 of 15

Technical 02 - Applicable to All Services

18 page 2-1-5

2.1.4

2.3.5.3; 3.1.17;

It is apparent the customer considers the SP's quality control function to be an important piece of this contract competition. This was reinforced at the site visit.

Would the customer consider either: 1)adding a requirement for the SP to attach the draft QCP to the proposal; or 2) having SF1 - Quality Control not counting toward total proposal page count.

100 technical pages should be sufficient for the offeror to depict their methodology, processes, and approaches to clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

It will be difficult to adequately reflect our plan to provide a "robust and adequately staffed" QCS within the 100 page constraint in which we must also explain our proposed Workforce Staffing Plan and Management Approach/Understanding the requirements

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Technical

Evaluation

Technical 03 - Aircraft

Maintenance

Industry Day briefing stated Aircraft Maintenance provides the Facility Maintenance on the Hush

House, Engine Stand, and Aircraft Shelters.

What are the requirements and where is the work load data?

Please see PWS, Appendix 3BB, Table BB.2, item p & v.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Technical 03 - Aircraft

Maintenance

20 page 3-2-1

Table 3.2.1

Industry Day briefing stated that Aircraft Availability (AA) targets are measured and that during certain periods (Winter/Summer) the AA Standard will be scheduled and flown.

Where is the work load data to support the staffing to support an AA Standard flying schedule?

How often will this occur? Over how many consecutive days?

Please see PWS, Appendix 3BBB.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 9 of 15

21 3BA-1

3BA.1. Annual Flying Hour Projections.

Appendix 3BA, Table 3BA.1, Flying hrs for FY15 are too low: T-1A 14517; T-6A 24949; T-38C 6877

Why are the T-6/T-38 Flying Hours in the base year set at values that are obviously less than

10months? We expect to see the following values: T-1, Why are the T-6/T-38 Flying Hours in the base year set at values that are obviously less than 10months? We expect to see the following values: T-1, 20832; T-6, 36192; T-38, 11302.

Please see response to ID 13.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

This averages all the other years (Opt 1 -6), divides by 12 (to produce a monthly average), then multiplies by 10 (to provide a ten month average). May erroneously lead to under pricing the maint labor support required in the base year.

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Technical

Evaluation

Technical 02 - Applicable to All Services

2.1.27. SP Furnished Services, Equipment, Property, Supplies

Requirement is open ended.

Please confirm that the Contractor is only responsible for the admin and office supplies supporting equipment for Contractor's use only? Or is it to support equipment jointly used by Contractor and

USG.

Yes, the contractor is only responsible for the admin and office supplies supporting equipment for

Contractor's use only.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Understand the requirements/Scope for pricing.Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Performance

Work

Statement

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 10 of 15

Contracting 02 - Applicable to All Services

23 CBA Pages 41 -

20.1 - 20.2

Section I Clauses, 52.222-41

Will the Government please clarify the requirement for a successor contractor to pay employees the

Flex Credit amounts listed in the CBA for coverage provided by the IAM Benefit Trust Fund

Medical Plans regardless of whether the successor contractor can provide comparable insurance coverage at rates lower than those posted in the CBA.

To be compliant with the law as stated in FAR 52.222-41, are these the minimum rates that an offeror can bid for the health and welfare portion of the labor cost for employees represented by the bargaining unit?

1. Providing comparable insurance coverage is a matter between the Collective Bargaining Unit and the Contractor/Offeror. 2. Reference 52.222-41 (c ) "Compensation", (e ) "Minimum wage", (f) "

Succesor contracts", CBA "Agreement and Article 1 Recognition" , and the Department of Labor

Wage Determination for the minimum rates that an offeror can propose (i.e. health and welfare, Vacation, etc.). The CBA applies to "employee or employees of the Company within the bargaining unit described in the Recognition Article." The Department of Labor Wage Determination applies to all listed occupations not covered by the CBA.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Collective

Bargaining

Agreement

Technical 03 - Aircraft

Maintenance

24 3BB-1 - 3BB-2

3BB.2

Table 3BB.2, right column

The table contains references to Note 1, Note 3 and Note 4 for additional information on the corresponding workload. However, all of the numbered notes below the table appear to address the

AGE workload by identifying the locations of various pieces of AGE. The references to Note 3 and

Note 4 do not appear to match the corresponding workcenter, (On-Station Transient Coverage for

Note 3, and Maintaining CTKs for Note 4).

Is the information for Note 3 and Note 4 missing from the table? Will this information be provided?

Notes 3-4 have been removed.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Performance

Work

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 11 of 15

Other XX-Other

Section L.2.10. Foldouts

L.2.7.1. Page Format

Section L.2.10. Foldouts describes the guidelines for the use of tables, charts, graphs and figures. It states for tables, charts, graphs and figures the font shall be no smaller than 8 point. L.2.7.1. Page

Format discusses the 1.5 line spacing.

Is the 1.5 line spacing requirement for proposal text, apply to tables, Text boxes and captions under figures for this proposal?

The L.2.7.1. Page Format does not apply to foldouts as indicated by the "not including foldouts."

L.2.10. Foldouts are applicable to large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics (not for pages of text). Foldouts also states "For tables, charts, graphs and figures the font shall be no smaller than 8 point." As such, if the offeror were to use a small table, chart, graph, figure, diagram or schematic in a page instead of a foldout, the depiction would be subject to the 8 point and not the

1.5 line spacing applicable to the rest of the page containing the small table, chart, graph, figure, diagram or schematic.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Past AETC guidance for line-spacing in tables, charts and figures has been defined as single-line spacing.

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Other

Technical XX - Other 26 189 of 200

L.3.2.4.4.2

None

The Mission Essential Services Plan can be provided as an appendix to Volume II and have its own page limit (we suggest two pages).

Will the Government agree to exclude the Mission Essential Services Plan from the Volume II

Technical Proposal page limit?

No.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Volume II is severely page limited for the volume of information required by the solicitationConcern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Technical

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 12 of 15

Other 03 - Aircraft

27 page 3-2-1

Table 3.2.1 Performance Objective and Performance Thresholds

Item B, Average Fleet Time

Performance Thresholds Standard in not equally evaluated across AETC.

Why are the Average Fleet Time Performance Thresholds for Vance aircraft stated to meet the

AETC Standard "or higher" when the Average Fleet Time Performance Thresholds for Columbus and Sheppard aircraft are the AETC Standard "+/- 10"? Why the difference in thresholds for like operations performed by like-contract work forces?

The average fleet time for RFP FA3002-13-R-0008 and subsequent contract is shown in Section 3-2, table 3.2.1.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Columbus and Sheppard are Award Fee contracts and Vance, although similar, is being held to the tougher metrics in the H-10 Incentive Plan (Withhold) Clause. Request a change in Performance

Thresholds metrics to reflect +/- 10.

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Collective

Bargaining

Agreement

Technical 03 - Aircraft

Maintenance

28 '3-1-25

3.1.12.8.1

Appendix 3A, Note 1; AFI 21-101

PWS paragraph 3.1.12.8.1. requires the SP to provide egress systems maintenance IAW AFI 21-101 and further states that personnel performing egress systems maintenance must meet formal training prerequisites IAW AFI 21-101. However, Appendix 3A, Note 1, states that AFI 21-101, Chapter 16, Aircrew Egress Systems Maintenance, is “Not applicable.”

Can the Government clarify the requirements for aircraft systems egress maintenance and the training of personnel maintaining egress systems?

Appendix 3A, Note 1 has been revised to read "Chapter 16 – AIRCREW EGRESS SYSTEMS

MAINTENANCE -- All paragraphs apply. "

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

It appears that the solicitation, as written, requires the SP to perform egress systems maintenance, but does not define the maintenance nor training requirements.

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Performance

Work

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 13 of 15

29 '3-1-26

3.1.12.12

Appendix 3A, Note 2; AFI 21-101

PWS paragraph 3.1.12.12. requires SP welders be qualified, certified, and recertified IAW AFI 21-

101 and TO 00-25-252, Aeronautical Equipment Welding. However, Appendix 3A, Note 2, seems to delete the certification requirements for J85 engine (5.9.3.1.6) and T-38 aircraft (5.9.3.1.7) welding.

Is it the Government’s desire to not require certified welders on these equipment?

Appendix 3A, Note 2 has been revised to read "Chapter 5 – MAINTENANCE SQUADRON

(MXS)--All AETC paragraphs apply with the exception of: 5.7.1, 5.7.3.16, 5.7.3.17, 5.7.3.18.,

5.7.4.14. – 5.7.4.23., 5.7.5.1., 5.7.5.2., 5.7.5.6., 5.9.2., 5.9.3.1.2. – 5.9.3.1.5., and 5.12.4.7.1."

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

It appears that the solicitation, as written, does not require persons welding on J85 engines and T-38 aircraft to be certified.

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Performance

Work

Statement

Contracting30 Page 62

B-6. WAGE PASS THROUGH ADJUSTMENT COSTS

Page 82, H-10, Sample Calculation

The ultimate Value for CLIN X016 is undefined until after award, due to the B-6 clause. H-10 states the TV-FFP amount is "Contract awarded for base plus 6 options with . . . "

Per Section H-10 Performance Incentive Plan, the RFP identifies the Total Value of Firm Fixed

Price (TV-FFP) CLINs to determine the amount to be held back as incentive to the contractor. With the addition of the as yet unidentified “Not To Exceed” wage adjustment line item used to account for the recovery of pass through costs contained in B-6, it is unclear the amount that will be withheld each quarter. Will this new pass through CLIN be included in the TV-FFP Calculation for determining the amount withheld each quarter in CLIN X016?

Section B/Schedule B FFP CLINs X001, X002, X003, and X004 will be adjusted for the amount withheld each quarter in FFP NTE CLIN X016. All CLINs associated/applicable to the PIP will be adjusted accordingly (i.e. Adjustments based on: Average Possessed, Flying Hours, Wage

Adjustments). The TEP will equal the "awarded amount" at time of award. The awarded amount and PIP amount are subject to post award adjustments based on requirement changes.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

The TV-FFP amount in the TEP is lower than the "awarded" amount that will be determined to support the H-10 Clause, Performance Incentive Plan.

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Schedule B

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 14 of 15

Other XX - Other 31 52 of the CBA

Article 23, Wages

None

The RFP contains the incumbent’s CBA which includes a table stating both the minimum and maximum wage rates allowed for CBA employees. However, the RFP does not include a manpower seniority list of the incumbent employee workforce. Questions and Answers were received on 16

January 2014 from the PCO attributable to the Site Visit, One-On-One Sessions . Importantly, the

Government’s answer to question number 2. states that the manpower seniority list “will be provided if it becomes available.” In addition, the PCO states in the answer to question number 2 that the successful offeror will not be entitled to an equitable adjustment “if off by any measure for payscale…”

Will the Government provide the manpower seniority data prior to bid submittal? Will the

Government provide direction to bidders as to which CBA wages should be used to price the proposed manpower? Will the Government establish an estimated seniority list and allow an equitable adjustment after award? If the manpower seniority data is not provided prior to bid submittal, will the Government allow for an equitable adjustment after award when the information is available?

1. If applicable, the Government will provide the manpower seniority list at the commencement of the succeeding contract in accordance with FAR 52.222-41(n). 2. This is a competitive performance based service acquisition whereby competing service providers' proposed technical approaches and pricing are evaluated to determine whether they clearly meet the solicitation minimum requirements by addressing how the service provider will achieve the end results. As such, the Government can only instruct offerors of the requirements. 3. The Government will not establish an estimated seniority list. 4. The Government will not allow an equitable adjustment after award to compensate for disparities between CBA requirements and proposals.

Comment:

Question:

Answer:

Without accurate manpower seniority data provided to the bidders, only the incumbent contractor has a clear competitive advantage in the procurement. Further, because the successful offeror must give preferential hiring treatment to the incumbent's workforce, any offeror other than the incumbent will be required to abide by the current workforce seniority ranking in contract performance.

Because the RFP provides for no equitable adjustment if the offeror bids incorrectly, offerors must either make artificially high seniority assumptions to ensure that their offers cover this contingency or risk performing the contract at a price at or below its actual costs. Likewise, offering a price without the actual seniority numbers puts offerors at risk for bids not passing a price reasonableness standard for performance. We would suggest you provide the manpower seniority data, direction to bid a certain rate for the proposed manpower or provide estimated seniority list numbers with an equitable adjustment after award.

Concern:

Type Response: PWS SectionID Page Reference

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference:

Proprietary IndicatorRFP Section

Collective

Bargaining

Agreement

Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Page 15 of 15