RFP_Questions_7-13_Apr_16_Final.pdf

FA461016R0001

Aerospace Support Services Contract Contractor Questions with Government Responses

1. Ref: Section L, Paragraph L.3.2 Table states “Price/Cost volume data is to be submitted in

Microsoft Excel format…”

Question: Is Microsoft Word allowed for narrative of Price/Cost Volume?

Response: Yes, Microsoft Word is acceptable for a narrative of the Price/Cost Volume.

2. Ref: Section L, Paragraph L.3.2 Table shows total number of copies for Volume I as 4.

However, Paragraph L.4.4 states “Submit (2) hard copies…”

Question: Please advise as to the total number of hard copies that must be submitted for Volume I.

Response: The “4” in Paragraph L.3.2, Table A, refers to “2” hard copies plus “2” electronic copies, which equals a total of “4”. Paragraph L.4.4 states “2” hard copies will be submitted.

3. Ref: Section L, Paragraph L.3.2 Table shows total number of copies for Volume II as 3.

However, Paragraph L.5 states “Offeror must submit two (2) hard copies…”

Question: Please advise as to the total number of hard copies that must be submitted for Volume II.

Response: Paragraph L.5 states “2” hard copies will be submitted for Volume II.

4. Ref: Section L, Paragraph L.6.1.1 (3.) and Paragraph L.6.2.5. Instructions for Volume III under Paragraph L.6.1.1 (3) state “Model Contract (sections B-K). All Fill-ins must be completed and signed as applicable…” However, Paragraph L.6.2.5 states “All information relating to cost or pricing data shall be included exclusively in Volume I.”

Question: Please advise if we are to include Section B in Volume III.

Response: Please include Section B-K in Volume III of the proposal in accordance with section L.6.1.1.

5. Ref: Section L, Paragraph L.6.2.4 states “For Sections C through I, the Offerors shall submit only those pages that require a fill-in. Complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications in Sections I through K. Section K shall be returned in its entirety”

Question: Section K starts on page 63 of 88 and continues to page 66 of 88. However there are some clauses that require fill-ins that are somehow part of Section L (page 67 of 88). Should these also be included as part of Section K?

Response: For Sections C through I and Section L Offerors shall submit only those pages that require a fill-in. Section K shall be returned in its entirety.

6. Based on DOL methodology will the wage determination be changed from even to odd numbered?

Response: Recommend contacting the Department of Labor to confirm whether or not the wage determinations will be changed from even to odd numbered based on that agency’s methodology.

7. Question: Section M.3.2.2.2 item e. states to “Demonstrate processes and procedures to provide personal protective equipment services.” It then references PWS paragraph

3.2.2.7. PWS paragraph 3.2.2.7 title is “SCAPE, SCBA, ELSA, and HDV Maintenance.

Please clarify if the government wants the contractor to demonstrate processes and procedures for personal protective equipment services or maintenance. It seems the maintenance of this equipment would be covered under Section M.3.2.2.1.1 item b and not in Section M.3.2.2.2 item e.

Response: The intent was to have the offeror address PPE maintenance in M.3.2.2.2 not services. When defining maintenance relative to AFI 21-101 in PWS 3.2.1.8.4., the Government did list PPE as part of the requirement which causes confusion. As the focus of those requirements should have been propellant systems not PPE. Recommend the offeror keep the defined maintenance concept referenced in PWS 3.2.1.8.4 in mind while addressing PEMO maintenance in M.3.2.2.2.

8. Question: PWS 3.1.9 indicates "If the contractor partially completes work described in a work request's PWS, the contractor is only entitled to a percentage of the fee specified in the contract's schedule equaling the percentage of the completed work. The contractor shall only bill for full fee if the work request requirements were completed in full. This seems subjective in nature, and who would be making this determination? What factor(s) would be used to determine the Work Request scope was/was not completed in full? How would the percentage of non-fulfillment be determined? If the Work Requests are issued as CPFF, in accordance with the FAR, the Fixed Fee is a set amount. With the Government limiting the Fixed Fee amount in the RFP to a 6% level, this seems to be over reaching limitations to the contractors’ ability to succeed. It is requested this be removed from the PWS.

Response: FAR 16.306(d)(1) explains the Government’s intent. Simply put, if the offeror completes the defined work in full, then full fee would be due; but if partial delivery of a task results, then full fee would not be due. In the case of a partial delivery, the actual cost would be the basis of the fees; but if full delivery results, full fee is due regardless of the actual cost. The delivery determination would ultimately be made by the Government, based upon confirmed receipt of services by the reimbursable customer that’s paying for the services, and a signed DD 250. This doesn’t happen too often, but the Government’s intent is to restrict fee to the actual work performed under the task; which sometimes varies and in some cases terminated well before completion. Also see FAR 16.306(a) which states: “The fixed fee does not vary with actual cost, but may be adjusted as a result of changes in work to be performed under the contract”.

9. Is the deadline for questions the 13th or 19th? You stated in your message on FBO that it is the 13th but the RFP states it is 10 days prior to the proposal due date.

Response: Section L.1.7, Discrepancies, Errors, Omissions and Questions, will be amended as follows:

FROM: If an Offeror believes the requirements in these instructions lack clarity or contain an error, omission, discrepancy, or are unsound, the Offeror shall immediately contact the CO in writing with supporting rationale. Address all questions or concerns to the points of contact (POC) listed above. Offerors are encouraged to submit all questions and requests for clarifications no less than ten (10) days prior to the RFP closing date. The decision whether to respond to questions and requests for clarifications made less than ten (10) days prior to the RFP closing date shall be at the sole discretion of the CO. Government responses will be posted on https://www.fbo.gov for access by all Offerors.

TO: If an Offeror believes the requirements in these instructions lack clarity or contain an error, omission, discrepancy, or are unsound, the Offeror shall immediately contact the CO in writing with supporting rationale. Address all questions or concerns to the points of contact (POC) listed above. Offerors shall submit all questions and requests for clarifications no later than 13 Apr 16 at 4:00PM. The decision whether to respond to questions and requests for clarifications made after 13 Apr 16 shall be at the sole discretion of the CO. Government responses will be posted on https://www.fbo.gov for access by all Offerors.

10. Question: Reference PWS 3.1.18.3.2. Is the contractor responsible for the actual recertification of pressure vessels or only the management of the recertification process (i.e. maintaining certification schedules, notifying the recertifier, etc.)? If the contractor is responsible for the actual recertification, can it be covered under the reimbursable cost

CLIN?

Response: The ASSC contractor is not responsible for the recertification of the pressure vessels, but will be responsible for ensuring the safety of ASSC employees, submitting an AF Form 332 to 30 CES to task the certifying agency, and will be required to provide support during the certification process. Certification of the pressure vessels is a government provided support thru another 30 SW associated contract and is funded by DLA Energy.

11. Question: Reference Historical Workload Data – Annual Basic Workload History. Does this data represent all non-Work Request labor under the contract for the given year? Is it only for VAFB? If so, do you have data for the 45th support?

Response: The basic workload history was for both 30 SW and 45 SW non-work request labor at VAFB, PAFB, and CCAFS. Additional workload data is being provided for both ranges.

12. Question: Reference Question #4 from the latest Q&A release. The Government’s answer to Question #4 states: “There are O&M requirements on the current requirement that will be considered work requests on the re-compete requirement.” Please provide information on what work this is so Offerors can account for it in the firm fixed price CLINs of their Price/Cost proposals. It is impossible to determine from the information provided.

Response: The intent was to convey that the requirements are similar in nature not that there was a duplication or overlapping of effort. For example, HOS escorts, SCAPE/Hazardous Operations, PPE training, TA/AGE etc. will be required in support of 30 SW/45 SW agencies under the FFP CLINs and non-wing agencies may also require the same support which will be added to the contract via Work Request CPFF CLINs.

13. Question: Does the Government require a draft CWBS with the proposal or upon award?

The 1423-1 CDRL requirements list is vague on the delivery date.

Response: Upon award of the contract and delivered sometime during the phase-in period.

14. Question: Government responses to questions posted to FBO under FA4610-16-R-0001 and amendments to RFP posted to under FA461016R0001 as of 4/7/16 do not provide information sufficient to adequately distinguish between work associated with the FFP portion of the contract. In order to maximize competition will the government please provide hours by SLC for all FFP CLINs (exclusive of PMO) and evaluate bidders based on total labor (including Bidder’s PMO) pricing?

Response: A response will be provided shortly.

15. Question: RFP Section L.6.2.1 specifies “font size shall not be less than 10 pitch using Times New Roman typeface.” Times New Roman is a proportionally spaced font which is inconsistent with a pitch designation. Please clarify the requirement to specify 10 pitch monospace or 12 point proportionally spaced font.

Response: Section L.6.2.1, 3. (iv) shall be changed as follows:

FROM: Font size shall not be less than 10 pitch, using Times New Roman type face, with a minimum of 1 inch margin not inclusive of headers/footers with the exception of charts, tables or diagrams which shall be not less than 10 pitch. Offerors shall insert page numbers in footer.

TO: Font size shall not be Times New Roman 12 point proportionally spaced, with a minimum of 1 inch margins not inclusive of headers/footers with the exception of charts, tables or diagrams. Offerors shall insert page numbers in the footer.

16. Question: In order to maximize competition and allow a level playing field, will the government provide general seniority information in order to adequately price each SLC based on employee period of service? This information directly affects non-incumbent bidders’ ability to fairly price entitlements accrued benefits for current union employees.

Response: A response will be provided shortly.

17. Question: In order to allow all Bidders to adequately prepare compliant proposals, will the Government consider extending the Proposal Due Date to no less than 30 days after all questions have been answered?

Response: The Government will extend the closing date of the RFP by fourteen (14) days to 13 May 16.