FOL-BOS-Industry_Day_Govt_Questions.docx
DOCX document 93 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Forward Operating Location - Base Operating Support (FOL-BOS) Curacao Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA4890-13-R-0117
About this file
Industry Day / One-on-One - Government Questions to Industry
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
Forward Operating Location - Base Operating Support (FOL-BOS) Curacao has more files on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS AIR COMBAT COMMAND
ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT AND INTEGRATION CENTER
JOINT BASE LANGLEY-EUSTIS VA
17 July 2013
MEMORANDUM FOR POTENTIAL OFFERORS
FROM: ACC AMIC/PKB
| 11817 Cannon Blvd., Ste. 516A |
| Newport News, VA 23606 |
SUBJECT: Solicitation FA4890-13-R-0117, Industry Day / One-on-One Government Questions to Industry for the Forward Operating Location (FOL) – Base Operating Support (BOS), Curacao Acquisition
1. To facilitate the 23 – 26 July 2013, Industry Day / One-on-One session dialogue, the acquisition team has prepared questions we are seeking Industry input to better define the requirement and acquisition strategy. We are providing the questions in advance to allow time for preparation. If you are not scheduled for a One-on-One session, but would like to provide a response, please submit your responses to the below e-mail address. The questions are as follows:
a. Are there any limiting factors / constraints within the PWS requirements that drive cost increases or inefficiencies? Could any areas be written more performance-based?
b. Are there any requirements in the PWS that need to be more clearly defined? For example, there are several areas throughout the PWS that require the contractor to perform work “IAW Industry Standards.” For those areas, do you have a recommended standard or approach that should be included in the PWS to add clarity to the requirement to ensure mutual understanding of performance expectation(s)?
c. In general, do you have any suggestions on how to improve the requirements as stated in the PWS, dated 9 July 2013?
d. Are there any requirements of the PWS that could be incentivized?
e. Do you think an Award Fee or Incentive Fee should be applied to this effort? Or, is no fee appropriate?
f. What workload data do you need to accurately bid the effort not already posted on FedBizOps?
g. How much time is adequate for the transition period?
h. What do you think is a sufficient proposal preparation time (i.e., 30 days, 45 days, etc.)?
i. What type of TDY lodging arrangements exist in the local market to address our concerns with Security and Safety?
j. How does your company sustain a Data Management System (DMS) for the life of the contract?
k. Is there a limitation on the number of Government user/ number of seats within the DMS?
l. What information would be required for you to price the cost reimbursable line item for Freight?
m. Are the evaluation factors in Sections L&M appropriate for the effort? Do you have any suggestions to clarify / improve?
n. Are there any opportunities for subcontracting part of the effort (assuming the RFP would be full and open)? If so, what approximately how much (i.e., percentage)?
2. Responses shall be provided in-person at your assigned One-on-One session and to ACCAMIC.FOLBOS-02@langley.af.mil. For those who do not have a One-on-One session, written responses shall be emailed to ACCAMIC.FOLBOS-02@langley.af.mil no later than 1400 EDT, 26 July 2013. If you have any questions, please send them to Mr. Jim Robinson, Contract Manager at jim.robinson@langley.af.mil or the undersigned at Ms. Christin Lockhart at christin.lockhart@langley.af.mil.
//Signed/cll/17 Jul 13//
CHRISTIN L. LOCKHART
Contracting Officer
Agile Combat Power image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .