Atch 3 - EA-37B Question-Comment Matrix.xlsx

Sheet1

(ii) That are awarded under FAR Part 12 procedures and are for the acquisition, development, production, modification, maintenance, repair, flight, or overhaul of aircraft; or otherwise involving the furnishing of aircraft;

17 Combined Synopsis/ Solicitation 21 Eval Factors, 1.1, next-to-last sentence States,"If the offeror through their analysis determines that the manning requirements for I/SMEs is greater or less than the minimum number recommended in the PWS, offeror must provide justification for their proposed FTE requirements." PWS contains no FTE information. Question: Should FTE information be included in the PWS? Revised Evaluation Factors Para 1.1 PWS is based off workload estimates

REASONS.

(a). A similar very recent USAF RFP FA6800-22-R-0006 for B-1/B-52 CAT/CWD at two USAF bases, allowed the Technical Volume a max page limit of 100 pages (which included the page counts of the required plans submitted with the proposal either: as separate documents; or, within the Technical Volume).

(b). In order to document in the RQ-4 U-2/T-38 Technical Volume for each of the two bases: Appendix A Workload CAT and CWD detailed analysis (multiple pages to include the PWS Appendix I nine tables but with additional columns of analysis plus paragraph text; and, contractor provided unclassified and classified network servers and switches network diagrams (multiple pages to include the 4 network diagrams).

Reference:

Reason: Because references are required for all teammates performing 20% or more of the effort, we recommend allowing additional past performance references to be evaluated. This would enable a more accurate assessment of the Offering Team's combined capabilities. Otherwise, an Offeror with more than one teammate is prevented from supplying more than one example of Very Relevant Work.

REFERENCE:PWS 6.01(2)."If the Offeror does not have any past performance where it performed as a prime contractor, the Government will accept past performance from a teaming partner, subcontractor, or where the offeror performed as a major subcontractor if the portion of the work completed was similar in size/scope to this requirement."

REFERENCE."If the Offeror does not have any past performance where it performed as a prime contractor, the Government will accept past performance from a teaming partner, subcontractor, or where the offeror performed as a major subcontractor if the portion of the work completed was similar in size/scope to this requirement."

REASON: The "Very Relevant" criteria, as currently written, is unreasonably restrictive and too limiting. It is more important for the supporting contractor to have an understanding of interservice training protocols than it is for the contractor to have USAF-specific fighter type instruction experience. RQ4 training employs similar tactics, but the U-2 is not a fighter type.

contemplated, provide complete information as to the arrangement, including any recent and relevant past performance information (as required) on previous partner arrangements with same partner. If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide a list of past

contemplated, provide complete information as to the arrangement, including any recent and relevant past performance information (as required) on previous partner arrangements with same partner. If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide a list of past

Reason. 2 pages total is not a sufficient page count to include both Offeror information, Award Fee information, and Past Performance Summary information. PPI Sheets (templates) are missing from the RFQ.

Reference 6.0(1) "For each performance reference submitted, the offeror shall include a summary or narrative containing the following information: a. Contract/Task Order Number and Title

b. Contract/Task Order Period of Performance (PoP)

c. Total Contract/Task Order Value

d. Prime Contractor Name, Cage Code and DUNS

e. Subcontractor Name, Cage Code and DUNS:

f. Government Contracting Officer: Name, Title, Agency/Organization, Current Phone Number and Email

g. Government Program Manager: Name, Title, Agency/Organization, Current Phone Number and Email

h. Number of FTEs Managed"

i. Level/Type of Required Security Clearances Required

j. Brief description of the scope of work performed relevant to this requirement and any other information the offeror determines pertinent" Revised to NTE two pages per reference

53 Solicitation 15 7.4. Please supply CBA Seniority List with years of service and Full Time and Part Time status for all personnel. Reason: This information will help Offerors determine PTO leave and fringe benefit eligibility using the Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA). The information will support development of the Total Overall Evaluated Price. Refernece: Attachment 5. Collective Bargaining Agreements. Seniorty list will be provided during transition period, as necessary. Information not relavant for proposal

68 Combined Synopsis/Solicitation 15 7.4. Please supply CBA Seniority List with years of service and Full Time and Part Time status for all personnel? Reason: This information will help Offerors determine PTO leave and fringe benefit eligibility using the Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA). The information will support development of the Total Overall Evaluated Price. Refernece: PWS Attachment 5. Collective Bargaining Agreements.; RFQ Page 25 "Factor 3-Price" Seniorty list will be provided during transition period, as necessary.

76 Combined Synopsis/Solicitation 21 1.1 What is the difference between Weakness and Significant Weakness? Reason: They are defined the same in RFP Page 21 Section 1.1. Reference: "A Significant Weakness is defined as a flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. A weakness is defined as a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. " Revised

79 CBA 20 18.7 CBA: The CBAs reference a "2019 Rehabilitation Plan" under the IAM Pension Plan. Specifically it states: "Effective on the Adoption Date, and on each Adoption Date anniversary, the Employer’s contribution rate otherwise obligated under the CBA will increase by a compounding 2.5% while the Rehabilitation Plan remains in effect." Can the Government provide the Rehabilitation Plan and effective dates referenced in the CBA? Ask Christin

81 RQ-4 Combined Synopsis / Solicitation 11-12, 28-33 6.0 Volume II: Factor 2- Past Performace

1) Table 3,

2) Paragraph (2) Past and Present Performance Inforamtion (PPI) Sheets (Appendix 2)

3) Paragraph (3) Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) (Appendix 2)

4) Appendix 2 Past Performance Information Sheets (PPI) and Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ): Can the government clarify the difference between the PPI and PPQ? If a CPARS is being provided for a Past Performance reference, does the Offeror need to provide a PPI as well? Section 6.0 of the Combined Synopsis/Soliciation, Table 3, directs the contents of the Past Performance Volume to Contain PPI Sheets and PPQ/CPARS. Both Paragraph (2) and Paragraph (3) reference Appendix 2 for the format of the PPI and PPQs. Appendix 2 is titled "Past Performance Questionnaire and Cover Letter" and makes no reference to a Past Performance Information Sheet. If a PPI Sheet is required in addition to a CPARS reference, what format does the government want the information presented (beyond the Table 3 guidance that "Each PPI NTE five pages") Clarified

84 PWS and RQ-4 Combined Synopsis / Solicitation PWS pg 5, 11, 13, 41 PWS paragraphs 1.3.2, 1.4.2, 1.4.2.8, 1.6.6, 1.7.2.1 and Appendix 4 Deliverables & Instructions to Offerors: Appendix 4 states in paragrapgh A4.1 that the "Contractor shall produce and deliver the following items relating to this contract" and further states in Paragraph A4.1.1 the following are to be "Delivered with Proposal":

A4.1.1.1 Training Workload Management Plan; PWS Para 1.3.2 A.4.1.1.2 Instructional Systems Development Management Plan; PWS para 1.4.2 A4.1.1.3 Quality Control Plan; PWS para 1.4.2.8 A4.1.1.4 Phase-In/Phase-Out Plan; PWS Para 1.6.6 A4.1.1.5 Instructor Training and Certification Plan; PWS para 1.7.2.1 In the Combined Synopsis/Solication, ITO section there is no mention of the Instructional System Development Management Plan, Quality Control Plan, Phase-In/Phase-Out Plan, and the Instructional Training and Certification Plan.

Questions:

1) Which of these plan(s), if any count against the Volume I; Techincal Volume Page count?

2) Would the government clarify in the ITO which plans are due with the proposal and whether to attach as an appendix or as part of the Volume I Technical proposal?

3) PWS para 1.4.2 states that the Instructional Systems Development Management Plan is due within 10 business days of contract award. Would the government clarify when this plan is due? Revise PWS We do not have problem with submitting the ISDMP, QCP and Phase In/Out during award.

88 RQ-4 Combined Synopsis / Solicitation 23 Evaluation Factors, 2.0 Factor 2 - Past Performance Table 4 Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method: Would the government clarify if a "Fighter type military aircrew training" is required to receive a "Very Relevant" rating? What qualifies as "Fighter type"? Is an RQ-4 or U-2 considered "Fighter type"? Are other Combat Air Force (CAF) aircraft such as MQ-9, B-1B, etc. considered "Fighter type"? Ask PM

&"Arial,Bold"SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

&"Arial,Bold"SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 Page &P of &N