Comment_Matrix_25_Feb_19.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 20 KB Posted

Attached to
AFICA/AFGSC Technical Order Library and Maintenance Data Support (TOLMDS) (formerly FA6800-18-R-0002)
Solicitation number
FA6800-19-R-A001
Issued by

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Comment_Matrix_07_March_19.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
FA6800-19-R-A001-0004_07_March_19.pdf PDF
Comment_Matrix_28_Feb_19.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
FA6800-19-R-A001-0003_28_Feb_19.pdf PDF
FA6800-19-R-A001-0002_25_Feb_19.pdf PDF
Comment_Matrix_13Feb19.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
FA6800-19-R-A001-0001_13Feb19.pdf PDF
A001_CDRL.PDF PDF
Attachment_3_-_FTE_Resume_Certfication.docx DOCX document
A004_CDRL.PDF PDF
Attachment_2_-_TOLMDS_DD_254_-_Solicitation.pdf PDF
WD_2015-5405_FE_Warren_AFB.pdf PDF
Attachment_1_-_TOLMDS_PWS.pdf PDF
A011_CDRL.PDF PDF
A002_CDRL.PDF PDF
FA6800-19-R-A001--TOLMDS.pdf PDF
A012_CDRL.PDF PDF
A003_CDRL.PDF PDF
WD_2015-5647_Vandenberg_AFB._pdf.pdf PDF
A007_CDRL.PDF PDF
A010_CDRL.PDF PDF
WD_2015-5383_Minot_AFB.pdf PDF
A006_CDRL.PDF PDF
A013_CDRL.PDF PDF
A005_CDRL.PDF PDF
WD_2015-5391_Malmstrom_AFB.pdf PDF
A008_CDRL.PDF PDF
A009_CDRL.PDF PDF
Show all 28

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

USG Answers to Questions Type of Question/Comment Solicitation Volume Name of Document Page Paragraph Number, or

Section of DocumentIndustry Comment/QuestionGovernment Response
Request for ClarificationOtherN/AN/AWe are unable to locate the deadline and format to submit questions regarding the active solicitation. Can you advise?A comment matrix has been uploaded for your use in submitting questions. This matrix includes questions the USG has received to date. The USG requests that critical comments be provided within 5 working days so that we have time to amend the solicitation, if necessary. (Ref: Amendment 1)
Request for ClarificationAttachmentsN/AN/ACan you confirm that there is no Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) in place for the existing AFICA/AFGSC Technical Order Library and Maintenance Data Support (TOLMDS) contract?CBAs were omitted by mistake. They have been incorporated into the solicitation as Attachment 6. Please note that there are two CBAs, one of which has three addendums. Attachment 6 is uploaded as ONE portfolio document. You can access the individual documents using the right-hand sidebar. You must open the document to access this feature. (Amendment 1)
Request for ClarificationSolicitationSolicitationPage 72/74
Paragraph Number 4.3.8TOLMDS, Section 4.3.8. states “Past Performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirements will be considered as past performance information for each offeror.” Question: Does the term “key personnel” refer to a) candidates being proposed to work on this particular effort, or does it refer to b) key staff within the bidder’s organization?“Key personnel” refers to candidates (i.e., program managers, etc.) that will be working on the effort. You may also provide information on key staff within your organization if that information is relevant.
OtherSection LRFP 52.212-1, Instrs., Conds., and Notices to OfferorsVolume 1, Technical Requirements, Subfactor B, Staffing PlanRFP stipulates "Ensure that all certification, resumes and/or training verification for each employee is included with the Technical Proposal." Section M stipulates "…provide one resume per FTE". The requirement to provide a resume for each FTE violates the Competion in Contracting Act. Will you remove these requirments?Attachment 3 has been omitted.
OtherSection L52.212-1, RFP, Instrs., Conds., and Notices to OfferorsVolume 2, Past Performance, Vol 3, paragraph 8.3As noted above, the RPF requires submission of a resume for each FTE. The RFP also requires that the awardee offer a job to each current FTE. See FAR 52.222-17. Why are you requiring resumes when you are also requiring that we hire the incumbent's employees? This contractor held this contract for more than 9 years and it is our understanding that the majority of our former employees are still working on this contract. The requirement to provide resumes is unnecessary and eliminates competition. Will you remove the requirement to provide resumes?Attachment 3 has been omitted.
OtherSection L52.212-1, RFP, Instrs., Conds., and Notices to OfferorsVolume 2, Past Performance, Vol 3, paragraph 8.3Past Performance Recency is defined as "...active contract performance (minimum of six (6) months) during the three (3) years preceding the date of issuance of this solicitation." The recency requirement is unreasonably short at it excludes many service providers who have performed like services in the past. There is no reasonable rationale for the unusually narrow recency requirement as the work performed on this contract is not highly complex and has not become more technically challenging in the more than 2 decades that this work has been contracted. Respectfully request the recency criteria be expanded to the common standard of 5 years as this requirement ensures an unlevel playing field and potentially violates the Competition in Contracting Act.The recency requirement has been modified to 5 years.
OtherSection L52.212-1, RFP, Instrs., Conds., and Notices to OfferorsVolume 2, Past Performance, Vol 3, paragraph 8.3As noted above, the three (3) year recency requirement effectively eliminates competition. Under the current RFP language, this contractor is effectively eliminated from the competition. Will you expand the recency requirment to at least include the prior incumbent?Similar work awarded by other contracts and/or other government agencies may be submitted as Past Performance. The recency requirement has been modified to 5 years.
Request for ClarificationOtherAmendment 01, dated 02/13/2019Page 2 of 11, Summary of Changes, Clarification 1.Are contract locations currently staffed so as to maintain contract Acceptable Quality Levels?IAW Amendment 1, the offeror may propose the labor mix and hours it deems necessary to accomplish the mission requirements.
Possible Error or OmissionSection LSolicitationPages 64, 71With the inclusion of 52.222-17 (Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers) and the union workforce already in place, the successful offerer will be required to offer jobs to the current staff. However, the requirement in the Subfactor B: Staffing Plan requires resumes for each employee is included with the Technical Proposal, along with their consent for the offeror to use their resumes by providing one signed FTE Resume Certification Form (Attachment
3) per FTE. Since only the incumbent contractor is able to have current employees in place, competitors are unable to provide candidates that will actually perform the work and be offered employment. We strongly urge the Government to remove this requirement to allow adequate competition. Initial attempts to contact current employees have been rejected due to employment restrictions from their employer, so we are unable to get resumes/completed Attachment 3s for existing staff that we will need to offer employment options after award.Attachment 3 has been omitted.

File details come from the government source that posted it.