Questions_and_Answers__5-_Solicitation.doc

Questions and Answers #5

SOLICITATION – FA8106-14-R-0004

Question #1: Reference ITO 2.1.1, When does the government anticipate the final date of submission for questions?

Answer: The Government will accept and answer questions if applicable until receipt of proposals; however, we will not extend the proposal due date because we were unable to answer questions received two weeks prior to the proposal due date.

Questions #2: Reference ITO 2.2.8, Requirements Correlation Matrix. What volume does the Correlation Matrix –Table 2.2.8 go in?

Answer: A Correlation Matrix should be placed in each volume.

Questions #3: Reference ITO, 4.0, We intend to submit multiple task orders that when combined, show relevant scope, magnitude of effort and complexity supporting one IDIQ, under one mission, for one customer. The Government should consider these as one contract for relevancy. How will the Government collectively evaluate these combined multiple task orders?

Answer: Evaluation of proposals is in Appendix E, Evaluation Factors for Award. Past Performance evaluation is under section 2.3 of the RFP. More specifically, para 2.3.2.2 states “In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the Offeror, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated”.

Questions #4: Reference ITO, 4.0, When submitting relevant past performance that has similar scope, magnitude and complexity, with work performed under a prime contractor, how will the Government evaluate the past performance when no Government CPARS are available?

Answer: Evaluation of proposals is in Appendix E, Evaluation Factors for Award. Reference your question above see para 2.3.2.3., which states; “The Government will consider the Performance Quality of recent and relevant efforts. The Quality Assessment consists of an in-depth evaluation of the Past Performance questionnaire responses, PPIRS information, Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), interviews with Government customers and fee determining officials and, if applicable, commercial clients. It may include interviews with DCMA officials or other sources known to the Government”.

Questions #5: Reference ITO, 4.0, Will work under a subcontract carry the same weight as a prime contract to the Government in the evaluation?

Answer: Evaluation of proposals is in Appendix E, Evaluation Factors for Award. Reference your question above, para 2.3.2.2. of Appendix E states; “The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the products provided/services performed under those contracts relate to the technical subfactors and price assessment. Consideration will be given to things such as similar service, similar complexity of the effort, breadth and depth of skills, similar contract scope and type, contract magnitude and schedule”.

Questions #6: Reference ITO, 4.0, How will maintenance of tactical transport aircraft on a contract of similar scope, magnitude and complexity be evaluated?

Answer: Evaluation of proposals is in Appendix E, Evaluation Factors for Award. Reference your question above, para 2.3.2.2. of Appendix E states; “The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the products provided/services performed under those contracts relate to the technical subfactors and price assessment. Consideration will be given to things such as similar service, similar complexity of the effort, breadth and depth of skills, similar contract scope and type, contract magnitude and schedule”.

Questions #7: Reference ITO, 4.0, Will experience maintaining a fleet of tactical transport aircraft be considered very relevant to the USAFA fleet/mission?

Answer: Evaluation of proposals is in Appendix E, Evaluation Factors for Award. Reference your question above, para 2.3.2.2. of Appendix E states; “The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the products provided/services performed under those contracts relate to the technical subfactors and price assessment. Consideration will be given to things such as similar service, similar complexity of the effort, breadth and depth of skills, similar contract scope and type, contract magnitude and schedule”.

Questions #8: Reference ITO, 4.0, For past performance evaluation Subfactor 3 (Maintenance and Supply), can we submit a variety of past performance citations (for example, others that support supply and another that supports maintenance), and earn a satisfactory performance quality assessment rating overall? If not, please explain how pp citations support maintenance and supply will be evaluated.

Answer: Although Subfactor 3 has Maintenance and Supply combined, a contractor can submit separate past performance information on Maintenance efforts and on Supply efforts. Evaluation of proposals is in Appendix E, Evaluation Factors for Award. Para 2.3.3 of Appendix E states, “As a result of the Relevancy and Quality Assessments of the recent contracts evaluated, Offerors will receive an integrated Performance Confidence Assessment rating based on the definitions provided in paragraph 2.3.1 above. The rating is not based on a qualitative analysis. Although the Past Performance evaluation focuses on performance that is relevant to the Technical subfactors and Price assessment, the resulting Performance Confidence Assessment rating is made at the factor level and represents an overall evaluation of Contractor performance.”

Questions #9: Reference Appendix G (CBA for Mechanics), Article 7, Section 2. Where and what work has been historically subcontracted out?

Answer: Overhauls are usually a type of work not performed at the Government facilities. The name of the subcontractor or place of performance is not relevant. This section also states “except where the Company does not have the necessary facilities to perform the maintenance.

Questions #10: Reference PWS Para 1.30. Plans, Scheduling and Documentation. Will the Government provide a representative sample of a daily flying schedule?

Answer: The Government will not provide a sample. Printed flight schedules are For Official Use Only (FOUO). The flight schedule includes time period of flights, types, organizations responsible/flying, and locations of flights by date and time. The Contractor will need to provide adequate ready aircraft within the published aircraft mission capable rates to meet those event times.

Questions #11: Item Unique Identification (IUID) Marking. This paragraph states that the Government intends to pursue physical marking of GFP USAFA inventory and may require the COMBS Services Contractor to accomplish this effort. Is there a specific timeline for when this may occur? Will there be a contract modification for this? If not, please provide work-load data.

Answer: No, there is not a specific timeline. When/if necessary the Government will work with the Contractor.

Questions #12: PWS paragraph 1.7 states “in the event Government provided fuel is not available for tow aircraft during deployed operations, the cost of fueling the tow aircraft is included as part of the tow support services” Can the Government provide historical data to enable the contractor to price this or if not will the Government treat this as a cost reimbursable?

Answer: Historical data over the last eight years show an average of approximately $12K was expended.

Questions #13: Reference Supplies and Services, Item No. X004 Contractor Operated Maintained Base Supply (COMBS). In the CLIN description it states that "... and replenishment of parts in the COMBS to maintain USAFA aircraft in accordance with PWS paragraph 1.18.1-9., 1.28.2". Would the Government clarify if this statement means the contractor needs to include the costs of the parts in this CLIN or just the labor needed to manage the replenishment of parts? If the contractor needs to include costs of the parts, how are the parts for this CLIN distinguished from the parts need in the other CLINs; X006, x009?

Answer: CLIN X0004 is for labor only. Replenishment refers to the labor needed to manage the replenishment of parts.

Questions #14: Reference, Appendix L, Parts Usage Data, Please provide status reports for 3 years of historical data.

Answer: Appendix L has been revised. The Government has provided as much data usage as available.

Questions#15: CLIN X006 requires "The contractor shall provide all components, parts, equipment, materials, bench stock and consumables required to support the USAFA fleet to include repair, maintenance, overhaul, replacement and replenishment of aircraft components, parts and consumables". Without benefit of access to an adequate amount of historical data it is impossible to adequate price this requirement. Request that the USG provide reports from REMIS or other available sources that provides detailed breakout of the annual cost of spares and consumables for each of the aircraft listed in CLIN X006.

Answer: The Government will not supply pricing for spares and consumables, it is incumbent upon each Contractor with their teaming partners/subcontractors to use the information provided to determine how they will price each CLIN.

Question#16: The Government will not supply pricing for spares and consumables, it is incumbent upon each Contractor to use the information provided to determine how they will price each CLIN.

Reference PWS 1.27.2 Tow Requirements, the Contractor shall provide tow aircraft IAW FAA FAR Part 43, 23 and 91 capable of meeting the following performance requirement:

a.

Basic Flight Profile tow rate up to 20 sorties per hour.

The PWS does not define the Basic Flight Profile. Please define the basic flight profile as one of the following:

A.

20 area tows to 8000’ MSL/hour or

B.

20 area tows to 8500’ MSL/hour Answer: Basic Flight Profile is defined as: 20 area tows to 8500’ MSL/hour.

Question#17: Reference PWS 1.18. Request Government provide work order data details for each Mission Design Series (MDS) for the previous three years.

Answer: The Government has provided all the available data it has for this requirement. See Appendix L, Amendment 0001 parts usage data.

Question#18: In order to provide competitive flying hour rates for the T-53A fleet, would the government consider providing the warranty status and information to all bidders?

Answer: All warranties for the T-53A fleet have expired.

Question #19: Paragraph 2.4.6 Total Evaluated Price (TEP) and 2.4.7 Estimated Quantities Table (EQT) instructs bidders to use the Addendum quantities for evaluation purposes. The EQT displays 9 contract periods beginning with the Phase-In period which is 3 months in duration. However the excel format of the TEP, AppendixFPricingMatrixAmendment0001.xls, has only 8 contract periods, beginning with the “Basic” Period. Should pricing for CLIN X001 Phase-In, be input into the cell for “Basic” since no column for Phase-In is provided? Also, should the monthly value for the Phase-In price be provided, meaning the total price of the 90 day phase-in period divided by 3, or should the value in the cell for phase-in represent the entire priced value for the total Transition of work?

Answer: Pricing Matrix will be revised to add a Phase-In column. Phase-In should have a monthly total on the Pricing Matrix. Annual prices/totals should be placed in the Pricing Model as stated in Appendix D, para 5.4.10., Question#20: The excel format of the TEP, AppendixFPricingMatrixAmendment0001.xls, has unit values for each CLIN by contract period/year. The value to be placed in each cell then represents the monthly value alone, not the annual value, correct? For instance, the price to be entered for CLIN 0002AB for the Option II period, would be 1/12 of the total annual cost for Aircraft Support Services for the T-41D fleet. Please confirm this is correct.

Answer: Yes, each cell represents the monthly value alone. The pricing matrix will be attached to the contract and therefore the price in the matrix corresponds to the unit column. Annual prices/totals should be in the pricing model as required in Appendix D, para 5.4.10.

Question 21: Please confirm that labor pricing for Flightline Expeditor Position(s), described by PWS paragraph 1.20.3 should be included in the CLIN 0008 Base Support price in the TEP excel spread-sheet as dictated by the definitions for CLIN 0008 in the Model Contract.

Answer: Flightline Expeditor Position should be included in CLIN X002 and removed from CLINX0008. The Model Contract will be amendment to reflect the change in the descriptions for CLIN X008 and CLIN X002.

Question#22: The excel format of the TEP, AppendixFPricingMatrixAmendment0001.xls, for CLIN X013 differs from the model contract attached to the solicitation.

a. The RFP model contract shows CLIN 0013AA as Strip and Paint for UV-18B however the TEP excel sheet shows CLIN 0013AA as Strip and Paint for T-41D.

b. The RFP model contract shows CLIN 0013AB as Strip and Paint for T-41D however the TEP excel sheet shows CLIN 0013AB as Strip and Paint for UV-18B.

Which document takes precedence for the purposes of pricing evaluation, the RFP model contract or the TEP excel sheet: Appendix F Pricing Matrix from Amendment 0001?

Answer: Pricing Matrix will be revised to match the contract model.

Question#23: Paragraph 1.27.2 TOW Requirements states that the contractor shall provide tow aircraft IAW FAA FAR Part 43, 23, and 91 capable of meeting the following (aircraft) performance requirements…..(para 1.27.2, a-e) Will the government consider relaxing the FAR part 23 certification requirement in lieu of a comparable TOW aircraft with a newer ASTM certification, if said aircraft can demonstrate equal performance capabilities and meet requirements of 1.27.2 a-e, and is legal under FAR Part 91.327 (a)(1) for use in the for-hire glider tow mission?

Answer: The Government will NOT relax FAR 23 requirements. Tow aircraft must meet the minimum requirements outlined in PWS paragraph 1.27.2 a-e.

Question#24: PWS 1.5.4 states "The Contractor shall hangar aircraft at the end of each flying day". Does this requirement include the gliders?

Answer: Yes, it includes gliders.

Question#25: Per PWS 1.6.6.1: The Contractor shall accomplish all maintenance required as a result of an "act of nature" such as: hail damage, lightning strikes, bird strikes, structural damage as part of the aircraft support service." Is it the government's intent to fund this work covered as an Over and Above?

Answer: Yes “acts of nature”, is and Over and Above when directed by the PCO.

Question#26: Per PWS 1.22.3.1, can the government quantify the number of recovery events annually the contractor will be responsible for?

Answer: Approximately 3 per year.

Question#27: Per PWS 1.22.3.2, can the government quantify the number of recovery events annually the contractor will be responsible for?

Answer: See question # 26.

Question#28: Is it the government's intent that the contractor is responsible for all costs associated with recovery within the 100 mile events (i.e. crane services, truck services, etc.)?

Answer: Government will provide associated recovery equipment for recoveries that occur on airfield property. If off-field, local instructions must be adhered to before recovery work is accomplished.

Question#29: Per PWS 1.27.2, would the government please define a basic flight profile to include durations?

Answer: Basic Flight Profile is defined as: 20 area tows to 8500’ MSL/hour with duration of .27.

Question#30: Per PWS Attachment C, 1.3 Air Force Instructions, references AFI 21-101 Chapter 10, as mandatory instruction, is it the government's intent not to allow personally owned toolboxes?

Answer: All tools used on the aircraft must follow all Air Force Instructions including local instructions (OI’s).