RFP_Questions_and_Answers-2-5-16.pdf

FA8106-15-R-0007

C-12 Contractor Logistics Support (CLS)

RFP Questions and Clarifications 5 Feb 2016

RFP

QUESTION

REFERENCE

QUESTION

REFERENCE

COMMENT/QUESTION GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

1-1

Section L, 6.3.5 Attachments to Model Contract

The Offeror shall provide as attachments to the RFP / model contract the documents listed in Section J of the RFP, with exception to Appendix G and Appendix M.

Question: Section J of the RFP lists Attachments 1-11 and Exhibit A; there are no appendices referenced or attached.

Request the Government advise if there are additional Section J, LIST OF ATTACHMENTS that are to be amended / added to Section J of the RFP?

The Section J provided in the solicitation is the only list of attachments.

The Government will update Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, para 6.3.5 to state: “The Offeror shall provide as attachment to the RFP / model contract a completed Attachment 9

– C-12 Pricing Matrix as listed in Section J.”

RFP

1-2

Section L, 2.3.4

2.3.4 File Names - Offeror shall submit volumes with the

following file names:

Volume 1 – Technical.doc, Volume II – PastPerf.doc, Volume III –Price.doc, Volume IV – Contract.doc

2.6 Electronic Offers …The electronic copies of the proposal

shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2007 or 2010, MS Excel 2007 or 2010, and MS-Power Point 2007 or 2010.

MS office 2007/2010 files have the file extension .docx. Will the Govt change the file naming requirement?

The Government is requesting volumes to be submitting in Microsoft Word 2007 or 2010 versions, therefore, the file extension for Word documents shall end with “.docx”.

The Government will update Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, para 2.3.4 to state: “Offeror shall submit volumes with the following file names: Volume I – Techincal.docx, Volume II – PastPerf.docx, Volume III – Price.docx, and Volume IV – Contract.docx.”

RFP

1-3

Section L, 2.4.1

Please confirm that body text is Arial 12 pt with 1.5 line spacing, and tables, charts, graphics, and figures are Arial 8 pt, with line spacing as appropriate.

Excerpts from Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, para 2.4.1 states: …”Page line spacing shall be 1.5 lines. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than Arial 12 points.”

Excerpt from Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, para 2.4.2 states: “Text intended for evaluation within all figures, charts, tables, and graphs, to include imbedded images, QUESTION

REFERENCE

shall be no less than Arial 8-pt.”

Please review Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, section 2.4 in its entirety for complete Page Size and Formatting instructions.

1-4

Section L.4.1.2 and Attachment 1.1 of the ITO

Background: We have followed the instructions to locate the PPI Tool on the FBO site, but we cannot locate a PPI Tool link. Therefore, offeror’s are unable to download the tool from FBO.

Questions: When will the Gov provide/post the PPI Tool, as it is needed ASAP? How will the tool be provided in a timely manner e.g., a specific FBO link to be posted in an Amendment, or directly on the FBO update page itself, or via email?

The Government will provide the PPI Tool link on FBO, via an update to the FBO notice itself.

RFP

1-5

Section M, 2.2.1.a

There are two paragraphs numbered 2.2.1.a; should the second one be 2.2.1.d?

The Government will update Attachment 8 – C-12 Section M Evaluation Factors for Award to correct the typo to reflect 2.2.1.d for the paragraph that is describing the requirements for the proposed approach for subcontracting.

1-6

Section M, 4.2.1

The Government requests that Volume III Past Performance be submitted 15 calendar days prior to the solicitation due date; this will be on Sunday, 21 February. Does the Government want to change the requested due date for Past Performance to a week day?

The 15 calendar days prior to the solicitation close date is a request and not a requirement. Offerors can submit their Past Performance Volume between the 15th day prior to the closing day of the RFP (21 Feb

16) up until the closing of the RFP (7 Mar 16).

Offerors are not required to submit the Past Performance Volume early and may choose to submit it with their final proposal. Failure to submit early proposal information will not result in Offeror disqualification.

QUESTION

REFERENCE

1-7

L.5.2.2 Pricing Information Requirements, 5th subparagraph

Background: Offerors shall complete the Pricing Matrix.

Offerors must ensure all required proposed pricing is provided in the Pricing Matrix. All periods of performance must be priced. The following is an estimated ten year period of performance: Base period/Phase-in period (one year)

Questions: What is the length of the Phase-In period during the Base Year period? What is the number of calendar days for the entire Phase-In period? What is the number of calendar days for the entire Base period?

In accordance with Attachment 4 – C-12 Deliveries or Performance from Section J in the RFP, the Base Period/Transition/Phase-In Period is listed as 1 Jan 2017 – 31 Dec 2017 (= 1 year or 365 days).

RFP

1-8

PWS 1.24.1

Phase-In Period

Background: The Phase-In period is not defined by a number of calendar days. And the first day of full performance is not defined by calendar day e.g., so many days after the first day of Phase-In. Yet there are two calendar-day numbers cited in the paragraph – the last 60 calendar days of the phase-in transition period, and 30 days prior to the first day of full performance. PWS Paragraph 3.5.1 requires a phase-in joint inventory be completed NLT 10 business days prior to the end of the phase-in period.

Questions: How many calendars days are in the Phase-In period? How many calendar days in the Base-Year period minus the Phase-In period? What specific calendar day number is defined as the first day of full performance?

In accordance with Attachment 4 – C-12 Deliveries or Performance from Section J in the RFP, the Base Period/Transition/Phase-In Period is listed as 1 Jan 2017 – 31 Dec 2017 (= 1 year or 365 days).

Full performance would not start until Option Year One. Attachment 4 – Deliveries or Performance states Option Year One will be from 1 Jan 2018 – 31 Oct 2018.

All dates are subject to change. Any changes or delays in the schedule will be provided on FBO.

RFP

1-9

PWS

Appendix D, Table B.4

Background: Note: The Following Navy Technical Orders are utilized for operation of aircraft BV-08 located at Holloman AFB only.

1. Maintenance manuals specific to BV-08 are listed under Industry Manuals.

2. BV-08 will be maintained as an Air Force aircraft.

QUESTION

REFERENCE

Navy Technical Orders

Question 1: Table B.4 only lists Navy NATOPS flight manuals. Is this aircraft going to require any Navy maintenance manuals/instructions for its support?

Question 2: Is aircraft BV-08 going to be maintained as an AF or Navy aircraft?

Question 3: If BV-08 is going to be maintained as a Navy aircraft, is it the Governments intent that bidders maintain AF GFP separate from Navy GFP?

Question 4: If BV-08 will be maintained with Navy GFP will the Government please provide a list of GFP for BV-08?

3. See answer to 2 above.

4. GFP currently listed for Holloman AFB will be utilized for support of BV-08. No Navy GFP will be utilized.

RFP

1-10

PWS 1.8

Defensive System Maintenance;

AFLCMC

Draft RFP Q&A 31 July 2015, #1-58

Reference: Question #1-58: 1. Which aircraft have defensive systems/ do all aircraft have defensive systems?

Answer: Five aircraft have the defensive system installed. A configuration listing will be posted to FBO.

Question: Which of the five aircraft have defensive systems?

Has the configuration listing information been posted to FBO as yet? If so, please provide a reference.

The Government will provide the list of aircraft that have defensive systems via a separate secure posting on FBO under FA8106-15-R-0007.

1-11

RFP Section B, CLIN X021-

X021AE

What is intended with the inclusion of “to comply with ISO 9001-2008” in all the phase-in CLINS? This is the first time we have noticed this phrase included in a phase-in CLIN. Is this referenced inclusion made to emphasize any important point?

The intended purpose of including ISO 9001-2008 on all CLINs was to emphasis the requirement as stated in Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement, para 1.14.

RFP

1-12

PWS 1.24.1 A one-year transition period is longer than normal. Does the government intend to have any partial assumption of responsibility, by location, between the successful offeror and the incumbent, prior to full contract responsibility?

Full contract responsibility during the one-year transitions/phase-in/base period will remain with the incumbent. Once full performance begins (Option Year One), the successful awardee will have full contract responsibility.

RFP Section Background: Subfactor 1: Program Management states, “The FBO posting titled “DRAFT RFP – Questions and

QUESTION

REFERENCE

1-13 L.3.2.3.a proposal must include resumes that meet the requirements of paragraph 1.9.2 of the PWS, letters of intent, and proposed location for each site lead.” However, Section I of the solicitation contains FAR 52.222-17, Non-Displacement of Qualified Workers (May 2014) (IAW FAR 22.1207), which requires the successful offeror to provide first right of refusal to incumbent personnel for employment. Therefore, the RFP requires all bidders to propose and provide resumes for the qualified incumbent employees.

Question: Will the Government provide resumes of incumbent personnel so that bidders may comply with FAR 52.222-17, Non-Displacement of Qualified Workers (May 2014) (IAW FAR 22.1207), or just a list of names and contact information for each employee? What additional guidance will be provided to ensure concurrent compliance with both Section L.3.2.3.a and FAR 52.222-17 for CONUS and OCONUS-based personnel?

Answers 10 Dec 2015”stated: “No, the Government will not direct the incumbent contractor to provide resumes from their current Site Lead Mechanics at the start of the proposal period. While a Contractor may decide to employ incumbent field personnel, the current contract does not contain FAR 52.222- 17, Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers. Thus, there is no requirement that an incumbent must furnish a list of field personnel or that a Contractor must employ any of incumbent’s workforce. The incumbent’s field personnel are not the only available workforce able to meet the Government’s requirements for this effort. No preferential treatment is being given for performance as the incumbent contractor. It is the Contractor’s responsibility to obtain resumes from qualified individuals meeting the Government’s requirements.”

Clause 52.222-17 did not exist and is not part of the current contract (FA8106-11-D-0002). Offerors are not required to comply with 52.222-17, Non- Displacement of Qualified Workers in their proposal in solicitation FA8106-15-R-0007. Clause 52.222- 17 will become part of the contract upon award.

1-14

Section L.2.6 Electronic Offers

Reference: The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2007 or 2010, MS Excel 2007 or 2010, and MS-Power Point 2007 or 2010.

Question: Will the Government accept searchable PDFs for the RFP documents in Volume IV - Contract Documentation?

Offeror’s must comply with Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, para 2.6 which states proposals shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2007 or 2010.

QUESTION

REFERENCE

1-15

AFLCMC C-

12_ Industry_ Day_ Information, 7/10/2014:

Question 40

Reference: #40 Q&A: Is there a COMSEC requirement?

Answer: Both a COMSEC and KLIF account are required.

Questions: Is a Key Data Processor Loading and Installation Facility (KLIF) account still required for this contract, since it is not identified in the RFP? If so, where are the instructions and point of contact to establish the KLIF account?

The KLIF account is still required. The Government will provide POC for KLIF account during contract Base/Transition/Phase-In Period.

1-16

PWS 1.10.6.

Communicatio ns Security

(COMSEC)

A COMSEC account is required to manage the Trimble TA- 12/TA-24 GPS. Who is responsible for inventory/ ordering / loading this equipment?

Per Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement, para 1.4, the Contractor will be responsible for the ordering and inventory of the Trimble TA-12/TA-24 GPS as a spare or repair item. The Government will be responsible for loading of the secure codes as required by mission.

RFP

1-17

AFLCMC C-

12_ Industry_ Day_ Information, 7/10/2014:

Question 48

Reference: #48 Q&A: 48. Are there any country nationals or local national’s requirements?

Answer: There is no requirement to utilize indigenous host country personnel; however, indigenous host country personnel shall not be used to maintain the aircraft. They may assist in routine duties such cleaning of the aircraft and minimal peripheral assistance but will be supervised at all times when in the vicinity of the aircraft and will have no unsupervised access to key aircraft systems/components.

Question: Is there any vetting process for Local or Third Country Nationals? If so, where are the instructions and point of contact referenced in the RFP to accomplish this specific action?

Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement will be updated under para 1.10 to state “The Contractor shall ensure background checks for all indigenous host country personnel employed by the Contractor are accomplished by the U.S. Embassy Regional Security Officer (RSO) prior to having access to the aircraft or site.”

RFP

1-18

PWS 1.10.7

Government Unclassified

Is there an established NACI process for staff that are not working on the aircraft but require access to the Unclassified Email/ and or Networks?

Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement, para 1.10.7 applies to all contractor personnel requiring access to Unclassified Email/ and or

QUESTION

REFERENCE

Email/Network /Information

Networks.

RFP

1-19

PWS 1.10.2 At what point in the contract is the Program Protection Plan provided to the service provide/contractor? Will the government provide an example for offerors to view as part of the solicitation/RFP?

The Program Protection Plan (PPP) is for situational awareness only and does not affect contract performance. PPP can be released during transition to successful offeror. All necessary requirements for security are identified in the DD254.

1-20

PWS 1.13.3.2 What are the requirements for access to the government Advanced Distributed Learning Services (ADLS) site, to accomplish cultural customs and courtesies for OCONUS locations?

ADLS site access will be provided to the successful offeror during the Transition/Phase-In Period.

RFP

1-21

Atch 1, C-12 Descriptions and Specifications

Paragraph 2. Notes and CLIN Descriptions contains numerous references to the PWS as Attachment 1.

Should the correct reference to the PWS be Attachment 5?

Due to size limits in the Government’s contracting writing system section for CLIN descriptions, the full description for each CLIN was provided in Attachment 1 – Description and Specification.

Therefore, the reference “See Attachment 1 - C-12 Descriptions and Specification for the CLIN description and PWS references” was to ensure contractors could find the CLIN’s full descriptions (which includes applicable PWS references as part of the description in Attachment 1 – Description and Specification.”)

1-22

Atch 1, C-12 Descriptions and Specifications

A Paragraph 2. Subparagraph states, “In event of the Missions Capability Requirements addressed in PWS are not met, then the Reduced Payment as outlined in Attachment 1, PWS, Sub- Section 1.2.2 would apply.” However, reduced payment is not address in the PWS reference.

Where in the RFP is Reduced Payment described?

Attachment 1 – C-12 Descriptions and Specifications will be updated to remove the language regarding Reduced Payments. Reduced Payments will not be included in FA8106-15-R- 0007 or subsequent award documentation.

RFP SF 1447 Block 18 of the SF 1447 states, “…the Contractor agrees to The Government will update Block 18 of the SF

QUESTION

REFERENCE

1-23 hold its offered prices firm for 30 days.” Does the Government intend to make an award within 30 days after receipt of proposals?

1447 to reflect “the Contractor agrees to hold its offered prices firm for 365 days.”

The Government does not intend to make an award within 30 days after the receipt of proposals.

1-24

PWS,

Paragraph 1.25.3

Paragraph 1.25.3 states, “The Contractor shall reduce his invoice price for ACI for each day in excess of the new negotiated delivery date.” There is no day-rate reduction / value inserted or described in the PWS. Please clarify.

Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement, para 1.25.3 will be updated to remove the reduction of invoice price as described. Reduced Payments will not be included in FA8106-15-R-0007 or subsequent award documentation.

1-25

Section I, DFAR

252.216-22

The DFAR clause states delivery or task orders may be issued up through 31 Dec 2027. Option to Extend Services, if utilized, would only take the Contract out through 31 Dec 2026. Option to Extend the Term of the Contract states “10 Years”. Request the Government clarify.

The Government believes the DFAR reference 252.216-22 provided in the submitted question was submitted in error and should have referenced FAR 52.216-22.

FAR clause 52.216-22 – Indefinite Quantity will be updated to state: “Contractor shall not be required to make any deliveries under this contract after up to one year after the ordering period.”

1-26

Section I, DFAR

252.225-7043

The referenced DFAR clause is dated MAR 2006. Current DFAR clause date is JUN 2015. Please clarify / correct the DFAR clause date.

The Government will provide an update to DFARs clause 252.225-7043 to reflect the Jun 2015 version.

RFP

1-27

RFP Section I Due to the scope of this RFP requiring operations in both CONUS and OCONUS locations, as well as austere & contingency locations, request the following FAR/DFAR clauses be included in the RFP via an Amendment.

1. FAR 52.228-3

2. FAR 52.228-4

3. DFAR 252.228-7000

The Government has determined that FAR clause 52.228-3 – Worker’s Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act) and FAR clause 52.228-4 – Worker’s Compensation and War-Hazard Insurance Overseas do not apply to the C-12 CLS follow on as it does not meet the prescribing requirements as stated in FAR 28.309 – Contract Clauses for

QUESTION

REFERENCE

Workers Compensation Insurance. The C-12 CLS follow on is not a public work contract nor is it approved or financed under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

The Government finds that DFAR clause 252.228- 7000 – Reimbursement for War- Hazard Losses also does not apply based on the prescribing language found in DFAR 228.370(a) which states it shall be used when FAR 52.228-4 Worker’s Compensation and War-Hazard Insurance Overseas is used; and when the HCA decides not to allow the contractor to buy insurance for war-hazard losses.

Based on the above, the Government will not be updating the solicitation to include the three clauses as referenced.

RFP

1-28

RFP Section I Due to the scope of this RFP including both services as well as the acquisition of supplies, request the following FAR clauses be included in the RFP via an Amendment.

1. FAR 52.246-23

2. FAR 52.246-24

The Government will not be updating the solicitation to include the two clauses as referenced.

The solicitation includes the applicable Limitation of Liability – Services clause (52.246-25) as this is a service contract.

1-29

Section L.6.1.1 RFP Section L.6.1.1, Solicitation/Contract Form (Section A), states: “Completion of blocks 11, 13, 15, 21, 22, & 27 of the SF33. Signature by the Offeror on the SF33 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept. …”

The Solicitation/Contract Form (Section A) used is a Standard

Yes, it is the Government’s intent to use the SF1447.

An update to Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, para 6.1.1 will be made to reference SF1447.

Form 1447 instead of the SF33.

Question: Is it the Government’s intent to use the SF 1447 and not the SF 33 and, if so, will the Government revise L.6.1.1 to reflect SF 1447?

1-30

Section M.1.6.3

RFP Section M.1.6.3, Subcontracting Classified COMSEC Work, states: “If the offeror plans to subcontract COMSEC work to a subcontractor, NISPOM 9-407 will apply. NISPOM 9-407, Subcontracting COMSEC Work, states, "Subcontracting requiring the disclosure of classified COMSEC information shall be awarded only upon the written approval of the Government Contracting Activity (GCA)".

Due to the long authorization process and in order to be in compliance with the NISPOM at contract award, the offeror's request for authorization to subcontract classified COMSEC work shall be included in the proposal. This authorization shall be a letter to the PCO with the subcontractor's name, full address, CAGE code, facility clearance level, ownership information, and shall address any FOCI issues.

Question: In the event an offeror determines the need to submit the request for authorization to subcontract classified COMSEC letter to the PCO, where within the proposal should the letter be included?

In the event an offeror determines the need to submit the request for authorization to subcontract classified COMSEC letter to the PCO, the offer shall submit such authorization request within the Contracting Volume.

Attachment 8 – C-12 Section M Evaluation Factors for Awards, para 1.6.3 will be updated to state “Due to the long authorization process and in order to be in compliance with the NISPOM at contract award, the offeror's request for authorization to subcontract classified COMSEC work shall be included in the Contract Volume of the offeror’s proposal.”

RFP

1-31

Section L.5.8 RFP Section L.5.8, Contractor Furnished Property/Equipment/Tooling/Material (CFP/CFE/CFT/CFM), states: “If property, equipment and/or tooling is necessary to meet the requirement but is not provided in Appendix S, it is the Contractor’s responsibility to obtain that property, equipment and/or tooling.”

Appendix S does not appear to exist in any of the RFP documents.

Question: Was it the Governments intent to site Attachment 6, Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, para 5.8 will be updated to reference Attachment 6 – C-12 Government Furnished Property.

C-12 Government Furnished Property, and/or PWS Appendix E, Government Resources, instead of Appendix S?

RFP

1-32

Attachment 1- Descriptions and Specifications

Attachment 5 – PWS, Section 1.3

RFP Attachment 1 - Descriptions and Specification, Paragraph 2, CLIN X001, Note at the bottom of page 1 states:

“There shall be a minimum of an equivalent of two (2) full-time technicians manning the C-12 sites at Ankara and Cairo.”

PWS Section 1.3, Site Operations, Note states: “The USAF requires that a minimum of the equivalent of two FAA certified technicians be available at all times due to the operating conditions (i.e., lack of hangar, security concerns, and test program support) at Holloman AFB, Turkey, and Egypt.”

Question: Will the Government reconcile the conflicting requirements for which sites require a minimum of two technicians?

Attachment 1 – C-12 Descriptions and Specification will be updated under CLIN X001 to reference that two technicians will be required at Holloman AFB, Turkey and Egypt.

The Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement, Section 1.3 references the correct requirement of technicians for these locations.

1-33

Attachment 10

– Wage Determinations

The list of wage determinations appears to only include Area Wage Determinations and no Collective Bargaining Agreements.

Question: Is any of the current workforce under a collective bargaining agreement? If so, will the Government provide a copy of these agreements to establish wage minimums?

Yes, Elmendorf, AK and Andrews AFB currently have Collective Bargaining Agreements. Holloman AFB and Edward AFB will utilize the previously provided Wage Determinations listed in Attachment 10 – C-12 Wage Determinations. The Government will update Attachment 10 – C-12Wage Determinations to include what is currently on contract in regards to the Collective Bargaining Agreements for Elmendorf AFB and Andrews AFB.

In the event applicable Wage Determinations or CBA’s are updated with newer revisions, the Government will determine the most feasible and logical time to incorporate them into the solicitation/contract.

RFP Attachment 1 – Description

X005 Aircraft Condition Inspection references 30 calendar days from induction to submit a discrepancy list, but CDRL

The correct number of days for ACI is 20 calendar

1-34 and Specifications

- Aircraft Condition Inspection

A014 states 20 calendar days, and Attachment 4 Item 3, ACI Delivery Schedule, references 15 calendar days after induction.

Question: Please provide clarification on the required timeline for submission of the ACI discrepancy listing.

days as stated in CDRL A014.

An update to Attachment 1 – C-12 Descriptions and Specification will be made on CLIN X005 as well as Attachment 4 – C-12 Deliveries or Performance to reflect the correct 20 calendar days.

RFP

1-35

SF1447 Block 9 and 18 on the SF1447 have two different dates (4 Feb 2016 vs 7 March 2016).

Question: Please provide clarification on the proposal due date for solicitation FA8106-15-R-0007.

The Government will update the SF1447 to reflect a proposal due date of 7 March 2016 in both Block 9 and Block 18.

RFP

1-36

Section L.2.3.3 Reference: Section L.2.3.3, which states in part, “The attachments identified in the table [Table 2.1] shall be separately bound in three-ring, loose leaf binders, as necessary.”

Issue: The Attachments for Volume II include Teaming Partnership List (Attachment 2.0), Present/Past Performance Information (PPI) Tool (Attachment 1.1), Consent Letter (Attachment 1.4), Client Authorization Letters (Attachment 1.5), Present/Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 1.2), and Relevant Contract Narrative (input into the PPI tool;

Attachment 1.1).

Question: Does the Government expect each of these small documents to have their own binder or is it acceptable to provide them consolidated in one binder?

Recommendation: Change Section L.2.3.3 sentence to read:

“The attachments identified in the table [Table 2.1] shall be separately bound in three-ring, loose leaf binders; or, clearly identified with tabs when included in the volume binders.

The Government will update Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, para 2.3.3 to state “The Proposal Volumes identified in the table [Table 2.1] shall be separately bound in three-ring, loose leaf binders, as necessary. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the ITO paragraph as noted in the table below.”

1-37

Section L, Paragraph 3.2.3.b

Reference: Section L, Paragraph 3.2.3.b, “An Approach for Quality Assurance” A PWS reference changed from 1.2.5, Configuration Management to 1.2.4, Subcontractor Management.

Issue: This topic change seems significant. While there is some need to manage subcontractor performance quality, Subcontractor Management could also be discussed as part of Subcontract Arrangements and Relationships.

Question: Did the Government intend to change this PWS Reference?

Yes, Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement reference 1.2.4 is correct.

RFP

1-38

Section L, paragraph 6.3.6

Reference: Section L, paragraph 6.3.6, Base Support Requirements; “The Government plans to provide the support listed in Appendix C, Base Support Agreement.”

Issue: Appendix C to Atch 5, PWS, is “Safety, Fire Protection and Health Specifications.” Appendix E to Atch 5, PWS, is “Government Resources”. App E does identify equipment and services at each aircraft location.

Question: Is the Section L Reference to Appendix E to Atch 5, PWS correct?

Recommendation: Reword Section L, 6.3.6 to read; “The Government plans to provide the support listed in Appendix E to the PWS, Government Resources.”

The Government will update Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, para 6.3.6 to reference Appendix E of Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement.

RFP

1-39

RFP,

Attachment 6

Reference: RFP, Attachment 6. Attachment 6 contains listings of program serialized and non-serialized materials and equipment, and engines to be provided as Government Furnished Property.

Issue: Not all sites which currently have aircraft are listed.

Buenos Aires, Gaborone, Nairobi, and Rabat are missing.

The Government will update Attachment 6 – C-12 Government Furnished Property to include the missing aircraft sites.

Question: Will the Government provide material and equipment listings for these sites to allow offerors to more accurately assess initial provisioning.

Recommendation: Provide the requested information or clarify the content of the presented data.

RFP

1-40

PWS

paragraph 1.24.1

Issue: The PWS references both a “Phase-in Orientation Plan” and a “Phase-in Plan.”

Question: Are these the same thing?

Recommendation: Delete the word “orientation” from the first sentence in PWS paragraph 1.24.1.

The Government will update Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement para 1.24.1 by deleting the word “orientation”.

RFP

1-41

Attachment 7, section L;

Instructions to Offerors, Table 2.1.

Issue: The PPI tool is somewhat restrictive in its ability. The tool does not permit tables and graphics that illustrate past performance. Summaries are not possible either, which hinders the vendor’s ability to tie the contracts together in a meaningful fashion.

Question: Are offerors permitted to include a brief (10-page) introduction to the Volume II, Past Performance?

Recommendation: Allow a 10 page answer to Section L.4.4.1 “Performance on Technical Approach.”

The Government will update Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, para 4.4 to state “The offeror is requested to limit relevancy narrative to a maximum of 8 pages. However, the offeror may exceed the requested page limit, if necessary to fully describe relevancy. For any information offerors are unable to include in the PPI Tool, offerors may add the information in Volume II Past Performance.

RFP

1-42

PWS section 1.3.6

Reference: PWS section 1.3.6 Functional Check Flights (FCFs) and Maintenance Test Flights (MTFs) -“The Contractor shall support FCFs and MTFs to include preparing profiles, performing aircrew briefings and debriefings, monitoring trend analysis and in-flight assistance as coordinated between Government and Contractor. The Contractor shall maintain completed FCF and MTF profiles IAW T.O. 1-1-300.” and PWS Section K, page K-38 - “(2) The contractor shall furnish qualified Functional Check Flight pilots for all necessary recurrences of the Functional Check

Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement, para 1.3.6 refers to the contractor supporting the Government pilots for MTF and FCF for non-depot FCF and MTF. The contractor is responsible for providing MTF and FCF pilots at depot as required in Appendix K. Refer to Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement, Appendix K, Section B – Check Flight, Para 2.a.(2) for additional information.

Flight.”

Issue: It is unclear if the vendor needs to provide FCF and MTF in the field during periodic maintenance.

Question: Can the Government confirm that FCF and MTF pilots away from depot will be government provided?

RFP

1-43

Section M, para 2.4.2.2, PP relevancy Criteria, page 10, Scope.

Issue: The 2nd relevancy item is for “Beechcraft King Air/Airliner maintenance.” This does not necessarily include Beech 1900 experience and the B1900 is a platform on the program. One could assume that a Beechcraft 1900 be part of the King Air Series, or not.

Question: Will the Government accept Beech 1900 experience as relevancy criteria equivalent to King Air?

Recommendation: Add “/B1900” to the line.

The Beechcraft 1900 is referred to as “Airliner” by Beechcraft. Yes, 1900 experience is the same as Beechcraft Airliner experience.

The Government will update Attachment 8 – C-12 Section M Evaluation Factors for Award, para

2.4.2.2 under the second relevancy item to include “Beechcraft King Air/Beech 1900 Airliner maintenance.”

RFP

1-44

Section M, para 2.4.2.2, PP relevancy Criteria, page 10, Scope. 2nd list item.

Issue: It is unclear what “Airliner” experience means in this context.

Question: Will the Government accept commercial airliner maintenance experience as fulfilling relevancy level 2?

See answer to question #51 above.

Refer to Attachment 8 – C-12 Section M Evaluation Factors for Award, para 2.4.2.2 for information regarding the Government’s “Relevancy Assessment.”

RFP

1-45

PWS 1.9.2 Key Personnel Section

Issue: The qualifications for Key Personnel call out “King Air Series” Experience. A Beech 1900 is not necessarily considered a King Air, and many sites have Beech 1900 aircraft.

Question: Is Beech 1900 maintenance experience considered relevant to the King Air experience?

Recommendation: Will the government replace the King Air reference to read “King Air or Beech 1900 experience”?

The Government will update Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement to include Beechcraft King Air/Beech 1900 Airliner experience.

1-46

SF 1447, CLIN

X001

Issue: CLIN X001 and all site operations CLINS call out the requirement for ISO 9001:2008 certification. This certification can take up to a year or more to acquire, with no guarantee of acquiring. Given that the Government may end up with a vendor that is unable to acquire ISO certification in advance of full operations. As this is a requirement, it creates a potential procurement integrity issue.

Question: Will the Government require demonstration of full & final ISO 9001:2008 certification with proposal submission?

Yes, the Government requires demonstration of full and final ISO 9001:2008 certification with proposal submission. Refer to Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement, para 1.14 and Attachment 8 – C-12 Section M Evaluations Factors for Award, para 2.2.1.b for additional information.

RFP

1-47

PWS Section 1.10

Issue: Paragraph requires Secret security clearances for “all key personnel as defined in this PWS, personnel performing maintenance on the aircraft and support personnel that are required to travel to sites”. As written, no part of the aircraft can be worked on except by personnel with clearances. An extension of this could be that no parts can be repaired except by cleared individuals.

Question: Will depot and engine overhaul employees require a clearance?

Recommendation: Can the Government include the requirement that only forward deployed program employees and PMO employees require a Secret clearance?

The Government will update Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement, para 1.10 to state “all key personnel as defined in this PWS, personnel performing maintenance on the aircraft at the sites and support personnel that are required to travel to sites.”

RFP

1-48

PWS Section 1.11.5

Issue: The RFP states that US Embassy RSO approval is required for housing. The locations of approved housing is not open source information, so costing is not possible to bidders, except for the incumbent.

Question: Will the government provide a separate CLIN with a “plug” number for forward location housing?

No, the Government will not be providing a separate CLIN for forward housing. Forward housing is part of Base Operations CLIN X001.

1-49

PWS 1.9 and

PWS 1.11.5

Issue: PWS 1.9 says the RSO may dictate housing requirements for all contractor personnel in OCONUS locations. PWS 1.11.5 says the Contractor shall provide housing for technicians…. As written, only Maintenance technicians require RSO approved housing, excluding Key Personnel, PMO staff, quality auditors, transient staff and other program visitors.

Question: Will the Government please clarify that the Contractor shall provide RSO approved housing, or hotel, for all contractor personnel at OCONUS locations?

Recommendation: Rewrite PWS 1.11.5. as “Personnel Residences: The Contractor shall provide housing, or hotel, for all contractor personnel located in OCONUS locations that meets the safety requirements of the U.S. Embassy. The U.S. Embassy Regional Security Officer (RSO) will provide a defined radius that has been determined to have adequate security protection.”

The Government will not be updating Attachment 5

– C-12 Performance Work Statement, para 1.9 or

1.11.5. The site technicians are the only contractor

personnel that are accredited to the US Embassies and the responsibility of the RSO. Other key Personnel, PMO staff, quality auditors, transient staff and other program visitors do not fall under the RSO responsibility. Therefore, it is the contractor’s responsibility for all other employees.

1-50

PWS 1.9.2. Issue: As written, it could be interpreted that Key Personnel resumes are not required with proposal submission, but rather “during the execution of the contract”.

Question: Will the Government clarify the resume requirement?

Recommendation: Rewrite PWS 1.9.2 to read: The Contractor shall notify the PCO in advance of key personnel changes. The Contractor shall submit resumes for replacement of the Program Manager (PM), Director of Maintenance (DOM), Avionics Manager and Site Lead Mechanic to the PCO for evaluation against contract requirements during the execution of the contract.

Replacements to these positions will not be made without the explicit approval of the PCO.”

The Government will not be updating Attachment 5

– C-12 Performance Work Statement, para 1.9.2.

See Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, 3.2.3 for clarification of resume requirements for proposal.

1-51

Attachment 9 - Price Matrix

Issue: The enclosed price matrix does not provide for a summation, or a Total Evaluated Price (TEP). This creates a lack of clarity of percentage breakdowns of subcontractor and small business workshare.

Question: Can the Government provide their TEP calculations?

Provided in Attachment 8 – C-12 Section M Evaluation Factors for Award, para 2.5.6.4 is detailed information on the TEP calculation methodology for each CLIN. Also in Attachment 8, para 2.5.7 is the Government’s Estimated Quantities Table per CLIN. An Offeror is able to take their proposed prices and apply the designated calculation methodology with the estimated quantities to determine their TEP.

RFP

1-52

Attachment 9 - Price Matrix

CLIN X013

Issue: The lack of a Government estimated figure for modifications creates a lack of clarity of percentage breakdowns of subcontractor and small business workshare.

Question: Will the Government provide a Modification estimate?

The estimate for CLIN X013 can be found in Attachment 8 – C-12 Evaluation Factors for Award, para 2.5.7 for the Estimated Quantities Table.

RFP

1-53

Attachment 9 - Price Matrix

CLIN X013

Issue: The grey shading does not seem to match up well with cells the Government wishes bidders to fill in, and not fill in.

Nor does the unit of measure seem to be correct.

Question: Will the Government review the units of measure, and which sub CLINs are requested to be filled in on the Price matrix?

The Government is requesting CLIN X013 to be filled in with vendor’s inputting their numbers in the “All Sites” rows. Transition shall remain “0” and contractors are to fill in for each option period.

The unit of measure for CLIN X013 as stated in “$000” represents the dollars proposed shall be represented in thousands of dollars. For example in CLIN X013 found in the Estimated Quantity Table, Option Year I states “603” and represents $603,000.

The Government will update Attachment 8 – Section M Evaluations Factors for Award and Attachment 9

– Pricing Matrix to correct CLIN X013 “Subcontractor Wrap Rate” to reflect “Subcontractor Wrap Rate Factor.”

Offerors shall provide percent figures where the

Government will multiply the proposed percentages by the estimated quantity found in the Estimated Quantity Table to determine the proposed value.

RFP

1-54

Attachment 9 - Price Matrix

CLIN X016,

CLIN X017,

and CLIN X018

Issue: The Unit of measure for these CLINS is $000.

Question: Was the intention of the Government for vendors to actually include G&A and Materiel Handling wrap rate % figures for these cost plus CLINS, rather than $000 as indicated in the Unit of Measure Column?

Recommendation: Clarify the unit of measure in the Pricing Matrix.

The Government intended for vendors to include their proposed indirect rates to CLINs X016, X017 and X018. The proposed indirect rates will be multiplied by the quantity listed in the Estimated Quantities Table found in Attachment 8 – Evaluation Factors for Award. The resulting extended pricing per evaluation period will be added together to yield the total evaluated price for the

CLIN.

The $000 represents that the dollar amount entered shall be represented in thousands of dollars as the Estimated Quantity Table is represented in thousands of dollars. For example in CLIN X016 found in the Estimated Quantity Table, Option Year I states “374” and represents “$374,000.”

Offerors shall provide percent figures where the Government will multiply the proposed percentages by the estimated quantity found in the Estimated Quantity Table to determine the proposed value.

RFP

1-55

SF 1447,

Clause 252.216-7006

Reference: RFP Clause: 252.216-7006 ORDERING (MAY 2011) (IAW DFARS 216.506(a)) (a) Any supplies and services to be furnished under this contract shall be ordered by issuance of delivery orders or task orders by the individuals or activities designated in the contract schedule.

Such orders may be issued from 1 JAN 2018 through 31 DEC 2027.

Issue: This conflicts with Attachment 4, Section 1.0, Period of Performance.

The Government is working towards a tentative Dec 2016 award date. As a result, the Base Period/Transition Phase-In Period is tentatively scheduled as 1 Jan 2017 – 31 Dec 2017 as notated in Attachment 4 – Deliveries or Performance.

All dates are subject to change. Any changes or delays in the schedule will be provided on FBO.

Question: Can the Government clarify the period of performance, expected award date and beginning of transition period?

Recommendation: Change the contract clause dates.

1-56

L.5.11 Submission of Price Models

Issue: Models in Contractor format may result in several different levels of detail that will hinder a fair comparison resulting in numerous ENs and required clarifications. If the USG could provide an excel sheet with required fill in cost/price elements, this would mitigate potential evaluation problems.

Question: Will the Government provide an excel sheet with required fill in areas that build to the required cost price elements?

The Government has provided Attachment 9 – C-12 Pricing Matrix as the only acceptable format for submitting vendors pricing information. It is the responsibility of the offeror to ensure that their price model is understood. The Price Volume has unlimited pages for explanation or clarification of every step used in the price model. As stated in Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L, Instructions to Offerors para 5.2.1 “The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices rests with the Offeror.”

1-57

PWS 1.3

Issue: The PWS requires that “a minimum of the equivalent of two FAA certified technicians be available at all times due to the operating conditions (i.e., lack of hangar, security concerns, and test program support) at Holloman AFB, Turkey, and Egypt.”

Question: Can the Government better define “available at all times”, and the response time required? Is the expectation that the Maintenance staff be available immediately, or within a call back window of time?

The Government will update Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement, para 1.3, NOTE as follows:

“NOTE: The USAF requires that a minimum of the equivalent of two FAA certified technicians be available to provide 7 days per week, 24 hours per day on-call capability due to the operating conditions (i.e., lack of hangar, security concerns, and test program support) at Holloman AFB, Turkey, and Egypt.”

RFP

1-58

PWS 1.25.13.

Facilities

Issue: PWS section requires, “The Contractor shall be responsible for leasing hangar facilities to support C-12 operations in Egypt, Argentina, the Philippines and as directed by the PCO.” The actual hanger requirements is unclear.

The contractor is responsible to provide hangar facilities of adequate size for C-12 maintenance and support. During the Base/Transition/Phase-In Period, the Government will review proposed hangar facilities for operational security.

Question: Will the Government provide full details as to Hanger requirements to comply with USAF and aircraft requirements?

1-59

PWS

Paragraph 1.1

Reference: PWS Paragraph 1.1, Sentence 5 states that "aircraft are currently based at 3 Continental United States (CONUS) and 16 Outside Continental United States (OCONUS) locations.

Issue: The table that follows Para 1.1 shows 20 sites (3 CONUS and 17 OCONUS) with aircraft.

Question: Will the Government confirm the status of Elmendorf, AK?

Recommendation: Reword the text to either 4 CONUS or 17

OCONUS.

Elmendorf, AK is considered OCONUS.

The Government will update Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement, para 1.1 to reflect 3 CONUS and 17 OCONUS locations.

1-60

PWS

Paragraph 1.4

Reference: PWS Paragraph 1.4, states that "NOTE: Some sites dictate special vehicle requirements per the Department of State.”

Issue: While the DRFP Q&A clarifies that armored vehicles are required in KSA, this requirement is not flowed in the final RFP.

Question: Can the Government clarify which countries require armored vehicles, and clarify the armor level required by DoS?

As stated in Attachment 5 – C-12 Performance Work Statement para 1.4, the Department of State (DoS) dictates any special vehicle requirements.

Clarifications on which countries require armored vehicles will need to be made from DoS.

1-61

Attachment 9 – Pricing Matrix;

CLIN X021

Issue: Due to the long transition period and visa processing time, Site lead Mechanics will need to hired during the transition period – significantly increasing transition cost.

This cost is not bourne by the incumbent, removing a level playing field in the total evaluated price.

Question: Can the Government remove CLIN X021 from the Total Evaluated Price?

An incumbent contractor may or may not have a competitive advantage by virtue of being an incumbent; however, the transition period will entail the performance of a wide variety of tasks that all offerors (including an incumbent) will have to accomplish. As a result, the Government anticipates all offerors will incur costs for such tasks.

Therefore, the Government does not believe the incumbent has an unfair competitive advantage.

Accordingly, the Government will not be removing CLIN X021 from the Total Evaluated Price."

RFP

1-62

Section L, Table 2.1

Issue: Subfactor 4, Transition: In order to provide sufficient detail, a lengthy POAM/GANTT (phase in plan) sheet would be useful to identify the multiple steps, dependencies, critical path and timelines required for the various elements required for transitioning the program in 17 countries. This POAM/GANTT (phase in plan) will take as many as 25-30 pages to provide adequate detail, significantly affecting the proposal due to page count.

Question: Will the government allow a POAM/GANTT to be provided as an attachment and not within the 90 pages page count?

In accordance with Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L, Instructions to Offerors, para 2.6 - Electronic Offers shall submit electronic copies (to include any required plans, exhibits, appendices and attachments) in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2007 or 2010, MS Excel 2007 or 2010, and MS-Power Point 2007 or 2010.

The Government will accept a Plan of Action and Milestones(POAM)/GANTT chart in the formats as described above.

The POAM/GANNT or any other required plans, exhibits, appendices and attachments must comply with Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L, Instructions to Offerors, para 2.6 and will be included as part of the 90 page limit. The Government believes offerors can provide sufficient detail for all subfactor requirements within the 90 page limit.

RFP

1-63

Section J, Attachment 7 titled Section L, Paragraph 5.1, under

Request for clarification. Are the offerors required to complete and submit Section B – CLIN Structure in response to the Solicitation?

The Government states in Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors under multiple sub paragraphs to Section 5.0 – Factor 4 – Price that offerors shall provide pricing in the Pricing Matrix.

Factor 4 – Price

An incomplete Pricing Matrix will be considered unreasonable since pricing completeness is part of the price reasonableness criteria.

The Government will update Attachment 7 – C-12 Section L Instructions to Offerors, para 5.2 to state “Offerors shall not input pricing information in Part I - The Schedule, Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs of the model contract.”

RFP

1-64

Section J, Attachment 9

In relation to Question 1 above, the Attachment 9 Pricing Matrix does not contain all of the CLINs / SubCLINs as included in Section B – CLIN Structure. As an example, the Pricing Matrix does not contain all of the SubCLINs for X010 or X012. Does not contain CLINs X015, X020 or X021.

Request a revision/amendment and/or clarification of what appears to be a discrepancy.

For CLINs X010 for Aircraft Labor Depot and X012 for Engine Repair Labor, DIA and DSCA do not have SubCLINs in the Pricing Matrix as they are not to be quoted. DIA and DSCA do not have any historical data for these CLINs, therefore the Government is not requesting pricing for SubCLIN X010AA, X010AB, X012AA and X012AB. The CLINS for DIA and DSCA as found in the RFP are used as place holders. In the case DIA or DSCA would need to utilize these CLINs during the 10 year timeframe, those CLINs would be negotiated at the time of occurrence. The Government will update Attachment 8 – C-12 Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award, TEP Calculation Table to state CLINS X010AA, X010AB, X012AA and X012AB will not be evaluated.

CLIN X015 is for Travel and Per Diem and is not evaluated. Therefore, it is not included on the Pricing Matrix.

CLIN X020 is…