RFP_FA8134-19-R-5000_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

Reference Question Answer

PWS, Section 1.31.1

Current requirement of Section 1.31.1 of the PWS requires the Contractor to comply with the CFR Title 14, Part 135.425, Part 145 and the requirements of ISO 9001 and/or 9100.

Question ‐ The requirements of CFR Title 14, Part 135.425 and Part 145 most closely align with the Society for Quality Control (ASQC) AS9110, as the AS9110 is specific to Aircraft Maintenance. Would the Government consider AS9110 as the “Higher Level of Quality” acceptable and in compliance with the requirements of the RFP and PWS?

The Government will consider AS9110 as the "Higher Level Of Quality" to meet the requirements of PWS paragraph 1.31.1. This paragraph was revised.

RPP and Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offerors

RFP, on page 3, it is stated “Prices are NOT to be provided in Schedule B, CLIN structure is presented for descriptive purposes only.

Include prices for all CLINs on CLIN Pricing Matrix, Attachment 2” RFP, on page 7, it is stated “*The Offeror shall fill –in the milestone dates.”

Attachment 5, 6.1.2, “Section shall be left blank and all pricing shall be contained within Attachment 2 for the model contract.”

Are Offerors to complete ONLY the table under CLIN X001AB on Schedule B with the milestone dates?

All other pricing information should be blank on Schedule B, is this correct?

Correct. Offerors only complete the table under SubCLIN X001AB within Schedule B with milestone dates and all pricing will be blank. All pricing will be completed on Attachment 2 of the Solicitation.

Schedule B and Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix On Schedule B CLIN X022 is listed as an EA, on Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix this CLIN is shown as TBN. Which is correct?

Both Schedule B X022 and Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix X022 show the unit of issue as Each (EA). CLIN X022 will be TBN.

Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix In Attachment 5 ‐ Instructions to Offerors, Section 2.4.2 and 5.4.2 font sizes and margins are defined for the proposal. Since most of the formatting for Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix is locked are Offerors to assume that they should make no changes to the formatting of Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix? If not, what types of formatting changes can be made?

Offers shall make no formatting changes to Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix.

Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix Since there are no cells for Offerors for to enter for CLINs 0001B and 0001AC are Offerors to assume they are not part of the TEP?

0001AB and 0001AC are not part of the Total Evaluation Price because the Government is setting the price and will be the same for all offerors.

Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix Are Offerors allowed to add a submittal date to the Header or Footer? Any data in the header or footer will not be evaluated. Adding a date is of no consequence.

Schedule B and Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix On Schedule B CLIN X014 is listed as an MO, on Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix this CLIN is shown as TBN on the "Calculation Method" tab, but appears to be a monthly cost on the "C‐21 CLS" tab. Which is correct, price as a monthly cost or TBN?

Offerors will price X014 as part of the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) using the deployment scenario in ITO attachment 3.0 (Deployment Scenario). The actual Southwest Asia Deployment pricing will be negotiated with the awardee. A revision will be made to the calculation methodology tab to show X014 as part of the TEP and the calculation methodology.

Attachment 5 ‐ Instructions to Offerors Section 5.4.3, Submission of Price/Cost Models. Are Offerors to submit a separate price model from the Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix for this FFP work?

Yes, a separate Price Model is required in addition to completion of the Price Matrix. The Price Matrix lists the proposed unit prices and calculates the extended prices and Total Evaluated Price. The Price Model supports the proposed unit prices by showing the logic and mathematical models used to develop the proposed prices. In addition, this Pride Model helps to demonstrate the Offerors understanding of the contract requirements.

Attachment 7 CBA Scott AFB Attachment 8 CBA Andrews AFB Would the Government provide a Seniority list for each location please? No. A seniority list will be provided to the awardee.

Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix CLINs X018AB and X026, Offerors are to populate these CLINs with their “Overhead Factor Rate”. During the draft process this was changed from a $ to a factor value in the January 2019 document. In the final this has been changed back to a $ amount. Should this factor be shown as dollars or as a true factor?

It is a true factor. Attachment 2 Price matrix will be revised.

Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix Base Period Unit Prices are formatted as dollars but the remaining years are a mixture of dollars and numbers. Should all cells in Columns D to M be dollars? Except for CLINs X018AB and X026?

Columns D through M will be revised.

Attachment 6 – Evaluation Factors for Award

2.4.5 TEP, “A rental equivalent evaluation factor as provided in the price volume IAW Addendum to FAR 52.212‐1, paragraph 5.3.5, will be applied to the total evaluation price”. The Attachment 2 – Price Matrix requests that Offerors provide a Unit Factor which is multiplied time the Evaluation Quantity to result in the Extended Price. The statement in Attachment 6 seems to be stating that the rental equivalent factor would be applied to the total TEP, is this correct?

If a rent equivalent factor is used by the offeror, then it will be applied to the Total Evaluated Price when into the respective cell for the rent equivalent factor within Attachment 3 Price Matrix. If the offeror is not using a rent equivalent factor, the cell for the rent equivalent factor in Attachment 2 Price Matrix will be blank.

Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix Rental Equivalent Factor is represented in dollars, should it be dollars or a factor? The Government provided an Evaluation Quantity of 1, which is multiplied by the Factor and included in the Base Period only. Is this correct?

Yes. The rent equivalent factor is a dollar value. The methodology for the rent equivalent factor is in the "Calculation Method" tab of Attachment 2 to the solicitation.

Attachment 6 – Evaluation Factors for Award 2.4.5 TEP, “Not all CLINs will be evaluated in the TEP”. Which CLINs are not part of the TEP? 0001AB; 0001AC; X013; X016; X021, X022; X027; X028

Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix Row 2, could the Government merge Columns D to M so that the Offerors name fits on one line and is not wrapped into Column D? Row 2, Columns D to M will be merged.

Attachment 2 ‐ Price Matrix Would the Government provide a sum of Column AU? A sum of column AU was added.

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offerors 5.4.3, Submission of Price/Cost Models. Is this Excel document subject to the restrictions for page size, font size and margins as described in Section 2.4, Page Size and Format?

The Price Model does not have to comply with the restrictions of paragraph 2.4. It is required to be in XLS file format (MS‐Excel 2016 or earlier) and provided on a CD as stated in paragraph 5.4.3 of Addendum to FAR 52.212‐1.

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offerors

3.2.3.d, “Provide signed letters of intent with the OEM…”

Learjet has stated they do not work directly with the C‐21 Prime Contractor and will not provide an Associate Contractor Agreement to any Offeror. Will the Government please clarify or remove this requirement?

Offerors are required to obtain letters of intent with the OEM and component vendors stating their intent to work with them in supporting the aircraft upon successful contract award. Associated Contractor Agreements are not required with the proposal, but rather with performance of the contract after award.

RFP FA8134‐19‐R‐5000 Questions and Answers

Attachment 6 – Evaluation Factors

2.2.4.d.1

Within the milestone schedule, is the Government looking for a critical path analysis (which may include minor tasks on the critical path and exclude significant tasks not on the critical path) or is the Government looking for contractors to include what they consider critical/significant tasks and milestones during the phase in?

Contractor needs to meet the requirements of PWS 1.32.1 to ensure a complete and harmonious transition within the 120 calendar day phase‐in plan.

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offeror Table 2.2 Proposal Organization Past Performance

The page limit for “Past Performance Information Forms (PPIF) (See Attach 1.1)” is indicated with double asterisks (**), but there is no corresponding footnote on the bottom of the table.

Does ** indicate there is no page limit because this data will be entered exclusively into the Microsoft Access file entitled “ppi_tool”? If not, what is the page limit for PPIF Attachment 1.1?

The double asterisk was revised to unlimited to remove any ambiguity.

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offeror Table 2.2 Proposal Organization and Section 4.3

Concerning Volume II page limits and content requirements, we request the Government define the terms Relevant Contract Narrative, PPIF and PPI Tool more precisely in relation to each other.

Table 2.2 states that for Section 4.3.2 a Relevant Contract Narrative is required and its page limit is defined with this: Request Max 5 pages per contract.

Table 2.2 also states a requirement for: Past Performance Information Forms (PPIF) (See Attach 1.1)

Section 4.3.1 states: Request each PPIF not exceed a target of 10 pages, although more or less may be submitted….

Section 4.3.2, which is entitled Relevant Contract Narrative, states: The offeror is requested to limit the narrative to a maximum of 10 pages. However, the offeror may exceed the requested page limit….

ITO Attachment 1.1 is entitled Past Performance Information Forms (PPIF) and states: Offerors must use the Past Performance Information (PPI) Tool (Use latest version from FBO.gov) in order to electronically submit the PPI portion of the Past Performance Volume.

ITO Attachment 1.1 also states: Hard copies of the pages generated from this tool shall be used in the hard copy of the past performance volume subject to the limitations outlined in this RFP and should be Tab 1 of the past performance volume.

Questions:

1. Does the Proposal Organization Table (Table 2.2) repeat the PPIF and the Relevant Contract Narrative, when in fact they are the same content?

2. If not, what is expected under Volume II’s Relevant Contract Narrative section?

3. Do the pages generated from the MS Access PPI Tool constitute the Relevant Contract Narrative?

4. If the PPI Tool does not constitute the Relevant Contract Narrative, what response is expected for the Relevant Contract Narrative?

5. If the PPI Tool does constitute the Relevant Contract Narrative, which portions of the data entered into the MS Access PPI Tool become the Relevant Contract Narrative?

6. Also if the PPI Tool does constitute the Relevant Contract Narrative, is the page limit 5, 10, or unlimited (with the expectation to remain as brief as possible)?

7. Should the contents of the PPI Tool be shown in textual or image format inside Volume II Past Performance?

8. Since the digital Volume II submission will be accompanied by the MS Access database, are only hardcopy versions of it required to contain the PPI Tool reports?

1. While it seems duplicative, the relevant contract narrative gives the offeror the opportunity to put that information in a clean, readable format.

2. As stated above, it is the same content for relevant contract narrative as in the PPIF, however it can be put into a more user friendly format

3. No, it should be a separate section in the proposed response

4. Same information, different format

5. All of the relevant contract narrative

6. No page limit, however we would like you to try for no more than 10 pages. (Table 2.2 will be revised to 10 pages.)

7. Text is the preferred method.

8. No. the digital version should contain everything that was included in the hard copy

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offeror Table 2.2 Proposal Organization and Sections 4.1.1 PPIF and Section 4.3 Relevant Contracts

Will the Government please confirm that the PPI tool output should be added to the Relevant Contract Narrative section of the Offerors proposal response?

If not, what additional content is the Government requesting in this area?

It is a separate section and will be evaluated per the requirements in the ITO

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offeror Will the Government please confirm that the 1.5 line spacing does NOT apply to the header, footer, tables, graphics, or bulleted list?

The header and footer are not part of the content and therefore are not subject to the formatting of the proposal body. Tables and graphics don’t have an established standard. Bulleted lists should follow the requested format.

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offeror Will the Government allow Offerors to use Arial Narrow in graphics, tables, headers, and footers? Yes. Attachment 5 will be revised.

PWS 1.22.1 Deployment Documents

The Contractor shall maintain current passports IAW DoDM reference 0‐1000.21 for those individuals identified on the Contractor’s mobility roster. The Contractor shall obtain all required visas to support CLS operations worldwide. The Contractor shall obtain CACs with the Geneva Convention Coding in order to support OCONUS deployments and exercises.

Question: Can the Government provide a listing of all the required visas to support CLS operations worldwide?

It is not yet known what visas are needed as deployments and exercises around the world in the future are not yet known. This is why the language says the "contractor shall obtain..."

PWS 1.33.12 Deployments and Exercises

The Contractor shall provide CLS support for the C‐21 fleet during contingency operation deployment and directed exercises. The Contractor shall ensure that all aircraft required to support a deployment are FMC IAW the C‐21 Minimum Essential Subsystems List (MESL) within 24 hours after official notification by the Government.

Question: Can the Government provide an electronic copy of the C‐21 Minimum Essential Subsystems List (MSEL)?

The MSEL will be attached as a package in FBO when these questions and answers are posted.

Attachment 5 – 3.2.3 Subfactor 1: Program Management (PM)

c. Provide a plan to provide mission essential services during, crisis, support deployments, drop‐in maintenance, aircraft on ground, and Contract Field Team (with proper security clearances) as listed in Attachment 11 in accordance with DFARS 252.237‐7024. (PWS 1.23) Attachment 11 FA8134‐19‐R‐5000 Mission Essential Contractor Services does not show a list of mission essential services.

Question: Can the Government provide an electronic listing of the mission essential services, functions, tasks for the C‐21 CLS during contingency and/or crisis situations?

Mission essential service are those items required to support and maintain the C‐21A aircraft with maintenance personnel, material and equipment to keep the aircraft in a fully mission capable status in both CONUS and OCONUS locations. This maybe during crisis situations, to support deployments, drop‐in maintenance, aircraft on the ground and Contract Field Teams when needed.

Attachment 5 – 3.2.3 Subfactor 1: Program Management (PM)

1.23 Mission Essential Services

Appendix B – Definitions

Appendix B – Definitions

1.13.2 Aero‐Medical Alerts

c. Provide a plan to provide mission essential services during, crisis, support deployments, drop‐in maintenance, aircraft on ground, and Contract Field Team (with proper security clearances) as listed in Attachment 11 in accordance with DFARS 252.237‐7024. (PWS 1.23) Attachment 11 FA8134‐19‐R‐5000 Mission Essential Contractor Services does not show a list of mission essential services.

The Contractor shall prepare for the continuation of essential DoD services during crisis IAW DFARS 252.237‐7023.

Contingency Operation Deployment: A contingency operation deployment is defined as a required deployment, often to a non‐C‐21 MOB, of C‐21 aircraft with necessary spares, support equipment and maintenance personnel to support aircraft utilization. Deployments are mission essential tasks.

Directed Exercises: A directed exercise is defined as a requirement for the C‐21 to exercise their mobility, wartime tasking, or both through self‐ directed exercises or by operational readiness inspections as directed by the Government. Directed exercises are mission essential tasks.

Main Operating Base (MOB) Contingency Operations: Contingency operations may be carried out under conditions where the base is subject to Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear or High Yield Explosives (CBRNE), conventional or terrorist attack.

Provide mission ready aircraft with aero‐medical equipment installed where required at MOB or DOL within 12 hours of notification by the Government.

Contingency Operation Deployment, Directed Exercise and Main Operating Base Contingency Operations are specifically identified as being mission essential services/tasks. Aero‐Medical Alert response is an implied mission essential capability requirement. Each of these “mission essential” responsibilities has specific response and timeline performance requirements identified in the PWS and are consistent with the definitions and terminologies provided in DFARS 252.237‐7023 and DFARS 252.237‐7024.

Question: Are those responsibilities identified in Attachment 5 – 3.2.3 Subfactor 1: Program Management (PM) c. (support deployments, drop‐in maintenance, aircraft on ground, and Contract Field Team) essential services as defined in the referenced DFARS or is it the Government’s intent to treat these responsibilities as mission essential services?

It is the Government's intent to treat these requirements/responsibilities as mission essential services.

Contract Field Team Support X015

Attachment 5 – 3.2.3 Subfactor 1: Program Management (PM)

Provide Contract Field Team support for any aircraft regardless of location in accordance with the PWS Paragraphs 1.33.7, 1.33.8, and any other PWS tasks that are not contained elsewhere and requires emergency worldwide support.

Provide labor for Aircraft Crash Recovery, Unscheduled Maintenance Away From MOB and/or DOL (Aircraft on the Ground), and any other emergency situation where a Contract Field Team is needed as directed by the PCO/ACO.

The Contract Field Team (CFT) is not further identified in the PWS and has an implied association with the Aircraft Crash Recovery (PWS 1.33.7) or Unscheduled Maintenance Away from MOB or DOL (PWS 1.33.8) through X015 reference. The CFT responsibilities and departure locations are not discussed.

c. Provide a plan to provide mission essential services during, crisis, support deployments, drop‐in maintenance, aircraft on ground, and Contract Field Team (with proper security clearances) as listed in Attachment 11 in accordance with DFARS 252.237‐7024. (PWS 1.23) Attachment 5 – 3.2.3 Subfactor 1 ties the CFT and the other cited responsibilities to the mission essential services while PWS 1.33.7 and

1.33.8 limit CFT responsibilities to Aircraft Crash Recovery and Unscheduled Maintenance Away from MOB and/or DOL.

Question: Can the Government provide qualifying and quantifying details on the CFT operations within the C‐21 CLS environment?

Attachment 11 indicates that the Mission Essential Contractor Services do not extend to Depot support.

Question: Can the Government clarify if drop‐in maintenance is Depot only and if not, whether drop‐in maintenance responsibilities can be performed at any MOB and/or DOL?

Contract Field Teams are those individuals that are required to go to both CONUS and OCONUS locations to get a downed aircraft due to maintenance related problems back to mission capable status. Those situations could be anything from tires/brakes being beyond limits to a engine change.

Drop‐in maintenance is normally a depot only situation requiring maintenance/repairs that can only be done in a depot facility.

PWS 1.33.1

Heavy/Depot Maintenance. Does replacement engine hardware need to be new condition, or is used/serviceable hardware from other engines allowable?

It depends on the hardware and situation. For example, if it is a time‐limited part, the number of hours left to next major inspection will reflect that part's limit.

PWS 1.33.1

Heavy/Depot Maintenance.

Are log book entry copies of previous Major Periodic Inspections (MPI) and Major Periodic Inspections/ Core Zone Inspections (MPI/CZI) events available? Will the Government provide these to industry?

The government has provided a listing of when the next MPI and CZI is due for each engine.

PWS 1.33.1

Heavy/Depot Maintenance.

Are any status sheets available on the engines that show the status of the life limited components such as turbine discs, and turbine blades showing life remaining? Will the Government provide these to industry?

The government has provided a listing of when the next MPI and CZI is due for each engine. Turbine disk and turbine blade life is determined during MPI and CZI inspections. No further information is available.

PWS 1.33.15 Other Maintenance Are all of the unscheduled maintenance events listed in PWS 1.33.15 covered under the O&A CLINs?

No. Demil and disposed are covered under CLINs X019 and X020 respectively. All other items within Performance Work Statement 1.33.15 will be Over and Above.

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offeror

Section 6.1 states that the offeror’s proposal shall include RFP Sections A‐K. ITO Sections 6.1.1‐6.1.4 only request RFP section A, section B, section I and section K.

Does the Government require all RFP sections A‐K or just the referenced sections in ITO 6.1.1‐6.1.4?

All sections. Instructions under paragraphs 6.1.1 through 6.1.4 are for assistance in providing those specific sections.

PWS 1.5.2, Aircraft Depot Level Maintenance Services

The “Note” in PWS 1.5.2 mentions “the Government QAR shall be present at Contractor’s site under paragraph 1.5.2 to the maximum extent possible”; however, there is no other description of the QAR’s role and level of involvement, or the expectation placed upon the Contractor to accommodate the QAR, found within the PWS.

Question: Would the Government please expand upon the QAR’s role and level of involvement during depot maintenance activities (i.e., in‐process inspections, safety of flight buybacks, etc.)?

Question: Would the Government please expand upon the expectations of the Contractor with respect to accommodating the QAR’s presence at the depot facility (i.e., office, phone, computer, etc.)?

The QAR responsibilities will be to ensure that the requirements of depot maintenance or any other maintenance action are done in accordance with applicable tech data and engineering guidance.

In regards to the contractor's accommodation of the QAR at the depot facility, the QAR must be provided necessary access to the facility to ensure required tasks and processes are carried out IAW with requirements in the maintenance contract.

CLIN X019 & PWS 1.33.15

PWS 1.33.15 does not provide sufficient information to provide an FFP price for CLIN X0019 and X0020.

Will the Government provide more information? Will the Government provide the C‐21 Demil Plan referenced in 1.33.15? The C‐21 demil plan has been added to the bidder's library.

PWS 1.31.1, Quality System

The last paragraph in PWS 1.31.1 is incomplete and contains a double statement reading as “The Contractor shall process deficiency reports IAW T.O. 00‐35D‐54, USAF Product The Contractor shall process deficiency reports IAW T.O. 00‐35D‐54, USAF Product”

Question: Will the Government please provide correction to this paragraph to clarify the intended requirement?

The Contractor shall process deficiency reports IAW T.O. 00‐35D‐54 USAF Deficiency Reporting. The PWS will be revised.

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offeror

3.2.6 Subfactor 4.b., PWS 1.34.4. & 1.34.5. Please confirm the PWS reference for Subfactor 4.b. should be 1.34.5 not 1.34.4. PWS reference should be 1.34.5. Attachment 5 will be revised.

PWS 1.22.3

PWS 1.27

PWS 1.33

Exhibit A – List of CDRLs

CDRL (A009) is identified as Deployment Plan/Mobility Roster and Mission Support Kits Report CDRL (A009) is associated with the training, qualifications and certification requirements identified for MOB or DOL Contractor personnel CDRL (A009) is referenced again as the Status Report for Deployment Plan/Mobility Roster and Mission Support Kits Report CDRL (A009) is identified as the Status Report for Deployment Plan/Mobility Roster and Mission Support Kits Report Question: Would the Government please clarify (a) if CDRL A009 is applicable to both reports and (b) if not can you provide a CDRL number and description for the CDRL indicated in PWs 1.27?

Yes, the CDRL does apply to all of the above due to deployed personnel requiring proficiency in applicable tasks for deployment. The contractor should also ensure this information is reflected in their local training records on site.

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offerors The format for Factor 3 – Price is different in the table under 2.3.3 and 5.4.4. Which is correct?

Table 2.3.3 is a summarized listing of information required in the Price Volume. Paragraph 5.4.4 is a specific organization of where the Government expects to find any response the Offeror provides to information discussed under the listed paragraphs. This organization is to aid in the evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal.

ITO Attachment 1.5 Will the Government confirm Client Authorization letters are not required for references if the Offeror is performing as a subcontractor and if their prime's customer is a Government client?

That is correct. Client Authorization letters are required for all commercial (non‐Government) contracts submitted. Client Authorization letters are not necessary for efforts supporting a Government contract.

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offerors

4.2.2 – Will the Government please confirm that only 1 PPQ is required per contract citation and not all 3 of the POCs in the PPIF are required to complete a PPQ?

A PPQ is required for all POC's that are being represented/called out in the Past Performance Proposal.

X002 Base Operations X002AC, X002AD, X002AE, X002AF

The Solicitation does not include a Base Support Outline Attachment For Andrews AFB, the PWS make no reference to Andrews AFB.

With the omission of these documents can the Government provide direction or clarity on what the Contractor is to price the Andrews

AFB CLIN ?

The contractor should price to perform work IAW the terms and conditions of the contract for Andrews AFB respective to the number of aircraft possibly located at Andrews AFB per each SubCLIN.

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offerors, Para. 4.2 Considering the Contractor elects to provide early submission of past performance in the PPI tool, can the Contractor expect to receive EN's relative to the Past Performance submission early, or prior to final proposal submission due date?

No. Evaluation Notices (EN) will not issued prior to the final proposal submission date. The timing of Evaluation Notices do not correlate to early submission but depends on the quality of the proposal.

PWS paragraph 1.25 Appendix C CDRL A010 Accident/Incident Report (PWS 1.25, Appendix C) states “Foreign Object Damage equal to or less than $10,000 and Missing Tools should be reported using CDRL A014.” CDRL A014 is Kit Status Report. Is it the intention that DI‐MGMT‐80368A Para’s 3.2.1.g and

i. be utilized as the basis for this report?

That statement in CDRL A010 is incorrect and will be removed from CDRL A010.

PWS paragraph 1.25 Safety Rqmnts, pg. 26 Does the Air Force additionally require facets of AFI 10‐220 (DCMA 8210.1) be complied with in addition to other Air Force requirements as they are presented in Appendix C, Section II?

No. GFR and GGFR requirements are not part of this contract.

PWS paragraph 1.27 Training, pg. 27 Are these training items in lieu of, to be blended with, or in addition to that required in AFI 10‐220, Attachment 12, Ground Training Matrix.

See above

PWS paragraph 1.27 Training, pg. 27 For engine run, and taxi training, certification, recurrent training. Should AFI 10‐220 (DCMA 8210.1), Chapter 5, para 5.4. Aircraft Engine/APU/GTC Operation (Ground Personnel). Procedures be used or an alternative guideline?

See above

1.25 paragraph Safety Rqmnts, pg. 26 Would it be acceptable to develop an overarching standardized ground safety program that incorporates Site specific safety requirements?

If the offeror believes this is necessary to create a safe environment, the Government has no objection.

1.25 paragraph Safety Rqmnts, pg. 26 Is there a safety Awards program that contractors can participate? Is there a monetized incentive to meeting certain AF safety objectives?

No

PWS, Appendix C‐Safety Specification, Section III, item 4.

It states that the Contractor must submit not only its Safety and Health Plan but its corresponding site safety checklist to the KO, 10 days after contract award.

There is no question to answer. The days will remain at 10.

PWS, Appendix C‐Safety Specification, Section III, item 4.

It states that the Contractor must submit not only its Safety and Health Plan but its corresponding site safety checklist to the KO.

Should the contractor craft this checklist from the various AF Instructions and regulations, or is there a specific regulatory guideline expected to be used and/or Air Force Checklist preferred.

The offeror's safety and health plan should be inclusive of all laws, regulations and OSHA/EPA requirements.

PWS 1.33.1

Heavy/Depot Maintenance. What is the Main LDG and Nose LDG Beyond Economical Repair dollar threshold?

Those thresholds are determined by the System Program Office (SPO) after information is given regarding cost of repair or replacement cost for new/overhauled component.

PWS 1.33.1

Heavy/Depot Maintenance.

On the "Landing Gear Scheduled maintenance Forecast" document. Can you clarify "Remaining Landings"? Does this indicate how many landing till the next 6000 LDG inspection is due/or to the Life Limit threshold?

Yes it is determined upon how many landings are remaining until the next inspection is due.

PWS 1.33.1

Heavy/Depot Maintenance.

The main landing gear strut part number determines the life limit. 12,000 vs. 16,500 landing. Can you provide the Part Numbers of all the Main Landing gear struts in order to line them up with the life extension STC, as different part numbers have different life extensions?

Please consult the IPC in the aircraft Technical Orders.

PWS 1.33.1

Heavy/Depot Maintenance.

The MLG strut PN 3141100‐x is not listed in the C21 chapter 5 tables. It is however listed in the Learjet 35 AMM and is life limited to 16,500 landings. Which is manual is correct?

All requirements for time change items and maintenance on the aircraft will be from the C‐21A tech data/manuals.

Attachment 5 – Instructions to Offerors Offerors are limited to 60 pages at 1.5 lines spacing which equates to roughly 40 pages for the response. With the strict page and font limitations it will be very difficult for Offerors to provide a compliant and compelling proposal response. Will the government please consider changing line spacing to single space or changing the page limitation to 75 pages?

60 pages at 1.5 spacing is sufficient to explain the offeror's approach to the subfactors with the exception of the deployment scenario, which is not included in this page count

Attachment 5 – 3.2.5.b Attachment 6 – 2.2.3.b

The referenced instructions and evaluation addresses “ability to manage pre‐positioned engines to meet PWS requirements”; however, the PWS reference (1.5.5) addresses Engine Depot Maintenance requirements. Is the Government looking for how we will manage the spare engine inventory to meet performance metrics; or is the Government looking for how we will perform engine depot overhauls?

Please provide clarification on the proposal instructions and evaluation.

Engine depot repair and staging of engines in the field or at the contractors storage facility all figure into spare engine availability.