T-6 COMB IV Vendor Questions No 1.pdf

Vendor Questions: Post-RFP Release through 25 August 2023

1. Bidders Library attachments 7d, 7e, and 7f appear to be duplicates of the following files: USA Flying Hours Jan 2018-Dec 2022.xlsx; USAF Flying Hours Jan 2018 to Mar 2023.xlsx; and USN Flying Hours Jan18 to Feb23.xlsx also issued with the solicitation. Please advise.

Government Response: Government concurs. The following documents are duplicates:

USA Flying Hours Bidder’s Library 7d USAF Flying Hours Bidder’s Library 7e USN Flying Hours Bidder’s Library 7f

The Government will delete the “Flying Hour” documents from the RFP posting in SAM.gov to eliminate confusion.

2. The parts usage data provided in bidders Library attachments 8E, 8F, 8G, 8H, and 8I were provided in adobe .pdf format, which is not useful for analysis of historical parts usage in determination of proposed cost per flying hour. Will the Government please provide these documents in excel format to enable offerors to adequately analyze the data?

Government Response: The Government will remove Bidder’s Library attachments 8E, 8F, 8G, 8H, and 8I and replace with the following Excel files:

1. Attachment 8 2019 Usage Data (previously 8E)

2. Attachment 8 2020 Usage Data (previously 8F)

3. Attachment 8 2021 Usage Data (previously 8G and 8H)

4. Attachment 8 2022 Usage Data (previously 8I)

3. The Government does not appear to have provided the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) or Area Wage Determinations (AWD) (for sites not covered by CBAs), to allow offerors to accurately determine Labor Costs. Will the Government please provide the appropriate CBAs or AWDs applicable to this solicitation?

Government Response: The Government will attach the following Wage Determinations and Collective Bargaining Agreements to the the RFP:

Wage Determination No.

Revision No.

Date of Last Revision State

2015-5157 21 14 July 2023 Mississippi 2015-5303 23 18 July 2023 Texas 2015-5253 21 12 July 2023 Texas 2015-5263 20 27 December 2022 Texas 2015-5857 10 27 December 2022 Oklahoma 2015-4561 22 27 December 2022 Florida 2015-5225 22 30 June 2023 Texas 2015-4281 27 30 June 2023 District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia

2015-4603 23 27 December 2022 Alabama 2015-4539 20 27 December 2022 Florida

CBA Description Effective Dates Location IAM & AW, LL No. 2916 8/31/2020 through 8/30/2023 Corpus Christi IAM & AW, LL No. 2341 8/31/2020 through 8/30/2023 Laughlin AFB IAM & AW, LL No. 4 8/1/2022 through 7/31/2025 Patuxent River IUE/CW.A, LL No. 83770 3/1/2019 through 3/31/2024 Columbus IAM & AW, LL No. 2777 5/16/2022 through 5/15/2026 Pensacola &

Whiting Field IAM & AW, LL No. 2771 9/9/2019 through 4/30/2023* Sheppard

*The is the most recent CBA for Sheppard—and current CBA has not been executed.

4. Is there a closing date to submit questions?

Government Response: The Government established a deadline of 1 Sep 23 for final RFP questions to be submitted.

5. L.4.3.3 requires a copy of the teaming agreements must be provided. However, Table 2.3 does not show L.4.3.3. Will the Government please clarify if a copy of a TA is required and should copies of these TAs be presented after the Relevant contract Narratives in Volume II - Past Performance?

Government Response: Please review Section 4.3 in its entirety. The Government will consider teaming if an offeror submits as part of their proposal. If an offeror wants the Government to consider affiliate companies, sister companies, teaming agreements, or joint ventures, offerors shall provide sufficient documentation in Volume IV of the proposal. Per L.4.3.3, if the required information is not included in the proposal, the Government will not evaluate or consider it. See revised Table 2.3 for inclusion of L.4.3.3 requirement.

6. Table 2.3 shows 5.1.6 through 5.1.8. However, L.5.2.10 Volume Organization does not present these areas in any areas for SECTIONS 1, 2, and 3. Will the Government please clarify if the offeror is to address 5.1.6 through 5.1.8. And if so, will the Government please update L.5.2.10 to reflect these three areas within SECTION 1?

Government Response:

5.1.6 Total Evaluated Price (TEP): The TEP is calculated and provided to the Government via Attachment 4, Pricing Matrix. No additional information is needed for Section 5.1.6.

5.1.7 Pricing Information Requirements/Data Other than Certified Pricing Data: Offerors do not need to submit other than certified cost or pricing data unless requested by the contracting officer (after receipt of proposals, if necessary). The contracting officer will request other than certified cost or pricing data if, and only if, additional information is needed to determine price reasonableness. No additional information is needed for Section 5.1.7.

5.1.8 Rounding: The offeror is not required to submit information for Section 5.1.8—rather the offeror shall comply with the stated rounding requirements in Attachment 4, Pricing Matrix.

7. Table 2.3 shows a Header for 5.2 Pricing Support Information. However, L.5.2.10 does not show his heading. Will the Government please update SECTION 2 in L.5.2.10 to include 5.2 Pricing Support Information or delete the header in Table 2.3?

Government Response: Section 5.2 is considered a header-section. The required information for Section 5.2 is the information detailed in subsections 5.2.1 – 5.2.8.

8. Section L.6.1 breaks out Section A (L.6.1.1), Section B (L.6.1.2) and Section I (L.6.1.3). However, Table 2.3 does not show these requirements, rather the requirements jump from L.6.1 and goes straight to L.6.1.4. Will the Government please modify Table 2.3 to reflect the structure under L.6.1?

Government Response: See revised Table 2.3.

9. Section L.6.3.4 requires the Offeror to provide Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations. However, Table 2.3 does not reflect this requirement. Will the Government please modify Table 2.3 to add L.6.3.4 to reflect this requirement?

Government Response: Table 2.3 already lists Section 6.3.4 in Volume IV: Team List, Arrangements, and/or Letters of Intent.

10. L.2.3.8 states a Table of Contents in each volume. However, Table 2.3 does not reflect a Table of Contents as a requirement for Volume II – Past Performance. Will the Government please clarify if a Table of Contents should be submitted in Volume II – Past Performance?

11. "L.2.3.9 states a Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms in “each volume”. However, Table 2.3 does not reflect a Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms as a requirement for Volume II – Past Performance. Will the Government please clarify if a Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms should be submitted in Volume II – Past Performance?

If not, will the Government please modify L.2.3.9 to exclude Volume II – Past Performance from this requirement?"

12. Attachment 1.4 Sample Consent Letter is in single line spacing. Since this is a Government produced document, can the Offeror provide their Consent Letters in single line spacing as well?

Government Response: Yes.

13. Attachment 1.3, PPQ appears to still map to the requirements as set forth in the April Draft RFP.

However, the June Draft and Final RFP no longer request most of the Questionnaire’s questions.

e.g., in Program Management the Questionnaire is requesting responses by the customer that include:

P1. Ability to staff a large supply effort at the contractor’s program office, as well as multiple other sites, adequate to ensure all requirements were met. Please explain.

P2. Ability to provide management services that include business relationships necessary and timely access to sub-vendor data to ensure adequate support to meet all customer requirements.

Please explain.

P3. Ability to manage and accept a transition (Phase-In) that ensured a seamless transition from an incumbent contractor. Please explain.

P4. Ability to maintain GFP inventory accuracy throughout contractor performance. Please explain.

P5. Ability to meet and report contract performance metrics. Please explain.

P6. Ability to manage and maintain compliance with a Quality Management System (QMS). Please explain.

P7. Ability to manage and maintain compliance with a Tool Control Program. Please explain.

P8. Ability to meet small business objectives. Please explain.

However, P2, P4, P6, and P7 was deleted from the Technical Volume. Will the Government please clarify if the Questionnaire is going to be modified to apply directly to the technical response?"

Government Response: The Past Performance Questionnaire has been updated as follows:

Subfactor 1: Program Management, removed the following:

P6. Ability to manage and maintain compliance with a Quality Management System (QMS).

P7. Ability to manage and maintain compliance with a Tool Control Program.

Subfactor 2: Supply Chain Management, removed the following:

S6. Ability to manage Support Equipment including Maintenance Repair, Calibration, and Replenishment.

Subfactor 3: Inventory Data Management and Reporting, removed the following:

I2. Ability for contractor to provide adequate training for ERP. Please explain.

14. "Section L.2.3.1 states: The Title Page of each volume shall contain the solicitation number, name, address, and telephone of the Offeror and electronic e-mail address if available. Section L.2.5 states: 2.5. Labeling A title page shall be included in each proposal volume, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification, and the Offeror’s name. For each proposal volume, the Offeror shall apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed IAW FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

However, in Table 2.3 for Volume IV – Contract Documentation shows 2.3.1 as Title Page

(SF1447).

Since the SF 1447 is the Solicitation/Contract Form (Section A) required in L.6.1.1, was it the Government's intent for the Offeror to provide the SF 1447 after the Title Page as well as provide a Section A with Blocks 30a, 30b and 30c completed under L.6.1 for Model Contract / Representations and Certifications?"

Government Response: The (SF 1477) listed next to Title Page in Table 2.3, Volume IV was removed. Follow the revised flow of Table 2.3.

15. "The Team List is being required as the second document within Table 2.3 for Volume IV – Contract Documentation and the sixth document of this Volume requires another Team List (as referenced in L.2.3.2) for Arrangements, and/or Letters of Intent.

Question 1: Can the Government please clarify if this is their intention for the Attachment 2.0, Team List be required in both places or is the Government actually looking for the Teaming Agreements required by Volume II – Past Performance as required in Section L.4.3.3?

Government Response: Offerors shall place the Team List (ITO Attachment 2) between the Title Page and the Table of Contents in Volume 4. Offers shall place any teaming arrangements/agreements and/or letters of intent between the Glossary of Abbreviations/Acronyms and the Model Contract in Volume IV.

Question 2: Table 2.3 for Volume IV shows in L.6.3.4 Team List, Arrangements, and/or Letters of Intent . However, Section L.6.3.4 references Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations. Will the Government please modify the reference to 6.3.4 within Table

2.3 for Team List, Arrangements, and/or Letters of Intent and add the reference to 6.3.4 for Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations under 6.3.1-6.3.3 Contact Information?"

16. "L.2.3.6 Pricing Information states ""All pricing information shall be addressed ONLY in the Price Proposal, SBPCD Template, and Contract Documentation Volume IV."

Section L.3.2.3.d.1 and Table 2.3.3 of Volume 1 - Technical requires the Offeror to submit a completed Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD). (See ITO Attachment

3.0 for SBPCD Template). Additionally, large businesses shall submit a subcontracting plan IAW FAR 19.7, tailored to this contract effort.

Question 1: Will the Government please clarify if the Offeror is to submit SBPCD and Subcontracting Plan as ""separate"" documents to Volume I - Technical or incorporate these documents within Volume IV - Contract Documentation?

Government Response: The SBPCD and Subcontracting Plan shall be included in Volume I of the proposal.

Question 2: If the Offeror is to incorporate these two documents into Volume IV - Contract Documentation will the Government please update Table 2.3 to reflect them in Volume IV?"

Government Response: The SBPCD and Subcontracting Plan shall be included in Volume I of the proposal.

17. The PWS requires the Contractor to manage and maintain any USAF-owned support equipment located at FRCSE, but we haven't been able to locate the type (i.e. powered or non-powered SE) or quantity of USAF-owned support equipment located at FRCSE. This information is vital to ensure offeror manpower strategies are adequate to successfully accomplish the requirement.

Will the Government identify the types and quantities of USAF-owned support equipment anticipated to be managed/maintained at FRCSE?

Government Response: All support equipment at FRCSE is on loan from other USAF sites and the part numbers/quantities are contained within Attachment 2 of the RFP.

18. Submittal of the offeror's subcontracting plan is a requirement of Volume I Technical, Subfactor One, Program Management. In order to ensure compliance with FAR 19.7 and FAR 52.219-9d, price data must be included within the plan. RFP Section L.2.3.5 already allows pricing information to be included within the SBPCD template, which is also a requirement of RFP Section L.3.2.3.d.1.

Will the Government consider revising RFP Section L.2.3.6 to allow pricing information to be included within the submitted subcontracting plan?

Government Response: The Government updated RFP Section L.2.3.6 to also include the Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

19. The Scheduled Inspection and Maintenance Requirements Manual identifies the various equipment that requires mandatory replacement, overhaul, restoration by part number. However, the solicitation does not provide a current status on any of these parts so bidders can perform an spares/inventory analysis and forecast for flight hour cost.

Will the government provide status reports on all of the OEM replacement schedule items for each aircraft in MS Excel format that include the date and aircraft time/cycles when installed in the bidders library so bidders can cost and forecast these items?

Government Response: Please refer to the Bidder’s Library Usage Data and the additional attachment TCI_MTCI_Calendar & Hourly Intervals by PN added to the Bidder’s Library to forecast requirements, and the TO 1T-6ABD-6, Change 10 listed under Attachment 8_Bidder’s Library Controlled 8J.

In addition, please refer to the PWS Appendix D for estimated workload data for projected MTCI repairs and overhauls.

20. PWS paragraph 1.1.8 states that third-party certification of AS9100D Quality Management Systems - Requirements based system is required. The AS9100D scope is for organizations that design, develop or manufacture aviation, space, and defense products.

Will the government accept a third-party certification to ISO 9001:2015 and AS9110C standard which scope is maintenance, repair, overhaul, and program management for government, military, and aerospace equipment?

Government Response: No, the USG will not accept the third-party certification to ISO 9001:2015 and AS9110C standard. The requirement will remain as AS9100D.

21. The T-6 engines are a complex and significant cost element of this solicitation with multiple internal life limited components and technical data requirements. However, the government has not provided any of the engine data needed in order for bidders to develop a firm fixed price for scheduled maintenance over the life of the contract.

1) Will the government provide the current hours/cycles on all installed and spare engines including hours/cycles on internal time change items in MS Excel format in the bidders library to allow bidders to more accurately forecast overhaul requirements/cost over the life of the contract?

Government Response: Please refer to the Bidder’s Library Usage Data and the additional attachment TCI_MTCI_Calendar & Hourly Intervals by PN added to the Bidder’s Library to forecast requirements, and the TO 1T-6ABD-6, Change 10 listed under Attachment 8_Bidder’s Library Controlled 8J.

In addition, please refer to the PWS Appendix D for estimated workload data for projected MTCI overhauls.

2) Will the Government provide the current hours/cycles of all engine Line Replaceable Units (LRUs) installed in MS Excel format in the bidders library to allow bidders to more accurately forecast overhaul requirements/cost over the life of the contract?

Government Response: Please refer to the Bidder’s Library Usage Data and the additional attachment TCI_MTCI_Calendar & Hourly Intervals by PN added to the Bidder’s Library to forecast requirements, and the TO 1T-6ABD-6, Change 10 listed under Attachment 8_Bidder’s Library Controlled 8J.

3) Will the Government provide a list of all Pratt & Whitney Service Bulletins that have been incorporated for each installed and spare engine?

Government Response: The USG encourages bidders to work with industry/third party repair facilities to establish agreements, IAW with PWS 1.1.1. Business Relationships and 1.1.16 Transition Requirements, to ensure applicable Service Bulletins are incorporated during Engine Overhauls.

22. There is no current total hours and cycles status of propellers, landing gear, and engines or projections provided in the solicitation that would allow bidders to perform MTCI analysis and projected overhaul schedule for pricing.

Will the government provide a MTCI status report in MS Excel that lists all MCTI by part number, current hours/cycles, and calendar time remaining in the bidder’s library?

Government Response: Please refer to the Bidder’s Library Usage Data and the additional attachment TCI_MTCI_Calendar & Hourly Intervals by PN added to the Bidder’s Library to forecast requirements, and the TO 1T-6ABD-6, Change 10 listed under Attachment 8_Bidder’s Library Controlled 8J.

In addition, please refer to the PWS Appendix D for estimated workload data for projected MTCI repairs and overhauls.

23. There are no specifications or technical data for the Aircraft Conditional Inspection (USN) or Analytical Condition Inspection (USAF) provided or cited in the solicitation. The Scheduled Inspection and Maintenance Requirements Manual for USN, USA, and USAF aircraft does not identify an ACI requirement or specification and the ACI is not a requirement of the aircraft manufacturer. However, bidders are required to include costs for ACI COMBS material support in the flying hour FFP that are not considered O&A. PWS paragraph 4.1.1 b) states that O&A discrepancies directly related to the flying hour program which are less than $5,000 per event are part of the flying hour program cost and will not qualify for O&A consideration. PWS paragraph

4.1.1 c) states that O&A discrepancies directly related to the flying hour program which are greater or equal to $5,000 per event are part of the flying hour program cost and will only qualify for O&A consideration if meeting the BFW&T definition listed in Appendix A of the PWS. Because there are no ACI specifications, on-condition replacement criteria, and life limited component replacement criteria, bidders are unable to assess possible ACI event discrepancies to develop ACI costs that are related to the flying hour program but are less than $5,000, and ACI costs that are equal to or greater than $5,000 but do not qualify because they are determined to be fair wear and tear.

1) Will the Government provide the manuals and/or specifications for the Aircraft Conditional

Inspection (USN) and Analytical Condition Inspection (USAF)?

Government Response: ACI Consumables and ACI Reparables are separately priced CLINs (FFP-TBN). The USG wants industry to propose IAW pricing matrix (Attachment #4) to the burden rates.

Government Response: The ACI repair process should follow PWS 4.1.1.f), g).

Paragraphs 4.1.1 b) & 4.1.1 c) would not apply as these address the price per flying hour program.

2) Will the Government provide a list of all parts or components that are replaced on each aircraft during an ACI event?

Government Response: ACI consumables and reparables are not to be included in the proposed price per flying hour.

3) Will the Government provide the ACI life-limited component replacement criteria for ACI, e.g., any criteria or policy where life-limited components are replaced with newly overhauled or zero-time components early during ACI if they have less than some pre-determined percent of their service life remaining.

Government Response: This could vary depending on each individual ACI.

24. Each offeror is requested to submit the Past Performance volume 15 calendar days prior to the solicitation closing date. Please clarify the method offerors are to use to submit the Past Performance volume.

Government Response: Offerors shall submit all proposal volumes via DoD SAFE, using the instructions outlined in Section L, paragraph 2.6. The only exception to this is that any Past Performance Questionnaires must be submitted directly to the contracting officer in accordance with the instructions stated on ITO Attachment 1.3 and Section L, paragraph 4.2.2.

25. Given conditions suitable for a fixed-price contract with prospective price redetermination as defined in and prescribed through FAR 16.205-1 and 16.205-2, particularly where conditions of a procurement render it impractical, if not impossible, to negotiate fair and reasonable firm-fixed prices for a 10-year contract period for aircraft parts that certainly will escalate or fluctuate significantly in price over that period, will the government consider adding the price redetermination clause FAR 52.216-2 to allow negotiation of prospective price changes after the 5th year of performance in order to establish a fair and reasonable negotiated price and to reasonably apportion the contractor’s risks IAW FAR 16.205-2? This same price redetermination approach has been implemented on other similar 10-year USAF CLS solicitations.

Government Response: The Government will not alter its acquisition strategy for the subject effort.

26. The Solicitation contains FAR 52.222-44 based on the prescription clause FAR 22.1006(c)(2) which states that FAR 52.222-44 should be used in contracts where there are not contract options to renew. Because the current solicitation would result in a contract where there are potential options to be renewed, should the government reconsider inserting FAR 52.222-43 instead of FAR 52.222-44?

Government Response: The Government will remove FAR 52.222-44 and replace it with FAR 52.222-43.

27. Section L 2.3.1 and 2.5 both state that the Title Page of each volume shall contain the solicitation number. Last sentence of Section L 2.6 states, for amendment purposes to the proposal, the "original" shall be clearly identified.

Is it the Government's intent that changes are made to the proposal 'for amendment purposes' refers to proposal amendments due to either post-submittal RFP amendments or EN responses, and at that time the title page would reflect such changes?

Government Response: Yes, any revised document submission should be labeled appropriately to ensure the Government is evaluating the most up-to-date proposal.

28. Section L Table 2.3 (page 4) indicates that the Volume III outline should contain a numbered header for a response to Section L paragraph 5.1.6 Total Evaluated Price (TEP). Section L.5.2.10 Volume Organization does not include a TEP requirement. Section L.5.1.6 states, the TEP is calculated in the Pricing Matrix (Attachment 4) in the “Pricing Matrix” worksheet.

Should the reference in Table 2.3 be removed or ignored, or should a line be added to Section 5.2.10 under SECTION 1 to require a numbered outline response to 5.1.6 Total Evaluated Price (TEP) in Volume III?

Government Response: 5.1.6 Total Evaluated Price (TEP): The TEP is calculated and provided to the Government via Attachment 4, Pricing Matrix. No additional information is needed for Section 5.1.6.

29. Section L Table 2.3 (page 5) and Section 5.2.10 (under SECTION 3 on page 17) both indicate that the Volume III outline should contain a numbered header for a response to Section L paragraph

5.2.10. Section L.5.2.10 provides the required organization (outline) for Volume III Price, but no requirement for a response.

Does the Offeror need to include a numbered paragraph header in Volume III that states the volume is organized per Section L.5.2.10?

Government Response: Offerors do not need to include a numbered header for Section 5.2.10, rather Volume III must be organized IAW Section 5.2.10.

30. Is it the Government's intent that the Offerors print the information from the PPI tool and insert it (which will not be searchable text) into the Volume II - Past Performance document/file OR does the Government intend for Offerors to list/summarize in Volume II (under the Relevant Contracts section) the relevant contract citations we are submitting via the PPI tool database/file?

Government Response: Offerors must use the PPI Tool (use the latest version at https://www.sam.gov) in order to electronically submit the database PPI portion of the Past Performance Volume in accordance with the RFP, Section L, Attachment 1.1.

In addition to the PPI Tool Database (Attachment 1.1), Offerors shall also provide as part of their Past Performance Volume submission the Relevant Contract Narratives for each PPIF in accordance with RFP, Section L, paragraph 4.3.2. Paragraph 4.3.2. provides further instructions regarding the specific information the Relevant Contract Narratives shall explain in relation to the contracts Offerors identify in their PPI Tool.

31. Does the Government intend Section L.3.2.5.a.3 to include PWS section 1.3.3.a)20 and 1.3.3.a)21 dashboards?

Government Response: Section L, paragraph 3.2.5.a.3 and Section M, paragraph 2.2.3.a will be updated to reflect these changes.

32. Appendix C, COMBS Incentive Structure: Item 3, “$203,750.00 of incentive” appears to be a duplicate of Item 2 above it.

Will the Government delete item 3 from page 99, and re-number item 4 "$81,500.00 of incentive is earned if contractor…" to item 3?

Government Response: The Government will not delete. Item 3 is not a duplicate; it is in reference to Long Term Agreements (LTA) for consumables, and Item 2 is LTAs for reparables.

33. How does the Government want offerors to price CBA-directed contributions to the I.A.M National Pension Fund, National Pension Plan, that are stipulated in some of the existing CBAs since the Air Force does not recognize these contributions as allowable costs to current programs?

Government Response: Offerors should not include in their contract price any costs associated with the IAMAW pension fund rehabilitation plan. Should these costs later be determined to be an acceptable fringe benefit, the government will entertain an REA from the successful offeror.

34. Section L.2.4.2 states text intended for evaluation within all figures, charts, tables, and graphs, to include imbedded images, shall be no less than Arial 8-pt. Section L.3.2.5.a.3 requires screenshots of the proposed dashboard capability of ERP IAW PWS 1.3.3.a)21.

Does the Government intend for text within screenshots to be modified to meet the Arial 8-pt requirement?

Government Response: Offerors may adjust the size of the screenshot to enlarge or shrink text within the screenshot as needed.

35. In reviewing the 2019-2022 Usage Data, we found several parts that are not included in the current data that we would expect to see. For example, the propeller is not listed. In previous data sets, there were 113 propeller transactions per year on average.

Would the government please confirm the data sets provided accurately reflect the historical demand and usage data for all active parts and materials required by the T-6 Bill of Materials, thus allowing accurate pricing of a material cost per flight hour rate?

Government Response: Propellers are reflected in the 2019-2022 Usage Data per FA8106-23-R- 0001 Amendment 0001, issued 7 Aug 23. The usage data provided is the information delivered to the USG.

36. Will the Government please provide guidance concerning how offerors should reconcile the ITO Attachment 1.1 instructions with the actual PPI Tool provided with the RFP? Or, will the Government consider reconciling the ITO Attachment 1.1 instructions to correlate with the actual PPI Tool provided with the solicitation?

Government Response: Offerors must use the PPI Tool (use the latest version at https://www.sam.gov) in order to electronically submit the database PPI portion of the Past Performance Volume in accordance with the RFP, Section L, Attachment 1.1. The Attachment 1.1 also includes PPI Tool instructions (with corresponding screenshots) of how Offeror’s can input their information into the PPI Tool.

Depending on what version of Microsoft suite an offeror is using, the instructions from the screenshots provided in Attachment 1.1 may appear slightly out of order or slightly different than what is displayed in the PPI Tool itself. In this instance, the Government recommends following the prompts as provided in the PPI Tool itself. If offerors have any issues with the PPI Tool, please contact the PCO for further instructions.

37. Will the Government please include the Subcontracting Plan to Section L paragraphs 2.3.6 and 5.1?

Government Response: Subcontracting Plan has been added to Section L paragraph 2.3.6 and 5.1.

38. Will the Government please include the Subcontracting Plan as an attachment to the model contract (Contract Documentation Volume IV)?

Government Response: Offerors have the responsibility in drafting and submitting their Subcontracting Plans. Offerors should refer to FAR 19.704 for subcontracting plan requirements.

39. Would the Government please ensure the two fields pull labor rate values instead of material percentage values?

Government Response: Column AJ, Row 115 has been corrected: changed link from AJ144 to

AJ142.

https://www.sam.gov/