Consolidated QA CFT LASR FINAL.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 38 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Contract Field Teams (CFT) Labor Augmentation Support Requirements (LASR) Multiple Award IDIQ
- Solicitation number
- FA810824RB001RFP
About this file
This is a Questions & Answers (Q&A) document containing 120 questions and responses related to the Contract Field Teams (CFT) Labor Augmentation Support Requirements (LASR) Multiple Award IDIQ solicitation. The Q&As address various aspects of the $7.09B IDIQ contract including: the change from Full Time Equivalent (FTE) terminology to Minimum Team Compliment (MTC), clarifications on firm-fixed-price requirements, surge/overtime provisions, transition costs, past performance evaluation methodology, and task order award procedures.
Key clarifications provided include: proposals are due by 5:00 PM CST on July 25, 2024; awards will use a Highest Technically Rated Offerors approach rather than LPTA or tradeoffs; task orders under 100 FTEs CONUS/50 FTEs OCONUS will be partially set aside for small businesses; the contract includes one 5-year base period and one 5-year option; and both firm-fixed-price and time & materials contract types may be used. The Q&As also clarify that quality control personnel are considered separate from the MTC, surge/overtime will be priced at the task order level, and the government will provide weapons systems and special tools while contractors provide common hand tools.
View the file
Other files
Show all 38
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q&As
| Question # | Document/Page | Text | Question/Recommendation | Government Answer |
| 1 | Attachment_1_PerformanceWorkStatement_Amendment 0003, Attachment A |
Attachment_1_PerformanceWorkStatement_Amendment 0003, Attachment C
Attachment_2_H_Clause_Amendment_0003 References to Full Time Equivalent (FTE) have been changed to Minimum Team Compliment (MTC). Request the Government define MTC and provide clarification on how MTC differs from FTE. As stated in the RFP, the FFP MTC is defined as the minimum required quantity of personnel by skill set to ensure mission readiness and mitigate risk as specified by the Government on each task order.
MTC is a full time headcount. The term FTE was included in the PWS in error and in all places used, MTC was intended. Therefore, this RFP amendment makes that correction. As such, the term FTE is irrelevant to the requirement 2 Attachment_4_Section_L_Amendment_0003, Section 2.1.7 and Section 6.2.2
Attachment_2_H_Clause_Amendment_0003 Section 2.1.7 states "Offerors will be provided the opportunity to either submit a revised proposal in its entirety or choose to certify in writing that their original proposal submission(s) remain valid. Offerors are encouraged to review the latest solicitation amendment and attachments against their original proposal submission before choosing to certify in writing that their original proposal submission(s) remain valid. Offerors shall certify in writing stating that the Offeror will stand on their original proposal dated in accordance with their original proposal submission. Additionally, the Offeror shall state the proposal is valid for 365 days from the date of issuance of Amendment 0003."
Section 6.2.2 Local Clauses - Special Contract Requirements (Section H) states "All Unique Contract Requirements are described in the special clauses in Attachment 2 of the RFP. The Offeror shall provide required information to complete special clauses if necessary." Offerors were required to provide a completed Section H and signed copies of all amendments in Volume IV - Contract Documentation as part of their original submission.
| Confirm whether offerors are required to submit their full proposal with an updated VoI IV. | If new or updated proposals will be submitted, then all Volume's must be resubmitted. If an offeror is keeping their current proposal valid, then you must return a signed SF30 for Amendment 3 and state that you are keeping your current proposal valid. | ||
| 3 | Attachment_4_Section_L_Amendment_0003, Section 2.1.7 and 2.1.6 | Section 2.1.7 states "Offerors will be provided the opportunity to either submit a revised proposal in its entirety or choose to certify in writing that their original proposal submission(s) remain valid. Offerors are encouraged to review the latest solicitation amendment and attachments against their original proposal submission before choosing to certify in writing that their original proposal submission(s) remain valid. Offerors shall certify in writing stating that the Offeror will stand on their original proposal dated in accordance with their original proposal submission. Additionally, the Offeror shall state the proposal is valid for 365 days from the date of issuance of Amendment 0003." |
Section 2.1.6 states "Proposals and modifications to proposals shall be submitted via drop-off (upload) files in DoD SAFE to Contracting Officer at jennifer.russ@us.af.mil. and Contract Specialist at colton.kalivas@us.af.mil." 1) Confirm whether offerors are required to submit revised proposals via DoD SAFE.
| 2) Confirm whether offerors are required to submit their certification to evaluate original proposal submission and signed Amendment 0003 via DoD SAFE. | If an offeror is re-submitting a new proposal, then they must sumit via DoD Safe by requesting a drop-off link. If an offeror is keeping their original proposal valid, then they can submit the signed Amendment 0003 via DoD Safe or via e-mail to both jennifer.russ@us.af.mil and colton.kalivas@us.af.mil. | ||||
| 4 | Attachment 4, Instructions to Offerors (ITO), Paragraph 5.1.1 | Is the Offeror required to re-enter information in the PPI tool when re-submitting our CFT LASR Proposal by 22 January 2025 if there are no changes to the information previously entered into the PPI tool? | No | ||
| 5 | PWS Paragraph 5.2.4, Contractor Identification | Please clarify the requirement to “display distinguishing badges at all times.” When performing aircraft maintenance operations, employee identification badges present an FOD risk and are typically not allowed to be worn by the customer. | While performing specific duties requiring secured badges, indivdiuals shall secure as per requirements. For example there are arm bands designed to hold line badges securely while working on aircraft. | ||
| 6 | If an IDIQ awardee does not have an active task order under a current CFT IDIQ awarded in 2016, how will past performance for task order award under this new CFT LASR IDIQ be evaluated? | The Government is not answering scenario based questions. Please refer to Section M for the IDIQ contract, Attachment 2 H-Clause, Attachment 3 Ordering Guide and FAR 16.5. CFT LASR Basic Contracts will be awarded utilizing FAR 15.3 procedures while task orders will be awarded utilizing FAR 16.5 procedures. | |||
| 7 | If an Offeror does not have an active task order under a current CFT IDIQ awarded in 2016, meaning they do not have hands-on, direct CFT experience or CFT Form 104s, how will the PCO determine the "best value" of that Offeror's proposal? | The Government is not answering scenario based questions. Please refer to Section M for the IDIQ contract, Attachment 2 H-Clause, Attachment 3 Ordering Guide and FAR 16.5. CFT LASR Basic Contracts will be awarded utilizing FAR 15.3 procedures while task orders will be awarded utilizing FAR 16.5 procedures. | |||
| 8 | How will the Government use the CFT Form 104 on the current CFT IDIQ awarded in 2016 to establish past performance on this CFT LASR IDIQ? | The Government reserves the right to use other methods of past performance data collection as stated in H-Clause H1 (13). However, the Government plans to establish past performance based on 104's from CFT LASR. | |||
| 9 | How will the Government determine that a proposal reflects an inherent lack of competence or failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the applicable task? | The Government is not answering scenario based questions. Please refer to Section M for the IDIQ contract, Attachment 2 H-Clause, Attachment 3 Ordering Guide and FAR 16.5. CFT LASR Basic Contracts will be awarded utilizing FAR 15.3 procedures while task orders will be awarded utilizing FAR 16.5 procedures. | |||
| 10 | Will the Government please provide a specific example of how the task order proposals will be evaluated, or share a draft "Section M" for a future FOPR? | Task Order proposals will be evaluated using best value with evaluation criteria defined in the FOPR. This will include price evaluation and quality of service, of which will include non-cost evaluation factors such as past performance, compliance with solicitation requirements, management capability, transition planning, and/or mission essential planning. | |||
| 11 | H Clause H1 (14) (15) | H Clause H1 (14) (15): If the Government determines it needs to open discussions and conduct interchanges with one company, will that trigger opening discussions and conducting interchanges with all Offerors during the FOPR? | The Government is not answering scenario based questions. Please refer to Section M for the IDIQ contract, Attachment 2 H-Clause, Attachment 3 Ordering Guide and FAR 16.5. CFT LASR Basic Contracts will be awarded utilizing FAR 15.3 procedures while task orders will be awarded utilizing FAR 16.5 procedures. | ||
| 12 | H Clause H1 (15) | H Clause H1 (15): If the Government opens discussions and requests a formal proposal update from interchanges from one Offeror, will all Offerors have the same opportunity to submit formal proposal updates? | The Government is not answering scenario based questions. Please refer to Section M for the IDIQ contract, Attachment 2 H-Clause, Attachment 3 Ordering Guide and FAR 16.5. CFT LASR Basic Contracts will be awarded utilizing FAR 15.3 procedures while task orders will be awarded utilizing FAR 16.5 procedures. | ||
| 13 | H Clause (H15) | H Clause (H15): Is a formal proposal update the same as a Final Proposal Revision IAW FAR 15.307? | No. Final Proposal Revisions are not required utilizing FAR 16.5 | ||
| 14 | Will the Government provide a specific example of how they intend to use a T&M CLIN on the CFT LASR IDIQ? What type of work will be contemplated for a T&M CLIN? Will it be in accordance with FAR principles on the use of a T&M contract? | The Government cannot anticipate the requirements where T&M may be utilized. Please see H-Clause H1 (19) | |||
| 15 | Will the Government explain what type of work will be contemplated for a T&M CLIN? | The Government cannot anticipate the requirements where T&M may be utilized. | |||
| 16 | When the Government elects to use a T&M CLIN will it be in accordance with FAR principles on the use of a T&M contract? | Please see H-Clause H1 (19) | |||
| 17 | How will the Government determine scope changes and other alterations to a task order? | Determinations will be handed on a case-by-case basis. | |||
| 18 | H-4 (b) | The Government may provide to the Contractor weapons systems and/or support equipment required in the performance of all labor CLINs… | Are there instances where the Government will not provide any of the items listed in H-4 (b)? Note: This was just an excerpt of the clause, and the question relates to all of the items listed (fuel, work space, electric power, etc.). | The government provides weapons systems and support euipment to perform maintenance activituies, The Contractor provides common hand tools. All special tools are provided by the government. | |
| 19 | The Government may provide to the Contractor weapons systems and/or support equipment required in the performance of all labor CLINs… | How will the Government determine what it will provide the Contractor? Note: This was just an excerpt of the clause, and the question relates to all of the items listed (fuel, work space, electric power, etc.). | The government provides weapons systems and support euipment to perform maintenance activituies, The Contractor provides common hand tools. All special tools are provided by the government. | ||
| 20 | H Clause H4 (b) | The Government may provide to the Contractor weapons systemsand/or support equipment required in the performance of all labor CLINs… | If the Government elects not to provide any or all of theseitems, will it be made explicitly clear in the FOPR? Note: This was just an excerpt of the clause, and the question relates to all of theitems listed (fuel, work space, electric power, etc.). | Specific special tools are ientified in the task order specific PWS | |
| 21 | H Clause On Ramping | H Clause On Ramping: How long will the on-ramping process take? | The Government cannot anticipate the time it will take to on-ramp at this time. | ||
| 22 | H Clause On/Off Ramping | H Clause On/Off Ramping: Who defines an "effective IDIQ awardee?" | Effective awardee refers to awardees actively participating in CFT competitions | ||
| 23 | H Clause On/Off Ramping | H Clause On/Off Ramping: Will there be specific, objective parameters to define an "effective IDIQ awardee?" | Effective awardee refers to awardees actively participating in CFT competitions | ||
| 24 | Ordering Guide | Ordering Guide: Can the Government provide a specific example of a situation in which the PCO's "broad discretion" is exercised? | The Government is not answering scenario based questions. Please refer to Section M for the IDIQ contract, Attachment 2 H-Clause, Attachment 3 Ordering Guide and FAR 16.5. CFT LASR Basic Contracts will be awarded utilizing FAR 15.3 procedures while task orders will be awarded utilizing FAR 16.5 procedures. | ||
| 25 | Section M | Does the Government currently have a Section M best value process outlined for the future FOPRS under the CFT IDIQ LASR? | FOPRs and the best value criteria will be defined for each individual requirement. | ||
| 26 | Historically, the CFT IDIQ has been advertised as a "flexible contract" for the military. Can the Government specifically explain how this iteration of the CFT LASR IDIQ is a flexible contract vehicle for the end user(s)? | The CFT LASR contract gives flexbility with potentially different contract types, terms and conditions within the H-Clause, and evaluation criteria. | |||
| 27 | The Government states that this is a "flexible contract". Have the current CFT IDIQ DoD end users communicated their ability to define their workloads for up to 5 years out? | Yes | |||
| 28 | Will the end-user USG DoD Customers be part of the sole source committee for the CFT LSR IDIQ? | Government teams for FOPR evaluations have not yet been determined. | |||
| 29 | Will the end-user USG DoD Customers be part of the sole source committee for each FOPR? | Government teams for FOPR evaluations have not yet been determined. | |||
| 30 | How involved will the end-user DoD Customer be in each FOPR best value determination? | Government teams for FOPR evaluations have not yet been determined. | |||
| 31 | Does the Government already have an idea of what a suitable requirement will be for a T&M CLIN? | The Government cannot anticipate the requirements where T&M may be utilized. | |||
| 32 | PWS 4.4.2 | PWS 4.4.2: What is the purpose of having on call requirements, given the potential Government legal liability for this type of labor requirement? | Any actual "on-call" requireements would be identified in the actual task order PWS. Based upon specific needs and weighed agsint risks. | ||
| 33 | PWS 4.4.2 | PWS 4.4.2: If Contractor employees are required to be "on call" for specificperiods of time, is the Government prepared to pay the requiredstipend that these employees are entitled to do for waiting for potential work to be performed on any given day? | If a task order requires on-call work the government would be prepared to fund as required | ||
| 34 | Are the end-user DoD customers aware of the potential cost increase of having "on-call requirements"? | Yes | |||
| 35 | PWS 4.4.2 | PWS 4.4.2: If Contractor employees required to be "on call" for specific periods of time, will there by an area in the pricing sheet for Offerors to bid the required stipend for employees to be on call? | The use of "On-Call Requirements" will be determined by the requirement and instructions would be included at the FOPR level. | ||
| 36 | PWS 4.4.2 | PWS 4.4.2: If the USG will not provide an area in the pricing sheet for "on-call requirements," why not? | See question and answer on #30 | ||
| 37 | H Clause 6 ( c ) | H Clause 6 ( c ): Will the modified definition of fully manned be applied uniformly to all Contractors? | Yes | ||
| 38 | What kind of collaborative dialogue can a Contractor expect to have with the Government prior to jumping into litigation with the Government over off set payments or any other issue? | Offerors are required to meet the FFP MTC in H-Clause H1. The Government encourages collaborative communication with all awardees, however, offset is the sole remedy for failure to meet the FFP MTC. | |||
| 39 | H Clause H1 6(d) | H Clause H1 6(d) : Will the method in which the Government determines "other remedies" be applied uniformally to all Contractors? | Yes | ||
| 40 | Will the Government disclose/describe, in detail, the specific regulatory techniques that will be used to determine that task order prices are fair and reasonable, or commit to a specific FAR clause that will guide this determination? | Please refer the techniques listed in FAR 15.404-1. | |||
| 41 | Please confirm the Government intends to only use only 104s that have been reviewed, had a comment period, and have been finalized. Additionally, will the Government consider items like unresolved legal matters, REAs, certified claims, etc. in the review of past performance during the FOPR phase/Task Order source selection? | Confirmed | |||
| 42 | Will a disagreement with the Government be used against a Contractor in future Task Order awards? | No | |||
| 43 | CFT Form 104 | When the Government decides to use CFT Form 104s to determine past performance during task order award, that inherently gives the CFT Form 104s more value than the absence of the CFT Form 104,whether that value is positive or negative. What specific measures will the Government take to ensure that Contractors with CFT Form104s on the LASR IDIQ and Contractors without CFT Form 104s on the LASR IDIQ are evaluated fairly and equally and on the same basis during task order source selection? | Contractors that do not have task order awards and a history of 104's would not be in a state of advantage or disadvantage. The Government does not treat unknown past performance as unacceptable during evaluation. | ||
| 44 | Despite the CFT Program historically utilizing T&M CLINs for themajority of the IDIQ's existence, in more recent years the Government has elected to utilize FFP CLINs. Can the Government describe its change in ideology? | The Government has selected the contract type that's best suited to meet the Government Requirement. Additionally, other contract types such as T&M are available to allow flexbility to meet our customers needs. | |||
| 45 | Can the Government provide a specific example of when a T&M CLIN will be utilized? | The Government cannot anticipate the requirements where T&M may be utilized. | |||
| 46 | Absent NTE rates at the IDIQ, which were how Offerors Task Order proposals were quickly determined to be fair and reasonable, how long will the task order award process take? | The Government cannot yet define the time it may take to award a task order as it will depend on the requirements of the FOPR. | |||
| 47 | Will the Government ensure proper labor mapping between a CBA and the CFT PWS during a FOPR? | Yes, however there may be instances where labor categories in the FOPR PWS may not be present in a CBA thus the need to negotiate them to a new CBA/MOU. | |||
| 48 | Can the Government explain the rational for considering Surge and OT firm fixed price? | Real world events may require additional labor/overtime as needed. | |||
| 49 | Does the Government currently have the ability to define Surge and OT requirements on it's CFT Programs in order to make these FFP CLINS? | Surge and overtime is above and beyond the FFP effort. These occur based on real world impacts. | |||
| 50 | How can the Government adequately determine Surge and OT on task orders with periods of performance spanning 5 years? | Surge and overtime is above and beyond the FFP effort, and priced at the time of need These occur based on real world impacts. | |||
| 51 | Can the Government provide a specific example of an Over and Above Requirement based on historical workload data over the past 8 years? This will be helpful to Offerors that are not familiar with the CFT Program. | An example is for our B-1 maintenance effort. The FFP is for 8 hrs/day, 5 days a week. ON occasion there has been additional work required on the weekend, This is priced at the time needed, usually with a week notice, and is priced seperately from the FFP effort, typically at eh standard OT rate (1.5 times labor rate) at the time of need. | |||
| 52 | How can the Government adequately determine Surge and OT on task orders with periods of performance spanning 5 years? | Overtime and Surge pricing arrangments will coincide with the pricing arrangment established at the task order level and will be documented with the FOPR. Example: Task Order is for FFP Labor, therefore any Surge or Overtime will be Firm-Fixed Price as well. Surge and Overtime are available for flexibility over the life of the task order. | |||
| 53 | H Clause H5 (b) (5) | H Clause H5 (b) (5): Will the Government clarify that Quality Control personnel are corporate resources and not the quality inspectors typically a part of the MTC? | Attachment 2, H-Clause H5(b)(5) states “Hands on” labor shall not include any labor performed by support or supervisor type personnel, such as, but not limited to: timekeepers, payroll clerks, purchasing, materials handling, quality control, storing and issuing personnel. Quality control personnel are considered as those personnel who apply standards to finished work/products to determine that finished production work is serviceable in all respects. These will be individuals not part of the MTC. | ||
| 54 | The Government continues to reiterate the choice for firm fixed price contracts while also requiring flexibility, which is not inherentlyseen as part of firm fixed price contracts. Meaning, if the USG is contemplating scenarios where a FFP can be increased or decreasedby 25%, then the requirement is not fully known. Can the Government rationalize/justify/ explain the selection of FFP contract type and why the Government chooses not to use othercontract types that allow such flexibility? | The Government has selected the contract type that's best suited to meet the Government Requirement. Additionally, other contract types such as T&M are available to allow flexbility to meet our customers needs. | |||
| 55 | If the Government can increase the MTC in perpetuity, does this mean that a FFP MTC can change from 100 to 300 during the life of a task order? When the Task Order is up for recompete, will the Government use any unilateral MTC increase or decrease data to properly assess the Contract type decision for the follow-on Task Order? | Please refer to Attachment 2, H-Clause H10 for MTC increases or decreases. The Government reviews their requirements during recompetition, however it is currently uknown whether or not the Government would utilize a unilateral MTC increase to assess contract type. | |||
| 56 | How often can the Government uniliaterally increase the Firm Fixed Price Minimum Team Compliment, through H-10? For example, can it be used once a month, once a contract period of performance, etc.? | Up to the percentages identified in H10 over the life of the task order. | |||
| 57 | Has the Government reviewed case law regarding surge? | Yes | |||
| 58 | Taking into considering the CLIN description for transition, can the Government please explain why the Contractor is not entitled to transition costs for additional MTC facilitated by H-10? | While the Government is not entitling offerors to tranisition costs, offerors are not prohibited from proposing tranistion costs as they so choose. | |||
| 59 | Does the Government believe a FFP Task Order can change infinitely during its lifetime? If not, what percentage differential does the Government believe a FFP Task Order can be justified? | The Government is not answering scenario based questions. Please refer to Section M for the IDIQ contract, Attachment 2 H-Clause, Attachment 3 Ordering Guide and FAR 16.5. CFT LASR Basic Contracts will be awarded utilizing FAR 15.3 procedures while task orders will be awarded utilizing FAR 16.5 procedures. | |||
| 60 | How much advanced notice will the Government provide to a Contractor prior to Off-Ramping them from the CFT LASR IDIQ? | There are different timelines based on different factors, but please refer to Attachment 2, H-Clause H8 (a) for off-ramping methods. | |||
| 61 | Will a Contractor notified of a potential Off-Ramping be given a certain amount of time to appeal the process with the Government? | No | |||
| 62 | H Clause Off Ramping | H Clause Off Ramping: What if there have not been enough FOPRS released during the Base Year of the CFT LASR IDIQ? | The Government is not answering scenario based questions. Please refer to Section M for the IDIQ contract, Attachment 2 H-Clause, Attachment 3 Ordering Guide and FAR 16.5. CFT LASR Basic Contracts will be awarded utilizing FAR 15.3 procedures while task orders will be awarded utilizing FAR 16.5 procedures. | ||
| 63 | The Government states that Contractors that are Off-Ramped will have no active task orders and that an Off-Ramp method can includenot exercising a Task Order option period. What if a Contractor has multiple Task Orders and is considered "performing" on all but one Task Order? Will the Government not exercise the option on the"non-performing" Task Order as well as the "performing" TaskOrder(s) in order to Off-Ramp a Contractor? | Non-performance on a single task order and how the non-performance is handled will be at the descretion of the PCO based on the Government's best interests | |||
| 64 | H Clause H8(a) | H Clause H8(a): What is the Government's definition of "non-performing"? | Failure to meet or comply with any requirements as detailed within the contract | ||
| 65 | DAFI 63-138 | Taking into consideration the latest versions of DAFI 63-138 and the DoD Source Selection Procedures, will the Source Selection Authority (SSA) be comprised of non-biased Government personnel that are removed from the current CFT IDIQ? | Potential Offerors can refer to the latest versions of DAFI 63-138 and the DoD Source Selection Procedures to determine how the SSA is selected. | ||
| 66 | DAFI 63-138 | Taking into consideration the latest versions of DAFI 63-138 and the DoD Source Selection Procedures, how is the Source Selection Authority (SSA) created? | Potential Offerors can refer to the latest versions of DAFI 63-138 and the DoD Source Selection Procedures to determine how the SSA is selected. | ||
| 67 | Please reiterate the Government's intent for not requiring a Contractor's Past Performance EN response in a FPR | Because offeror responses will automatically be applied during final evaluation IAW Section M, 1.8. | |||
| 68 | This methodology differs from the current CFT IDIQ. Can the Government explain the change in methodology from the current IDIQ to the LASR IDIQ considering the scope of work has not changed? | Government unsure what methodology is being questioned here | |||
| 69 | Why has the Government determined to interfere with vacation, sick leave, and other protected labor rights? | The government is not interferring with these "labor rights" The government is merely stating the FFP personnel requirements to cover mission risk. | |||
| 70 | Considering these are FFP CLINS and no downward deviation will be considered to meet mission readiness and risk, if the Government is incorrect and there is a downward deviation, will the Contractor be able to keep the difference in funds? | No | |||
| 71 | FAR Subpart 37.6 | Is this a Performanced-Based acquisition, pursuant to FAR Subpart 37.6, or labor augmentation, as noted in the title of the IDIQ? We are unfamiliar with any FAR principles that consider both to be true at the same time. | This is a performance-based contract that includes labor augmentation. | ||
| 72 | Please confirm the Government will still use T&M where appropriate based on mission instability or expected workload changes or otherwise deemed necessary for the mission. | Confirmed | |||
| 73 | The unilateral MTC increase and decrease seems to be identical, in practice, to the DFARS 232.217-7001, Surge Option. How is a MTC increase under the H Clause different from a surge? | Surge is a short-term temporary adjustment to mission requirements, not an MTC change. | |||
| 74 | Since Best Value determinations are subjective, how can theGovernment ensure task order source selection evaulations are fairand reasonable? What Government personnel will determine bestvalue awards for the CFT LASR IDIQ task orders? | Government teams for FOPR evaluations have not yet been determined. | |||
| 75 | Can the Government provide an example of a CDRL that is incorporated in a task order but not in the IDIQ? | Examples of individual CDRLs are based on the requirement itself and are currently unknown. An example is the CDRL to provide a "quality deficiency report" for an faulty engine sub-assembly such as a leaking fuel pump received from another source for installation on an engine. | |||
| 76 | How will Task Order level CDRLs be reviewed and verified to conform with the terms and conditions with the IDIQ? | Task Order level CDRLs are developed and reviewed to support individual task order requirements, The IDIQ PWS indicates task order CDRLS are developed as required | |||
| 77 | The terminology "pre identified work fluctuations" has been removed from H Clause H10. Can the Government please explain why this term was removed from the H Clauses in the RFP because pre-identified work fluctuations exist operationally? | The term introduced ambiguity, and was removed. | |||
| 78 | Can the Government please explain, in detail, how the offset payment, which is calculated using hours x rate is different than a T&M? | The Offset payment is used to calculate based upon the rates for the FFP workforce and shortfalls in staffing from PWS requiremenst | |||
| 79 | Ordering Guide: How frequently has the CFT Program utilized Transient Alert Aircraft Services in the past? | Tansient Alert services are rarely provided utilizing CFT support. | |||
| 80 | Will the USG consider using a separate line item for Transient Alert Aircraft Services on a Task Order that can be exercised, if needed? | If transient Alert efforts are required these would be cited at task order level | |||
| 81 | Will the USG be able to define the Transient Alert Aircraft Services workload for up to five (5) years? | If a given base utilizes a CFT Transient Alert workforce it would be based on requirements as known at the time of task order award | |||
| 82 | Will the USG be shipping the necessary equipment required for pure I-Level and D-Level maintenance task orders? | Required special equipment is provided on site. | |||
| 83 | As a labor augmentation support requirements contract, will the USG be providing guidance on day-to-day operations? | The government does provide mission requirements for example, flying schedules. | |||
| 84 | As a labor augmentation support requirements contract, will the USG be providing daily assignments for Contractor employees? | Employee daily work assinments are determined by the Contractor site lead/supervisor. | |||
| 85 | What is the Government's contemplated Best Value methodology, and will the formula be included in the Ordering Guide | FOPRs and the best value criteria will be defined for each individual requirement. | |||
| 86 | The USG states that FFP rates are used for the life of the task order - how does that reconcile with surge labor? | Overtime and Surge pricing arrangments will coincide with the pricing arrangment established at the task order level and will be documented with the FOPR. Example: Task Order is for FFP Labor, therefore any Surge or Overtime will be Firm-Fixed Price as well. | |||
| 87 | Ordering Guide Fair Opportunity Process | Ordering Guide Fair Opportunity Process: Will the Government confirm that "broad discretion" ensures competitive fairness to all Contractors? | Attachment 3, Ordering Guide states that the PCO placing an order for subsequent TOs has broad discretion in setting the terms of competition for the TO as long as the acquisition process is in accordance with FAR 16.505 and this fair opportunity process. Competitive fairness will be in accordance with the acquisition process in accordance with FAR 16.505 and the fair opportunity process. | ||
| 88 | Ordering Guide Fair Opportunity Process | Ordering Guide Fair Opportunity Process: Will the Government confirm that "broad discretion" ensures fairness to a successful Offeror when it takes into consideration the best interests of the Government, or can a Contractor expect only the best interests of the Government to be considered? | Attachment 3, Ordering Guide states that the PCO placing an order for subsequent TOs has broad discretion in setting the terms of competition for the TO as long as the acquisition process is in accordance with FAR 16.505 and this fair opportunity process. | ||
| 89 | Ordering Guide | Ordering Guide: What kind of checks and balances exist in the Fair Opportunity Process? | Please refer to FAR 16.505(b) and Attachment 3 Ordering Guide regarding the Fair Opportunity Process. | ||
| 90 | Is the USG able to define the requirements for mission readiness and mitigate risk for 5 years, per Program, as per the requirements in the FAR for a FFP contract? | The government determines FFP requirements based on known factors at the time of task order development, based on Planned budgetary inputs and Service forecasts. | |||
| 91 | If the Government is contemplating situations where there is going to be a "modified definition of 'fully manned'" for a Program requirement, how is a firm-fixed-price contract suitable for acquiring services when the basis of a FFP is that there is a reasonably definite functional or detailed specification? | The modified definition referenced is based on task order requirements, which may indicate a specific requirement for availability | |||
| 92 | Would any or all of these modified standards made by the USG be considered a change? | These modified requirements would be based on specific task order requiremenst, and stated in the task order PWS, and thus not a change as considered. | |||
| 93 | Assuming the Government's answer is some form of "no" to the above question - please explain why not. | Please see answer to #87 above | |||
| 94 | Will Site Supervisors be expected to make any maintenance decisions? | Assuming the question is related to actual personnel assignments, confrimed. | |||
| 95 | Will the USG allow additional, separately priced and reasonable transition costs when requriements change and the 25% surge threshold is utilized? | When exercising H-Clause H10, contractors are not entitiled to transition costs. | |||
| 96 | Are incumbents entitled to less transition costs than other offerors? | No | |||
| 97 | analyzing a Task Order TEP? | Not sure of the question | |||
| 98 | Will FAR Subpart 16.1 be utilized when determining a CLIN type on a task order? | Please refer to FAR 16.104. The Government may utilize many factors in determining Contract Type for a FOPR. | |||
| 99 | Will the same FFP rates on a task order be used in surge situations? | Overtime and Surge pricing arrangments will coincide with the pricing arrangment established at the task order level and will be documented with the FOPR. Example: Task Order is for FFP Labor, therefore any Surge or Overtime will be Firm-Fixed Price as well. | |||
| 100 | Will technical SMEs be involved in the the source selection process? | Government teams for FOPR evaluations have not yet been determined. | |||
| 101 | Can the Government confirm that the actual technical SMEs on the current CFT Program are not being told to commend work by contractors? | Confrim this is the standard practice. Any comments are to be attributed to the Contractor and NOT the employee. | |||
| 102 | Will the USG provide an example FOPR with best value parameters? | The Government is not entertaining sample FOPRs at this time. | |||
| 103 | Will the USG create a sample FOPR response as an RFP requirement? | The Government is not entertaining sample FOPRs at this time. | |||
| 104 | Considering a number of efforts have had manning changes over the last five years, why is FFP the best CLIN? What additional factor is the USG considering when deciding to use/create a hybrid FFP? | The Government has selected the contract type best suited to meet the Government Requirement. | |||
| 105 | Please explain the CFT 104 protest process | Once the 104 as submitted is protested, the CFT PMO PM assigned reviews, and in discussions with the site COR maks a recommendation based on the facts to the PCO to change or amend the rating given. | |||
| 106 | Based on the $7.09B IDIQ ceiling - are there efforts that are leaving CFT or are there new requirements coming in? | The ceiling value is based on anticipated needs as well as the potential to exapand our customer base for new requirements. | |||
| 107 | Will the Government confirm that they will open discussions to ensure there is no miscommunication regarding a perceived unsubstantiated and/or misleading claim? | Please refer to Section M, 1.8. The Government intends to award without discussions but reserves the right to conduct discussions if necessary. Therefore, it is imperative that the initial offer contain the Offeror’s best terms from a technical standpoint. | |||
| 108 | Will the USG uniformly be investigating each Contractor's past performance claims? | The Government's evaluation methodology for all factors, to include Factor 3 Past Peformance, are described in detail in Section M. Specifically, Section M 2.4 and all subparagraphs describe the Government's methodology of Past Performance. | |||
| 109 | Section M 1.7 | Section M 1.7: How will the competitive range be established? | Please refer to Section M, 1.7. | ||
| 110 | Section M 1.8 Discussions | Section M 1.8 Discussions: Will the USG open up discussions for all contractors, if they open up discussions for one conractor? | Please refer to FAR 15.306 and Section M, 1.8. | ||
| 111 | How much scrutiny will a non-CFT CPAR get from the source selection board vs. a CFT CPAR/104 document? | The Government's evaluation methodology for all factors, to include Factor 3 Past Peformance, are described in detail in Section M. Specifically, Section M 2.4 and all subparagraphs describe the Government's methodology of Past Performance. | |||
| 112 | Section M 2.1.1 Evaluation Methodology | Section M 2.1.1 Evaluation Methodology: Please provide an instance where a contractor reaches Step 3 but is disqualified without discussions. | The Government is not answering scenario based questions. Please refer to Section M for the IDIQ contract, Attachment 2 H-Clause, Attachment 3 Ordering Guide and FAR 16.5. CFT LASR Basic Contracts will be awarded utilizing FAR 15.3 procedures while task orders will be awarded utilizing FAR 16.5 procedures. | ||
| 113 | Can the USG please confirm if a Contract COR can be used as theProgram Site Manager, as some Programs do not have a Government Program Site Manager on site? Usually the COR is the besttechnical SME for a Contract | Confirmed this would be the typical arrangement | |||
| 114 | Section L Customer Points of Contact: Can the USG please confirm who the "Admin POC" is supposed to be - is this the Contract Specialist? If not, who is the Admin POC? | This person could be a COR or a Contract Specialist. | |||
| 115 | Praragraph 1.2 of section M | Praragraph 1.2 of section M indicates that the government did not know the number of contracts to be awarded when this solicitation was initially released. | Has the government identified that number yet? | The government anticipates the number will not be known until after all proposals are received and evaluated. | |
| 116 | Award criteria within section M | The award criteria within section M indicates either relevant or not relevant, or acceptable or not acceptable proposal grades will be awarded for relevancy, performance quality, and past performance confidence. | Since this is the case, what criteria will be used to select the best proposals from the group of bidders who’ve met those criteria? | All propsals meeting the HTRO, SB, Past performance and relavancy/recency requirements will receive an award. | |
| 117 | Attachment A, paragraph 4 | Attachment A Minimum Team Compliment | Does the contractor have to incorporate the new Minimum Team Compliment (MTC) language in there Volume II or just acknowledge accepting the change in our certification statement? | By signing the SF30 for Amendment 0003, the contractor is agreeing to all the terms and conditions within Amendment 0003 | |
| 118 | CFT LASR Summary of Solicitation Changes – Amendment 0003 | Attachment 2 H-Clause | Since the government did not post a revised Attachment 2 - H Clauses on SAMS, does the contractor have to incorporate the new Minimum Team Compliment (MTC) language in there Volume IV or just acknowledge accepting the change in our certification statement? | Yes, the revised Attachment 2 was uploaded out to SAM.gov. | |
| 119 | Section L, 2.1.6 Submission, Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of Proposals | Our original proposal submission Vol II, ITO Attachment 3, Small Business Participation Commitment Document is addressed to the previous contracting officer. | Will the Government accept our original proposal submittal with the previous government points of contact listed? | Yes, as long as you send in a signed copy of the SF30 for Amendment 0003 and a statement that you are going to keep your current proposal valid to the new points of contacts | |
| 120 | Sec L, 2.1.7 Certification to Evaluate Original Proposal Submission and Section L, 2.1.5 Amendments to Solicitation | In our original submission, we acknowledged solicitation amendments on SF33. | Will the Government accept our original SF33 which only acknowledges two amendments if we submit SF30, Amendment 003, with our certification statement? | Yes |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .