AS_Engineering_Questions_and_Answers_27Mar19.pdf

ALCM Aging & Surveillance Engineering

FA8101-19-R-0002

Questions and Answers 06 March 2019 - - - - - - - - - updated 25 March 2019

Q001) a) Is there an incumbent contractor currently performing these services, if similar services have been performed in the past, or if this is a new requirement?

b) If there is an incumbent, could you please provide the contract or task order number?

R001) a) Per Description for the RFP, this is denoted as a follow-on to an existing contract. b) The Government is not providing contractual information for the existing above that which is already provided in the RFP

Q002) Do you have an "Interested Parties" list with POC's & contact info?

R002) Please see the table below for interested vendors:

Marvin Heymann & Assoc Aaron Aabon 513-706-8098 Metro Building & Painting Co. Joseph Armstrong 763-536-0277 Stardust Tech Services Bruce Fleming 859-705-3060 E-Spectrum Technologies, Inc.

Dan Burris 210-696-8848

Q003) Request for Information relevant to CDRLs provided at the initial RFP posting on

FBO.

R003) CDRLs loaded were inadvertently pulled from incorrect drive. A new attachment:

PWS_Addendum_2_CDRLs_combined_v2 has been uploaded into FBO and replaces the previous copy of PWS Addendum 2 dated 23 Feb 2019 in its entirety.

Q004) In the Supplies or Services and Price/Cost section, page 2 of 81) on the RFP, item 4), Can Milestone 1. be changed from “MTS-8 (Service STAR Test Set) Sustainment” to “SSTS sustainment” as the SSTS is the test station at Hill FB (which is what this must be referring to) and the MTS-8 is an A&S test set in the existing A&S Lab (which is fully covered in milestones 8 and 10)?

R004) New attachments FA812819R0002_Rv2_14Mar19 and RFP_Addendum- 1_PricingMatrix_AS_Rv1_14Mar19 have been updated in FBO to reflect changes for Milestone 1 language and replaces all previous versions in their entirety.

Q005) Page 53, under past performance, Early Proposal Information...we just noticed that this was to be delivered not later than 20 days prior to solicitation closing date. Any suggestions?

R005) Past performance, ‘early’ proposal information is not mandatory for this solicitation. Past Performance however is an assessment criteria for the contract award and should be included within your proposal.

Q006) Page 3 of 81, Milestones for CLIN 0001. Note #3 below the table indicates that the table is to be used for the base period of performance. The milestone Major Tasks are more a summary of the tasks and/or possible tasks that any contractor may have to complete rather than target milestones for incremental payments. It seems that the milestone payments are to provide incremental funding to the small business based on work completed along the way, but the table includes many items that are on-going from the start through the end of the period of performance and some that may not apply (i.e., milestones 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 19 fit in these 2 categories). Can the offeror present their own proposed milestone payment/schedules for work they anticipate in the base period?

R006) Yes; any information an Offeror wishes to be considered must be a part of the delivered proposal

Q007) In table 2-2, under vol 1, ITO paragraph 2.3.1 calls out an SF1449...but the solicitation is on a SF33. My question is: If we use the SF33, is there a copy we can edit to add our info or do we start from scratch and try to recreate one? If we use a 1449, do we start from scratch and create a new document?

R007) Please use the SF 33 format to respond and edit as needed.

Q008) On page 50 of 81, Subfactor II, there is a document called out as “Outgoing

Contractor Transition Plan.” Is this the same as the RFP Attachment 16 pdf file titled “Attachment_16_A_S_Transition_Management_Plan.pdf” Or is there another document that is yet to be provided?

R008) There is not another document yet to be provided. This document is the base of what is required and can be used 100% as-is or can be tailored to meet the Offerors’ organization to meet the requirement.

Q009) The spreadsheet for the pricing matrix doesn’t seem to work the way we would expect it to work. Can we discuss to get all the issues addressed?

R009) The spreadsheet is being updated to fix known errors and is scheduled to be updated in FBO no later than 28 Mar 2019 as RFP_ADDENDUM- 1_PricingMatrix_AS_Rv2_25Mar19 and replaces all previous versions in their entirety.

Q010) On Page 65, the first 2 tables in the questionnaire do not have complete titles and they seem to be associated with a requirement concerning the FFA rather than ALCM Lab Test and the 3rd table should probably be “Subfactor 3” rather than “Factor 3”. Can these be clarified?

R010) The tables referenced are for the past performance evaluation and are an example for Offerors to tailor and use in the event of ‘early past performance’ questionnaire submittal.