DRAFT_C-26_RFP_Questions_and_Responses_28_March_16.docx
DOCX document 20 KB Posted
- Attached to
- C-26 Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8131-16-R-0002
About this file
Responses to Industry questions
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 32
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
FA813116R0002
DRAFT RFP QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
| 28 Mar 16 |
| DRAFT RFP |
QUESTION REF#
INDUSTRY QUESTION
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE
| 1-1 |
| Paragraph 1.3.4 of the PWS talks about a plan in accordance with DFARS 252.237-7023 being submitted with the proposal. A review of the DFARS indicates the following statement: |
(b) The Government has identified all or a portion of the contractor services performed under this contract as essential contractor services in support of mission essential functions. These services are listed in attachment __, Mission-Essential Contractor Services, dated __________.
All Services under this contract are considered Mission Essential Services. The Clause has been updated to read.
(b) The Government has identified all or a portion of the Contractor services performed under this Contract as essential Contractor services in support of mission essential functions. These services are listed in attachment PWS- All Services in the PWS, Mission Essential Contractor Services, dated 09 - MAR – 2016.
| 2-1 |
| PWS 1.33.1.11- Page 23- In the absence of general TDY requirements, is the assumption that TDYs will still occur on a regular and/or recurring basis accurate? Attempting to accurately price liability for any TDY requirement. |
| Yes, TDYs are projected to occur on a regular and recurring basis. |
| 3-1 |
| PWS 1.33.1.1- page 24- How will TDY requirement be generated? Does the end-user establish the requirement and is it in the offeror’s responsibility to inform the Government PM for approval? Is the assumption that some TDYs will not require CLS? Will approved TDYs be covered under O&A? Attempting to accurately price liability for any TDY requirement. |
| TDY requirements are generated by the Air National Guard and communicated to the Government PM/PCO. The Government in turn communicates the TDY requirements to the contractor. TDY requirements are developed on a case by case basis. Most TDYs will require CLS support. No, TDYs will not be covered under O&A. |
| 4-1 |
| PWS 1.38- Page 31, How will TDY’s be covered if they are not included under O&A? |
| TDYs will be covered under CLIN X008, Travel & Per Diem. |
| 5-1 |
| PWS Appendix G- Page 58- With the deletion of the Serialized materials, Non Serialized and Block AC parts list as Government Furnished Property, is it assume this material is now Contractor Furnished Property? |
| Appendix G attachments (the Serialized materials, Non Serialized and Block AC parts) have not been deleted and will remain GFP. The list can be found in Appendix G page 58 of the PWS. |
| 6-1 |
| RFP B-07- Page 4- Recommend replacing the B-07 Indemnification of Government Assets clause with DFARS 252.228-7001 Ground and Flight Risk. |
| DFARS 252.228-7001 does not apply per the prescribing language found in DFARS 228.370 (b)(1)(ii). This contract is a FAR Part 12 contract. |
| 7-1 |
| RFP- X001 Page 7- If the Fleet size is no longer 11 aircraft, is the offer to assume the overall fleet size will increase? If so, by how many? |
| The current requirement is 11 aircraft. Changes to the number of aircraft or sites are discussed in B-02 of the RFP. |
| 8-1 |
| RFP- X001 – Page 7- Is it assumed that sub-CLIN X001AM will only be used if the # of aircraft at the San Juan, Puerto Rico MOB exceeds 3 aircraft? Will the increased # of aircraft at this location be the result of a larger overall fleet size, or forward deploying aircraft from other MOBs? |
| Sub-CLIN X001AM will only be used if the number of aircraft based in in San Juan, Puerto Rico exceeds 3 aircraft. Forward deploying aircraft from other MOB’s will be in a TDY status and not considered at the base at Puerto Rico. Increasing number of fleet is discussed in B-02 of the RFP. |
| 9-1 |
| RFP SUBCLIN x001AK shows San Juan Puerto Rico in description and this SUBCLIN also refers to Montgomery AL. Please clarify SUBCLIN description. |
This was a typo that has been corrected in the final version. 0001AK language now reads: Base Operations, Montgomery, AL - SAME AS 0001 Base Operations Maintenance Support for Montgomery, AL. The required support shall be for a minimum 1 aircraft.
| 10-1 |
| Per Attachment 7, Instructions to Offerors, Section 2.7.3, Table 2.1, it states that the ITO numbers for the Cross Reference Matrix, Table of Contents, List of Tables and Figures, and Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms are 2.7.6, 2.7.7, 2.7.8, and 2.7.9 respectively; however, in the text paragraphs, they are listed as 2.7.7, 2.7.8, 2.7.9, and 2.7.10 respectively. Can the Government please clarify which numbering scheme is correct? |
Error in the Proposal organization Matrix. Matrix will be updated on RFP release.
| 11-1 |
| Has a contractor performed similar work to this for the government in the past? |
If available, please provide the incumbent contract number. If you are unable to provide a contract number, is it safe to assume this is a new requirement for the government?
The two previous contracts for this work are government contract number FA8131-16-D-0001, and FA8106-07-C-0004
| 12-1 |
| Does the Government had a paint drawing for the subject solicitation? |
| Paint scheme drawing ANG-C-26-51000 will be provided as part of the bidder’s library at RFP release. However, paint scheme drawing 27-92173-5 is proprietary and will need to be acquired through the OEM. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .