Q A_for_Amendment_1.docx
DOCX document 49 KB Posted
- Attached to
- T-38C Avionics Component Integration and Contractor Logistics Support Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8211-15-R-0001
About this file
Question and Answers
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
T-38C Avionics Component Integration and Contractor Logistics Support has more files on GovTribe.
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
Doc Name
| Section |
| Description |
| Page # |
| Question / Comment / Recommendation |
| 1 |
| Attachment 12 Section L |
| 4.1 |
| Table 4.1 Proposal Preparation Instructions |
CLIN’s 0001 - 0003 (MDP, HUD and ADS-B) are required to be addressed in the proposal per Section L Table 4.1 and are also included in the Sections L and M Subfactors. CLIN 0004 VHF Communication / Nav Radios is required to be priced per Section B of the RFP, however it is not addressed in the Sections L and M subfactors and are not listed in the Section L Table 4-1 Proposal Organization.
Please confirm there is no requirement to address the VHF Communication / Nav Radios within the Proposal?
If there is a requirement please identify where it should be addressed?
Government Response: There is no requirement to address the VHF Communication/Navigation Radios within the proposal.
| 2 |
| Attachment 12 Section L |
| 9.2 |
| General |
| 17 |
| Current language states: “Offerors shall submit past performance information on three recent contracts that are considered most relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the efforts detailed in the AvCI CLS PWS and component replacement SOO(s) and shall include rationale supporting the assertion of relevance. Three recent contracts will, also, be required for all subcontractors, teaming partners, or joint ventures performing 20 percent or more of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price or perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to overall successful performance.” |
Our assumption for “Proposed effort” would include, pricing for one of the two Options years for CLIN’s 0001-0004, and the cumulative total of all years for CLIN’s, X005, X006, X007, X009, X010, X011, X012, X013, X023 & X024.
Please confirm this assumption. If the assumption is incorrect, please clarify.
Government Response: The assumption is correct. The “Proposed effort” will include, pricing for one of the two options years for CLIN’s X001-X004, and the cumulative total of all years for CLIN’s, X005, X006, X007, X009, X010, X011, X012, X013, X023 & X024.
| 3 |
| Attachment 13 Section M |
Attachment 6B Total Evaluated Price Work Sheet
3.5 TEP
Item 3
Total Evaluated Price
TEP Worksheet
Section M Sect 3.5 Item 3 states: “FFP CLINs (X005, X006, X007, X009, X011, X012, X013, X023, & X024) will be evaluated at the proposed fixed prices multiplied by specified quantities for specified years.”
Part 1/Section B of the Solicitation/Contract for the referenced CLINs contain a quantity of 12 / unit of 12 months or quantity of 95,000 flight hours / unit of each for 12 months. With this information, it is not clear what is to be populated in Part 1/Section B of the Solicitation/Contract, and subsequently what is to be populated on the TEP worksheet, as there will be no direct cross-reference between the two. Please help clarify.
Government Response: Part 1, Section B FFP CLIN’s indicate the quantity, unit of issue and the length of award.
Example: X005, X006, X007, X011, X012 & X013 Quantity = 12; Unit of Issue = MO; ARO = 12 Months. The CLIN “Amount” is the FFP for 12–months of service. The Unit Price equals the “Amount” divided by 12 months. The TEP is populated with the “Amount”.
Example: X009 Quantity = 95,000; Unit of Issue = EA; ARO = 12 Months. The “Total Estimated Amount” is the “Cost Per Flight Hour” multiplied by 95,000. The TEP is populated with the “Total Estimated Amount”.
Example: X0023 & X0024 Quantity = 1; Unit of Issue = LO; ARO = 90 Days. The “Amount is the FFP for the 90-Days of service. The Unit Price equals the “Amount” divided by 3 (months). The TEP is populated with the “Amount”.
| 4 |
| FA821115R0001 |
| Part I – The Schedule Section B Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs |
| CLIN 0001AD |
CLIN 0002AD
CLIN 0003AD
CLIN 0004AD
| 6 |
| Please clarify if the Contractor Field Team option sub-CLINs will have the same start and finish dates (within 54 months after receipt of order) as the development and integration sub-CLINs. |
Although we believe this to be possible, we would like to share our concern that this aggressive schedule will likely add cost associated with additional tooling and manpower, as compared to, say, a 72 month schedule.
Government Response: SOO’s have been modified to CFT requirements. Revisions will be posted to FBO.
| 5 |
| Attachment 13 Section M |
| 4.1 |
| Past Performance Recency Assessment |
| 11 |
| Current language states: “To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.” |
Please confirm 23 January 2015 is considered the date of issuance for this solicitation?
Government Response: Yes, 23 January 2015 is considered the date of issuance for this solicitation.
| 6 |
| Attachment 2 MDP, Attachment 3 HUD, Attachment 4 ADS-B, and Attachment 5 VHF SOOs |
| Sect 4.1 |
| Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) Content |
| 7, 8 |
| The current language requires the submittal of an ECP and it seems the AvCI proposal contains the ECPs for CLINs 0001-0004. For example, we are describing our proposed engineering change along with a price. |
Please clarify if a separate ECP will be required to be delivered within the execution of CLINs 0001-0004.
If so, how will those ECPs differ from what we are proposing now?
We recommend eliminating the requirement for submittal of a separate ECP within the execution phase since we will be submitting our priced proposal with this main AvCI proposal.
Government Response: The AvCI proposal does not require an ECP for evaluation. Sections L&M require a “Technical Proposal to evaluate the contractor’s Technical Capability”. The proposal requirement is limited to the information requested in the Technical Acceptability Factor. The ECP and additional requirements of the SOOs will be completed after award as part of the contracted requirements.
| 7 |
| Attachment 6A T-38 AvCI FFP Labor Rates Work Sheet |
| - |
| Labor Rate Table |
| 1 |
| Please clarify the expected Period of Performance for the Base Year and each subsequent year. |
Government Response: The TEP and FFP Labor Rates Worksheet has been revised to clarify pricing years.
| 8 |
| Attachment 2 MDP SOO |
| 8.5.3 |
| Contractor Field Team |
| 13 |
| Please clarify whether the Material Fielding Plan is due with the AvCI Proposal or as CDRL A010 during execution? |
Government Response: The Material Fielding Plan is not asked for in sections L&M. It will be completed after award as part of the contracted requirements.
| 9 |
| Attachment 5 VHF SOO |
| Multiple |
| HUD |
| - |
| There are several HUD references in the VHF SOO, please confirm these requirements are relevant to the VHF system. |
Government Response: Corrections made to the VHF SOO. The word “HUD” in paragraphs 5.1.4, 8.1.1 and 8.2.1 have been changed to “VHF”. An updated document will be posted to FBO.
| 10 |
| Attachment 12 Section L |
FA821115R0001
11.4.2
Part I - The Schedule Section F Deliveries or Performance Small Business Subcontract Plan and Small Business Participation Requirements
Current language states: “If the Offeror is other than a small business, the Offeror shall submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 19.7, 52.219-9 and Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation (DFAR) Supplement 252.219-7003. The Subcontracting Plan does not count in the total page count. The Contracting Officer (PCO) must approve the plan before contract award. The small disadvantaged business (SDB) goal is 5%. The woman owned small business (WOSB) goal is 5%. The service disabled Veteran Owned small business (SDVOSB) goal is 3%. The HUBZONE goal is 3%. The overall small business subcontracting requirement is a minimum 3% to Final RFP of total contract value.”
Please confirm the percentages highlighted are goals based on Total Subcontract Value (TSV) in lieu of Total Contract Value (TCV) as required for the FAR Small Business percentage goal.
Also, the Model Contract references H-133 paragraph A states: “The Government has set a minimum small business subcontracting goal for this effort of 3% of the total subcontracted amount that the contractor agrees to put forth a good faith effort to achieve.”, however Section L, Section 11.4.2 indicates the 3% is of the Total Contract Value, please clarify.
Government Response: The requirement is A minimum 3% overall small business subcontracting requirement based on total contract value. The model contract language will be corrected and a revision posted to FBO.
| 11 |
| Attachment 12 Section L |
| Section 11.4.1 and 11.4.2 |
| Participation of Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB) and Small Business Subcontract Plan and Small Business Participation Requirements |
| 20 |
| Pursuant to the regulatory change implemented 14 October 14 2014 (FAC 2005-77; FAR Case 2009-016 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-10-14/pdf/2014-24236.pdf), the text for FAR clause 52.219-24 was deleted from the FAR. |
We therefore request that Section 11.4.1 Participation of Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB) be removed from the solicitation RFP# FA8211-15-R-0001 / Section L Part IV Representations and Instructions Section L.
Government Response: The assertion is correct. Attachment 12, Section L will be amended and posted to FBO.
| 12 |
| Attachment 12 Section L |
| 4.1 |
| Proposal Preparation Instructions |
| 5 |
| We respectfully request the Integrated Master Schedule, Subcontractor Consent Letters, and Commercial Client Authorization Letters be excluded from page counts within the various Volumes. |
Government Response: Page limits will remain the same.
| 13 |
| Attachment 6B Total Evaluated Price Work Sheet |
| - |
| Total Evaluated Price (TEP) Worksheet |
| 1 |
| On CLIN X010, please clarify if the contractor should only input the fee percentage (Ref: TEP Worksheet). |
Government Response: Correct. The Offeror shall propose a fee percentage. Please reference Section L, Paragraph 6.4, Item 2.
| 14 |
| FA821115R0001 |
| Part I - The Schedule |
Section B Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs
| Government Damaged Parts |
| 21 |
| On CLIN X010 in the Not To Exceed Price, please clarify if the contractor should only input the fee percentage. |
Government Response: Correct. The Offeror shall propose a fee percentage. Please reference Section L, Paragraph 6.4, Item 2.
| 15 |
| Attachment 6A T-38 AvCI FFP Labor Rates Work Sheet |
| - |
| Labor Rate Matrix |
| - |
| To ensure all competitors are supplying rates per the Collective Bargaining Act (CBA), please add the CBA labor categories for Field Service Representative and Material Coordinator to the FFP Rate Sheet. |
Government Response: The Field Service Representative and Material Coordinator labor categories have been added and an update will be posted to FBO.
| 16 |
| FA821115R0001 |
| Part II, Section I |
| Contract Clauses |
| 21 |
| FAR 52.203-16 Preventing Personal Conflicts of Interest (DEC 2011): This clause is significantly administratively burdensome in its procedural compliance requirements. |
Clause not deleted as stated in Q&A Response posted on fbo.gov 15 December 2015.
Government Response: The Model Contract will be corrected. The corrected document will be posted to FBO.
| 17 |
| FA821115R0001 |
| Part II, Section I |
| Contract Clauses |
| 24 |
| FAR 52.215-9 Changes or Additional to Make-or-Buy Program (OCT 1997): This clause imposes undesirable administrative burdens on the contractor. The requirements for coordination with and approval from the Contracting Officer may negatively impact the contract cost and/or schedule, and is contra-indicated in an LPTA environment. |
Clause not deleted as stated in Q&A Response posted on fbo.gov 15 December 2015.
Government Response: The Model Contract will be corrected. The corrected document will be posted to FBO.
| 18 |
| FA821115R0001 |
| Part II, Section I |
| Contract Clauses |
| 30 |
| FAR 52.224-2 Privacy Act (Apr 1984): This clause is required in solicitations and contracts when the design, development, or operation of a system of records on individuals is required to accomplish an agency function. This clause is not applicable to this solicitation. |
Clause not deleted as stated in Q&A Response posted on fbo.gov 15 December 2015.
Government Response: The Model Contract will be corrected. The corrected document will be posted to FBO.
| 19 |
| FA821115R0001 |
| Part II, Section I |
| Contract Clauses |
| 23 |
| DFARS 252.211-7003 Item Unique Identification and Valuation (DEC 2013): |
This clause is a significant cost driver and its applicability in the PBL contract is questionable. Under the “cost per flying hour” scenario where failed parts are replaced with new boxes, there is no advantage to the government with this clause.
Clause not deleted as stated in Q&A Response posted on fbo.gov 15 December 2015.
Government Response: The Model Contract will be corrected. The corrected document will be posted to FBO.
| 20 |
| FA821115R0001 |
| Part II, Section I |
| Contract Clauses |
| 26 |
| DFARS 252.219-7003 Small Business Subcontracting Plan (DoD Contracs) (DEVIATION) (SEP 2013): |
Clause not replaced with October 2014 as stated in Q&A Response posted on fbo.gov 15 December 2015.
Government Response: The Model Contract will be corrected. The corrected document will be posted to FBO.
| 21 |
| Attachment 1- AvCI CLS PWS |
| 4.9.2 |
| Joint Mission System Planning System (JMPS) Software Support |
| 22 |
| On 26 November 2014 Questions & Answers submittal, it was requested that Paragraph 4.9.2 be removed from the PWS. In the Government response to this question, it was stated that this paragraph would be removed. We respectfully request clarification. We have included the initial text below as a reference to our initial 26 November question. |
Please clarify if this PWS 4.9.2 requires that “The Contractor shall support and maintain all MPE applications to ensure that they are kept current with all Time Compliance Network Orders (TCNO) and Group Policy Object (GPO) software changes.”
Currently, the APPS contractor is responsible for ensuring currency with TCNOs on the ground station software EXCEPT FOR the Mission Planning Environment; while the MPSSF at Hill-AFB ensures currency of the MPE with TCNOs.
Unless this division of responsibility will change in the future, we recommend that paragraph 4.9.2 be removed from the PWS.
Government Response: The language for paragraph 4.9.2 has changed from Draft RFP to RFP. The intent of the paragraph is for the contractor to provide the necessary software support or updates required due to TCNO or GPO changes within the scope of the PWS and prevent the need for separately negotiated ECPs as required under the current support contract.
| 22 |
| Attachment 6A T-38 AvCI FFP Labor Rates Work Sheet |
| - |
| Labor Rate Matrix |
| 1 |
| Row 131, the FCCM rate may differ between Prime Offeror, Inter-Divisions, and subcontractors, should the only value entered be the Primer Offeror’s FCCOM value? Or should an average between all the labor categories be entered? |
Government Response: The Prime Offeror’s FCCM rate should be used.
| 23 |
| Attachment 6B Total Evaluated Price Work Sheet |
| Total Evaluated Price Worksheet |
| 1 |
| The CLS Period of Performance starts on 1 Apr 2017 and ends on 31 Mar 2018 and starts in Program Year 2 – FY17. The total duration of the CLS CLIN’s is 8 Years. However, the provided Total Evaluated Price (Attachment 6B) spreadsheet requires that we provide pricing for 9 years. If our conclusion is correct, please provide an updated spreadsheet. |
Government Response: TEP has been clarified.
| 24 |
| Attachment 12 Section L |
2.4 and 9.1
| Past Performance and Volume III - Past Performance |
| 2 |
| Current language for Section 2.4 states: “For each contract identified, the offeror shall complete a Past Performance Questionnaire; (see Attachment L-5, in response to this solicitation).” |
Does the customer intend for the offeror to fill out the Past Performance Questionnaire on their own performance? If not, please consider providing instructions on the Past Performance Questionnaire. As an example, we have provided instructions from a previous acquisition as a reference below:
The offeror shall send out the Past Performance Questionnaires (See Section L Attachment XX) to each of the offeror’s, critical subcontractors’, teaming contractors’ and/or joint venture partners’ (i.e., each entity’s) Points of Contact (POCs) identified in the contracts listed in the Past Performance Information Tool (PPIT). The responsibility to send out the Past Performance Questionnaires rests solely with the offeror – i.e., it shall not be delegated to any other entity. The Transmittal Letter (See Section L Attachment xx) shall be used by the offeror in sending out the Past Performance Questionnaires. Once the Past Performance Questionnaires are completed by your POCs, the information contained therein shall be considered sensitive and shall not be released to you, the offeror. Questionnaires shall be sent directly back to the Government.
In addition, please consider adding instructions for the subcontractor consent form and the commercial client authorization letter. As an example, we have provided instructions from a previous acquisition as a reference below:
Subcontractor Consent Form: Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. Provide with the proposal a letter from all subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime offeror. (See Section L Attachment XY)
Commercial Client Authorization Letter: In the event that commercial contracts are presented as past/present sources of information, a client authorization letter shall be issued to those commercial POC’s authorizing/instructing them to complete a Past Performance Questionnaire. A sample client authorization letter is attached to this RFP (See Section L Attachment XZ). The offeror is required to send the client authorization letter with the Past Performance Questionnaire to each POC on commercial contracts. A separate copy of client authorization letter(s) for each commercial contract shall be included in the offeror’s proposal submission for the Government’s use in case additional questionnaires need to be sent by the Government after proposal submittal.
Government Response: Past performance in Section L has been clarified.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .