4th SET OF QUESTIONS.docx

FA8224-20-R-0001

ISSUES & QUESTIONS CONCERNING SOLICITATION

4th SET

1. A revised PWS has been posted. It changed the number of pages permitted on Volume II Tech Evaluation from 25 pages to 35 pages. Also, pages 15 and 16 of the PWS - The paragraph numbering under 6 CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT has also been changed from 6.1, 6.1.7, 6.1.8. 6.1.9 to 6.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3, 6.1.4.

2. To be able to send encrypted emails in response to the solicitation, your company needs to send a digitally signed email to Vera Pinkerton vera.pinkerton@us.af.mil so a certificate for your company can be established in our system. The website sited on page 81 under Section L paragraph B Communications is no longer a viable website. Please note in the subject line that it is to establish an encrypted certificate.

3. The past calendar years required in the TCIR/DART report should be 2017, 2018, and 2019; not 2016, 2017, 2018 as noted on page 85, Section M of the solicitation.

4. If the contractor does not have a VPP program in place or has not previously worked on an Air Force Facility, a brief narrative explanation is sufficient as the VPP portion which will accompany the signed RFP in Volume I.

5. Is the scope and pricing of the Randolph T-38 work included in base year CLINSs 0001 through 0004.

Pricing is not submitted in the CLINs portion of the solicitation. Pricing is entered on the Total Evaluated Price Matrix. Pricing for the T-38 is part of the Matrix.

6. PWS paragraph 2.3.2. and 2.3.2.4 and Table 2.3 Of the 40 CME positions listed in the Estimated Team Compliment (ETC) table, 18 of the positions have incumbent personnel, implying the other 22 EMEs are new. Will those 22 positions be considered “new workload” and thus have a different ramp-up requirement per paragraph 2.3.2.3?

Yes, those 22 positions will be considered “new workload” and will have a different ramp-up requirement per paragraph 2.3.2.3.

7. TEP Matrix.

The CLINs listed at the bottom of Tab 2 do not correspond to the CLINs listed in the RFP pages 3/16. Please clarify which CLINs to use.

The CLINs are not used in submitting your proposal. Prices are to be entered in the Total Evaluated Prices Matrix, Tab 1. On Tab 2, you need to ensure your prices have populated correctly and then under the FTE columns you are to add the number of Full Time Equivalents (personnel) you propose for each of the shifts for the programs listed. Table 2.3 Estimated Team Compliment (ETC) on page 6 is provided to assist in determining the total FTEs each program may need.

8. RFP Section L, paragraph II A Can bidders attach example Program Plans (such as the Quality or Safety Plan) to their proposal response in the Technical or RFP volumes without going over the page count?

No, any examples will be considered as part of the Technical Proposal page count. The page count has been increased from 25 to 35 pages, however.

9. Is this Solicitation intended for a single or multiple award contract to support the FOM program?

The FOM program is a single award acquisition. Any Task Orders issued for FOM support for the 6 platforms listed under SCOPE, paragraph 1, page 4 of the PWS during the 5 year period of performance will be made in accordance with the resulting contract of this solicitation.

10. Reference: TEP Pricing Spreadsheet. The hourly rates and hours for the Texas site are not evaluated in the TEP calculation included in the workbook; however, the staffing for those sites is currently included in as part of the total staffing calculation in Cell F99. To remain consistent should the total FTE sum only include the current awarded task order for the Utah staff?

The hourly rates and hours for support of the T-38 at the Texas site are part of the TEP and will be evaluated in the Total Evaluated Price Matrix. Award for the support of all sites will be evaluated. Please refer to the first set of questions posted on Beta.SAM for instructions to complete Tabs 1 and 2 of the Total Evaluated Price Matrix.

11. PWS Paragraph 3.5 and RFP Section L, Paragraph D.1.1.

Does the baseline contract awarded per this solicitation include the FOM work scope to support the T-38 aircraft at Randolph Air Force Base or is the T-38 an option to the initial award?

The T-38 FOM support is part of this solicitation and will be part of the contract awarded. The task order covering the work at Randolph is anticipated to be awarded shortly after contract award.

12. TEP worksheet and PWS Table 2.3 Can the Government provide a job description for the FOM Specialist?

The FOM Specialist listed under the Skill Title of Table 2.3 equates to the Labor Category 21030, Material Coordinator listed on the Labor Determinations. Hill AFB does not use SJC or AWD. The PWS defines the job description.

13. Will the government provide the SEA Wage Determination Code for the FOM Specialist?

See the answer to number 12 above.

14. RFP Section L, paragraph II, B.2 Is past participation and experience with the formal Voluntary Protection Program a requirement in order to make a compliant bid on the solicitation?

No, it is not. See Notice 4. Above.

15. PWS paragraph 3.4 When inventory and tracking move from AMXG paper forms to electronic method, will the government provide training on the current production management system, and what will be the Contractor’s ramp-up time?

The Contractor employees are required to receive training on the current production management system. (See Table 12.1 on page 25) At the time AMXG transfers inventory and tracking to electronic methods, training will be provided by the government. Systems on base are phased in and there will be no ramp-up time.

16. PWS Appendix D Appendix D does not illustrate T-38 historical workload data, will the government provide data or amend Appendix D so as to provide this data?

The T-38 workload is a new effort. There is no historical data available. The information provided in Table 2.3, page 8 is provided to assist the contractor in establishing manpower requirements.

17. PWS paragraph 14 Paragraph 14 speaks to the hours of operation for OO-ALC, however, they do not address Randolph AFB at all. Are bidders to consider RAFB to be a duplicate of OO-ALC in relation to the hours of operation?

Hours of operation are standard across most Air Force Bases, so yes, the hours should be the same.

18. Is this solicitation to be considered a combined Basic Contract and First Task Order solicitation?

This solicitation is a combined Basic Contract and First Task order. Besides being the base contract, this basic solicitation with its PWS also provides the specifics for performing the first TO. A Task Order will be issued shortly after contract award which will obligate funds and the CLINs.