6th SET OF QUESTIONS.docx

DOCX document 14 KB Posted

Attached to
AMXG AIRCRAFT FACILITATE OTHER MAINTENANCE (FOM) FOR HILL AFB
Solicitation number
FA8224-20-R-0001
Issued by

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
TEP FOM 6Mar2020.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
PWS Basic 4Mar2020.rtf RTF text file
5th SET OF QUESTIONS.docx DOCX document
4th SET OF QUESTIONS.docx DOCX document
Encrypted Email Instructions.pdf PDF
QUESTIONS AND ISSUES FEBRUARY 28 2020.docx DOCX document
PWS Basic 28Feb2020.rtf RTF text file
FA822420R0001 Solicitation 26Feb2020.pdf PDF
FA822420R0001 Solicitation 25Feb2020.pdf PDF
QUESTIONS AND ISSUES FEBRUARY 25 2020.docx DOCX document
FOM Preproposal Conference.pptx PPTX presentation
QUESTIONS AND ISSUES FEBRUARY 20 2020.pdf PDF
QUESTIONS AND ISSUES FEBRUARY 20 2020.docx DOCX document
EXHIBIT F CDRL A006 NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT.pdf PDF
EXHIBIT E CDRL A005 MANAGEMENT PLAN, TASK REPORT.pdf PDF
Map Directions to Bldg 100.pdf PDF
EXHIBIT C CDRL A003 ACCIDENT-INCIDENT REPORT.pdf PDF
Wage Det Utah Counties of Davis Weber 23Dec2019.pdf PDF
AMXGI 21-12, Condition Tagging and Labeling of Air Force Material.pdf PDF
FA822420R0001 Solicitation 10Feb2020.pdf PDF
AMXGI 24-5, Use of Low Speed Vehicles and Other Government Motor Vehicles.pdf PDF
EXHIBIT D CDRL A004 PHASE-OUT PLAN.pdf PDF
EXHIBIT A CDRL A001 STATUS REPORT.pdf PDF
EXHIBIT B CDRL A002 TRANSITION PLAN.pdf PDF
TEP FOM 29Jan2020.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Wage Det Texas County of Bexar 23Dec2019.pdf PDF
DD254.pdf PDF
PWS Basic 22Jan2020.doc DOC document
Show all 28

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

FA8224-20-R-0001

ISSUES & QUESTIONS CONCERNING SOLICITATION

6TH SET

Question: PWS Section 2.3 and Table 2.3 identify the Estimated Team Compliment (ETC) necessary for effective performance of the workload requirements. Several questions have been submitted that refer to a “Minimum Team Complement” associated with Table 2.3. Respectfully request the government clarify whether Table 2.3 is a required Minimum Team Complement or Estimated Team Complement, and will an offerors proposal be found technically unacceptable if proposed staffing is less then the 40 FTE identified in Table 2.3?

Answer: Table 2.3 is a Estimated Team Complement. If offerors propose less than the 40 FTE they must provide an extensive rational/justification as to why they think they can do it with fewer bodies. I think the rationale would have to be very convincing to the customer Subject Matter Experts for them to find a proposal proposing less than the Estimated Team Complement to be technically acceptable. Paragraph 2.3. of the PWS does state: “The ETC is defined as the estimated minimum amount of staffing necessary for effective performance on each task order.”

Question: Previous Questions and Answers were submitted relating to the Occupational Code equivalent to the FOM Specialist. The government answered that the 21030 – Material Coordinator is the appropriate labor category to adequately support the functions of these positions. Will the government deem an offeror’s proposal technically unacceptable if labor categories other than the Material Coordinator are utilized for staffing?

Answer: The labor category 21030 Material Coordinator is written in stone. Yes, the offeror’s proposal will be deemed technically unacceptable if the offeror proposes a different labor category.

Question: Company X asks the government to review the calculations/formulas in the TEP Matrix Worksheet. In our preparation, our Pricing Team found an issue with the the yearly totals sum formula.

Answer: You are correct, TEP FOM 29Jan2020 has been removed from beta.SAM. Please use TEP FOM 6Mar2020 which has been uploaded to beta.SAM.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .