FOM Questions and Answers Week 2.docx
DOCX document 21 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Facilities Other Maintenance
- Solicitation number
- FA822425R0011
About this file
This document is a Questions and Answers (Q&A) file for a Facilities Other Maintenance (FOM) contract opportunity for the 309th Aircraft Maintenance Group. The Q&A addresses critical clarifications about the solicitation, including site visits, equipment provisions, and contract requirements. Key details include confirmation that no additional site visits will occur, government-provided equipment for storing and transporting parts, and clarification that F-22 and F-35 program duties are primary and vital to the contract's performance.
The contract involves managing FOM programs for multiple aircraft types (C-130, F-16, F-22, A-10, T-38, and F-35) at Hill AFB, Utah, and Joint Base San Antonio/Randolph AFB, Texas. The contractor's responsibilities include receiving, issuing, inventorying, and verifying parts and materials for storage with positive control of assets. Notable Q&A points include guidance on document formatting (font sizes for charts), security clearance references, and the government's stance that offerors should use independent expertise to determine appropriate labor mix and pricing, without providing extensive additional historical staffing data.
View the file
Other files
Show all 48
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
1. Will there be a site visit before the submittal due date?
There was a site visit in September 2024 and another one will not take place.
2. Appendix D (page 33), Historical Workload Data – the 1st table shows an asterisk with clarifying information. Which column does it refer to?
The asterisk in the first table represents the number of planes to be disassembled at a given time.
3. Appendix D (page 33), Historical Workload Data – the 2nd table shows a double asterisk with clarifying information. Which column does it refer to?
The second table double asterisk is “Since FOM assets are stored/ secured away from aircraft, this number only reflects the number of aircraft that will be in assembly.”
4. Is there a descriptive list of the FOM assets the contractor must receive, inventory, store, and issue IAW PWS?
A descriptive list of assets the contractor receives, inventories, and issues is not currently available to share. We will see if we can obtain one if it exists and share it next week.
5. PWS Section 3.1.8.6 (page 8) discusses storing, transporting, and delivering FOM assets, which implies the need for trucks, trailers, forklifts, jacks, dollies, hoists, etc., as well as storage racks, containers, cages, etc. Appendix G (page 36) lists some vertical lift machines, but is there a further list of Govt-furnished vs. contractor-furnished equipment and vehicles?
Our understanding is that all equipment necessary for storing, transporting, and delivering of FOM assets are provided by the government and the government maintains responsibility for them. The contractor should not need to obtain any equipment to perform this work. We will verify this information and respond to it next week.
6. Source = Instructions to Offerors, paragraph 2.2.2: can the Charts and Graphs be in a smaller font, 8/10 rather than 12?
Charts and graphs can use size 8 font if absolutely necessary, 10-point font would be preferred if 12 point font will not work.
7. Regarding PWS 3.1.10, will the government please confirm whether FOM duties under the F-22 and F-35 programs are primary and vital requirements of the contract, or are the duties ancillary to the principal purpose of the procurement?
The duties on the FOM contract are the same regardless of which airplane is being worked on. F-22 and F-35 will have the same duties of receiving airplane parts from the mechanics, preparing them for storage, storing them, inventorying regularly to make sure parts aren’t missing and when needed retrieved from storage to reassemble the airplanes. Therefore, the duties under F-22 and F-35 are primary and vital to successfully performing the contract.
8. Regarding ITO 4.3.2.2. Security Clearance, the paragraph states "IAW PWS Paragraph(s) 2.3.2 and all subparagraphs." There is no paragraph 2.3.2 or further subparagraphs to reference in the PWS. To ensure compliance, is there another intended section in the PWS that should serve as a reference for security clearances?
Paragraphs 3.1.3.2 and 3.1.10 address the need for security clearances. Paragraphs 2.3.2 and it’s subparagraphs were removed during review of the solicitation. Additional information removed from this section has been added to Paragraph 2.2 and its subparagraphs that should not have been removed.
9. Regarding ITO 4.3.1.2. Multiple Site Supervision, the paragraph states, "IAW PWS Paragraphs 1, 1.1, 2.3.3, and 2.3.3.1." There are no corresponding 1.1, 2.3.3, or 2.3.3.1 paragraphs in the PWS for reference. Is there another intended section in the PWS that should serve as a reference for multiple site supervision to ensure compliance?
The PWS underwent some changes at the last minute and the referenced paragraphs have been moved. Paragraphs 1 and 1.1 are typos and should not have been included. Paragraphs 2.3.3 and 2.3.3.1 are now 2.3 and 2.3.1.
10. Regarding the submission of questions for the solicitation, is the intention for vendors to submit questions encrypted? If so, I'm ready to initiate the coordination process to exchange certificates, allowing communication to begin. The instructions in sections 1.1 and 1.2 of the ITO imply that all communications must be encrypted. If not, I will send questions via unencrypted email.
Email communication does not need to be encrypted for questions. If you are emailing something that needs to stay private you should send an encrypted email.
11. Appendix D of the Performance Work Statement includes historical workload and staffing data from the current contractor. However, to develop a comprehensive staffing proposal that aligns with the requirements outlined in section 4.3.2.1 of the PWS, we find that additional information is needed. Specifically, non-incumbent offerors lack sufficient data to determine the necessary personnel to fully meet the contract requirements.
To ensure a level playing field and enable all offerors, including those who are not the incumbent, to submit reasonable and realistic staffing proposals, could the Government please provide further guidance? The current lack of information appears to give the incumbent a considerable advantage.
The Government anticipates that responsible offerors will use their independent expertise to determine the appropriate labor mix and pricing necessary to fulfill the contract requirements. While the Government provided Appendix D as some historical data to help with refining a price volume consistent with each offeror’s unique methods of performance, additional data is not available.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .