LGR2 Industry Comment Responses.pdf

LGR2 Industry Comment Responses 28 Sept 2011

Comment Response 1 As for the upcoming contract, is it a: Four year firm fixed contract or a one basic year with three option years?

This is a four year contract with no options

2 Will there be a compliance matrix provided in the final RFP?

There is a requirements traceability matrix in Section L, attachment TWO. This will be the compliance matrix. The applicable columns will be filled out by the Gov. and contractor.

3 Will USAF perform a pre-award survey on the successful offeror as per FAR part 9?

A pre-award survey will only be conducted if the information that the Contracting Officer has available is not sufficient to make a responsibility determination. This is IAW FAR 9.106-1.

4 It is understood from Clause H.01, that the contractor will have to upgrade the landing gear received to the latest configuration at no cost to the Government. It is very difficult for a bidder to properly evaluate the cost of this activity if the number of landing gear and their respective configurations to be upgraded is not made available.

Will the USAF provide this information in the Final

RFP?

This information will not be included in the final RFP because it is impossible to predict configuration updates. However, if there is a minor change, there will be no cost. If the configuration update is a major change, then there will be a mod to the contract to cover the costs.

Additionally, the RFP and resulting contract will include language allowing a request for equitable adjustment for configuration updates that are considered a major change.

5 In many instances, the latest configuration of the item implies different machining dimensions and/or different material, it is therefore impossible to bring the item to the latest configuration except by replacing the item itself. Is it the intention of the Government that the contractor supplies complete replacement end items at no cost to the Government?

This will be answered on a case by case situation. If there are carcasses available for the latest configuration the Gov will cover the cost through a contract mod. The RFP and resulting contract will include language allowing a request for equitable adjustment.

6 We understand the the contractor will have to implement all future scope of work changes (TO Changes) at no cost to the Government? Is our understanding correct?

See 4 and 5.

7 The duration of the contract is very important to the bidder to evaluate/minimize its business risks. What are the terms of the contract, four years or one basic year with three options?

This is a four year contract with no options.

8 Is it the intention of the USAF to reimburse the unused CFM to the Contractor if the USAF would terminate in whole or in part the contract prior to its expiration?

It is NOT the intent of the Gov to reimburse the contractor. We understand there is risk involved and contractors will need to propose accordingly. This will be clarified in

PWS 1.1.11

9 As part of the solicitation, we would assume a new contractor will have to submit First Articles for all Critical Safety Items. If our assumption is accurate, what will be the amount associated with the First Article testing that the Government will add to the bidder’s proposal?

It is the intent of the Gov that once a contractor has been deemed technically acceptable from the source selection then they are qualified to accomplish the repair and overhaul. Once on contract the repair work will be validated by DCMA.

There will be no first article testing.

This will be clarified in PWS 1.1.12

10 In regards to CFM, there are many parts which require forgings. The forging cost is an important cost element of the parts to be replaced. Will there be an Economical Price Adjustment (EPA) clause in this contract to protect the contractor against raw material and energy surcharges imposed by the forging houses? Will the bidders be required to supply a forging quote with their proposal?

There will not be an Economical Price Adjustment (EPA) clause in this contract IAW FAR 16.203-2.

Bidders are NOT required to supply forging quotes.

11 Many changes will occur during the term of this contract. The contractor will have to invest a very significant amount in inventory to properly support the program. Further, the USAF may decide to no longer repair an end item while the contractor has CFM inventory and thus this inventory would become obsolete. How would the Government support the contractor if such a situation arises? The same question also applies to inventory that could become obsolete due to a drawing change or any other USAF change during the execution of the contract that would make the CFM obsolete.

see #8

12 Most of the MICAP situations are not due to contractor performance, but rather are Government caused either by late receipt of repairable items, unavailability of Government Furnished Material, lack of funding, delays in engineering response, etc.

We understand that the contractor will have to :

Contractor will not be held responsible for gov delays in accordance with the contract's terms and conditions. Contractor will not pay for Government caused MICAP situations.

• Reschedule its production line at no cost to the Government

• Expedite charges such as overtime and premium transportation at the expense of the contractor

Is it the intent that the Contractor pays for the Government caused MICAP situations?

13 In the event that there is a large surge in MICAPs, will there be a tradeoff/relief, for capacity purposes, to support the MICAPs versus the regular Monthly Demand Rate production?

This question is answered in PWS par. 4.6.2, 4.6.3, If the situation cannot be handled with the overtime CLIN, and then this will be dealt with on a case by case basis.

14 The specifications for Packaging and Marking are not provided in the current RFP documents. Will the Air Force provide the complete requirements of the packaging and marking since as indicated at paragraph 4.4.12.3 of the PWS the contractor is responsible for all box repair and/or replacement?

This could represent significant costs to the contractor depending on USAF needs and condition of the boxes received by the Contractor.

The specifications for packaging and marking will be determined on individual orders. Contractors must price this into their overall repair cost of the item.

15 There is a new requirement on this RFQ regarding the part identification or UID. In fact the contractor will have to identify each designated part with a Unique Identification (UID) label. Based on the Monthly Demand identified in the solicitation, over 600 UID tags and transactions in the Government system will have to be generated on a monthly basis.

Since there is neither CDRL nor a Contract Line Item Number in the RFP to cover this activity, is it the intent of the Government that the contractor includes the associated costs related to this activity in its firm fixed prices?

There will be a separate CDRL and Line item for the UID label. The contractor will not need to include associated costs related to UID in its firm fixed price.

16 This solicitation requires that all inventory movement of Government owed material (carcasses, WIP, Deliveries, GFM, etc.) be reported on a daily basis in the CAV system. Based on the different transactions that must be inputted in CAV (Appendix B), we estimate that over 1,000 transactions must be entered in the Government system on a weekly basis. Although page 30 of the Performance-Based Work Statement (PWS) stipulates that there is no CAV II XML file transfer capability, paragraph 1.5 of Appendix B states that in the future XML batch filing will be available.

Would you please clarify, and advise if XML file transfer is available for this contract or will the contractor have to manually input all the transactions in the CAV system?

XML file transfer will be available only if receipt and induction can be done separately.

17 The following statement is found on the PWS, Page 6, para 4.3.2 “The contractor is required to document repairs made to each piece of equipment, including parts required. The Maintenance Service Report (AFTO 95) will be used (IAW CDRL A004) to report repair actions to the program office on a monthly basis.” This is not what the AFTO 95 is intended for and has never been used to report repair actions to the program office. The paragraph further stipulates that MSRs are not required to be packed with each item shipped. It is correct that AFTO 95s are not required for each item shipped but there are many CLINs in which the AFTO 95 is required to be packed with each item shipped? Please clarify this issue.

The AFTO 95 will not be a monthly report. CDRL A004 (AFTO 95) has been updated to reflect the proper use of the AFTO 95.

18 PWS, Page 7 paragraph 4.3.3 (ref IAW CDRL 0002 and Item Number 0006), the detailed information as requested IAW CDRL 0002 is enormous and will greatly impact the contractor’s pricing and will make the report extremely long to the point that it will be very cumbersome to the Government to analyze. In fact, at the end of the 4th year, the report could have more than 13,000 lines to be updated. Is this report really required since all information is already available in the CAV system?

Yes, this report is required because not all of the required information is contained in CAV.

19 The specified quantities among the various RFP sections (RFP Part 1 – The Schedule Section B, Section B Line Item Matrix and MDR Tables) are different. Would you please clarify the quantities to be used in the pricing volume and which quantity prevails in the evaluation of the RFP?

Quantities in the Line Item Matrix are correct. The MDR table shows our total requirement (contract and organic) Organic requirements will be removed.

20 The NSNs/PNs called out in the Deliveryschedule14July2011.pdf provided on FEDBIZOPPS.GOV do not reflect what is listed in the RFP, Part 1, and Schedule B. Please clarify which Part Numbers and NSNs prevail.

14July2011.pdf takes precedence. If there any discrepancies please refer to the pdf file.

21 Contract Line Item 0001 to 0009:

a. Can you provide a clear description of Clin x001 and what information is expected from the bidders?

b. Item 0003 through 0009 are only listed in the Basic Year 1. Is it a requirement for the following years?

a. This is over and above. No response from contractor required.

B. CDRLs apply to years 1 through

4. This will be clarified in the RFP.

22 We understand that per the Monthly Demand Rate schedule, the contractor will have to repair approximately 300 landing gear assemblies per month. As per Technical Acceptability Factor Section, the contractor has to be able to demonstrate that it will be able to deliver 120 landing gear assemblies per month after 180 days of award. What are the true expected needs of USAF? Please clarify.

Refer to the updated sections L & M technical acceptability subfactors which reflect the estimated needs of the Air Force.

23 Page 443, paragraph 3.1 states that the Offer & Administrative Volume shall include section A though K and paragraph 3.1.2 at page 444 Section B shall not be included. Would you please clarify?

Paragraph 3.1 was changed to clarify that Section B shall not be included.

24 Page 446, paragraph (c) Equipment Plan requires the use of Section L, Attachment Three to address the various processes and all components which undergo that process and list each P/N. This will extremely lengthy for any valid offeror – is it necessary? Also as a subparagraph to this under para (i) wherein evidence of ownership is requested

– what kind of evidence should be provided?

Yes, this is required. Evidence demonstrating legal title of ownership or legal right of use of the equipment identified. This will be clarified in the RFP and resulting contract.

25 Page 446, table I. C, Equipment List for Specific Processes, is it really the intension of the Government that the bidders list all subcomponents (i.e. over 1,500 parts) of every Item Number in this table? What is the purpose of this request? Isn’t it a duplication of information requested also in Attachment L-3 Equipment Plan Worksheet on page 453?

Table I. C is the Equipment list.

Specifically we are looking for contractors to list the specific equipment they will be using which will support the listed Items in the table I. C for each of the processes (not each subcomponent).

Attachment L-3 is the format which the gov. requests this information provided. This will be clarified in the RFP and resulting contract.

26 Page 456 to 458, Attachment L – These pages are not readable, would you please provide readable copies of these pages so the Contractor understands what is being requested?

Yes, these pages will be readable in the final RFP.

27 We understand that the contractor is responsible to meet contractual flow days 98% of the time but are unsure about the content stating “allowing for government caused delays”. We believe that the Contractor cannot be responsible for government caused delays. Please clarify this performance threshold?

PWS has been updated to clarify the gov. intent.

28 Page 7, paragraph 4.3.7, states “The Phase-In transition period is to be defined as, at a minimum, the first 6 months…..” should this not state the

MAXIMUM?

Yes, this should state maximum.

29 We are requesting that you add the contract clause FAR 52.219-4 and/or DFAR 219.1307, the HUB Zone Price Evaluation Preference to your full and open competitive solicitation, as you have the authority to do so

We will add FAR 52.219-4, DFARS

219.1307 no longer exists