Revision 01 - Industry Questions with USG Responses to UDLM PDM RFP - 14 Jan 2020.pdf

REVISION 1 ‐ CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS WITH GOVERNMENT RESPONSES (Replaces Contractor's Questions responses dated 31 Dec 2019)

# RFP Document Section # RFP Wording Question for Government Government Response Government Response Date

1 Section L, Section M

The formal release dated 5 November deleted the requirement for a cross reference matrix in volume one. Does the Government desire or expect a CRM to be submitted as part of the Offerors submittal.

A Cross Reference Matrix is not required.

31-Dec-2019

2 UDLM/PDM

Pricing Model

Attachment 2 For the qty band pricing, is it the Government's intent that bands will be utilized consecutively. For example, if the Government exercises 4 H1's in FY21, the first three aircraft would utilize the qty 1-3 band pricing and the 4th aircraft would utilize the 4-6 band pricing.

The USG intends the pricing bands to be used consecutively based off the initial order but starting in the appropriate quantity band of the initial order. If 4 of the same type aircraft are on the initial order, all 4 of those aircraft will all be priced in the 4-6 pricing band.

Any subsequent order of the same type aircraft will continue consecutively on the pricing band. See Example at bottom of page.

31-Dec-2019

3 PWS Section L Paragraph B.1.

Offerors shall ensure that all clauses and provisions that require “fill-in” information are appropriately completed, including the proposed prices associated with the contract line items in the Schedule of the

RFP.

When completing the model contract, what aircraft variant should the contractor assume when entering the unit price?

Referenced paragraph will be changed to add the following language: ". . . (by completing "RFP_Atch_2_C130_UDLM_PDM_Pricing Model_dtd_31Oct19). . . " Please note that the RFP_Atch_2_C130_UDLM_PDM_Pricing Model_dtd_31Oct19 will be incorporated into final contract. Please note that the prices will not need to be filled in on the model contract, but only in attachment

2. The clauses will need to be filled in as applicable.

31-Dec-2019

4 Paragraph II, C, 1.3.3, Page 4

Section M, Evaluation Basis for Award

1.3.3. The associated goals expressed in terms of

percentages of the total planned subcontracted dollars is provided. Adequate rationale is provided if limited or no subcontracting possibilities exist for these socio-economic entities. Offerors are cautioned against only acknowledging a goal is not met, if applicable. Adequate rationale includes specific reasons why a goal is unmet and any actions being taken to increase any unmet goals.

In order to allow common calculation basis of small business content, will the government provide a defined basic program scale or scope. (qty of PDM, qty of UDLM, qty of Paint)

The subcontract percentages are not dependent on quantities. The RFP provided the 2019 DoD subcontracting goals as a reference, however each offeror is to develop their own plan to utilize small business.

31-Dec-2019

5 RFP, PWS There are many references to "fiscal year" within the RFP & PWS. When (month/year) should the Offeror begin the fiscal year for pricing purposes?

DoD Fiscal year is 1 Oct- 30 Sept 31-Dec-2019

Contractor Questions to USAF

REVISION 1 ‐ CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS WITH GOVERNMENT RESPONSES (Replaces Contractor's Questions responses dated 31 Dec 2019)

Response Date

6 Section L 2.1.1 Assumptions: For technical evaluation purposes only, assume the following when responding to this subfactor: The plan shall describe the approach for eight C-130H(83+) PDM aircraft, four C-130J-30 PDM/D-Check aircraft, and six mid-cycle paint. When responding to this subfactor, assume the first PDM/D-Check aircraft will be inducted on 1 March 2021 and subsequent PDM/D- Check aircraft will be inducted in even/equal intervals across the rest of FY21. When responding to this subfactor, assume the first Mid-Cycle Paint aircraft will be inducted on 1 February 2021 and subsequent Mid-Cycle Paint aircraft will be inducted in even/equal intervals across the remaining FY21 period. 2.2.1.1 Eight C- 130H(83+) PDM aircraft, four C-130J-30 PDM/D- Check aircraft, and six Mid-Cycle Paint. When responding to this subfactor, assume the first PDM/D-Check aircraft will be inducted on 1 March 2021 and subsequent PDM aircraft will be inducted in even/equal intervals across the rest of FY21.

When responding to this subfactor, assume the first Mid-Cycle Paint aircraft will be inducted on 1 February 2021 and subsequent Mid-Cycle Paint aircraft will be inducted in even/equal intervals across the rest of FY21.

Assuming the fiscal year is 1 October through 30 September, Section L paragraphs 2.1.1 and 2.2.1.1 requires Offerors to describe and address available facilities and/or demonstrate the ability to obtain facilities to support 12 PDMs (eight C-130H (83+) PDM aircraft and four C-130J-30 PDM/D-Check aircraft) within a seven-month period. With the first aircraft inducted on 1 March 2021 and the remaining aircraft to be spread evenly over FY21, this seven- month period drives Offerors to demonstrate much higher hangar requirements for FY21 than what will be required to support annual maximum PDM quantities in FY-22-

25. Would USAF consider changing the requirement in Section L from"... even/equal intervals across the rest of FY21" to" ...

even/equal intervals across a 12-month period of performance"?

This would align with the basic period of performance for FY21 stated on page 3 in Section B of the RFP.

The first year is a 12 month period, 3 month ramp up timeframe, and 9 month induction period. Delivery of aircraft back to the USG after completion of the PDM can be after the 12 month period in which it was inducted. For example, an aircraft may be inducted on 30 Sep (last day of the FY) and returned to the USG in the next FY after PDM is completed. There is no "period of performance" on task orders but instead required deliveries. The requirement in Section L re:

assumption, will not be changed. The assumption was placed in Section L for technical evaluation purposes only and is not a firm requirement.

31-Dec-2019

7 PWS 4.5.2. AFTO Form 103 workload tasks shall be either a FFP Catalog M task (see Appendix B) or a negotiated task prior to PDM induction. The FFP Catalog M tasks will be used for PDM and UDLM support. If a task on FFP Catalog M list is part of the basic PDM Work Spec, it will be completed as part of the PDM CLIN X001. Any work outside the PDM work spec, but within the PWS, shall be considered Over and Above (O&A). No O&A task shall be completed until authorized by PCO or their delegates.

PWS paragraph 4.5.2 has two sentences that may conflict. The sentence recently added states: "If a task on FFP Catalog M list is part of the basic PDM Work Spec, it will be completed as part of the PDM CLIN X001". Does this mean that Offerors should include the prices for the Catalog M tasks in their proposed price for PDM work under CLIN x001? For instance, aircraft in-processing/out-processing must be done for every PDM. Should Offerors price these tasks individually under CLIN x005 and price these tasks again in their proposed PDM prices under CLIN x001?

Yes, any task shown on the C130 PWS UDLM PDM App B C130HJ Catalog M Task FFP List that are part of a normal PDM process should be priced under PDM CLIN x001. All tasks shown on the C130 PWS UDLM PDM App B C130HJ Catalog M Task FFP List are to be priced as stand alone tasks.

REVISION 1 ‐ CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS WITH GOVERNMENT RESPONSES (Replaces Contractor's Questions responses dated 31 Dec 2019)

Response Date

8 Section L 1.1.1. CLINs x001 (C130 PDM): Offerors shall propose a fixed unit price for each quantity range, based on the estimated Maximum Quantity for each Fiscal Year (FY).

1.1.2. CLINs x003 (C130 PDM Paint): Offerors

shall propose a fixed unit price for each quantity range, based on the estimated Max Quantity for each FY.

1.1.3. CLINs x004 (C130J Mid-Cycle Paint):

Offerors shall proposed a fixed unit price for each quantity range, based on the estimated Maximum Quantity for each FY.

Instructions contained in Section L paragraph E.1.1.1 thru 1.1.3 states that fixed unit prices for CLINs X001, X003, X004 should be based on" ... the estimated Maximum Quantity for each Fiscal Year." This appears to contradict the purpose of establishing price ranges. Should the unit prices for these CLINs be based on maximum quantities for each FY, or should they be based on the quantities specified in each price range?

The Instructions in Section L, paragraph E.1.1.1 thru

1.1.3 will be changed to include "…the estimated Maximum Quantity in each pricing band for each Fiscal Year.

31-Dec-2019

9 Appendix A 3.2.2.2.4.1.1 - CP - Report any disbonds outside of the allowable limits (IAW TO 1C-130A-36, Inspection CW-48) to engineering AC130U

AC130W

C130H 73-74 C130H 78-82 C130H 83+

HC130(H)N 88-93

HC130N/P 64-69

LC130H

MC130H

MC130P

WC130H

Assigned MDS(s) 1B3I - AFT Nacelle Boron Repair Inspection and Thermography Scan Assigned Tasks

Appendix A section 3.2.2.2.4 requires a Thermography Inspections to existing Boron repairs in accordance with TO 1C- 130A-36, Inspection CW-48. TO 1C-130A-36 Page 15-30-00.

Table 2-13 states "Contact WR-AFLCMC for Authorized Equipment". Please identify the equipment required to accomplish this task.

The equipment required to perform TO 1C-130A-36, Inspection CW-48 is listed within the specific inspection instructions, see inspection paragraph 7.2.19, CW-48, Boron Repair Patches (57-10-20).

Required NDI equipment is listed under sub-paragraph

7.2.19.5.1. The “Thermographic imaging equipment”

and “recording medium” mentioned in the list does not specify a certain model or type. For reference, the Robins AFB NDI group uses the following thermographic imaging equipment and media:

FLIR SC660, 640 x 480 IR resolution, non-radiometric video recording to on-board memory card, built-in digital camera, flip-out 5.6” LCD display. This is used with a tripod to mount the camera looking up at the wing surface.

IAW the note in paragraph 7.2.19.5.1, C-130 engineering must approve new equipment prior to implementation. This can be accomplished after contract award via TAR in AIRCAT IAW PWS paragraph 4.31.

31-Dec-2019

10 PWS 4.16.7. The prices for O&A firm fixed price items listed in Appendix B do not include any payment for contactor furnished direct parts and materials.

PWS 4.16.7 states that "O&A FFP items in Appendix B do not include any payment for contractor furnished direct parts and materials". Does this mean that contractors should not include any material or subcontracts in the pricing of the O&A FFP Appendix B (Catalog M) line items?

This will be changed to read, "The prices for O&A firm fixed price items listed in Appendix B shall include any costs for contractor furnished parts and materials (XB3/XF3 coded parts) The contractor is not required and should not provide break out of subcontractor costs for an FFP line item.

31-Dec-2019

11 Reference FAR 52.211-12 "Liquidated Damages - Construction (SEP 2000)". Please remove this clause as it does not apply to the work anticipated under a resulting contract.

Clause will be removed 31-Dec-2019

REVISION 1 ‐ CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS WITH GOVERNMENT RESPONSES (Replaces Contractor's Questions responses dated 31 Dec 2019)

Response Date

13 Reference the RFP, Section I, Page 53. At the bottom of the page DFARS 252.204-7004 titled "BASIC AGREEMENT APPLICABILITY (FEB 2019)" is listed. The clause number is duplicative to the clause listed next above and on the same page titled "Level I Antiterrorism Awareness Training for Contractors (FEB 2019)". The Antiterrorism clause is the clause associated with this DFARS number. Please clarify.

NOTE: UPDATE 9 Jan 2020, The Basic Applicability Agreement clauses as listed as 52.209-13 and 252.204- 7004 are two of several cluases that include the Basic Applcability Agreement via reference when the other clause (52.209-13 (Antiterrism....) and 252.204-7004 (Volation of Arms....). the Basic Applicability Agreement is mandatory and will not be deleted from the RFP and subsequent contract.

12/31/2019

UPDATED:

14 Jan 2019

Section L, Paragraph E 1.3.5

The O&A job descriptions contained in the Pricing Model for CLIN X007 do not include all the labor categories required to process O&A tasks. For example, categories for Financial Control, Contracts, and Quality are not mentioned. Are Offerors permitted to add job categories/descriptions to allow us to perform the work in accordance with our disclosed practices and labor categories?

Any labor costs/categories (such as Financial control, contracts, and Quality) not listed in the pricing model MAY be included in overhead when burdening the labor rates. Additional labor categories may not be added by the offeror. Only the labor categories provided by the Govt in the pricing model should have a proposed burden rate.

14-Jan-2020

The RFP incorporates Service Contract Labor Standards (FAR 52.222-41). The job categories listed under CLIN x007 in the Pricing Model do not align with the Department of Labor Wage Categories for the applicable service contract labor. Since this contract requires compliance with the Service Contract Labor Standard, shouldn't the job categories in CLIN x007 align with applicable DOL wage categories?

The USG provided labor category descriptions to define each labor category. The USG will provide a GS/WG equivalent that aligns with each labor category listed in the Pricing Model. Offerors should match their labor categories to USG labor category descriptions when proposing a burdened rate. It is the Offerors responsibility to ensure their proposed burdened rates comply with the Dept of Labor standards.

14-Jan-2020

In review of the response provided on 1/6/2020 regarding Q&A #2, there is a concern regarding how to appropriately price and allocate non-recurring cost related to the various scopes of work.

As a follow-up, would the USG consider a establishing a separate CLIN for non-recurring? This will help to ensure the USG only pays once for non-recurring for each scope as well as an appropriate means of recovery for the contractor.

No. The USG will not provide a separate non-recurring CLIN. The Government requirement is based on the customer parameters such as funding type, aircraft availability, PDM due date, etc. Non-recurring start-up cost should be incorporated in the FFP of the PDM min (6 aircraft) during basic ordering period (FY21). This will allow for the non-recurring start-up cost to be captured without the USG having to pay for them more than once.

14-Jan-2020

REVISION 1 ‐ CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS WITH GOVERNMENT RESPONSES (Replaces Contractor's Questions responses dated 31 Dec 2019)

Response Date

17 In review of the response provided on 1/6/2020 regarding Q&A #6, we are asking for further clarification given the requirements contained in the PWS and Section L. We recognize there is no "period of performance" on task orders and an aircraft may be inducted on the last day of contracting period and delivered to the Government during the next contracting period. However, the instructions contained in paragraph 2.2.1.1 of Section L directs Offerors to describe their facilities to support eight C- 130H (83+) PDMs and four C-130J-30 PDM/D-Checks with the first PDM aircraft inducted on 1 March 2021 with subsequent PDM inductions in even\equal intervals across the rest of FY21.

We take this to mean Offerors must show they have facilities to support twelve PDM inductions spread evenly from 1 March through 30 September. From a proposal standpoint, this drives a higher number of maintenance bays required to support the program in the first year than in subsequent years. The following clarification requests are provided based on this concern.

We recognize that the assumption in Section L is not a firm requirement, but how will the Government be able to fairly evaluate the technical capabilities of Offerors if there is confusion regarding the induction requirements and each Offeror responds differently?

The requirement for the first 12 month period following contract award is to induct a maximum of 12 PDMs with FY21 funds. This means all contracted PDM aircraft (max of 12 aircraft) must be inducted within that given FY (1 Oct - 30 Sep). During the base year, the USG requirement allows for up to 120 days of ramp up time prior to the induction of the first PDM aircraft.

Consequently, this may (if the entire 120-day ramp up time is utilized) result in less than 12 months to induct the max of 12 aircraft in the base year (FY21) which could drive the need for additional maintenance hangar bays during the base year of the contract (FY21).

When you couple this clarification to the very specific scenario in Section L, "The plan shall describe the approach for eight C-130H(83+) PDM aircraft, four C-130J-30 PDM/D-Check aircraft, and six mid-cycle paint. When responding to this subfactor, assume the first PDM/D-Check aircraft will be inducted on 1 March 2021 and subsequent PDM/D-Check aircraft will be inducted in even/equal intervals across the rest of FY21." each offeror will be able to respond in the same manner.

14-Jan-2020

18 In review of the response provided on 1/6/2020 regarding Q&A #6

Would USAF consider changing the PDM induction requirement in Section L from" ... even/equal intervals across the rest of FY21" to " ... even/equal intervals across a 12-month period"?

No, the Government will not change the PDM induction language in Section L for FY21. Using even/equal intervals across a 12 month period would not align with the Government's schedule, aircraft availability, and/or funding.

14-Jan-2020

19 In review of the response provided on 1/6/2020 regarding Q&A #6

Comment: A suggested potential solution to both questions 1 and 2 would be for the Government to establish a 120- day Phase- In CLIN. This would allow the contractor to price and deliver the non-recurring requirements against what should then be known, in terms of the initial planned inductions, as well as provide a date for the start of the first 12- month performance period.

No. The USG will not provide a separate 120-Day Phase-In CLIN for non-recurring requirements. The Government requirement is based on the customer parameters such as funding type, aircraft availability, PDM due date, etc. Non-recurring start-up cost should be incorporated in the FFP of the PDM min (6 aircraft) during basic ordering period (FY21). This will allow for the non-recurring cost to be captured without the USG having to pay for them more than once.

REVISION 1 ‐ CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS WITH GOVERNMENT RESPONSES (Replaces Contractor's Questions responses dated 31 Dec 2019)

Response Date

The Attachment 2 Pricing Model for PDM Paint shows a min of 6 and max of 12 for the Hs & Js and it also shows a min of 6 and a max of 12 for the J-30s. Does this mean we should expect a min of 6 for both sets or does it mean we should only expect a minimum of 6 for the Hs, Js, and J-30s? This same methodology applies to the Mid-Cycle paint, but with different quantities.

PDM Paint: The min/max is cumulative across all C- 130 variants. Only the aircraft contracted to receive a PDM will receive a PDM paint.

Mid-Cycle Paint: The min/max is cumulative across all C-130J variants.

14-Jan-2020

The O&A job descriptions contained in the Pricing Model for CLIN X007 do not indude all the labor categories required to process O&A tasks. For example, categories for Financial Control, Contracts, and Quality are not mentioned. Are Offerors permitted to add job categories/descriptions to allow us to perform the work in accordance with our disclosed practices and labor categories?

Any labor costs/categories (such as Financial control, contracts, and Quality) not listed in the pricing model MAY be included in overhead when burdening the labor rates. Additional labor categories may not be added by the offeror. Only the labor categories provided by the Govt in the pricing model should have a proposed burden rate.

14-Jan-2020

The RFP incorporates Service Contract Labor Standards (FAR 52.222-41 ). The job categories listed under CUN x007 in the Pricing Model do not align with the Department of Labor Wage Categories for the applicable service contract labor. Since this contract requires compliance with the Service Contract Labor Standard, shouldn't the job categories in CUN x007 align with applicable DOL wage categories?

The USG provided labor category descriptions to define each labor category. The USG will provide a GS/WG equivalent that aligns with each labor category listed in the Pricing Model. Offerors should match their labor categories to USG labor category descriptions when proposing a burdened rate. It is the Offerors responsibility to ensure their proposed burdened rates comply with the Dept of Labor standards.

REVISION 1 ‐ CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS WITH GOVERNMENT RESPONSES (Replaces Contractor's Questions responses dated 31 Dec 2019)

Response Date