Consolidated QA_FA855224R0001 (16Nov23).pdf

Consolidated Industry Questions and Government Answers

RFP FA8552-24-R-0001

Q1. RFP Section L-II.D.2 states, "...past performance information shall be provided in a separate volume labeled “Volume II – Past Performance".” L-II-A shows the title as Volume III Past.

Please clarify.

A1. See Attach 04_Sections L&M Provisions Revision 02. RFP Section L-II.D.2 and Section L- II-A remain unchanged and, in both sections, correctly shows Volume III as the Past Performance Proposal.

RFP Section L-II.D.2 (p.8), reads “The requested present and past performance information shall be provided in a separate volume labeled “Volume III – Past Performance”.

RFP Section L-II-A (p.2) shows the Past Performance Proposal as Volume III.

Q2. RFP Section L-I.A states, “Proposals must be received by AFLCMC/WIUKB SOF Rotary Contracting Section, Address: 35 Byron Street Suite 19A, Robins AFB, GA 31098-1670, Attention: Capt Tarha Mazyck, Procurement Contracting Officer,” and L-II.A states, “All proposal volumes shall be submitted in electronic format via email or the Solicitation Module in the PIEE at https://piee.eb.mil.” Can the proposal be submitted via email or the Solicitation Module, and hard copy delivery is not necessary?

A2. See Attach 04_Sections L&M Provisions Rev 2. RFP Section L-I.A and L-I.B have been revised in Solicitation Amendment 0002 to remove all references to the Solicitation Module in PIEE and incorporated in Solicitation Amendment 002 as follows:

A. General. The following instructions cover the preparation and submittal of the offeror’s proposal for this solicitation. Offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the Request for Proposal (RFP) may cause their proposal to be determined not eligible for award. If a joint venture arrangement exists for this acquisition, the offeror shall provide a copy of the joint venture agreement that is signed and dated by all joint venture members as part of the proposal submission. Offerors shall submit only one (1) proposal for the TH-1H Depot Level Maintenance program. The Government will review only one (1) proposal per offeror.

Proposals must be received via email by the Contract Specialist, Erica Carter, at erica.carter.3@us.af.mil and the Contracting Officer, Capt Tarha Mazyck at tarha.mazyck.2@us.af.mil, no later than 4:30 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST) on 15 December 2023. Offerors are requested to submit Volume III – Past Performance Proposal via email to the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer, so that it is received no later than 4:30 PM EST on 05 December 2023, ten (10) calendar days prior to the required due date for proposals. Failure to submit Volume III by the earlier date will not result in offeror disqualification.

B. Communications. Exchanges of source selection information between Government and offerors will be controlled by the Contracting Officer. Exchanges of source selection information after submission of the initial proposal packages between the Government and offerors will be controlled by the Contracting Officer. The Government will only accept electronic proposals.

Email to transmit such information must be sent encrypted and must include “Source Selection

Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104” and the RFP number in the subject line of the email. In order to facilitate the sending and receiving of encrypted emails, offerors must use Microsoft (MS) Outlook email configured to support encryption or a different email product that is S/MIME compatible and configured to support encryption. If you intend to submit your source selection information via encrypted email, you will need to contact the Contract Specialist/Contracting Officer indicated on the face page of the solicitation prior to that first submittal in order to exchange certificates used for encryption. To ensure the process is working correctly, send a test encrypted message first (without including any source selection information). When submitting source selection information via email, file suppression utilities, to include, but not limited to zip files, will not be accepted.

Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via DoD SAFE at https://safe.apps.mil.

In order to send the Government a file in DoD SAFE, the offeror must contact the Contract Specialist/Contracting Officer prior to request access to drop off the file on the DoD Safe-Site. The offeror is responsible for contacting the Contract Specialist/Contracting Officer prior to the required RFP response date to ensure timely submission of proposals.

1. Discrepancies. If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer, in writing, with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the offeror is asking the Contracting Officer to consider as related to the omission or error.

Q3. The RFP does not state the following document specifications: font type and size for text, tables, and graphics, page size, margins, and line spacing. Does the government have limits/requirements for these?

A3. See Attach 04_Sections L&M Provisions Revision 02. RFP Section L-II.A.6 has been updated and included in Solicitation Amendment 0002 to reflect the following:

Text shall be single-spaced, on an 8 ½" x 11" sheet with a minimum one-inch margin all around, excluding any charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, or spreadsheets, etc.

Charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc. shall not be greater than 11” x 17”. Text font shall be no less than Times New Roman (or Arial) size 12. Font size 10 is acceptable for charts, graphs, drawings, supporting illustrations, or spreadsheets, etc.

Pages shall be numbered consecutively within each volume. The page limits prescribed are maximum page limits for each volume. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Cover pages, tables of contents, tabs, and glossaries shall not be counted against prescribed page limits. Pages submitted in excess of these limits will not be read or considered in the Government’s evaluation of the proposal. All proposal information shall be submitted in either MS Word or PDF format except for pricing information in the Cost/Price Proposal (Volume IV). Pricing information shall be submitted in an unlocked MS Excel format showing any linked values, cells, formulas, etc.

Q4. The proposal organization table switched Att. 15 Tabs B and C; they should be reversed;

Please clarify.

A4. See Attach 04_Sections L&M Provisions Revision 02. The proposal organization table has been corrected in Solicitation Amendment 0002 to show:

Volume

Instructions to Offeror

(Section II Reference)

Title Maximum Number of Pages***

Paragraph E.2.d RFP Attachment 15 – TH-1H Price Matrix (Tab B) – PDM Pricing

N/A

Paragraph E.2.e RFP Attachment 15 – TH-1H Price Matrix (Tab C) – CRNF Material Add-on Factor

N/A

Q5. RFP Section L.901 states: “USE OF NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS (a) Offerors are advised that technical and cost/price data submitted to the government in response to this solicitation may be released to non-government advisors for review and analysis. The non-government advisor support will be provided by:

Axient Corporation

(2) states: “to non-government advisors for review and analysis; I have entered into (or will enter into) a non-disclosure agreement(s) with the non-government advisor(s), or with the company employing the non-government advisor(s); and, I will submit a copy of any such agreements to the Contracting Officer not later than the date established…”

Can the Government provide a point of contact for NDA requests?

A5. The Axient POC for NDA coordination is:

Mr. Jordan Blevins Contracts Administrator, Axient LLC jordan.blevins@axientcorp.com

Q6. With regards to Past Performance:

A. Are Commercial examples acceptable? – i.e., contractual instances where a Prime services commercial fleets, providing the equivalent to Depot Level Maintenance or DLM (i.e., aircraft structural inspections & repairs greater than organizational & intermediate levels), unscheduled maintenance actions or UMA, components overhaul–&-return-to-service, and the like)

B. Is it acceptable to submit – as contractual performance – the DLM-equivalent activity services the contractor executes for their helicopter fleet (including the Bell 204 (UH-

1B derivative), Bell 205 & related 214ST (UH-1H derivatives), and Bell 212 / 412 (UH- 1N derivatives))?

A6. See Attach 04_Sections L&M Provisions Revision 02. Yes, offerors may submit commercial past performance history. See the Prime Contractor/Critical Subcontractor Relevancy tables in RFP Section M-II.D.4. (Note: This is the Government’s response to Q6.A-B above).

Q7. With regards to Place of Performance, PWS Paragraph 4.1.2 indicates “… services will be performed at the Contractor’s facility. The facility shall include adequate hangar space to accommodate up to five (5) work-in-progress TH-1H helicopters simultaneously, within a 300-mile radius of Cairns AAF”:

A. Specific to the contractor’s provided services, could the below sites be considered within an acceptable margin (exception) as it relates to the radius-from-Cairns AAF distance?

i. Contractor’s facility in Houma, LA – with its 50,000-sq-ft facility including storage for parts platforms – at 317 miles from Cairns AAF; &/or

ii. Contractor’s facility in Lafayette, LA location – with its 250,000-sq-ft facility with maintenance bays, avionics/mechanical/structural back shops, paint booths, & space-plus to accommodate (5) or more in-work platforms – at 380 miles; the contractor also has a Cooperative Base at the Enterprise Municipal Airport AL that could assist with the staging and transition of platforms.

B. For contractor collaborating with a team-up member – one with a site ~200 miles from Cairns AAF – would a distributed Contractor Facilities approach be acceptable, whereby the:

i. Contractor site is the Primary Contractor Facility (PCF) re: DLM & UMA maintenance;

ii. Contractor Houma site – ~100 miles from the PCF – is the parts platform storage location; and

iii. Contractor’s Lafayette site – ~150 miles from the PCF – provides DLM & UMA capacity as well as back shop execution re: components overhaul & return-to-service (RTS), corrosion control / paint, & test flight / RTS coordination – with the contractor(s) providing the personnel, logistics, & insurance coverage associated with moving parts & platforms between sites.

A7. See PWS Revision 01 (9 November 2023). As identified in PWS Paragraph 4.1.2, services will be performed at the Contractor’s facility. The facility shall include adequate hangar space to accommodate up to five (5) work-in-progress TH-1H helicopters simultaneously, within a 300-mile radius of Cairns AAF (Ft. Novosel, AL). No margin or exception will be considered with regard to the radius-from-Cairns AAF distance.

Q8. As extensions of Question 7 above:

A. Would it be acceptable for DLM and UMA to be performed at the PCF (~200 miles from Cairns AAF) while overflow capacity was available at a separate, qualified site (~150 miles from the PCF).

B. Would it be acceptable for back shop execution to be performed at the above-noted separate, qualified site (~150 miles from the PCF)?

C. Similar to Question 8.B, except for corrosion control and/or paint activities?

D. Similar to Question 8.B, except for test flight/RTS coordination activities?

A8. It is acceptable for DLM and UDLM to be performed at a location within 200 miles from Cairns AAF as that distance is within a 300-mile radius of Cairns AAF (Ft. Novosel, AL). The requirements of this effort do not require or address overflow capacity; however, no margin or exception will be considered with regard to the radius-from-Cairns AAF distance. Refer to A7 above. With regard to B through D, to clarify most simply, the point of induction and the point of aircraft delivery (to include final acceptance check flight and receipt by the custodian) must be within the stated 300-mile radius from Cairns AAF.

Q9. Schedule B of the RFP, Page 5 of 176 indicates “170 calendar days”.

However, per PWS 4.3.1.3. Total Flow Days (Attach 01_PWS), the total PDM flow days are a combination of the fixed and variable work requirement and shall be negotiated at the 45-Day Induction Meeting based upon number of manhours required to complete the PDM work and states “the contractor shall complete all work within 260 calendar days from induction. Please clarify how many days – calendar or otherwise is the maximum?

A9. CLIN X003 is for the Programmed Depot Maintenance Repair (fixed) labor requirement and does not account for the variable work (i.e., Over and Above (O&A)) that will be negotiated at the 45-day Induction Meeting. PDM variable work is accounted for via CLINs X007 and X008. The total flow days remain within 260 calendar days from induction.

Q10. PWS 3.1., Government Property to be Provided states “The USAF will provide salvage aircraft hulks to the Contractor as GFP. These aircraft will be cannibalized as a source of supply for customer aircraft undergoing DLM and in support of all TH-1H trainer aircraft. Disposition of GFP will be provided at contract completion.” Please clarify who will have authority over what parts to utilize?

A10. The Government (CFA/CFR) retains authority over what parts to utilize. Prior to cannibalizing parts from the salvage aircraft hulk, the Contractor shall coordinate with the CFA/CFR. See PWS Revision 01 (09 November 2023) Paragraph 3.1.

Q11. PWS 3.3.1., Contractor Acquired Property (CAP)/Long Lead Items states “The Contractor shall furnish all repair parts, consumables, material, and supplies required for performing the work of this PWS. The Contractor shall receive, store, and account for existing CAP/Long Lead Items, and if necessary, replace.” Please clarify how are we reimbursed since each aircraft is different?

A11. CLIN X013, CAP and Long Lead Material is cost-reimbursable no fee (CRNF).

Q12. PWS 3.3.2., Replacement of Consumable Maintenance Supplies and Material states “The Contractor is responsible for obtaining consumable supplies and materials as required to perform maintenance on TH-1H aircraft and accessories as contained in the aircraft parts manual.

Consumable Supplies used on the TH-1H aircraft are found in the applicable Technical Orders (TOs) and the TH‐1H‐23-010-001… The contractor shall use the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) to order consumable parts and material when it is economically feasible. Requests for consumable assets to be provided by the Government will be considered on a case-by-case basis with approval of the System Program Office (SPO).” Who or what determines if an item is economically feasible? Example time vs cost?

A12. The Government will determine if an item is economically feasible. See PWS Revision 01 (09 November 2023) Paragraphs 4.10.1., Economical Repair Determination, and 4.10.2., Condemnation.

Q13. PWS 4.1.2., Place of Performance states “These services will be performed at the Contractor’s facility. The facility shall include adequate hangar space to accommodate up to five

(5) work-in-progress TH-1H helicopters simultaneously, within a 300-mile radius of Cairns AAF (Ft. Novosel, AL). Other Places of Performance may include Cairns AAF, Robins Air Force Base (AFB), and/or other locations designated by the Program Manager (PM) and PCO to meet mission requirements.”

However, per RFP Sections L.C.2.c.(i) Technical Subfactor 3: Facility and Tooling, Hangar Space;

RFP Section M-C.1.c.i. Subfactor Three: Facility and Tooling, Hangar Space; and PWS paragraph

4.1.2, “the offeror’s proposal shall include adequate hangar space to accommodate up to five work in-progress TH-1H helicopters simultaneously, within a 600 nautical mile round-trip (300nm one-way) of Cairns Army Airfield (Ft Novosel AL).” Please clarify places given that the aircraft will be PDM an indicates government places of performance vs contractor facility? Secondary given that the contract only requires 3 aircraft per year what is the requirement to have having a hangar for 5?

A13. The DLM requirements may also include unscheduled maintenance and the deployment of Contractor Field Teams (CFT). Therefore, some Other Places of Performance may include CAAF, RAFB, and/or other unknown locations. Any UDLM (including Contractor Field Team (CFT) and drop-in maintenance/Depot Field Team (DFT)) and travel requirements are addressed IAW PWS Paragraphs 4.4 AND 4.27, respectively; and CLINs X009 – X012 and X006, respectively.

With regard to hangar space, the contractor’s facility shall include adequate hangar space to accommodate up to five (5) work-in-progress TH-1H helicopters simultaneously to allow for the potential of drop-in/UDLM repairs. See PWS Revision 01 (09 November 2023) Paragraph 4.1.2.

Also, the number of aircraft varies each period of performance (PoP). Refer to the RFP CLINs with regard to the number of aircraft per year/PoP.

Q14. PWS 4.3.3., DLM Repair Standards and Defect Classification states “A fundamental task associated with the DLM process includes objectively classifying defects in order to determine if a defect requires correction during the DLM process.” Who is the final authority of defect classification?

A14. All defects are subject to the validation of the CFA/CFR. See PWS Revision 01 (09 November 2023) Paragraph 4.3.4., Defect Classifications.

Q15. PWS 4.3.11. Workmanship and Repair Standards states “All repairs shall be performed under the direct supervision of aircraft mechanics licensed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to perform safety of flight maintenance on rotary-wing aircraft.” Please confirm mechanics must possess at a minimum FAA A&P?

A15. PWS Revision 01 (09 November 2023) Paragraph 4.3.11. Workmanship and Repair Standards states “All repairs shall be performed under the direct supervision of aircraft mechanics licensed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to perform safety of flight maintenance on rotary-wing aircraft.” This does not require every mechanic to individually possess an FAA A&P license. Personnel qualification standards are outlined in the PWS Paragraph 4.11, Personnel and Support and evaluated IAW Section M-II.C.1.b.(iii), Personnel Requirements.

Q16. PWS 5.5.3. Voluntary Protection Programs (VPP) states “Contractor personnel performing work on a USAF installation shall participate in the local Voluntary Protection Program (VPP)”. Please clarify since the work will be off an USAF base, at a contractor facility. If not applicable, removal is recommended.

A16. While standard depot work is performed at the contractor’s facility, in the event Contract Field Team (CFT) work is performed at a government facility or installation, the requirements are subject to regulatory guidance of the Voluntary Protection Program (VPP).

Q17. With regard to Work Spec TH-1H-23-010-0001 dated 07 July 2023 (Attach 02_PDM Work Specification):

A. Paragraph 1.1. Scope states “The modifications, detailed in Time Compliance Technical

Order (TCTO) 1H-1(T)H-501, include the Bell Helicopter UH-1H-II (Huey II) kit (ref 205- 705-001-101K, Kit Assembly Inspection Log or “KAIL”), the Honeywell T53-L-703 commercial engine upgrade, and the Bell 212 nose installation; a communications and navigation systems avionics upgrade; an electronic MFD glass cockpit; an emergency locator transmitter; and crashworthy pilot, copilot and center observer seat installations.”

Please clarify how the items will be obtained.

B. Paragraph 3.1.1.6. Perform Check Flight states “Prior to aircraft induction the contractor shall perform a joint check flight with a representative of the owning activity for all flyable aircraft. The check flight may be accomplished concurrently with the aircraft ferry flight to the DLM facility, with the DLM facility test pilot serving as aircraft co-pilot. A check flight consists of a thorough inspection and airworthiness check of the aircraft before flight, during flight.” Please clarify if DLM facility test pilot is the contractor flight test pilot.

A17. Attach 02_PDM Work Specification Paragraph 1.1., Scope does not require the Contractor to obtain any item, it is just describing the configuration of the helicopter. The Contractor’s flight test pilot will be the DLM facility test pilot. (Note: This is the Government’s response to Q17.A- B above).

Q18. Is there an incumbent, and if so, what was the awarded amount?

A18. Yes; the incumbent is Arista Aviation Services, LLC; awarded at $39.5 Million Ceiling Value.

Q19. What is the number aircraft completed per year under the current contract?

A19. Four.

Q20. Confirm that this is a small business set aside? Is it restricted to an established Multiple Award Contract (MAC)?

A20. This acquisition is not associated with any established multiple award contracts (MAC) and is a total (100%) small business set-aside.