AGE SPV Solicitation_Government Response to Industry.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 18 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA857526RB004
About this file
This file is a Government Response to Industry Questions and Answers document addressing clarifications for the F-15 FMS Aerospace Ground Equipment/Special Purpose Vehicles (AGE/SPV) solicitation (FA857526RB004) in support of the Royal Saudi Air Force.
The document addresses 35 industry inquiries across multiple solicitation topics. Key clarifications include: SAM.gov self-certification under applicable NAICS is sufficient for Small Business status, with no additional SBA documentation required for foreign entities; this is a Small Business Set Aside with no incumbent, as it is a new effort; foreign contractors are eligible to participate at the prime level subject to 13 CFR 121.105(a) restrictions; proposals may be delivered fully electronically or in combination with hard copies; the 12-point font requirement applies to all text including tables and figures; the Saudi Business License must be included within the 35-page Volume II limit; all repair and return services must occur in-country (Kingdom) with no U.S.-based repair option; labor categories across CLINs X006, X007, and X008 have been updated; the NSN List has been corrected to reduce duplicates and errors; past performance efforts must fall within the $2.1M-$7.9M annual threshold and one to two-year period of performance to be evaluated; the contract supports approximately 210 F-15 C/D and SA aircraft; subcontractor cost breakdowns are required at proposal time; No "Not To Exceed" pricing will be accepted; and the proposal deadline extension will be provided in RFP Amendment 1. Multiple attachments including the Cost Model, NSN List, and Relevancy Requirements were noted as being updated and incorporated into RFP Amendment 1.
View the file
Other files
Show all 27
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
Sheet1
| No | Reference | Industry Question/Feedback | Government Response |
| 1 | General | Is SAM registration with self-certification under the applicable NAICS sufficient? | Yes, self-certification in SAM.gov under the applicable NAICS as a Small Business is sufficient. See the following guidance: |
IAW 13 CFR 121.405:
“(a) A concern must self-certify it is small under the size standard specified in the solicitation, or as clarified, completed or supplied by SBA pursuant to § 121.402(d).
| 2 | General | Are there any additional SBA documentation or certifications required for a foreign entity? | No further certifications are needed as long as the offeror is registered in SAM.gov as a Small Business and identified as a Small Business under the applicable NAICS. | |
| 3 | General | Is any further validation required prior to proposal submission? | No further validation is required. | |
| 4 | SAM.gov posting | 1. Number 5 on SAM.gov states “Foreign contractors are permitted to participate at the prime level.” Is this an error? | Yes, eligible Foreign Contractors are permitted to participate at the Prime Level. See guidance for details on eligibility: “IAW 13 CFR 121.105(a), “(1) Except for small agricultural cooperatives, a business concern eligible for assistance from SBA as a small business is a business entity organized for profit, with a place of business located in the United States, and which operates primarily within the United States or which makes a significant contribution to the U.S. economy through payment of taxes or use of American products, materials or labor. A business concern may be in the legal form of an individual proprietorship, partnership, limited liability company, corporation, joint venture, association, trust or cooperative, except that where the form is a joint venture there can be no more than 49 percent participation by foreign business entities in the joint venture. | |
| 5 | General | 2. Is there an incumbent for this effort? • | If so, who are they and what was the inning bid contract number and scope? | This in a new effort and therefore there is not an incumbent. |
| 6 | PWS Section 5 | What are the security requirements? | Para 5.2, 5.2.1 of the PWS references the Security Requirements. | |
| 7 | General | Will the Government clarify whether proposals may be delivered fully by electronic means (encrypted email or DoD SAFE, as suggested in L.II.A.7) or if a combination of electronic and hard copies is required (as suggested in the L.II.A. table)? | Proposals may be delivered fully by electronic means or a combination if the contractor desires. | |
| 8 | L.II.A.2 states, “Print shall be no smaller than a font size of 12.” | Will the Government consider allowing a smaller font size (such as 10 pt) for tables, graphs, charts, figures, headers, and footers? | No. 12 pt font is the requirement for submission. See Section L, II Volume Organization, para A(2) for details. | |
| 9 | Section L, C. Volume II, Written Technical Proposal, para 2.1(f) | Will the Government consider allowing the Saudi Business License to be excluded from the required 35-page limit for Volume II? | The Saudi Business License shall be included in the 35- page limit for Volume II. See Section L, C. Volume II, Written Technical Proposal, para 2.1(f) for requirements. | |
| 10 | Cost Model | Should the contractor expect to perform repair and return services of Aerospace Components as identified in TAB CLIN X002_Sample Repair Year along with the equipment identified in the RFP attachment NSN List? | The CLIN X002_Sample Repair Year is the Cost Model has been updated and included in RFP Amendment 1. The contractor should have the capability to repair all equipment listed if needed. | |
| 11 | Cost Model | It appears the Labor Categories for Operator Familiarization Training are the same as identified across CLINs X006, X007 and X008. Can the Government update the Labor Skills mix for CLIN X008 to include Labor Categories that map to training requirements? | The Labor Categories in CLINs X006, X007 and X008 have been updated. This correction will be incorporated in RFP Amendment 1. | |
| 12 | RFP attachment- NSN List | The line numbers in the RFP attachment |
“NSN list” appear to be duplicate NSNs, some with different Item Names & Descriptions and others with the same name. Can the Government verify if these duplicate NSNs are errors or line items
| that require repair services? | The NSN List has been updated to reduce duplicates and errrors. This correction will be incorporated in RFP Amendment 1. | ||
| 13 | General | Will the Government clarify that no |
“Small Business Participation Proposal” and no “Small Business Subcontracting
| Plan” is required to be submitted? | As this is a Small Business Set Aside, no Small Business Participation Proposal or Small Business Subcontracting Plan is required. | ||
| 14 | RFP Attachment | There is a discrepancy in Scope and |
magnitude of effort between the RFP_Section_M Relevancy definitions and RFP_Attachment_7_Relevancy Requirements. Will the Government clarify which relevancy definitions apply
| for evaluation of Past Performance? | RFP Attachment 7 - Relevancy Requirements has been updated and will be incorporated in RFP Amendment 1. | ||
| 15 | Cost Model | There is no clear reference in |
Attachment_4_Cost-Price_Model that allows identification of Major and Minor repairs. Clarify how major and minor
| repairs will be priced | The Government is not asking for Major and Minor Repair costs to be seperately priced. Proposed rates will not be evaluated as major or minor repair. | ||
| 16 | General | We understand that a breakdown of cost is |
needed for each subcontractor and/or vendor, however, would it be possible to waive the requirement for vendors only, due to vendors being unwilling to provide this information at time of proposal, but will provide, if awarded, at time of
| request for repair? | Subcontractor Costs must be provided at time of proposal. | ||||
| 17 | General | The Solicitation provides a November 2026 timeframe for starting the PoP. Can the USG please provide the specific start date for the Base Year? | Contract Start date will be determined at time of award. | ||
| 18 | PWS | The PWS uses a Purchase Request number of FD2060-25-31659, but the solicitation number is FA857526RB004. Can the Government clarify which number they prefer the Offeror reference in its proposal? | Use the Solicitation number as the reference in proposals. | ||
| 19 | General | Are there any additional conflict zone costs the Offeror should consider in their proposal? | |||
| 20 | PWS 4.2 | The PWS references 10 holidays for in Kingdom employees, does the USG have a requirement for the number of holidays for U.S. based employees? | Per PWS para 4.2.6 Holidays and Facility Closings states holiday requirements for employees in Kingdom. All employees are permitted a maximum of 10 observed days in one year; otherwise, leave policies will be applied. | ||
| 21 | Cost Model | On RFP attachment 4, the Cost-Price Model.xlsx, Clarification on CLIN X002 (Repair & Return): In the provided Excel Pricing Sheet, CLIN X002 is identified as "Repair and Return for RSAF Contract."" Could you please clarify if this CLIN is intended to remain part of the current scope for this effort, or if this requirement might be removed? | The Government does not see any reference to "Repair and Return RSAF Contract" in CLIN X002 of the Cost Model. | ||
| 22 | Section M | Past Performance Thresholds (Page 9/14): The solicitation currently specifies that present/past performance efforts should involve contracts or task orders between $2.1M and $7.9M annually, with a period of performance between one (1) and two (2) years. | |||
| • | Duration: May we submit past performance projects where the period of performance exceeded the two-year mark? | ||||
| • | Value: Will the Government consider projects performed within the last two years that fell below the $2.1M annual threshold but are highly relevant to the technical scope of the AGE/SPV requirement? | Per Section M, only Past Performance that falls within the given parameters will be evaluated. Any submitted effort will be considered but in order to be evaluated and rated at the necessary levels, it must meet the minimum threshold requirements. | |||
| 23 | PWS Section 4 | Is this for F/N parts and repairs, or is it just repair pricing? It also appears like the ask is to have these assets repaired in country is that correct? Our partners would want to repair these assets in the US and return to either the USAF or account to have them shipped back to the RSAF. | This cost of repair should include parts and repair. PWS 4.2.1 and Table 1 state all repairs shall occur in Kingdom. No assets are to be repaired in the US. | ||
| 25 | General | Final question revolves around cost plus contracting. With so many parts is the USAF comfortable with “Not To Exceed” (NTE) pricing that will be definitized at a future date? | No, the Government will not accept Not To Exceed (NTE) pricing. | ||
| 26 | General | Due to the current issues in the Middle East, will you consider extending the deadline for this solicitation by 30 days? | The proposal deadline is not currently being extended for issues in the Middle East. | ||
| 27 | RFP Attachment - NSN List | 1. | Please verify the Items Names, Descriptions, and NSNs found on the Non-Serially Managed tab of the Government Furnished Property (excel) document. We have determined several NSNs are duplicated but have differing Item Names/ Descriptions. The Lines in question are as follows: | ||
| • | 22-26 | ||||
| • | 38-44 | ||||
| • | 36-49 | ||||
| • | 51-52 | ||||
| • | 69-73 | ||||
| • | 81-85 | ||||
| • | 95-96 | ||||
| • | 105-106 | ||||
| • | 116-118 | ||||
| • | 127-128 | The NSN List has been updated to reduce duplicates and errrors. This correction will be incorparate in RFP Emendment 1. | |||
| 28 | PWS Section 4 | 2. | If needed, are AGE OEMs permitted to perform overhaul/repair services outside of KSA? | PWS para 4.1.2 states all repairs must take place in Kingdom. | |
| 29 | Section L | 1. | Are offerors expected to submit the proposal volumes via email/DOD SAFE as well as physically delivered to 235 Byron St, Ste 19A Robins AFB? | Per Section L, offerors may deliver elctronically, physically or both. | |
| 30 | Section L | 2. | Section L, E. Volume IV. Cost/Price Proposal, 2. Cost or Pricing Data Requirements, Cost Format D states “Major subcontractors are required to provide RFP Attachment 4, Cost/Price Model as part of their proposal.” | ||
| a. | Please clarify if Major Subcontractors are meant to provide data for the Attachment 4, Cost/Price Model to only the Prime Contractor for incorporation into proposal submission, or directly to USG as well. | Per Section L, "It is also the offeror’s/joint venture member’s responsibility to submit all major subcontractor proposed unit costs, major subcontractor elemental cost breakouts, and major subcontractor documentation in support of the elemental cost breakouts, as part of the offeror’s/joint venture member’s proposal. For any of the above referenced information that a major subcontractor may not be willing to provide directly to the offeror/joint venture member, the offeror/joint venture member shall instruct the major subcontractor to provide that information directly to the Government IAW the terms and conditions of this solicitation." | |||
| 31 | NSN List | Is the list of equipment (133 items) comprehensive in terms of type and quantity? As a prime on several AGE contracts, we have not seen an AGE contract supporting a unit that only contains one bomb lift and two generators. | The type of equipment listed in the NSN List attachment is comprehensive. The quanitity will vary and fluctuate throughout the contract based on need. | ||
| 33 | PWS para 1.3 | Section 1.3 of the PWS does not provide a clear number of how many aircraft are supported. Can the Government also provide this information | PWS para 1.3 states "The resulting larger fleet (approximately 210 aircraft) of C/D and SA aircraft will require a continuation of repair and return support for the AGE/SPV and Fire Safety Vehicles far into the future." | ||
| 34 | General | Is there an incumbent on this contract, and if so, may we ask who it is and what is the contract number? | There is not incumbent as this is a new effort. | ||
| 35 | General | We are unable to find the historical workload for the support required on this contract. Can the Government provide it? | There is no historical workload to provide as this is a new effort. The CLIN X002 Sample Year gives examples of scope of repairs required. | ||
| a |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .