L_M_CLIN_Matrix_Questions_-_Govt_Responses.pdf

Draft Section L, Section M, and Pricing Matrix Comments and Questions

Maintenance and Aircrew Training at Kirtland/Davis- Monthan/Andrews/Moody (KDAM) in support of the Aircrew Training and

Rehearsal Support (ATARS) Program (KDAM ATARS)

Draft Section L:

1. II. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS, item 11 Point of Contact states “After the release of the RFP, the Government will not accept requests for clarification.” Please clarify “requests for clarification”. Does this mean the Government will not accept any questions regarding the final RFP?

Response: At the present time, the Government does not intend to address questions after release of the final RFP. The Government is willing to conduct exchanges with industry and is posting draft documentation for comment/questions. Industry is strongly encouraged to take this opportunity to review all draft documents, ask questions and request clarification prior to final RFP release.

2. II. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS, item 8. Has an acquisition strategy been determined?

Response: The acquisition strategy for KDAM ATARS is in final coordination and will be part of the draft RFP released the week of 6 Apr 15.

3. III. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS, item 4.c. states “Pages larger than 8.5x11 (Foldout pages) shall fold entirely within the volume and each 8.5x11 surface containing printed material shall be counted as a separate page.” Please confirm our understanding of this instruction. An 11x17 foldout with tables/graphics from margin to margin counts as 2 pages.

Response: Correct, and if printed on both sides of the foldout it will be counted as 4 pages.

4. IV. PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION, 1. VOLUME I – TECHNICAL VOLUME, b.

Format and Specific Content, (1) Volume Organization requires a Cross Reference Matrix be provided. Please confirm this CRM is included in the 50 page limit. We request the Government consider expanding the page count for this volume. The Draft PWS is 72 pages and while we understand that contractors are not required to respond to every PWS paragraph, it will be extremely difficult to provide any level of detail regarding how the requirements of the PWS will be met in 50 pages.

Response: The cross-reference matrix will not be part of the page count; Section L will be updated accordingly.

5. IV. PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION, 1. VOLUME I – TECHNICAL VOLUME, b.

Format and Specific Content, (4) Technical Subfactors, Subfactor 2: UH-1N WST/OFT HTAWS/TCAD Concurrency Mod. Please confirm the Technical Solution and Statement of Work are included in the page count. If so, we request the page count be included to be able to provide a greater level of detail in the proposed solution and the requirements document.

Response: The Technical Solution will be limited to 25 pages and the Statement of Work will be limited to 50 pages. Section L will be updated accordingly.

Draft Pricing Matrix Comments and Questions

6. The Government will remove this statement from the document: The Government makes no commitment to exercise any specific quantity of CLINs or any specific configuration of CLINs.

7. Table Rates, item b. The Table Rates submitted shall be utilized for all ECPs without exception. Does this apply to the prime contractor and all teammates or is this to include all unknown, potential future subcontractors?

Response: Table rates will apply to the prime contractor only.

8. Table Rates, item c. The Offeror shall submit to the Government every 36 months a cost element breakdown of all Table Rates to allow DCMA, DCAA and or the PCO to perform a cost analysis between the most current FPRR or FPRA and the competitively priced Table Rates. The results of the cost analysis will be utilized to determine if the competitively priced Table Rates are still in the Government's best interest or not. If they are determined to be in the Goverment's best interest, the competitively priced Table Rates will continue to be utilized for all future ECPs. However, if the competitively priced Table Rates are determined to not be in the best interest of the Government, they will not be utilized for any future ECP(s), until such time that they are re-determined to be in the best interest of the Government. Can the Government please clarify the intent of this paragraph?

Response: As stated, the intent is ensuring competitively priced Table Rates are in the best interest of the Government. If they are not, they will not be utilized for any future ECP(s), until such time that they are re-determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

9. There are varying degrees of effort, labor, and material cost to differentiate between based on the government's requirements. Not all targets, airfields, etc are the same, providing more or less value to the government's needs. Compliance can be met by the contractor without necessarily being functional for the customer. For example, the level of effort required to build a landing strip in the middle of the desert is significantly less than an airport in a populated metropolitan area. What is the baseline of complexity for the database efforts (pages 10-11)? Is it meant to be priced at a core capability of the contractor will build XX amount of airfields and XX amount of targets? Or will further parameters be defined against which to price and evaluate?

Response: Database design requirements will be provided in Section J, Attachment 2 of the draft RFP.