111711 AIMD Industry Questions Rev1.docx

AIMD Industry Questions Post Solicitation Release 17 November 2011

1) RFP Section L, paragraph 3.0, Proposal Content and Volumes states, “The Offeror shall submit a Cross Reference Matrix (CRM) for the Technical Volume, similar to the example below, to help ensure that all solicitation requirements are addressed and to facilitate the evaluator’s review of the Offeror’s proposal. The CRM should be a single integrated matrix and cross-reference the proposal volumes and paragraphs to specific RFP requirements, as well as other parts of the proposal that contain relevant information.”

The example provided on pages 107 and 108 of 133 includes: 3.0 Past Performance (Volume 3), 4.0 Corporate Experience (Volume 4), and 5.0 Price (Volume 5). Is it the Government’s intent for offerors to include cross-reference information for the Past Performance (vol 3), Corporate Experience (vol 4) and Price (vol 5) volumes within the technical volume (vol 2) CRM?

There is no need to provide a cross reference matrix for proposal volumes other than Technical. However, if the Offeror provides information in volumes other than the expected location relative to an evaluation factor, it would be wise to include such reference in a matrix to make sure it is adequately identified to the Government.

2) RFP Section L, paragraph 4.0 Proposal Submission states, “…..However, Offeror shall also submit copies of Volume (3) Past Performance information in paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2 and Volume I, Executive Summary “Offeror’s Summary Table”, 1.0 (ii) on 23 December 2011.”

Past Performance information in paragraphs 3.1 General and 3.2 Past Performance Data Requirements constitute the entire Volume 3 Past Performance. For submission of Volume 3 Past Performance, is it the Government’s intent that the entire Past Performance Volume be submitted on 23 December 2011, or is it the intent that only the Contract Data Table required in paragraph 3.1(a) Contract Data and the Customer’s Points of Contact Table required in paragraph 3.2 Past Performance Data Requirements be submitted on 23 December 2011 along with the Offeror’s Summary Table in Volume I, Executive Summary?

No, that is not the Government’s intent. Section L, paragraph 4.0 has been clarified to indicate that only the Offeror’s Summary table (from Volume 1.0) is expected to be submitted on 23 December 2011. Note that the requirement in Section L, Part B, paragraph 3.1 to have the Offeror’s customers submit the completed past performance questionnaires on 23 December 2011 still applies.

3) Section L, Part A, paragraph 1.0 states: “…With the exception of the Price/Cost volume, no cost or pricing information should appear in any volume.”

Section L, Part B, Volume 2 instructions, paragraph 2.1.7.1, Strategies for using Small Business (SB) Concerns, requires offerors to: “Provide targets, expressed as dollars and percentages of total contract values for SB participation. Note: This calculation is different from the calculation required by FAR 52.219-9 in the Subcontracting Plan, as the Plan requires percentage of subcontracting value.”

Section I, FAR clause 52.219-9, requires the offeror’s SB subcontracting plan (Annex C) targets be expressed in planned subcontracting dollars.

Section L, Part B, Volume 2 instructions, paragraph 2.1.7.2, requires the offeror’s SB Subcontracting Proposal to be provided as Annex C to the proposal submission.

Section L, Part B, Volume 7 instructions, paragraph 7.b, requires inclusion of Section B with all pricing filled in.

Section L, Part B, Volume 7 instructions, paragraph 7.e, requires inclusion of a complete copy of Annex C, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

Section L, Part B, Volume 7 instructions, paragraph 7.g, requires a Summary Sheet be provided following the title page that requires inclusion of the Total Dollar value of the proposal.

Although Section L Part A, states that pricing/cost information may only appear in Volume 5, Price, however; Section L, Part B appears to also require pricing/cost information in Volume 2, Annex C, and Volume 7.

Is it the Government’s intent that pricing/cost information may only be provided in Volume 5, Price Proposal? Is pricing/cost information also permitted in Volume 2 – Technical (Section 2.1.7), Annex C – Small Business Subcontracting Plan, and Volume 7 – Model Contract Documents, per Section L, Part B instructions?

Pricing information is permitted in the Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Annex C) and in Volume 7, Model Contract Documents. Section L, Part A, paragraph 1.0 has been clarified.

4) Section L, Volume 7 – Model Contract Documents, paragraph 7.g states: “Summary Sheet: Following the title page, the price proposal shall include a summary sheet with the information specified below:”

Did the Government intend for offerors to include the summary sheet following the title page of Volume 7 – Model Contract Documents, vice the price proposal?

Section L, Part B, 7.0, paragraph 7.g has been clarified to state the summary page is required following the title page of Volume 7.

5) Section L, Part A, paragraph 3.0, Proposal Content and Volumes, provides a table on pages 106 and 107 of 133, which prescribes the proposal volumes and authorized annexes for this solicitation.

Is it the Government’s intent that annexes A, B, C, and D be provided as separately bound documents, or included within the binder for their parent volume (i.e. annexes A, B, and C within Volume 2 and annex D within Volume 4)?

Note that Section L, Part A, paragraph 3.0 has been revised to specify that Volume 2.0 Technical should be submitted in four separate volumes—Volume 2.0, Annex A, Annex B, and Annex C. Volume 4.0 and Annex D may be combined in one binder or provided in separate binders.

6) Section L, Clause 5252.219-9501, Less Than Five Percent Small Disadvantaged Business Subcontracting Goal (NAVAIR) (Mar 1999). DFARS Clause 252.219-7003 has been revised as of September 2011, and no longer contains the verbiage reflecting a 5% SDB goal.

Would the Government consider removing clause 5252.219-9501 from section L of this solicitation, due to the clause no longer reflecting the language of DFARS 252.219-7003?

Yes, the Government has removed the NAVAIR clause 5252.219-9501.

7) Solicitation Attachments J 14-1 and 14-2 MDR Reports for NASCC and NASP. Paragraph 9.2 Site Specific I-Level Maintenance.

Review and analysis of the reference MDR reports indicate either anomalies in the data or possible significant underreporting of MMH data. Example: at NASCC the MDR total MMHs for Work Center Code 610 Com/Nav Br can only support one FTE. However, PWS Paragraph 9.2.2.2 (c) contains significant tasks for avionics/electronics test, check and repair. This is not the only data that seems to be significantly inaccurate. Data for both SE support shops do not seem to correlate with the amount of equipment historically supported by these shops. Request the Government provide an updated MDR covering FY2011 for each AIMD. Additionally, request that the Government provide a Monthly Production Report (MDR-2) report for each AIMD covering the third and fourth quarters of FY2011. –Please refer to previous Industry questions posted on 20 October 2011 and the provided Attachment 12 (Other AIMD Support). The previous response provided was as follows:

…The ICRL is the document that governs the capabilities and requirement to perform I-level services at the sites specified in the PWS. Historical work data is provided for representation of the potential workload for USN support.

NASCC and NASP AIMD perform…efforts for the non-CNATRA activities under Work Authorization Requests, which are not captured in the production report. Please note that these non-CNATRA activities are ordered on an as-needed basis and are not predictable in nature. For an example of historical data performed for Non-CNATRA customers please see solicitation Attachment (12)…

As in the previous 20 October response, where historical data appears to present an anomaly, hours for that activity or workcenter have been performed on an as-needed basis for non-CNATRA customers. Therefore Attachment 12 has been provided to reflect these other historical work hours performed. The Government will not be providing updated MDRs for FY2011 data, as they will not provide the additional data the Offeror is requesting.