Feedback_Responses_Post-Conf_3.22.2013.pdf

22 March 2013 Draft RFP Feedback & Gov’t Responses N00019-12-R-0001

CLIN Related

1) CLIN XX14 references PWS sections 5.6.6.17.2.15 and 5.18.2.1.1, which do not exist in the PWS.

CLIN 0X14 references PWS 5.6.6.16.2.15 and 5.18.8.

See Section C-2 of RFP for official CLIN to PWS cross-reference. Correction noted in Section B Excel workbook.

2) CLINS XX16 and XX17 seem to provide an incorrect PWS Cross Reference.

CLINs 0X16 reference PWS 5.22.1 and CLINs 0X17 reference PWS 5.22.2.

See Section C-2 of RFP for official CLIN to PWS cross-reference. Section B Excel workbook states correct information.

3) DRFP CLINS and Attachment L-6 inconsistencies. The definitions of certain SLINs are inconsistent from period to period. Please consider changing the definitions to incorporate a consistent numbering scheme from period to period. We suggest the following changes in the SLIN structure definitions:

a) CLIN 6 Year-to-year SLIN in labeling intelligence could be eliminated by relabeling SLINs for the option periods as follows:

0X06AK 6 - 13 Sorties at NASP (instead of 6-12)

0X06AL 14 - 20 Sorties at NASP (instead of 13-20)

CLINs 0X06 have been revised based on the recommendation, as well as changing from “sorties” to “aircraft”. SLINs 0X06AM are now removed from all ordering periods.

b) CLIN 8 - Year-to-year SLIN inconsistencies in labeling intelligence could be eliminated by relabeling base period SLINs as follows:

0008AD (instead of 0008AA) Integrated Maintenance Program 3: T-45A

0008AA (instead of 0008AB) Integrated Maintenance Program 3: T-45C

0008AB (Instead of 0008AC) Integrated Maintenance Program 4: T-45C

0008AC (Instead of 0008AD) Integrated Maintenance Program 5: T-45C

Change logical and implemented in Section B. Section B now lists SLINs under 0X08 as follows:

AA – IMP Level 3 T-45C AB – IMP Level 4 T-45C AC – IMP Level 5 T-45C AD – IMP Level 6 T-45C

AE – IMP Level 3 T-45A

4) CLIN 11 - Year-to-year SLIN inconsistencies in labeling intelligence could be eliminated by relabeling the 52.217-8 OPTION SLIN as follows:

0711AC (Instead of 0711AD) DDS TD Incorporation per Aircraft

No inconsistency in Section B identified. DDS TD Incorporation remains as SLIN AC throughout all performance periods of CLIN 0X11.

5) B-3.3 and B-3.4; and CLS L-6 (CLIN 0X02) show that CLIN 0X02 is to be priced to a single RFT for each site with future changes to the RFT requirement put in place through Government Task Orders.

Clarification: Required RFT band (from PWS tables in 5.6.5) will be noted in each Task Order (TO) in order to state the applicable readiness compliance for the POP. If a band needs to be changed during the given TO POP, it will be executed via mutually agreeable bi-lateral TO modification.

a) Please provide for each site in CLIN 0X02 the RFT band bidders are to price.

The last para in B-3.4 states ―The RFT selection identified on a Task Order may be changed at any time during the applicable Task Order period of performance via bilateral Task Order modification or may be changed via unilateral Task Order modification by the ACO, provided that 30-days written notice is issued to the Contractor from the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO).‖ Please clarify if it is the Government‘s intent to have contractors bid a single FFP that will cover all RFT bands.

The Government requests that offerors propose a site-specific FFP that would encompass either RFT band per site listed in the PWS 5.6.5 tables. The Government does not foresee the pricing to differ or provide substantial savings enough to require cumbersome pricing development individually for each RFT band listed. Each SLIN FFP is to be site-specific per month, regardless of the RFT band selection from PWS 5.6.5 on each Task Order.

b) Will Task Order modifications include cost modifications as well?

Not necessarily for bi-lateral RFT band modifications during TO POP. Pricing should remain the same for either band selected.

6) B-3.8 – CLINs, CLIN X010 hours

Discussion: The government lists one total number of CDFT hours for each period of performance without regard for location of the work to be accomplished. RFP, B-

3.8 – CLINs 0X10 states; the composite unit price for each SLIN under these CLINs shall cover Depot-level maintenance performed primarily at either the NASK or

NASM facilities.

Question: Will the government provide an estimate of where, which Main Operating Base, these hours will be applied in order to better meet the detailed staffing requirements of the RFP?

The number of CDFT hours has been provided as stated in Section B for future unplanned TD and ECP incorporations. Historical data is in the Competition Library.

How each offeror chooses to propose how they man staffing levels at each site is up to the individual offeror. The awarded Contractor shall schedule and manage the Depot line throughput.

7) CLIN 0X10, CLIN 0X11

Discussion: It is understood that the CLIN 0X10 hours listed in Section B are in addition to the requirements of the TD‘s listed in CLIN 0X11. The CLIN 0X11 description does not list the requirements for each type of TD. It is also noted that the TDs are not separated by location.

Questions:

a) Will the government provide anticipated hours per occurrence of each of the TDs listed?

Competition library will be populated with TDs. TDs state number of MHs required.

b) Will the government provide anticipated locations for the completion of each

TD?

The Government does not intend to provide anticipated locations for the completion of each TD. The Contractor shall schedule and manage the Depot line throughput.

8) PWS 5.12.2 The Contractor shall utilize Government Sources of Supply to requisition MILSTRIP NSN material listed in Attachment 25, Government Supply NSN Items, which includes NSN repairable, consumable, ALSS equipment, indirect material, and HAZMAT, as well as material listed below IAW Contract Attachment 6, Applicable Documents. NSN material not in NALCOMIS shall be requisitioned IAW approved Property Management Plan (CDRL A027).

RFP Section B-3.7 - CLINs 0X07, 0X08, 0X09 – The unit price for each SLIN under these CLINs shall include labor and material required to perform the task required.

Discussion: None Question: Are the items considered HAZMAT that are applicable to CLINs 0X07, 0X08, and 0X09 to be purchased by the Contractor from outside sources and included in the Unit Prices of these FFP CLINs, or is the Contractor to utilize Government Sources of Supply, in accordance With PWS 5.12.2?

HAZMAT and shall be requisitioned via Navy Supply per PWS 5.12.2 using MILSTRIP and shall not be included in the FFP CLIN price.

9) Reference: File T45CLS_DRAFTCLINs_24Jan 2013 and File T45_CLS_L-6 Vol_3_B Matrix_15Jan2013 Discussion: There appears to be a discrepancy with the EST QTY between the T45CLS_DRAFTCLINs_24Jan 2013 and the T45_CLS_L-6 Vol_3_B Matrix_15Jan2013 spreadsheet. The discrepancy is on each of the particular worksheets for CLIN X001 SLINS X001AA, X001AB, and X001AC.

Question: Would the Government please clarify the quantities to be proposed?

Correction to Flight Hour (FH) estimates in Section B to reflect FH estimates noted in PWS 3.8.1 table.

10) We recommend a revision of CLINs 0X01 and 0X02 to more closely reflect day-to-day maintenance operations and reduce administrative costs while achieving the objective of correlating flight hours to labor hours.

a) The current CLIN construct assumes a clear separation of flying hours generated maintenance and non-flying hours generated maintenance. In execution, there is considerable gray area between the two at the organizational level. Maintenance processes, staffing, and concept of operations for discrepancy identification and correction are focused on sortie generation and mission accomplishment. Imposing a requirement to determine cause of discrepancy would require additional processes and audits that would be non-value added in supporting mission requirements.

b) Additional processes and audits induce added administrative costs for the government and the contractor. These processes could potentially add an element of complexity when negotiating individual maintenance transactions with a given level of subjectivity.

c) There is an alternative approach to achieve the government‘s objective of correlating flying hours to maintenance labor costs to account for expected variability in the flying hour program.

RECOMMENDATION:

As an alternative approach, we recommend CLIN 0X01 as an FFP priced level of effort with a government determined base number of hours. CLIN 0X02 would be a corollary to CLIN 0X01 as a rate based cost plus (minus) level of effort. If the actual flying hours exceed the base by greater than 5%, CLIN 0X02 is invoked and the additional hours flown are priced at the proposed rate. Conversely, if the actual flying hours are 5% or greater below the base number of hours, CLIN 0X02 is invoked and the contractor reimburses the government using the same calculation.

Our recommendation achieves the same objective as the current construct while more closely aligning to maintenance processes, staffing, and concept of operations. It will also significantly reduce non-value added administrative costs and reduce execution complexity for both the government and the contractor.

We suggest the following revisions:

CLIN 0X01 - Total estimated flight hours by site +/- 5 % shall be FFP. Per estimates provided in PWS 3.8.1, this range would be established per the table below.

CLIN 0X02 – Cover maintenance required above and below the range established in CLIN 0X01 via LH CLIN.

Given the uncertainties of the current and future budgets, CNATRA is not willing to change how flight hour driven support is ordered. CLIN structure will remain as is.

11) Reference: T45CLS_DRAFTCLINs_24JAN2013.pdf

Please Clarify:

a) CLIN 0X08 is titled for IMP Levels 3-6; SLINs AB, AC, AD have incorrect levels

All SLINs under CLINs 0X08 cover IMP Levels 3, 4, 5, and 6 events for T-45A and T- 45C as follows:

AA – IMP Level 3 T-45C AB – IMP Level 4 T-45C AC – IMP Level 5 T-45C AD – IMP Level 6 T-45C AE – IMP Level 3 T-45A

b) CLIN 0X14 refers to PWS 5.6.6.17.2.15, but that PWS paragraph does not exist.

CLIN 0X14 references PWS 5.6.6.16.2.15 and 5.18.8.

See Section C-2 of RFP for official CLIN to PWS cross-reference. Correction noted in Section B Excel workbook.

c) CLIN 0X14 refers to PWS 5.18.2.1.1, and that PWS paragraph also does not exist

CLIN 0X14 references PWS 5.6.6.16.2.15 and 5.18.8.

Low Mid High Low Mid High Low Mid High Low Mid High

NASK 32,540 34,253 35,966 33,195 34,942 36,689 33,259 35,009 36,759 32,705 34,426 36,147

NASM 31,265 32,910 34,556 31,892 33,571 35,250 31,954 33,636 35,318 31,422 33,076 34,730

NASP 5,415 5,700 5,985 6,778 7,135 7,492 7,010 7,379 7,748 6,257 6,586 6,915

NAS PAX 190 200 210 190 200 210 190 200 210 190 200 210

Low Mid High Low Mid High Low Mid High

NASK 32,362 34,065 35,768 32,793 34,519 36,245 31,401 33,054 34,707

NASM 31,093 32,729 34,365 31,508 33,166 34,824 30,170 31,758 33,346

NASP 6,315 6,647 6,979 6,431 6,769 7,107 5,967 6,281 6,595

NAS PAX 190 200 210 190 200 210 190 200 210

Est FY-20

Est FY-14 Est FY-15 Est FY-16 Est FY-17

Est FY-18 Est FY-19

See Section C-2 of RFP for official CLIN to PWS cross-reference. Correction noted in Section B Excel workbook.

12) RFP Reference: B-3.12 CLINs 0X20 - 0X26, CLIN 0X2602 Draft CLINs Excel

Version) Question: How will we be tasked under CLIN 0X26 to perform any work? (e.g., crashed damaged (conditional maint.) aircraft and material is needed to repair)?

What payment terms are used for these situations?

When Over and Above (O&A) tasking - and associated material – is submitted via OAWR, the O&A ACO Authorization will be provided to the Contractor. O&A tasking is IAW Conditional Maintenance Section 5.1.4 of the PWS and Clause H-7.

13) RFP Reference: PWS 5.12.1 The Contractor shall maintain, manage, issue, replenish, and receive the inventory of consumables, repairables, spares, and repair parts utilized in support of the aircraft, SE, and associated minor assemblies, subassemblies or parts at NASK, NASM and NASP in order to meet the performance requirements of this PWS. The Contractor shall obtain CNATRA PA approval, via the CNATRA DET Industrial Property Management Specialist (IPMS), prior to purchasing material with a unit acquisition cost exceeding $5,000.00. The Contractor shall replenish the inventory listed in Contract Attachment 8, CNATRA GFP, to maintain limits as follows and IAW Contract Attachment 6, Applicable Documents. Inventory items that are listed in Attachment 25, Government Supply NSN Items, shall be replenished via MILSTRIP IAW PWS paragraph 5.12.2. The Contractor shall produce and deliver a Supply Management Performance Report

IAW CDRL A024.

Discussion: With the inclusion of a Material Cost Incentive, the purpose for including the requirement for Government approval to purchase material with a unit acquisition cost in excess of $5,000 is unclear. Additionally, with the inclusion of a $2.5 million per quarter incentive/disincentive, this additional requirement is concerning, as the increased administrative effort (both by the Contractor and the Government) to comply with this requirement will potentially impact the contractor‘s ability to effectively manage the inventory in order to meet the Performance Metrics as prescribed in the Draft RFP.

Recommendation: It is recommended this requirement be removed from the PWS.

The requirement will not be removed from the PWS.

14) CLIN 0X06 Surge Sorties: Contractor costs are driven largely by labor and the timeframe for sortie generation is as important as the number of surge sorties. If the government were to order 1-5 sorties, all to launch and recover on Saturday morning, the FFP cost would be far less than if you ordered 1-5 sorties that would launch/recover over a 10 hour period.

Please provide a timeframe over which the surge sorties will be supported once ordered.

PWS 5.6.6.7 surge requirements would cover up to 10 hours of operations; therefore the FFP shall reflect the associated launch and recovery window.

15) Reference: File T45CLS_DRAFTCLINs_24Jan 2013 and File T45_CLS_L-6 Vol_3_B Matrix_15Jan2013

Discussion: It appears that both of these Spreadsheets are exactly the same except that file T45CLS_DRAFTCLINs_24Jan 2013 has a column for the PWS Cross Reference.

Question: Would the Government please clarify the requirements for the duplicate files?

The Excel Section B is intended to be a helpful tool during solicitation development. L-6 is a duplicate of the Draft Excel version of Section B which is to be utilized during development of the price proposal.

16) CLIN 0X05, 0X06, 0X30, 0X21, 0X22, and 0X26. Please define the unit abbreviation

―LO‖.

“Lot”

17) CLIN 0025 Option-30 Day Phase-out Transition. It is our interpretation that the incumbent will be held responsible for full contract performance during the phase-out transition. As such, the price for this period should already be included in the last option year or 6 month extension option and therefore pricing the current CLIN 0025 would be double counting of price.

a. Is it the government‘s intent that this 30 Day Phase-out Transition period is to be in addition to the other option year costs and therefore should be treated as an added 30 period of performance for the incumbent? If not, recommend deleting this CLIN unless the intent is to add 30 days to the end of the final contract option period for transition.

The Option CLINs for Phase-out Transition have been removed. When Transition-out occurs, it shall essentially be continued full performance under the standard full performance-related line items.

CLAUSE RELATED

18) H-3 Material Incentive calculations don‘t seem to be correct. Following the example, the under run would seem to be $61 flight hour, or $3,960,000.

This has been taken into consideration during Clause H-3 finalization.

19) NAVAIR 5252.216-9534 TASK ORDER PROCEDURES (NAVAIR) (OCT 2005)

addresses DD Form 254 for Task Orders. Will the Gov‘t provide a DD Form 254 for this contract?

DD FORM 254 is N/A for Task orders under this contract.

20) Recommend adding 52.245-9 Use and Charges and adding 52.249-14 Excusable Delays

Clauses 52.245-9 and 52.249-14 are both listed in Section I by reference.

21) H-7 OVER AND ABOVE WORK REQUEST AUTHORIZATION (f) (2) Authorize the

OAWR.

Discussion: In this event, a task order or task order modification will be issued by the ACO to the Contractor referencing the OAWR. The Contractor shall proceed with the O&A effort as authorized.

The over and above work request authorization process introduces the potential for delay in the Contractor‘s ability to correct Over and Above discrepancies, due to the administrative process requiring task orders be issued by the ACO to authorize the work. With the inclusion of a $2.5 million quarterly incentive/disincentive, the potential impact of a delay on the Contractor‘s ability to meet the Draft RFP Performance Metrics is concerning.

Question: What is the Government‘s anticipated turn-around-time for Over and Above authorization under this process, and will the Government considered revising the Over and Above approval process, at a minimum removing the requirement for the ACO to issue a formal task order to authorize the work?

Time constraints for Government processing have been incorporated into clause H-7.

22) Reference: H-10 REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL, PER DIEM, AND SPECIAL

MATERIAL COSTS

Discussion: Reference states:

―(a) Area of Travel. Performance under this contract may require travel by contractor personnel. If travel, domestic or overseas, is required, the contractor is responsible for making all necessary arrangements for its personnel. These include but are not limited to: medical examinations, immunizations, passports/visas/etc., and security clearances. All contractor personnel required to perform work on any U.S. Navy vessel shall obtain boarding authorization from the Commanding Officer of the vessel before boarding.‖

Statement implies DoD Security clearance would be required, yet there is no DD254 associated with the RFP.

Question: Will the Government please clarify security clearance requirements?

There is no DD FORM 254 for this contract.

23) Reference: Draft RFP H-13 REQUIREMENTS FOR BASE ACCESS AND

SECURITY SYSTEM

Discussion: Reference states:

―To comply with FAR 52.204-9 and NAVAIR 5252.204-9505, the Contractor shall process employee background investigations via the Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office (DISCO). A Personal Identity Verification (PIV) card is required for each Contractor employee requiring long-term access to a Federal facility. A Common Access Card (CAC) will be issued as the DoD Personal Identity Verification (PIV) card for each approved Contractor employee requiring access to NAS Kingsville, NAS Meridian, and NAS Pensacola, and NAS Patuxent River, as well as access to Government IT Systems to perform tasks associated with the Performance Work Statement under this Contract.‖

This issue is associated with the question above relating to the type of background investigation. Contractors cannot submit SF85Ps to DISCO. Also noted there is no DD254 associated to the Draft RFP. However there is reference as stated on page 62, (see 5252.216.9534 TASK Order Procedure Item C, number 6).

Question: Will the Government please clarify background investigations requirements?

There is no DD FORM 254 for this contract. However, the background investigation required are to comply with NAVAIR Clause 5252.204-9505 and the Government mandated Information Assurance requirements in order to access Government IT systems.

24) Clause H-14, Limitations on Subcontracts for Material and Services

Discussion: As written, the provision is ambiguous as to the status of members of a joint venture that may be formed for purposes of responding to the Solicitation, as the JV may issue subcontracts to its members for performance of various portions of the work.

Question: Will the Government consider modification of the Clause as now written to include the following language: ―For the purpose of this clause, the term

“Contractor” shall be limited to mean the prime contractor, and in the case of a joint venture prime contractor, it shall not include the joint venture members or affiliates.‖

Clause H-14 resides in the contract established between the Government and prime contractor (or joint venture), and establishes a requirement to implement all subcontracts under the prime (or joint venture) in accordance with the requirements. In addition, the clause requires a flow down to all subcontracts performing work under the prime (or joint venture) contract.

25) Incurred Cost and Progress Reporting:

a) Will the Incurred Cost and Progress report be in addition to the DD 1921 requirements?

NAVAIR has determined that the Incurred Cost and Progress Reporting requirement (pre-award and execution) does not apply to this T45 CLS procurement.

b) The provisional language for Sections L and M states ―Any calculated fully burdened annualized labor rate exceeding NAVAIR's Functional Area "triggers" may ultimately be determined excessive and unreasonably high.‖

Question: Will these triggers be applicable to Offsite depot work, where the fully burdened rate includes facility costs?

NAVAIR has determined that the Incurred Cost and progress reporting requirement (pre-award and execution) does not apply to this T45 CLS procurement.

26) RFP Reference: Section I - Contract Clauses

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

252.234-7004 Cost and Software Data Reporting System NOV 2010 Section L – Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Bidders 252.234-7003 Notice of Cost and Software Data Reporting System NOV 2010 L.3.2 Price Proposal Instructions, Section 6 Cost and Software Data Reporting Discussion: DFAR 234.7100 states (a) The cost and software data reporting (CSDR) requirement is mandatory for major defense acquisition programs (as defined in 10 U.S.C. 2430), and major automated information system programs (as defined in 10 U.S.C. 2445a) as specified in DoDI 5000.02, Operation of the Defense Acquisition System and the DoD 5000.04–M–1, CSDR Manual.

The requirement appears to be mandatory for major defense acquisition programs and major automated information system programs.

Question: Will the Government confirm that the T-45 CLS Program falls within the scope of this definition and in fact requires a Cost and Software Data Reporting System?

CSDR Reporting was previously required only for Major Defense Programs, Production but is now also required for Operations and Sustainment (O&S), per the 2008 DoD

5000.02 update.

27) Clause H-9, NALCOMIS Business Expenses:

PWS Pg 36, 5.11.19 states ―The Contractor shall provide and maintain ADP systems…‖.

DRFP Pg 58, (b) restricts CLIN 0X20 by stating ―The costs of general purpose business expenses required for the conduct of the contractor‗s normal business operations will not be considered an allowable direct cost in the performance of this contract. General purpose business expenses include, but are not limited to, the cost for items such as telephones and telephone charges, reproduction machines, word processing equipment, personal computers, office furniture and other office equipment, cleaning supplies, and administrative office supplies, such as paper and printing supplies. This includes supplies for Government NMCI workstations to access NALCOMIS OOMA/OIMA, printers, and ancillary equipment. Passenger vehicles, such as golf-carts and trucks, are also not considered direct costs chargeable to the parts and material line items.

a) The combination of both of these sections is interpreted as a contractor requirement to provide replacement hardware, software, printers, printer cartridges, and paper for the NMCI workstations to access NALCOMIS

OOMA/OIMA.

The clause has been revised to remove the reference to NALCOMIS usage supplies. It is understood that the Contractor shall stock the supplies associate with their use of NMCI workstations, which are to be considered included in the general purpose business expense category.

b) If the contractor is to provide replacement hardware, software, printers, printer cartridges, and paper for the NMCI workstations to access NALCOMIS OOMA/OIMA, please provide the following information so bidders will know how to account for the associated costs:

The Contractor shall not be responsible for procuring or replacing NMCI (NALCOMIS, etc) hardware or software; however, appropriate responses to the following questions have been provided below.

1. Provide a list of all NMCI workstation items to include the costs Number of NALCOMIS Printers per Site - Kingsville 15; Meridian 15; Pensacola 3

2. Define and list what is meant by ―ancillary equipment‖ Any other Government equipment not related to aircraft maintenance. However, this reference is N/A and has been removed from the clause.

3. Provide an estimate for supplies used the contractor will have to provide Estimates for supplies in support of NALCOMIS per site: Kingsville $27K, Meridian $18K, Pensacola $6K. The supplies are to be considered indirect costs of doing business and not direct costs associated with performing the work under the contract.

28) RFP Reference: H-3 MATERIAL COST INCENTIVE (j) Exclusions. Parts and material procurements which are specifically at the direction of the Government for unusual or unanticipated sparing or other circumstances shall be excluded from this calculation. Such procurements shall be confirmed as exclusions in a letter from the PCO at the conclusion of the annual period of performance.

Discussion: None Recommendation: It is recommended the authority to provide exclusions as referenced in this section be delegated to the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO), and those exclusions be confirmed on the Delivery Order when issued, at the time of the order.

This suggestion has been taken into consideration during Clause H-3 finalization.

29) RFP Reference: PWS 5.10.6.1, Purchase of Life Time Buys (LTB) will only be executed upon bi-lateral agreement between the parties. These LTB pertain to parts that are going DMS based on DMT recommendations to allow for procurement of material until planned tech refresh is implemented or as a life of type buy to eliminate the need for redesign activity.

H-3 Material Cost Incentive (j) Exclusions. Parts and material procurements which are specifically at the direction of the Government for unusual or unanticipated sparing or other circumstances shall be excluded from this calculation. Such procurements shall be confirmed as exclusions in a letter from the PCO at the conclusion of the annual period of performance.

Discussion: None Question: Will the Government confirm that Life Time Buys (LTB) as prescribed in

5.10.6.1 are considered exclusions under H-3 (j), and will not be factored in the Material Cost Incentive calculation?

Confirmed. A reference to LTB will be noted as an exclusion during finalization of Clause H-3. If LTB are procured, the associated line item would not be associated with CLINs 0X20.

30) H-3 Material Cost Incentive:

a) Moving toward a cost per flying hour basis for material is the right path forward.

That said, by establishing a baseline and then using that baseline as the target cost presents several challenges. We believe the baseline should incorporate a higher level of statistical rigor to account for the variability that will occur in any given year due to factors beyond flying hours, such as material cost spikes, the addition or removal of high cost-drivers due to modifications, and major inventory adjustments based on reliability/maintainability trends in aging aircraft.

Recommendation: We recommend the Navy establish a baseline with normalizing spikes to identify the correct target cost.

The Material Cost Incentive cost per flight hour baseline has been established using appropriate rigor. The baseline accounts for four years of historical material usage data and incorporates any annual adjustments required for variability based on material price changes, usage pattern changes, aircraft/part modifications and material adjustments based on reliability/maintainability/supportability to include Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortage (DMSMS) considerations. Additionally, the effects of inflation and cost growth above inflation (accounting for material cost growth higher than inflation, introduction of higher cost replacement components, higher vendor repair prices, etc.) are included in the "target cost" Material Cost Incentive baseline calculation.

b) The government‘s T-45 supply chain is currently a hybrid with supply chain responsibilities shared by both the Government and the contractor. This imposes a target cost within a system that the contractor doesn‘t fully control and limits the impact and value of innovative contractor management.

Recommendation: We recommend taking a holistic approach, and constantly assess—component by component—the trade-off between local repair and centralized repair. When a particular business case makes sense, industry has the investment option to increase its capacity and capability to repair locally, and thereby provide the Government the most efficient and effective supply chain management system. Under this scenario, those decisions would require customer input. To share responsibility with cost impacts, a partnered approach to making the repair/replace decision in a time-constrained environment, rather than a more traditional customer/contractor relationship, is necessary.

c) Implementing this costing model incentivizes the contractor to eliminate non-value added processes. Incentivizing cost savings from year to year reduces investment interest for longer-term total ownership cost reductions.

Recommendation: We recommend a clause in this CLIN, or elsewhere in the pricing model, to allow for shared benefits to be determined and negotiated on a case by case basis.

The suggestions have been taken into consideration during Clause H-3 finalization.

31) DRFP Pg 60, Clause H-14. The following two sentences appear to compare two different factors, fee and maximum pass through rate by directing bidders to not exceed the lesser of 8% fee or maximum pass through rate _____%. Please clarify if is the Government‘s intent to limit the maximum pass through rate (G&A, Overhead, Material Handling, and Fee) to 8%.

Clause H-14 has been revised to reference the “fee or profit”, not “pass-through”.

Performance Measurement Framework

32) Balance of incentive/disincentive:

We like the idea of incentives/disincentives tied to metrics but we are concerned the incentive to disincentive likelihood of reward/fine is not well balanced.

Incentive – this side of the equation seems well thought out allowing for a graduated award based on performance. From review of the historical RFT/SCR data and our reading of the very complex formulas for the sustainment metrics, we see the little likelihood of earning the entire $2.5M award. But we are ok with the concept of having a stretch goal of having to reach for the top reward especially when there is the potential to earn some of the reward for surpassing the minimums.

Disincentive – as with the incentive, we would like to see some kind of graduated decrement scale vice a straight drop off to being fined $2.5M per quarter for not meeting the metrics. We think this is particularly applicable for the sustainment metrics since bidders cannot ascertain how difficult it will be to achieve these metrics which may very likely cause the contractor to choose between making RFT/SCR or the sustainment rate. Facing a potential fine of $2,5M for not meeting a sustainment metric in consecutive quarters, a contractor may in fact chose to miss RFT/SCR vice missing the mark on sustainment. This scenario does not appear to meet the Govt‘s goal of training pilots. The addition of sorties per CLIN 0X05 or surge operations per CLIN 0X06 directly impact the contractor‘s ability to perform required maintenance and therefore adds significant contractor risk of missing sustainment metrics if the priority is to meet RFT/SCR. With up to 50% of the aircraft potentially limiting the contractor‘s ability to schedule aircraft to meet the daily flight schedule, the Govt may very well put the contractor in a lose-lose situation.

a. Having not operated under sustainment metrics before, perhaps the sustainment metrics need to be a little more flexible at least until more data can be gathered.

b. Option recommendations

1. Do not include the sustainment metric when determining two or more consecutive misses that fine the contractor $2.5M per quarter.

2. Create two incentive/disincentive pools. Carve out a portion of the

$2.5M and create two awards, one for a combination of performance, quality, and safety and the second for sustainment.

For example, set $2.0M per quarter for the performance, quality, and safety metrics and $0.5M for the sustainment metric.

3. Establish a graduated incentive/disincentive for the sustainment metric.

1. If the goal is to meet the FMP(FLE) and FMP(ARR) goal at the 70% level, then reward and fine using graduated scales just like the performance incentive scale.

i. Sample incentive scale.

Sustainment Percent of Incentive

>95.0 100

>90.0 98

>85.0 96

>80.0 94

>75.0 92

>70.0 90

ii. Sample disincentive scale

Sustainment Percent of Disincentive

<70.0 90

<65.0 92

<60.0 94

<55.0 96

<50.0 98

<45.0 100

We recommend the quarterly evaluation decrement be weighted just as the period incentive is weighted to achieve a balanced risk / reward relationship.

We respectfully offer the following amendment to the Draft RFP H-1 clause:

―1.2 Upon conclusion of the transition in period, the Government will evaluate the Contractor‗s performance. ―

1.2.1 Performance, Safety and Quality calculations for the PMF shall assume a quarterly evaluation period. The contractor is eligible to earn the Performance Incentive associated with Performance, Safety and Quality calculations starting in the first quarter of performance, however they will not be penalized during the first two quarters for any metrics not met.

1.2.2 Sustainment calculations for the PMF shall assume an annual evaluation period and will be mutually exclusive of the quarterly metrics and calculations associated with Performance, Safety and Quality. The contractor is eligible to earn the Performance Incentive associated with the Sustainment calculations starting in the first year of performance. The contractor may also be penalized for not meeting the Sustainment metric during the first year.

1.4 Performance, Safety and Quality. The Contractor must exceed the required Contract Minimum for one of the three PMF components, while at least meeting the required Contract Minimums of the other three PMF components, to be eligible to earn the performance incentive IAW the following weightings and as described in the Performance Calculations below:

1.4.1 Quarterly Performance Incentive = (0.25) Performance + (0.375) Safety + (0.375) Quality

1.4.2 Any positive performance incentives will be paid under the PMF incentive SLIN under CLIN 0X22 pertaining to the associated quarterly evaluation periods.

If the Contractor meets but does not exceed any of the required contract minimums stated in the PWS and 1.3 above for Performance, Safety and Quality, the Contractor will not earn any incentive or receive a decrement. For any decrement, the contractor agrees to forfeit the amount identified by the Government on the applicable quarterly performance evaluation period‗s Task Order Final invoice submission against CLIN 0X02 for each site proportionally IAW Section G.

1.4.3 The Government agrees to fund up to $2,000,000 per quarterly evaluation period to incentivize performance by the Contractor for Performance, Safety and Quality metrics. Conversely, the Contractor agrees to be decremented up to $2,000,000, per quarterly evaluation period (with the exception of the first two quarterly evaluation periods after full performance), as a disincentive for not meeting the required contract minimums stated in the PWS and noted above.

1.4.4 If the contractor fails to meet any one of the quarterly required contract Performance, Safety and Quality minimums in the PMF during the quarterly evaluation period, the Contractor will not be eligible for any positive incentive during that period.

1.4.5 If the Contractor fails to meet any two of the quarterly required contract Performance, Safety and Quality minimums in the PMF during the quarterly evaluation period, the Contractor will not be eligible for any positive incentive during that period and will be decremented up to $2,000,000 from the SLINs under CLIN 0X02.

1.4.6 If the contractor fails to meet any single PMF component‗s required quarterly contract Performance, Safety and Quality minimum for two or more consecutive quarterly evaluation periods, the Contractor will not be eligible for any positive incentive and will be decremented up to $2,000,000 from the SLINs under CLIN 0X02.

1.5 Sustainment. The Contractor must exceed the required Contract Minimum for the Sustainment PMF component to be eligible to earn the performance incentive:

1.5.1 Annual Performance Incentive = Sustainment

1.5.2 Any positive performance incentives will be paid under the PMF incentive SLIN under CLIN 0X22 pertaining to the associated annual evaluation periods. If the Contractor meets but does not exceed the contract minimum stated in the PWS and 1.3 above for Sustainment, the Contractor will not earn any incentive or receive a decrement. For any decrement, the contractor agrees to forfeit the amount identified by the Government on the applicable annual performance evaluation period‗s Task Order Final invoice submission against CLIN 0X02 for each site proportionally IAW Section G.

1.5.3 The Government agrees to fund $2,000,000 per annual evaluation period to incentivize performance by the Contractor for Sustainment metrics. Conversely, the Contractor agrees to be decremented $2,000,000, per annual evaluation period as a disincentive for not meeting the required contract minimums stated in the PWS and noted above.

1.9 If the Contractor fails to meet the annually required Sustainment contract minimums in the PMF during the annual evaluation period, the Contractor will not be eligible for any positive incentive during that period and will be decremented $2,000,000 from the SLINs under CLIN 0X02.

Noted. The PMF will remain as stated in the RFP. Disincentive will be a cliff to stress importance of the required metrics.

33) RFP Reference: H-1 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT FRAMEWORK (PMF)

PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE, 3.1.4: SLMMESA is the total number of aircraft assigned to NASK, NASM and NASP that have been exempted from SLMM status by the ACO.

3.1.4.1.2: Aircraft undergoing a modification of greater than 250 man hours will be exempted as determined by the ACO.

Question: Does this exemption apply to all aircraft in non-reporting status with greater than 250 man hours of Per Occurrence or Over and Above work (e.g., strip and paint, IMP, etc.)?

Intent is to exempt aircraft in for Depot work, including Modifications, IMP and strip and paint. This has been considered during the finalization of Clause H-1.

34) Performance, Quality, and Safety are very much ―real time‖ metrics that must be constantly monitored to meet CNATRA‘s daily training schedule. As such, evaluation of these metrics on a quarterly basis is warranted and favorable to all constituents in sharing in the commitment to contract performance.

Sustainment, on the other hand, is PMA-273‘s long-term commitment to promoting a fleet management life cycle perspective versus a short-term ―sortie by sortie‖ focus.

Managing a long-term metric on a short-term schedule has the very real potential to encourage short-term management decisions that hurt, not help, the achievement of the daily flight schedule.

Because the two organization‘s priorities have two very different time horizons, the measurement of their respective metrics should also have appropriate time frames in which they are measured. With PMA-273‘s interest in shepherding their T-45 fleet at least out to 2035, it follows that the Sustainment metric should be evaluated on an annual basis, rather than quarterly. By decoupling near-term and long-term objectives relative to the PMF, NAVAIR promotes responsible management discretion in achieving the intent of the PMF, rather than potentially rewarding a short-term, quarterly focus on the incentive/disincentive cash potential.

We suggest that the performance incentive be divided into two, mutually exclusive categories:

1. Performance, Quality, and Safety

2. Sustainment

Noted. However, the Government chose to keep all four metrics linked together when calculating the performance incentive IAW H-1.

35) Simplification of the Sustainment calculation

The sustainment guidance highlighted during the Pre-Solicitation Conference represents the following critical aspects for achieving the sustainment objectives:

Service Life Maintenance Management (SLMM) factor greater than 0.70 o Up aircraft Flight Hours within the fleet average plus or minus 20 hours

(pro rated)

Fatigue Management Program (FMP) factor greater than .70 o High fatigue aircraft not assigned to too many high fatigue flights o Low fatigue aircraft not assigned to too many low fatigue flights o High trap aircraft not assigned to more than 15% of the CQ sorties o Low trap aircraft assigned to at least 20% of the CQ sorties

We request the Government consider revisiting the in-depth sustainment metrics and associated calculations. Aligning the data required for the sustainment metrics at the top level per the guidance above should achieve sustainment objectives and significantly reduce non-value added administrative costs / complexities for both the government and the contractor.

Noted. This suggestion was considered during finalization of Clause H-1.

36) NEW DRFP Pg 37, 2.1 defines the term OTAA with 2.1.2 implying that OTAA is measured against meeting the Daily Flight Schedule requirements.

a. Please explain how RFT is measured and what the difference is between OTAA and RFT.

Clause H-1 now includes RFT measure and the OTAA measure has been removed.

37) DRFP Pg 39, 3.1.4.1.1 states ―Aircraft involved in a Class A or Class B mishap will be exempted as determined by the ACO.‖ Recommend the Government add Class C damaged aircraft to the list of potential exempted aircraft. A typical BASH event will cause Class C Mishap damage and create the need for long lead time parts (Nose Frames, Slat, Intake, Canopy Frame) or create the need for a lengthy repair. If aircraft suffering Class C Mishap damage are not eligible for exempt status on review of the ACO, the contractor may impact

OTAA due to events beyond the contractor‘s control.

This suggestion was considered during finalization of Clause H-1.

38) PWS Pg 17, 5.6.3 states ―The Contractor shall assign Ready For Training (RFT) aircraft 30 minutes prior to scheduled launch time for shore-based operations and 45 minutes prior for ship-based operations. Aircraft in an ACO deferral status will not be counted in calculations for the RFT. ACO deferrals are at the Government‘s discretion for unusual and exceptional circumstances and are limited to Government caused delays only.‖ DRFP Pg 37, 2.1.1 states ―Total On-Time Aircraft (TOTA) is defined as a Mission Capable (MC) aircraft (as defined in COMNAVAIRFORINST 4790.2 series) assigned to the flight schedule in Training Information Management System (TIMS) one hour prior to scheduled take-off time.‖

a. Recommend 2.1.2 be changed to read ―…(TIMS) 30 minutes prior to scheduled take-off time.‖

Since this reference to TOTA was removed from the H-1 clause, along with the OTAA measure, this suggestion is no longer applicable.

ATTACHMENTS

39) T45CLS_Att_8.3_CNATRA_IMRL_GFP_NASPAX_29NOV2012 Pax River does not list Government provided items like covers, chocks, tow bar, tug, engine change tools, stands, and ground support equipment is this correct?

Items such as chocks and covers are part of the Aircraft Inventory Report for each aircraft at NAS PAX. Support Equipment items provided are listed in the VX-23 Shared GSE Attachment.

40) Attachment 8 GFP. In compliance with FAR Part 45.201 Solicitation clause, request the government provide the following data elements for all items on all tabs of Attachment #8 Government Furnished Property?

1. Part Number

2. NSN

3. Description

4. Manufacturer

5. Model (if applicable)

6. Quantity

7. Unit of Measure

8. Unit Acquisition Cost

9. UID (if applicable)

10. Condition

The CNATRA Site Tabs have been revised to reflect the required data elements.

The NAS PAX Tab for Repairables is in the process of being revised to include the required data elements. The NAS PAX Tab for Consumables is in development. Once the NAS PAX Tabs are finalized, Attachment 8 will be revised by way of an amendment to the solicitation.

41) Attachment 10 – Engine Parts Requiring O-Level Support –

Please supply all of the detail data elements for all Engine parts requiring O- Level support as defined in the Solicitation clause 45.201?

The Attachment 10 list of engine parts is not to be considered a list of GFP to be supplied by the Aircraft CLS Contractor; therefore, the requested format is not required.

The engine contractor will supply the engine parts.

42) Attachment 21 – ALSS EQUIPMENT –

Please supply all of the detail data elements for all ALSS equipment as defined in the Solicitation clause 45.201?

Attachment 21 has been revised.

43) Please explain why the Area Wage Determination for NASP is an odd numbered AWD while the other three are even numbered AWDs.

An even-numbered AWD Is attached for NASP – no correction to attachment required.

However, if the question was supposed to pertain to NAS PAX, it is odd-numbered because this is the first contract covered by Service Contract Act (SCA) for support of the T-45 test and evaluation aircraft at NAS PAX. The DOL WD website generates the odd-numbered AWD for NAS PAX, which is the standard WD for “first-time” contractual coverage.

44) The Boeing CBA provides wide wage rate ranges for high level labor grades, but does not identify which specific labor classifications performing the T-45 work at NAS PAX. In addition, no information was provided regarding the workforce demographics to properly determine where in the wide wage rate ranges the T-45 support personnel are currently at or to calculate the fringe benefit costs. The requirement to comply with the CBA for at least one year requires that bidders understand the costs in order to correctly use those costs for proposal pricing.

a) If the information below cannot be made available, please provide a copy of the

Area Wage Determination bidders should use to determine appropriate wage rates.

The Boeing CBA for T-45 test and evaluation aircraft at NAS PAX has been removed from the solicitation and is no longer to be considered incumbent CBA coverage associated with the applicable SCA clauses. The NAS PAX AWD is attached and listed in Section J and shall apply to SCA coverage.

45) In order to preclude requests for equitable adjustments shortly after contract award, please provide the following for T-45 work being performed at NAS PAX under the Boeing CBA.

b) All labor classifications performing T-45 work The incumbent Boeing CBA does not apply to this solicitation for NAS PAX. The labor classifications shall be competitively proposed.

c) All job descriptions negotiated between the Union and the company related to performing T-45 work The incumbent Boeing CBA does not apply to this solicitation for NAS PAX.

d) The current actual individual wage rates by labor category for each CBA employee currently performing T-45 work The attached AWD for NAS PAX shall apply to SCA covered labor proposed.

e) All applicable Summary Plan descriptions for insurance and retirement support offered to the incumbent CBA workforce and the cost sharing split between employees and the employer for each plan.

The incumbent Boeing CBA does not apply to this solicitation for NAS PAX.

f) Any additional CBA supplemental LOAs or MOUs in effect that have not yet been provided to bidders The incumbent Boeing CBA does not apply to this solicitation for NAS PAX.

g) Please also provide CBA seniority data for all four sites so bidders can correctly price fringe costs such as vacation time which varies with seniority.

Seniority Lists will be provided IAW FAR 52.222-41(n) for the CNATRA sites. The

NAS PAX Site incumbent seniority list does not apply since the incumbent support at NAS PAX for T-45 is not SCA covered.

46) Attachment 17, GFP Real Property. There are several places throughout this document where there is a conflict between what is designated as shared and what is designated as belonging to the CLS contractor. For example, the very first page shows that building 2741, Admin & ICH has a total area of 5,882 SQFT which is all shared. All of the spaces listed as sub-elements for building 2741 total the same

5,882 SQFT yet these are marked as CLS contractor. It is unclear if the entire building is shared or belongs to the contractor for janitorial services. Please clarify for all spaces listed in Attachment 17 which spaces belong to the contractor for janitorial upkeep.

Revisions to Attachment 17 will be provided under Solicitation Amendment 001.

47) In compliance with 45.201 Solicitation clause, will the government provide the following data elements on all of the attachments listing GFP; including IMRL, ALSS, Equipment, Special Test Equipment, Special Tooling, Tooling and Materials (both consumable and reparable)? This applies to Attachments 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 21, 25. Also attachments 22, 23, and 24 which have not yet been provided.

Part Number

NSN

Serial Number (where applicable)

Description

Manufacturer

Model (if applicable)

Quantity

Unit of Measure

Unit Acquisition Cost

UID (if applicable)

Condition Code

Attachments listing GFP inventory to be managed and replenished have been revised to include the data elements as required.