UASTD_Aircrew_RFP_questions.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 31 KB Posted
- Attached to
- UAV Aircrew
- Solicitation number
- N00421-17-R-0047
About this file
Q&A
View the file
Other files
Show all 34
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
| N00421-17-R-0047 | ||||
| Reference/RFP Section | Discussion | Question | Government Response | |
| 1 | 113 & 118, 1.0 General 1.3.5 - Small Business Utilization RFP Section L | a. Solicitation is a Total Small Business Set-Aside b. 1.3.5.1 notes, “SB Offerors may meet this requirement using work they perform themselves”. | As this is a Total Small Business Set Aside, all Offerors will be Small Businesses, who can support this utilization themselves. Will the USG consider removing this requirement? | This will not be removed due to small business goals are still required. |
| 2 | 118, 2.1 RFP Section L | Solicitation states, “The Offeror shall complete the Past Performance Information Form, ATT P-3, for each past performance reference performed within five years of the solicitation release Joint Venture (JV) team, no more than two forms for each principal subcontractor, and/or no more than two forms for each JV team member.” This statement appears to be missing some instruction, or potentially merging two requirements. | a. Can the USG confirm how many PP references are required in total? b. Of the total PP references required, how many are anticipated to be provided by the Prime? c. Of the total PP reference required, how many are anticipated to be provided by subcontractors? | Total of Five PP References from the Prime and Two from subcontractors. The Total page count for the Prime is 25 Pages and 10 for each subcontractor, See changes in RFP Section L. |
| 3 | 119, 2.1 RFP Section L | Solicitation states, “In the event a CPAR does not exist for a past performance reference, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), ATT P-5, to the Program Manager who is the Assessing Official." | a. Can the USG please confirm that PPQ is ONLY required in a instance where CPARs do not exist? b. If the answer to 3a is yes, then where is Offeror to provide detail on whether USG should be receiving a PPQ? | A. Yes B. If block 14 is blank and blocks 15-20 are completed on ATT P-3. |
| 4 | 119-120, 3.1.v RFP Section L | Solicitation provides a Table of Business Systems FAR References. These do not provide sufficient detail or information to suggest any action is required on the part of the contractor | a. Is the contractor required to provide a response in support of this table? b. If yes, can the USG provide detailed instructions for contractor response? | Please see updated language for the Business Systems Table in Section L. |
| 5 | 15, 3.2.3.3 SOW | DD-254 is noted but not provided | a. Can the USG provide details and draft DD-254 for the contract? b. What is the security level that will be required for performance on this contract? | a. See Attachment 17 that has been added b. See SOW Paragraph 3.7.2 |
| 6 | 16 3.2.5 - OPSEC SOW | SOW references requirement for OPSEC Plan. No CDRL defined for OPSEC Plan. | a. Can the USG provide information on format for OPSEC Plan? |
b. Can the USG provide information on timeline for response for OPSEC Plan?
| SOW 3.2.5 states "While performing aboard NAVAIR or NAVAIR sites, the contractor shall comply with the provisions of OPNAVINST 3432.1A, the local Command/Facility OPSEC policies, as well as any procedures identified in Program-Specific Operations Security Plans, and Program Protection Plans (PPP) as applicable" due to this effort being performed on Webster Outlying Field Annex, (WOLF) St. Inigoes, Maryland the contractor will adhere to the local Command/Facility OPSEC policies | ||||
| 7 | 118 & 128, Instructions 2.0 2.1 Instructions RFP Section L M ATT P-3 | Section L and Section M both state past performance references performed within 5 years of the solicitation release. ATT P-3 Instructions state performance within 3 years of the proposal due date. | Can the USG confirm past performance references are to be within 5 years of the solicitation release | Attachment P-3 Instructions have been updated to reflect past performance references are to be within 5 years of the solicitation release. |
| 8 | 116, 1.1 RFP Section L | Solicitation states “The workforce identified in ATT P-1 represents the Government’s best estimate for proposal purposes of the workforce necessary to successfully execute the mission requirements of the PBSOW. If a contractor’s technical approach requires additional management, supervisory, or administrative personnel, include those personnel…” | Given that no workforce is identified in ATT P-1, please confirm that, at the IDIQ level, the Contractor is just to provide one name for each position listed in PBSOW 3.8. | The reference in Section L has been updated to ATT_16. This contract has no IDIQ level it is a stand alone "C" Type contract and is CPFF. |
| 9 | 12, 3.1.8 SOW | SOW Transition Strategy states “Contractor shall submit a Transition Out Plan to include the minimum elements listed below: Work Turnover, Quality Assurance, Risk Mitigation Strategies, Data/Information Transfer” | Can the USG confirm this Plan is required after award? | See SOW 3.1.8 "Upon termination or expiration of the contract, the contractor shall ensure an orderly transition of responsibilities, while minimizing impact to the operation. The contractor shall submit a Transition Out Plan, to include the minimum elements listed below". This section has been added to ensure at the end of the contract the incumbent has a Transition Out Plan. This plan will be required after award. |
| 10 | 117 & 128, 1.2 1.0, 1.1 RFP Section L Section M | Section L requires “Understanding of the Work,” however, Section M has no clear evaluation factor for this section. Additionally, Section M provides an evaluation factor for “Management Approach,” but Section L calls for a “Manning Approach.” | Can the USG advise if Section L or Section M need to be amended? | Please Take Notice***Section L and M have been Amended. Section L and Section M have been restructured to ensure all evaluation information is clear. *** |
| 11 | 24, 3.4 SOW | “3.4 CONTINUOUS PROCESS IMPROVEMENT 3.4.1 The Contractor shall participate in the implementation and development of NAVAIR sponsored initiatives for continuous improvements such as Airspeed, Theory of Constraints, Six Sigma and Reliability-Centered Maintenance. The contractor shall maintain internal company policies for process improvements to reduce the cost of doing business and improve productivity.” | a. Is the last sentence in this section, “The contractor shall maintain internal company policies for process improvements to reduce the cost of doing business and improve productivity”, a recommendation or a specific requirement that extends to contractor’s “internal company policies”? b. Further, is the USG requiring the contractor to adopt NAVAIR sponsored continuous process improvement initiatives as internal policy at contractor or subcontractors’ primary place of business or headquarters? | a. As instructed in section 3.4.1 "the contractor shall maintain internal company policies for process improvements to reduce the cost of doing business and improve productivity" b. See SOW para. 3.1.2. All work performance specified in this Performance Based Statement of Work (PBSOW) will be accomplished at St. Inigoes Maryland and the occasional off-site maintenance detachments. |
| 12 | 11 & 78, 3.1.5.1 Section H SOW | The SOW states, “Travel authorization request shall be prepared in accordance with the sample in Section J, Attachment 11 and submitted no less than 5 business days prior to travel for COR approval.” The RFP, Section H - Special Contract Requirements (Clauses Incorporated by Full Text), 5252.232-9509 TRAVEL APPROVAL AND REIMBURSEMENT PROCEDURES (NAVAIR)(OCT 2013) states, “(1) The Contractor shall provide the [Insert Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) or Contracting Officer's Representative (COR)] a written request for authorization to travel at least 30 days in advance of the required travel date, when possible.” | Can the USG please confirm travel authorization requests submitted to the COR for approval within 5 business days of travel is acceptable on this contract? | See SOW 3.1.5 Contractor Process for Approval of Travel, Material and Other Direct Charges (ODC). travel requests should be submitted in a reasonable time frame but requests can be submitted for approval within 5 days of travel to the COR. |
| 13 | 114 & 118 Instructions, A.3.0 B.1.2.0.6 RFP Section L ATT P-3 | Section L states “The Offeror shall complete the Past Performance Information Form, ATT P-3, for each past performance reference…” Volume page limits dictate 25 pages for the PP Volume, with 5 pages for each contract. ATT P-3 states to “create an individual tab” for certain contractual information. | a. Can the USG please confirm the required format for the Past Performance Information Form and PP Volume? b. Is the excel spreadsheet to be appropriately inserted into the word .doc? c. Does all contract description narrative need to be within this format – up to 5 pages per contract? d. Please confirm the excel spreadsheet is not to be submitted as an excel spreadsheet and how additional tabs are to be formatted within the PP Volume. | Government provided forms that are excel documents can be completed and turned in as excel documents. The Government Provided forms ask specific questions or request specific information. All Government provided forms do not count against the page count of the proposal unless excess information is added that was not asked for in the Government provided forms. |
| 14 | Instructions, 6 ATT P-3 | States “If there are Delivery Orders or Task Order (e.g. 0001) Numbers under a contract, the Offeror shall create an individual tab and complete a unique Table PP-1 Past Performance Contract Data for each DO or TO number or those portions of each DO or TO number, whose performance is within 3 years of the proposal due date (i.e. this box shall contain only one DO or TO). The Offeror may only put multiple DO or TO numbers in this box if they can be grouped because they are the same work effort and are evaluated under the same CPAR.” | Please confirm if each contract Task Order is to be counted as an individual Past Performance Reference, or if all Task Orders are to be included as one with the overarching contract? | Each Task Order is it's own past performance reference. |
| 15 | 117, 1.3.3. 1.3.4 RFP Section L Part B | The RFP states contractor is required to develop and submit a Transition Plan (1.3.3) including a Phase-In Plan. Given the Phase-In Plan is to cover the 60-day period prior to the official start of the period of performance, there will be overlap between the incumbent’s and new contractor’s transition plan, especially with regard to turnover. See reference below: 1.3.3. Transition Plan - The transition period begins 60 days prior to the beginning of the period of performance. The Offeror shall describe the approach to initiating this program and provide a 60-day plan of action with milestones required to begin performing the requirements in this solicitation to start full performance on the first day of the period of performance. Include the following information: a) The plan should take into consideration the following elements as well as any additional elements deemed necessary by the Offeror: 1) Work Turnover 2) Training 3) Risk Mitigation 4) Security Requirments 5) Data Transfer" | Will the USG provide the incumbent’s Phase-Out Plan so bidders can develop a more responsive/collaborative Phase-In Plan, especially regarding turnover and any interest the Government may have in retaining any part of the existing contractor workforce? | The Phase-out Plan will not be provided by the Government. |
| 16 | 71, 5252.232-9510 RFP Section G | This clause indicates that fixed fee installments shall be in the same ratio to the total fixed fee as the net direct labor hours expended during the installment period is to direct labor hours specified in the clause entitled “Level of Effort”; however, we could not locate the referenced entitled clause in the solicitation. | Can the USG clarify? | This contract is a performance based C Type contract, not a Level of Effort, therefore the LOE clause was not included. |
| 17 | 76-77 5252.215-9505 RFP Section H | This clause indicates that in order for the Government to evaluate whether the proposed agreements inhibit competition, offerors are required to (1) provide a copy of all teaming arrangements, and (2) explain why the teaming agreements do not inhibit competition. Neither Section L nor Section M provide any guidance on submission of this data or how it will be evaluated for award. | Can the UGS provide clarifying instructions for submission and information for the evaluation criteria of this data? | The Government will not expand on the criteria set forth in Clause 5252.215-9505 as the instructions are objective. However, we intend to add the requirements portion of this clause to Section L of the Solicitation so that the criteria can be submitted as part of each offeror's proposal. |
| 18 | 119, 3.0 RFP Section L | Solicitation indicates subcontractors are required to provide the same information required by the prime contractor unless otherwise noted below. | Are the subcontractors required to submit signed SF33 or SF1449 for basic solicitation and acknowledgement of amendments and a completed Schedule B with prices completed at the CLIN and Sub-CLIN unit prices? | There is no requirement for subcontractors to submit the forms. |
| 19 | 120, 3.3c RFP Section L | Paragraph indicates the offeror shall propose in compliance with the current hourly rate set forth in the Department of Labor Wage Determination as applicable. We could not locate a wage determination in the provided solicitation attachments. | Can the USG incorporate the applicable wage determination(s) into the solicitation? | Due to this contract being professional services the SCA does not apply. The Department of Labor Wage Determination will not be incorporated. |
| 20 | 122-123, 3.7.1 ODCs RFP Section L | Table includes $100,000 per annum for ODC Material. Paragraph indicates the values provided are for informational purposes only and the offeror should propose costs/prices for the ODC CLINs that it determines reasonable and appropriate. PWS paragraph 3.3 indicates contractor shall perform a variety of tasks in accordance with the flight schedule, but nothing in the PWS quantifies the requirements in a manner that one could logically develop material requirements for pricing. In the absence of the above information and given the nebulous requirements described in the PWS, this could result in an unfair competitive advantage to the incumbent contractor(s). | a. Can the USG provide a notional schedule of materials to include item name, number and part description and estimated quantities required to support the PWS? b. If answer to a. is no, will the USG consider providing a plug number that all offerors should propose? C. If answer to b. is no, will the USG consider excluding the ODC Material from the total evaluated price? | Section 3.1.5.2 Material explains the process if materials are needed. Based off the needs of the Aircrew the total materials needed varies depending on the projected program mission requirements which are unknown at this time. The amount displayed in the chart is one in which the Government, based of off previous ODC Material costs, has set to ensure the coverage of any future material purchases. |
| 21 | 122-123, 3.4.1 ODCs RFP Section L | Table includes $100,000 per annum for ODC travel. Paragraph indicates the values provided are for informational purposes only and the offeror should propose costs/prices for the ODC CLINs that it determines reasonable and appropriate. PWS paragraph 3.3 indicates contractor shall perform a variety of tasks in accordance with the flight schedule, but nothing in the PWS quantifies the requirements in a manner that one could logically develop travel requirements for pricing. In the absence of the above information and given the nebulous requirements described in the PWS, this could result in an unfair competitive advantage to the incumbent contractor(s). | a. Can the USG provide a notional schedule of travel requirements to include origin, destination, number people, number trips, number days each to form the basis of the offerors’ estimated travel? b. Would the USG consider providing a plug number that all offerors should propose? c. If answer to b. is no, will the USG consider excluding the ODC Travel from the total evaluated price? | See SOW 3.1.5 Contractor Process for Approval of Travel, Material and Other Direct Charges (ODC) explains the process if travel is required on this contract. Based off the needs of the Aircrew the total travel required varies depending on the projected program mission requirements which are unknown at this time. The amount displayed in the chart is one in which the Government, based off of previous Travel costs, has set to ensure the coverage of any future material purchases. |
| 22 | 123, 3.7.2 Labor Hours RFP Section L | Paragraph indicates the estimated hours are for informational purposes only and the offeror should propose a mix of labor categories based on an understanding of the work being requested. PWS paragraph 3.3 indicates contractor shall perform a variety of tasks in accordance with the flight schedule, but nothing in the PWS quantifies the requirements in a manner that one could logically develop staffing requirements for pricing. Given the nebulous requirements described in the PWS, this could result in an unfair competitive advantage to the incumbent contractor(s). | Will the USG consider establishing the required staffing mix and level of effort that all offerors should propose? | The Government provided it's best estimate for the labor categories and hours. An Industry Day was hosted where information was provided to assist in determining if a deviation from the estimate was required in conjunction with the PWS. |
| 23 | 116 Instructions, Part B 1.1 Specific Instructions RFP Section L | 1.1a) Manning Approach Spreadsheet (ATT P-1).1.1 c) The Offeror shall provide a resume for the key personnel identified below… 1.1d) ...The offeror must submit a labor category breakdown that covers the completion of the tasks in the Performance Work Statement (PBSOW) in Section C of the solicitation in accordance with the format in the Workforce Hour Matrix (Attachment P-2). | Please advise if the following are considered part of the 50-page limit for the Technical Volume: a. Manning Approach Spreadsheet (ATT P-1) [Section 1.1a)] b. Resumes for Key Personnel [Section 1.1c)] c. Workforce Hour Matrix (Attachment P-2) [Section 1.1d)] | All Government provided documents will not count against the page limit unless excess information is provided that was not requested in the Government provided form. The resumes for Key Personnel will be part of the 50-page limit. |
| 24 | 119 Instructions, Part B 2.0 Specific Instructions RFP Section L | CPARS | a. For PP references that have CPARS, should the Offeror include the CPARS as part of the submission? b. If so, do CPARS count against the PP Volume page count? | Refer to ATT P-3, If form PP-1 is completed properly, no copy of the CPARS will be required. If choosing to send in the CPARS, it will not be counted against the page count. |
| 25 | 133 Instructions, Part B 3.3(f) RFP Section L | DOL Wage Determination Classifications | Can the Government please provide the applicable Wage Determination for this effort? | Due to this contract being professional services, the SCA does not apply. The Department of Labor Wage Determination will not be incorporated. |
| 26 | Part B 3.3(g) Section 1 | Bullet #3 – Escalation for Non-SCA labor categories | The referenced instruction indicates that escalation shall be applied to non-SCA labor categories. This assumes that escalation is not to be applied to SCA labor categories. If this is the case, will the Government be including the clause at FAR 52.222-43 SCA Price Adjustment in the resulting contract? | Due to this contract being professional services the SCA does not apply. FAR 52.222-43 SCA Price Adjustment is not applicable. |
| 27 | 114 Instructions, 2.00 and Instructions and table RFP Section L | 2nd paragraph of 2.0 states that “The Offeror will provide one complete copy of the proposal to the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) as electronic files…”. Further, table indicates “1 Original/ 1 Copy/ w/ CD-ROM” required but does not explicitly require paper originals and copies. | Please clarify if original and copies are hard copy paper and whether they are to be provided in binders. | One original paper copy with ink signatures is required. One paper copy of the original is also required. While the Government cannot tell the offeror how to organize their proposal submissions, a binder is preferred. |
| 28 | 10, 3.1.4.2 PBSOW | Overtime. The referenced section references FAR 52.222-2 and 52.222-4 regarding Overtime. FAR 52.222-4 is not listed as a Clause in the RFP. | Please verify that FAR 52.222-4 is applicable to this solicitation. | No, this clause is specific to laborers or mechanics and is not applicable to this solicitation. |
| 29 | 123 & 25, L.3.7.2 & PSOW 3.8 RFP Section L Instructions & PSOW | Labor Hours. The referenced section includes a table that presents the Government historical data for performance labor categories and level of effort for each. The table includes a position for two FTEs entitled “UAS Group 1&2 Small Internal/External (AVO) (CAT A/B) in the column entitled “MAINT Team”. However, in the PSOW in paragraph 3.8 Labor Categories, this position is not described. | Please provide the information for this position in the same level of detail as provided for the other labor categories. | See PBSOW Section 3.8 for updated Labor Category. |
| 30 | 123, 3.7.2 RFP Section L | Key Personnel. The referenced table indicates that the position in the “MAINT TEAM” column entitled UAS Group 3 Small Internal External (AVO) (CAT A/B) is designated as a “Key Personnel” position. The table also indicates that the level of effort for this position is two FTEs. | Are both FTEs in this position to be proposed as “Key Personnel”; or just one? | Both FTE's for this position are "Key Personnel". |
| 31 | 9-10, 3.1.3.6 - 3.1.3.9 SOW | Duplicate paragraphs | There are duplicate paragraphs in referenced sections. Is this intentional? | This was unintentional and the SOW has been updated. |
| 32 | 116, 1.1 RFP Section L | In the Manning Approach section, the Gov’t references the best estimate attachment and indicates additional positions may be proposed. | Is the workforce identified in ATT 16 - Estimated Hours to be considered the minimum staffing required? | The workforce identified in ATT 16 is the Government's best estimate, any deviation should be justified. |
| 33 | 123, 3.7.2 RFP Section L ATT_16 | In both the RFP and ATT 16, the estimated labor hours matrix for Aircrew services is titled “UAV Maintenance” and “MAINT TEAM.” | a. Are these table headers correct? b. If not, the headers should be corrected so as not to be confused with the UAS Maintenance similar solicitation. | Pleaase see ATT_16 update. |
| 34 | 1, 9 RFP | The time the solicitation is due on 26 Feb 2018 does not provide much buffer for those companies in the local area who choose to hand carry their proposals and deliver on the due date. | Would the Gov’t consider changing the time the solicitation is due on 26 Feb 2018 to 12:00pm or later to provide a buffer for those offerors who choose to hand carry their proposals? | The Government is extending the due date to Tuesday February 27th at 2:00 PM. |
| 35 | 18, 3.3c SOW | Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) appropriations are described as supporting significant aircraft system operations. This level of potential OCO operations can drive costs up significantly, as well as qualifications of operators. | a. Is there an average number of OCO operations in the past three years? B. Will OCO operations be a separate plus-up/TO to the base contract? | Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) is the type of funding that can possibly be utilized on this contract and if utilized the scope of this requirement would remain the same. At this time that is all the information needed for proposal purposes. |
| 36 | 24, 3.4 SOW | Section states the Contractor shall participate in the implementation and development of NAVAIR sponsored initiatives for continuous improvements such as Airspeed, Theory of Constraints, Six Sigma and Reliability-Centered Maintenance as well as maintain internal company policies for process improvements to reduce the cost of doing business and improve productivity. | a. Are there training and currency requirements for these efforts? |
b. Is there an anticipated LOE for these initiatives?
| a. See 3.6 Certicification and Training of Contractor Personnel which explains Government directed training. b. All of these initiatives, if participation arises, will be perfomed by the personnel on contract and will have no effect on the efforts of this contract. | ||||
| 37 | 24, 3.5 SOW | The Airworthiness site is mentioned in Section 3.5 and Airworthiness is defined twice in Section 2.1, and Airworthiness is a huge part of flight test preparation. | Are there Airworthiness activities in this SOW? | Section 3.5 is a description of the electronic sites that the contractor will gain access to and 2.1 is Abbreviations and Acronyms which is not a definition. There is no wording in this effort that would lead in the direction of Airworthiness Activities only gaining access to the Airworthiness Site. |
| 38 | 18, 3.3.1.1 SOW | The following statement is found in Section 3.3.1.1: “Additionally, the contractor shall participate in evaluations of flight simulation devices such as operational flight trainers, weapon system trainers, position/tactics trainers, scenario development, mission planning and flight crew brief and debrief or any other simulation device for an air vehicle.” | a. Are there any specific qualifications required to be a simulator device/system evaluator? b. If so, the required qualifications are not annotated in any of the current labor categories | There are no additional qualifications required to be a simulator device /system evaluator. The qualifications are the same as what is required to be qualified in that particular type/model/series aircraft system as a trainer, simulator, and/or mission planner support. |
| 39 | 7, 3.1.2 SOW | OCONUS land based sites are mentioned as potential work locations for detachments. Since OCONUS operations | Will the Gov’t further describe the potential locations/scope of work to be performed, the specific requirements, and how costs associated with the detachments will be handled? | If an OCONUS requirement for Aircrew operations arises the program office requesting that service will provide guidelines and any specific requirements. All funding needed for preparation and execution of these efforts will be provided before the OCONUS effort. The scope of work would be consistent with what is requested in this contract just performed in an OCONUS location. |
| 40 | 13, 3.2 SOW | Facilities clearance requirement. | Would the Gov’t please confirm there is no facilities clearance requirement? | There is no Facilities Clearance Requirement on this effort. Refer to 3.2.5 Operational Security: While performing aboard NAVAIR or NAVAIR sites, the contractor shall comply with the provisions of OPNAVINST 3432.1A, the local Command/Facility OPSEC policies, as well as any procedures identified in Program-Specific Operations Security Plans, and Program Protection Plans (PPP) as applicable. The required effort performance location is on Webster Outlying Field Annex, (WOLF) St. Inigoes, Maryland the contractor will adhere to the local Command/Facility OPSEC policies. |
| 41 | SOW | The RFP makes several references to requirements for Secret and Top-Secret security clearances. Would the Government consider providing offerors with a Draft DD 254? | See Attachment 17 the Draft DD254 has been added. | |
| 42 | 118 & 128, 1.3.5, 1.2 RFP Section L Part B, Section M Part B | Since the solicitation is a 100% Small Business Set Aside, would the Government consider removing Section L, Part B, paragraph 1.3.5, and Section M, Part B, paragraph 1.2 (second paragraph only)? | No, small business goals are still required. | |
| 43 | 114, 2.0 RFP Section L Part A | Section L, Part A, paragraph 2.0, page 114 says, in part: “The Offeror will provide one complete copy of the proposal to the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) as electronic files fully compatible with Microsoft 2010 and for information not supported by MS Office products Adobe files will not be accepted.” Scanned documents such as letters from DCAA or DCMA that the Government requires in Section L, Part B, paragraph 3.3(c), are only available as Adobe files (.pdf). Will the Government consider allowing submission of these documents as .pdf files? | The Government standpoint concerning the permissable electronic format for proposals stands, no Adobe files will be accepted. The only exception is scanned documents from outside sources such as letters from DCAA or DCMA that the Government requires if that is the only option available. | |
| 44 | 118, 2.0 RFP Section L Part B | Section L, Part B, paragraph 2.0, page 118 says, “The Offeror shall complete the Past Performance Information Form, ATT P-3, for each past performance reference performed within five years of the solicitation release Joint Venture (JV) team, no more than two forms for each principal subcontractor, and/or no more than two forms for each JV team member.” Can the Government clarify this sentence? | Please refer to Section 1.0 in Section L for the definition of Joint Venture. | |
| 45 | ATT P-3 | In Attachment P-3, the wording in block 13a. does not seem applicable to this contract. Will the Government amend or replace this attachment? | Attachment P-3 block 13a has been updated. | |
| 46 | ATT P-3 | Attachment P-3 is an Excel spreadsheet, which does not lend itself to narrative passages, as are called for in response to Block 13. Would the Government allow offerors to present this information in a similar table in MS Word instead? | Attachment P-3, if more space is needed for narrative passages please add information to an additional sheet labeled with the PP contract number and block number of the additional information. | |
| 47 | 17 & 18, 3.3a, 3.3.1 SOW | Does the Government already have test equipment and facilities to support “testing such as Hazard of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance (HERO), Electromagnetic Compliance (EMC), and Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) for Groups 1-4 UAS type Unmanned Air Vehicles” or other additional Article 1 testing? Will this be GFE that must be cited per draft contract paragraph 3.5 Use of Government Furnished Property? Considering the potential volume and complexity of the Test Equipment for the various systems, if the test equipment is GFE, will the Government provide a listing of GFE available and/or required? | There is no Government Furnished Equipment attached to this contrating effort. All equipment needed for performance of this contract is Government Furnished Property. Testing equipment will be handled by the program office or test directorate requiring the testing. | |
| 48 | 21 & 24, 3.3.10, 3.6 SOW | Is it correct to assume the Government has flight simulators for the contractor aircrews to conduct training and maintain currency requirements? Can the Government list the simulators available or required to be accessed by the contractor? | The Government, or in some cases of early platform development and initial training, the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM), has the simulators available for all aircrew, including contractors, to train and maintain currency in the assigned platforms. The simulators are made available to support the currently assigned Type/Model/Series aircraft systems and the assignment of platforms changes over time. As such, no listing of available simulators will be provided at this time. | |
| 49 | 21 & 24, 3.3.10, 3.6 SOW | As new aircraft, payloads and associated systems become available for testing at NWTL, is the contractor or Government responsible for funding the initial qualification or transition training for these systems if Navy provided training is not available? If the vendor is responsible, and considering the unknown nature of the platforms that may come available, can this training be considered an ODC subject to COR approval? | See 3.6 Certification and Training of Contractor Personnel which explains Government directed training. Please see PBSOW "Section 3.3.6 If the Government requests training for the contractor (outside of the guidelines above sections 3.6.1-3.6.4) it will need to be approved by the TPOC and COR. The cost for Government requested contractor training will be reimbursed by the Government". | |
| 50 | 117, 1.1.d RFP Section L Part B | The offeror shall provide a breakdown of hours for each individual labor category required for the base and each option period of performance. The offeror must submit a labor category breakdown that covers the completion of the tasks in the Performance Work Statement (PBSOW) in Section C of the solicitation in accordance with the format in the Workforce Hour Matrix (Attachment P-2). The only vendor that will have historical data on the work breakdown will be the incumbent. This places challengers to the incumbent at an undue disadvantage. Can the Government provide a baseline expectation of the percent of total work under each CLIN? | The FIAR compliance requirement (NAVAIR INSTRUCTION 7040.14D) serves to ensure establishment and tracking of the type of appropriation (color of money) as aligned to a specific requirement within the Purpose, Time, and Intent of the appropriation. NAWCAD Comptroller guidance requires the establishment and alignment of CLINs and the effort (SOW) to the type of appropriation. NAWCAD Program Management requires compliance with Comptroller guidance and the alignment of that appropriation identified to the requirement/funding owner. The Government Team will be responsible for identifying the appropriation to the appropriate CLIN; however the selected contractor will likely be involved in the requirement planning phase and thus assist to ensure compliance. The Labor, material, travel and ODC CLINs are defined in ATT_16 of the RFP. Additional CLINS may be added should new requirement owners be identified. |
E.g. PMA-263 is funding $200K for RDT&E Labor for effort defined in paragraphs 3.3.1 and 3.3.21 of the SOW. The funding will be applied to CLIN X001 Labor PMA XXX RDT&E. As a process, the Government team will work the modification through the proper processes ultimately to the Contracting Officer/Specialist, whom will execute the effort by:
**CLIN X111 Unfunded Ceiling Labor will have the entirety of the option year’s available ceiling. For this example the unfunded ceiling on CLIN X111 Unfunded Ceiling Labor is $1.1M.
1) Re-aligning $200K of CLIN X111 Unfunded Ceiling Labor to CLIN X001 PMA-XXX RDT&E Labor.
2)As a result the CLIN X111 Labor Unfunded Ceiling will decrease from $1.1M to $900K, and the CLIN X001 PMA-XXX RDT&E Labor Ceiling will increase from $0 to $200K.
3) The $200K in RDT&E funding may then be applied onto CLIN X001 PMA-XXX RDT&E Labor which is increased from $0 to $200K.
As in the example, the funding is therefore applied and aligned to the respective effort, requirement owner and appropriation type. This is the process for FIAR Compliance and the reason a percentage of effort for each CLIN cannot be provided. See ATT_16 for Estimated hours and labor categories.
51 116 RFP Section L Part B Considering the Government states in Section B that they intend to realign, create and exercise subCLINs on a unilateral basis, will prospective vendors be evaluated on how they apportion the hours and will vendors be held to those hour breakdowns? The FIAR compliance requirement (NAVAIR INSTRUCTION 7040.14D) serves to ensure establishment and tracking of the type of appropriation (color of money) as aligned to a specific requirement within the Purpose, Time, and Intent of the appropriation. NAWCAD Comptroller guidance requires the establishment and alignment of CLINs and the effort (SOW) to the type of appropriation. NAWCAD Program Management requires compliance with Comptroller guidance and the alignment of that appropriation identified to the requirement/funding owner. The Government Team will be responsible for identifying the appropriation to the appropriate CLIN; however the selected contractor will likely be involved in the requirement planning phase and thus assist to ensure compliance. The Labor, material, travel and ODC CLINs are defined in ATT_16 of the RFP. Additional CLINS may be added should new requirement owners be identified.
E.g. PMA-263 is funding $200K for RDT&E Labor for effort defined in paragraphs 3.3.1 and 3.3.21 of the SOW. The funding will be applied to CLIN X001 Labor PMA XXX RDT&E. As a process, the Government team will work the modification through the proper processes ultimately to the Contracting Officer/Specialist, whom will execute the effort by:
**CLIN X111 Unfunded Ceiling Labor will have the entirety of the option year’s available ceiling. For this example the unfunded ceiling on CLIN X111 Unfunded Ceiling Labor is $1.1M.
1) Re-aligning $200K of CLIN X111 Unfunded Ceiling Labor to CLIN X001 PMA-XXX RDT&E Labor.
2)As a result the CLIN X111 Labor Unfunded Ceiling will decrease from $1.1M to $900K, and the CLIN X001 PMA-XXX RDT&E Labor Ceiling will increase from $0 to $200K.
3) The $200K in RDT&E funding may then be applied onto CLIN X001 PMA-XXX RDT&E Labor which is increased from $0 to $200K.
As in the example, the funding is therefore applied and aligned to the respective effort, requirement owner and appropriation type. This is the process for FIAR Compliance and the reason a percentage of effort for each CLIN cannot be provided. See ATT_16 for Estimated hours and labor categories.
| 52 | 118, 1.3.5 RFP Section L Part B | Small Business Utilization: Considering this is a total small business set aside, is this portion of the proposal required? | Yes, We do require a Small Business approach. |
| 53 | 122, 3.5 RFP Section L Part B | Use of Government Furnished Property: Is the vendor responsible for providing hand tools and other maintenance equipment such as test equipment, meters, o-scopes etc., or are those available for check-out from the Government? | This effort is an Aircrew effort, there is no maintenance requested for this effort. Equipment necessary to complete the Aircrew efforts required in this solicitation will be provided by the Government. |
| 54 | Section L, 3.3 – Price/Cost Information |
| Paragraph states “The Offeror shall use the CLIN Summary tab to breakout total proposed costs by CLIN”. We could not locate this tab in Attachment P6-A Prime Contractor Cost Summary or Attachment P6-B Subcontractor Cost Summary. | Can the USG provide this CLIN Summary tab or advise if Schedule B is an acceptable format for the CLIN breakout of proposed cost? | This wording has been removed from the Price/Cost Information, the cost proposal requested by the Government is for cost to be provided for the labor categories through the P-6. |
| 55 | Section L, 3.7.1 - ODCs |
122-123
| Informational table includes a line for Extend Services Clause Option; however, neither Schedule B nor the Attachments P6-A or P6-B include line items for the extension period. | Can the USG clarify if the offeror is to propose material and travel costs for the six-month option period? | The Option to Extend has been removed from the Labor hour chart on page 123. The Government will determine the cost for the six-month option period. |
| 56 | Section L, 3.7.2 – Labor Hours |
| Information Table includes a column for Ext Hours; however, neither Schedule B nor the Attachments P6-A or P6-B include lines items for the 6 month LOE. | Can the USG clarify if the offeror is to propose labor costs for the six-month option period? | The Option to Extend labor has been removed from the labor hour chart on page 123. The Government will determine the cost for the six-month option period. | ||
| 57 | Section L, X034 – Optional Labor Ceiling CLIN 11, 21, 30, 41, 51 | Option Labor Ceiling CLINS do not include Estimated Fee or Estimated Cost + Fixed Fee. | Can the USG confirm if fee should be applied to the Optional Labor CLINs? | This contract is requesting cost to be provided for the labor categories through the P-6, no where in this RFP does it ask for cost to be proposed at the CLIN level. |
| 58 | Section L – B.1.1.c, |
Attachment P6-A and P6-B 116-117
| This paragraph appears to indicate that resumes for key personnel are required for one (1) UAS Group 4 Test Air Vehicle Operator (AVO) and two (2) UAS Group 3 Small Internal/External AVOs, for a total of three (3) key personnel resumes. However, Attachments P-6A and P-6B show that there are 3 LCATs assigned as Key Personnel, with an additional 3 key personnel positions for UAS Group 4 AVOs. | Please clarify the LCATs for which key personnel resumes are required, and the number of resumes required for each LCAT. | The P-6 has been updated to reflect the actual Key Personnel labor categories. The Government will not dictate how many personnel should be proposed. To clarify, there should be a resume for each person proposed in a Key Personnel labor category. | |
| 59 | Section L, 1.1.a, 3.3.c 116, 121 | Section 1.1.a suggests that all contingent hires shall have a letter of intent. Section 3.3.c states, “For contingent hires, the offeror shall provide contingent offer letters outlining salary information for contingent hire employees. For any prospective hires for any non-key personnel, provide information to substantiate the rates proposed. All contingent hires shall have a letter of intent submitted under the Cost Volume.” | a. Can the USG please provide detail on difference between contingent or prospective employee? |
b. Based on statement regarding prospective non-key personnel, is Offeror to assume all non-internal candidates that are identified as key personnel are considered contingent?
The Sections questioned are clearly stated in Section L and require no further explanation from the Government.
Sheet2
Sheet3
File details come from the government source that posted it.