UASTD_Maintenance_Questions_0065.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 28 KB Posted
- Attached to
- UAV Maintenance Groups 1-4
- Solicitation number
- N00421-17-R-0065
About this file
Q&A
View the file
Other files
Show all 39
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-0065 | ||||
| Reference | Discussion | Question | Government Response | |
| 1 | RFP Section L, 2.0 Proposal Format, Second Paragraph | RFP Section L, 2.0 Second Paragraph states “The Offer 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.” The first sentence in the second paragraph does not make sense as written. | Request the Government clarify the requirement for submittal of electronic files in the situation where the information is not supported by MS Office products. Recommend the Government accept Adobe 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. |
| 2 | RFP Section L, Section 3.0 Proposal Content and Volumes, Example of a Cross Reference Matrix and Part B, Section 1.0 Volume 1: Technical Table T-1 | RFP Section L, Section 3.0 Proposal Content and Volumes, Example of a Cross Reference Matrix, Government SOW/PWS column states “Note: This column shall address all paragraphs in Section xx and xy of the SOW/PWS.” Part B, Section 1.0 Volume 1: Technical Table T-1, PBSOW column identifies specific paragraphs of the SOW/PWS. | Request the Government clarify the requirement for submittal of Technical Cross Reference Matrix. Specifically, does the Matrix need to cross reference to the PBSOW sections specified in Table T-1 or to all paragraphs in the SOW/PWS? | Follow the PBSOW references in Table T-1. |
| 3 | RFP Section L, Part B Section 2.0 Volume 2: Past Performance, Paragraph 2.1.b, first sentence | RFP Section L, Part B Section 2.0 Volume 2: Past Performance, Paragraph 2.1.b, first sentence states “The Offeror shall complete the Past Performance Information Form, Attachment 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. | Request the Government clarify the requirement for submittal of past performance references for the Offeror and principal subcontractor for non-JV and JV teams. | Please refer to Section 1.0 in Section L for the definition of Joint Venture. |
| 4 | RFP Section L, Part B Section 2.0 Volume 2: Past Performance, Paragraph 2.1.c | RFP Section L, Part B Section 2.0 Volume 2: Past Performance, Paragraph 2.1.c states “Insert following if desired: Additionally, the Offeror shall provide one electronic copy of the Statement of Work/Performance Work Statement for each contract reference as Annex 1 to this Past Performance Volume.” | Question: Request the Government clarify whether this requirement is optional or required. Question: Request the Government clarify that the contents of Annex 1 are outside the page count of the Past Performance Volume. | Providing the Statement of Work/Performance Work Statement for each contract referenced is optional. This is not part of the page count for the Past Performance section. |
| 5 | RFP Section L, Part B Section 3.0 Volume 3: Price/Cost, Paragraph 3.5, Labor Hours | RFP Section L, Part B Section 3.0 Volume 3: Price/Cost, Paragraph 3.5, Labor Hours includes a reference table which states in column 1 “All labor categories below are SCA”. Column 1 includes the labor category “Maintenance Manager, Senior”. | Request the Government clarify the Wage Determination Schedule and SCA labor category number corresponding to the Maintenance Manager, Senior position or clarify that this position is not SCA. While many of the positions on the resultant contract are appropriately expected to be filled by non-exempt personnel, there are some that clearly will qualify as exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Will the Government alter the solicitation to permit offerors to propose staffing plans that identify those positions they feel are appropriately deemed exempt? | We have updated the position descriptions to capture the exempt positions. The Wage Determination Schedule has been attached to the RFP as ATT-24. |
| 6 | RFP Section M, Part B Section 1.0 Technical, Paragraph 1.2, Manning Approach, 2nd paragraph | RFP Section M, Part B Section 1.0 Technical, Paragraph 1.2, Manning Approach, 2nd paragraph states “The Offeror’s strategy for utilizing Small Business, Veteran-Owned Small Business……will be evaluated”. | Request the Government clarify if a Small Business Plan is required since the solicitation is set-aside for Small Business. Request the Government clarify how the Small Business strategy will be evaluated and specify whether Small Business Goals have been established for this solicitation. | We do require a Small Business approach. |
| 7 | RFP Section M, Part B Section 2.0 Past Performance, Paragraph 2.2, Relevance, last sentence | RFP Section M, Part B Section 2.0 Past Performance, Paragraph 2.2, Relevance, last sentence states “Relevant contracts are contracts that performed the required functions in alignment with the labor categories and requirements of this effort”. | Request the Government clarify what are the “required functions”. Are the “required functions” the requirements in the Scope of Work? | The required functions of this effort are the requirements in the PBSOW and providing personnel that meet the requirements of the requested labor categories. |
| 8 | RFP Section M, Part B Section 3.0 Price/Cost, Paragraph 3.0 Overall Summary Level for all CLINS, Last paragraph, last sentence | RFP Section M, Part B Section 3.0 Price/Cost, Paragraph 3.0 Overall Summary Level for all CLINS, Last paragraph, last sentence states “Should Offerors populate Section B in their proposal resulting in a discrepancy with Attachment P-6, Section B will prevail”. | Request the Government clarify whether the Offeror is required to fill out and submit Section B in their proposal or just submit Attachment P-6. | The Offeror is required to fill out Section B AND Attachment P-6. If there are discrepancies between the two, Section B information will prevail. |
| 9 | RFP PWS Section 3.1.4.1 Work Schedule and RFP Section L, Paragraph 3.5 Labor Hours | RFP PWS Section 3.1.4.1 Work Schedule states “In addition to above hours, the contractor must be able to support concurrent tri-site operations detachment/home-guard for Group 3 and above. The Contractor must also be able to support Group 1 / 2 operations during that time”. Section L, Paragraph 3.5 Labor Hours provides historical labor hours and FTE count for the entire work effort. | Do the labor hours and FTE count provided by the Government include the requirement in PWS Section 3.1.4.1 to support tri-site operations for Group 3 and above while at the same time supporting Group 1 / 2 operations? Is the FTE count provided by the Government adequate to support tri-site operations for Group 3 and above concurrent with Group 1 / 2 operations? | The Government Hour Estimate ATT_23 includes the projected operational supporting requirements of tri-site operations and support of homeguard operations in all configurations. |
| 10 | RFP PWS Section 3.3.2 Contractor Technical/Performance Requirements, Training Courses and Training Assets | PWS does not clearly identify the Government provided training courses and whether Government provided training will be provided to the Contractor at no cost. The PWS does not identify what Government owned training assets are available to the Contractor to conduct Contractor training and maintain qualifications. Additionally, the Government does not clarify beyond the labor category descriptions what certifications are required specific to each airframe. | Request the Government clarify in the PWS the specific Government provided training courses and whether these courses will be provided at no cost. Request the Government clarify in the PWS the Government owned training assets that are available to the Contractor to conduct initial Contractor training and maintain qualifications. | See addition 3.3.10.6 "If the Government requests training for the contractor (outside of the guidelines above sections 3.3.10.1-3.3.10.5) it will need to be approved by the TPOC and COR. The cost for Government requested contractor training will be reimbursed by the Government". Aircraft and support equipment are available for training and maintaining qualifications. |
| 11 | RFP PWS Section 3.3.5.2 Contractor Furnished Property | RFP PWS Section 3.3.5.2.2 specifies the special clothing and equipment requirements. | Does the Government Estimate for ODCs include the Contractor Furnished Property specified in PWS Section 3.3.5.2? | The Government's Estimate includes Contractor Furnished Property which requires Government approval before purchase. |
| 12 | RFP PWS Section 3.4.1 Position Requirements | RFP PWS Section 3.4.1, Maintenance Controller Labor Category, states “Provides daily oversight of all functional and operations activities….and assists the Senior Maintenance Control Manager with daily operations.” PWS Section 3.4.1 does not include a labor category for Senior Maintenance Control Manager. | Request the Government clarify if a Senior Maintenance Control Manager is a required position? | See updated section 3.4.1: The wording in this labor category should state "Senior Maintenance Manager" so, the correction to the "Maintenance Controller (49-1011)" would read "Provides daily oversight of all functional and operational activities in maintenance control of aircraft, and assists the Senior Maintenance Manager with daily operations" |
| 13 | RFP Section L 3.0 Proposal Content and Volumes | Volume Number 2, Past Performance page limit is 25 Pages. Since Att P-3 Past Performance is to be used to evaluate Past Performance Citations, per Part B Specific Instructions 2.1.C, “The Offer shall provide a narrative on each past performance information form in the “contractor effort description” area that clearly describes how each contract reference has relevant work effort that matches the relevancy definitions specified in section M of the solicitation. | Since Att P-3 Past Performance is to be used to evaluate Past Performance Citations, per Part B Specific Instructions 2.1.C, we assume that page count applies to the “contractor effort description” that we also assume should be entered in block 13 of Att P-3 since it is not specifically labeled “contractor effort description.’ Can the Government please clarify the page limit requirement for Vol II, and what it requires within Vol II since, Att P-3 and Att 5 PPQ complete all requirements for Vol II. | The P-3 is not included in the 25 page limit. |
| 14 | Will NAVAIR require contractor to have a signed and approved Ground Operating Procedure (GOP) IAW DCMA 8210/NAVAIRINST 3710 by a GFR prior to commencing work? If offeror has no experience establishing a GOP this could be a critical element during transition. Will the Government consider inclusion of a draft GOP by prime offeror as a source selection criterion under Volume I Technical? | The Ground Operating Procedures accepted and signed by the GFR is required before commencing work. (See CDRL A001) No inclusions will be permitted but communication concerning GOPS with GFR after contract award is permitted to aid in completion. | ||
| 15 | The solicitation number still has a 2017 date. | Will the solicitation change from N00421-17-R-0065 to N00421-18-R-XXXX? | No, the solicitation number remains an FY17 number. Once the contract is awarded, the contract will be assigned a new FY18 number. | |
| 16 | PBSOW paragraph 3.4 does not list position requirements for a Program Manager. | Does the Government plan to include position requirements for the contractor to provide a direct charge Program Manager (PM)? Or does the Government expect the PM to be an indirect cost? | The Management of the contract is the company's overall responsibility not the Government. | |
| 17 | PBSOW paragraph 3.4 lists a “Maintenance Controller (49-1011)”. Within the description of this position, it includes a reference to a “Senior Maintenance Controller”. | Will the Government provide a position description for the Senior Maintenance Controller? | The wording in this labor category should state "Senior Maintenance Manager" so, the correction to the "Maintenance Controller (49-1011)" would read "Provides daily oversight of all functional and operational activities in maintenance control of aircraft, and assists the Senior Maintenance Manager with daily operations" | |
| 18 | Attachment P-6A and Attachment P-6B does not have cells to price the Transition period. | Will the Government provide guidance to price Transition? | No, there will be no pricing of the transition period. The Government is not responsible for funding the work on the contract until the date of beginning of the Period of Performance. Any transition period or preparation time prior to the start of the contract is the Offeror's responsibility. | |
| 19 | The SOW makes several references to requirements for Secret security clearances. Would the Government consider providing offerors with a Draft DD 254? | See Attachment 8, Draft DD254 | ||
| 20 | Since the solicitation is a 100% Small Business Set Aside, would the Government consider removing Section L and Section M language requiring and evaluating SB socio-economic criteria? | The Section L and Section M language requiring and evaluating SB socio-economic criteria will not be removed, small business goals are still required. | ||
| 21 | Section L, Part A, paragraph 2.0, page 159 | 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 allow 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. | |
| 22 | RFP – Section L, 160 and 161, Part A 3.0 and Part B 1.0 | Part A 3.0 provides request for CRM and template for such. Part B 1.0 provided request for TCRM and template for such. | Can the USG confirm that only one CRM is required for response? |
If only one CRM required, can the USG please confirm which template is desired?
If the TCRM is required, please confirm that it is not part of the page count.
| Please use table T-1 TCRM. It will be part of the page count. | ||
| 23 | RFP – Section L, 164, 2.1b | Solicitation states, “The Offeror shall complete the Past Performance Information Form, Attachment 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.
Can the USG confirm how many PP references are required in total?
Of the total PP references required, how many are anticipated to be provided by the Prime?
Of the total PP reference required, how many are anticipated to be provided by subcontractors?
| It is up to the Offeror to compile their five past performance submissions. | |||
| 24 | RFP – Section L, 164, 2.1d | Solicitation states, “In the event a CPAR does not exist for a past performance reference, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), Attachment P-5, to the Program Manager who is the Assessing Official.” | Can the USG please confirm that PPQ is ONLY required in a instance where CPARs do not exist? |
If the answer to 3a is yes, then where is Offeror to provide detail on whether USG should be receiving a PPQ?
| Yes, a PPQ is only required when there is no CPARS If block 14 is blank and blocks 15-20 are completed on ATT P-3. | ||||
| 25 | RFP – Section L, 165, 3.1.a.iv | Solicitation provides a Table of Business Systems FAR References immediately following request for validity period. The table does not provide sufficient detail or information to suggest any action is required on the part of the contractor. | Is the contractor required to provide a response in support of this table? If yes, can the USG provide detailed instructions for contractor response? | |
| Please see updated language for the Business Systems Table in Section L. | ||||
| 26 | SOW, 22, 3.2.5 OPSEC | SOW references requirement for OPSEC Plan. Attachment 20 is provided as required guidance and format for OPSEC Plan. No CDRL is noted. | Can the USG provide detail on when OPSEC Plan is required for contractor response? | 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 |
| 27 | RFP Section L, 162, 1.1 | 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 correct Attachment is ATT_23, this contract is a C Type, there is no IDIQ level. |
| 28 | RFP Section L |
Section M
| ATT P-3, 164, 175 Instructions | Section L and 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? | Past performance references are to be within 5 years of the solicitation release. ATT P-3 has been updated to reflect 5 years. | ||
| 29 | SOW, 19, 3.1.8 | 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? | Yes. It is required after the contract award, not as a part of the proposal. | |
| 30 | RFP Section L |
ATT P-3, A.3.0, B.1.2.0.6, 159, 164 Instructions
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. Can the USG please confirm the required format for the Past Performance Information Form and PP Volume?
Is the excel spreadsheet to be appropriately inserted into the word .doc?
Does all contract description narrative need to be within this format – up to 5 pages per contract?
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.
| Attachment P-3 is the format that is to be filled out. | ||||
| 31 | ATT P-3, Instructions, 6 | 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. |
| 32 | RFP Section G, 110, 5252.232-9510 | 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 contract, not a Level of Effort, therefor the LOE clause was not included. . |
| 33 | RFP Section I, 127, 52.222-41 | 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 USG provide clarifying instructions for submission and information for the evaluation criteria of these data? | The Government will not expand on the criteria set forth in Clause 5252.215-9505 as the instructions are fairly objective. See Secton L updates under Small Business Utilization. |
| 34 | RFP Section L, 167, 3.4.1 ODCs | Table includes $300,000 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 3.3.5.1 appears to indicate that all equipment and materials required for performance will be provided to the Contractor as Government Furnished Material and Equipment. PWS paragraph 3.3.5.2 provides a list of Contractor Furnished Property (CFP) to include personal clothing and safety equipment. | Can the USG confirm that ODC Material includes only that Contractor Furnished Property (CFP) listed at paragraph 3.3.5.2 of the PWS? |
If no, can the USG provide a notional schedule of materials to include item name, part number and part description, and estimated quantities required to support the PWS?
If answer to b. is no, will the USG consider providing a plug number that all offerors should propose?
If answer to c. is no, will the USG consider excluding the ODC Material from the total evaluated price?
| No, we cannot confirm that ODC Material includes only CFP. No, we will not provide a notional schedule. The numbers provided in the chart are the Government's best estimate. Please see section 3.4.1 in Section L for updated language. | |||
| 35 | RFP Section L, 167, 3.4.1 ODCs | Table includes $150,000 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 3.3.1 indicates labor and services are required to perform supportability/safety studies on various aircraft and weapon systems and off-site safety/spill containment patrols and aircraft recovery services. There is nothing in the PWS that quantifies the requirements in a manner that one could logically develop travel requirements for pricing | 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? |
If no, in the absence of the above information and given the nebulous requirements described in the PWS, would the USG consider providing a plug number that all offerors should propose?
If answer to b. is no, will the USG consider excluding the ODC Travel from the total evaluated price?
| No, we cannot confirm that ODC Travel includes only origin, destination, number of people etc. No, we will not provide a notional schedule. The numbers provided in the chart are the Government's best estimate. Please see section 3.4.1 in Section L for updated language. | |||
| 36 | RFP Section L, 168, 3.5 Labor Hours | 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 3.3.1 indicates purpose and scope includes logistic support on all Unmanned Systems Group One through Four and Support Equipment (SE) to include assigned aircraft, aircraft on-site for project testing, transient aircraft, loaner aircraft, leased aircraft, aircraft systems, associated support equipment, and civilian aircraft tested at NAWCAD. Additionally, labor and services are required to perform supportability/safety studies on various aircraft and weapon systems and off-site safety/spill containment patrols and aircraft recovery services. ATT_11-Aircraft Inventory consists of 20 Group 1, 3 and 4 unmanned aircraft vehicles. | Can the USG provide estimated quantities, frequencies and durations of support for aircraft and equipment required under PWS 3.3.1, but not included on ATT_11_Aircraft Inventory? |
b. If no, in the absence of the above information and given the nebulous requirements described in the PWS, will the USG consider establishing the level of effort that all offerors should propose?
| The estimate provided is the Government's best estimate. An Industry Day was hosted and aircraft load information to assist in determining if a deviation from the estimate was required in conjunction with the PWS. | ||||
| 37 | RFP Section L, 168, 3.5 Labor Hours | Table indicates that all labor categories below are SCA. PWS paragraph 3.4.1 maps the Maintenance Manager, Senior to BLS SOC # 11-1021 General and Operations Manager; maps the Maintenance Controller to BLS SOC # 49-1011 First-Line Supervisors of Mechanics, Installers, and Repairers; maps the Aircraft Quality Assurance to BLS SOC # 53-6051 Transportation Inspectors; and maps the System Administrator, Junior to BLS SOC # 15-1142 Network and Computer Systems Administrator. Further, each of the descriptions of duties indicates these positions provide daily oversight of operations and/or provide supervision and evaluation of subordinate employees. | Can the USG confirm the Maintenance Manager, Senior, Maintenance Controller, Aircraft Quality Assurance, and System Administrator, Junior meet the criteria for bona fide exempt salaried positions and do not fall under the Service Contract Act? Can the Government clairfy what positions are exempt and non-exempt? | Yes, the positions have been updated in Section L and attachments. |
| 38 | SOW, 22, 3.2.5 OPSEC | SOW references requirement for OPSEC Plan. Attachment 20 is provided as required guidance and format for OPSEC Plan. No CDRL is noted. | Can the USG provide detail on when OPSEC Plan is required for contractor response? | 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. |
| 39 | RFP Section L, 159, 2.0 and 3.0 | States that “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. The Offeror will ensure that the Price/Cost Volume is provided on a separate CD-ROM.” However, table in section 3.0 seems to indicate that paper originals and copies are required. | Please clarify whether hard copies (and original) of each volume is required, and whether these are to be bound. | 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. |
| 40 | RFP Section L Part B, 163, 1.3 | The Government has allowed a total period of 120 days for transition and phase-in, and requires separate plans for each 60-day period. | As there is not an incumbent contractor in place, can offerors combine these separate plans into one and propose a shorter duration? | No, use the plan as stated in the solicitation. |
| 41 | RFP Section B, 168, 3.5 | Para 3.5, Labor Hours, and Att 23 indicate that all labor categories are covered by the Service Contract Act (SCA). | Will the Government please provide the current wage determination (WD) for Webster Outlying Field Annex, (WOLF) St. Inigoes? | Yes, please see the updated attachment. |
| 42 | RFP Section L, 116, 1.1 | 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. |
| 43 | RFP, 1, 9 | 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. |
| 44 | RFP, 14, 3.1.2.1 | There are no OCONUS shipboard or land-based operations mentioned. | Do maintainers ever detach with aircrew to OCONUS locations and operation sites? | If an OCONUS requirement for Maintenance 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 evolution. The scope of work would be consistent with what is requested in this contract just performed in an OCONUS location. |
| 45 | SOW & ATT 8 DD254, 19, 3.2 | 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. |
| 46 | Schedule B, 17, 47, 64, 79, Items 0049, 2049, 3049, 4049 | Supplemental Labor CLINs for base year and option years 2 through 4 reflect Estimated Cost only and do not include fill ins for Estimated Fee and Estimated Cost, Fixed Fee, Total Estimated Cost + Fee. | Can the USG confirm these labor lines should bear fee? | 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. |
| 47 | Schedule B 53-56 Items 3017-3024 | Material and Travel CLINs for option year 3 reflect Estimated Cost, Fixed Fee, Total Estimated Cost + Fee. | Can the USG confirm these ODC lines should not bear any fee? | There is no fee on ODC lines. 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. |
| 48 | Schedule B 60-62 Items 3037-3040 | Line items reflect Group Four UAV “Travel” for OY3 RDT&D, OM&N, APN, and OCO respectively. Believe these should be “Labor” for OY3 RDT&D, OM&N, APN, and OCO respectively based on CLIN structure from Base Year, and Option Years 1, 2, and 4. | Can the USG confirm CLINs 3037 through 3040 should be OY3 Labor? | Section B has been updated. |
| 49 | Schedule B 2-80 Items 0001-0051, 1001-1051, 2001-2051, 3001-3051, 4001-4051 | The Base and Option Years 1-4 contain 17 CLINs each for RDT&D, OM&N, APN, and OCO respectively which are farther broken down by Labor, Material, and Travel; however, there is nothing in the PWS that quantifies the requirements in a manner that one could logically develop pricing at this level of detail. | Can the USG provide a detailed level of effort, material and travel requirements at this level or confirm that equally leveling the project costs from the Cost Summary Format is acceptable? | 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. |
| 50 | Section L 165 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 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. |
| 51 | Section L 167 3.4.1 - ODCs | 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 labor has been removed from the labor hour chart on page 123. The Government will determine the cost for the six-month option period. |
| 52 | Section L 168 3.5 – Labor Hours | Information Table includes a column for 6 month LOE; 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. |
| 53 | Section L 168 3.6 | Incumbents | During the Industry Day in August, it was clear that an incumbent team of a prime and subcontractors provided current services for this effort. Is that not the case now since the referenced section paragraph in the RFP states “Not Applicable” for both an incumbent Prime and Subcontractors? | The original contract N00421-13-C-0027 is being split into two contracts. This solicitation is considered a brand new effort. |
| 54 | Section L 159 2.0 | “Each CD-ROM is to be labeled for content, the Offeror’s name, and includes “For Official Use Only” and “Source Selection Information”.” | Since there is a requirement to label the CD ROM with “For Official Use Only”, is there also a requirement to password encrypt? If so, please provide instructions for providing the password. | Encrypting is not necessary. |
| 55 | PBSOW 17 3.1.4.3 | Overtime | The referenced paragraph state: “Overtime is anticipated”. However, in the RFP and Section J Attachment 23, the estimated hours indicate a standard work year of 1920 hours. Can the Government provide an estimate of anticipated overtime? | Overtime is anticipated but very rare for this contract the possible overtime is encompassed in the work year hours of 1920. |
| 56 | RFP 2 Section B – Ceiling | The total ceiling values are identified in CLINs 0001, 1001, 2001, 3001, and 4001. Section B of each individual order will establish CLIN ceiling values for that order | Please clarify whether the Offeror is to complete the Section B CLIN structure by providing a cost/price for each CLIN 00xx through 40xx or just put the proposed total amounts in CLINs 0001, 1001, 2001, 3001, and 4001. | 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. |
| 57 | RFP 2 Section B | Unit for CPFF Labor CLINs | The Unit for the CPFF CLINs is “Lot”. Does this mean that the Offeror is to provide the total annual cost for labor as the Unit Price with “1” as the quantity? Shouldn’t the Unit be “Month” and Quantity be “12”? | 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 162, 166 1.2.a.1, 3.3.c | Section 1.2.a.1 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.