PPSC_064-080.pdf

SOLICITATION QUESTION/RESPONSE FORM

N61340-18-R-1199, Attachment 6

CONTRACTOR QUESTION

SUBJECT: Long lead items unable to deliver within 365 days of contract completion

SPECIFIC QUESTION: Discussion: It was briefed during the Pre-Solicitation Conference that all work must be completed within 365 days from the end of the contract. It is not uncommon for some of the platforms included in the CMMARS Contract to have parts and materials on order with lead times of 365 days or greater. Under a Cost Reimbursable material structure, these items are not invoiced until delivery has occurred.

Question: How will the Government address delivery and invoicing of parts and materials that extend beyond 365 days from the end of the contract?

REFERENCE: Pre-Solicitation Conference 1-on-1 Discussion

PAGE NUMBER: N/A PARAGRAPH: N/A

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

The Government does not intend to issue Task Orders where performance extends more than 365 days past the ordering period of the IDIQ vehicle.

As stated in clause 52.216-22 ‘INDEFINITE QUANTITY (OCT 1995),’ “the Contractor shall not be required to make any deliveries under this contract after 365 days following the end of the ordering period.”

FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY: CONTROL NUMBER: PPSC-064

PREPARED BY: DATE:

SUBJECT: Industry Exclusion

SPECIFIC QUESTION:

Based on the Contract Reference Requirements listed in PART B SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS 1.3.1; is it the Governments position to exclude Commercial Industry Experts from participation in this competition?

Based on the 1.3.1 Contract Reference Requirements is the Offeror to understand that:

1. For each contract that Offeror enters in T-2 and T-3 the Offeror must have performed as a US Government Prime Contractor on a US Government Contract.

a. Is the Offeror permitted to submit commercial contracts such as performing maintenance for Commercial Airlines for this Solicitation? Yes or No. If no, please explain why.

2. For each contract that Offeror enters in T-2 and T-3 the Offeror must have an Annualized dollar value of aircraft maintenance work executed greater than or equal to $10M.

a. Is the Offeror permitted to cumulatively satisfy the requirement of 1.3.1(d) by demonstrating concurrent and sustained aircraft maintenance across multiple contracts within an annualized period equaling or exceeding $10M? Yes or No. If no, please explain why.

1.3.1 Contract Reference Requirements

The Offeror shall demonstrate (using authoritative documentation regarding contract performance) that contract reference(s) identified in Table T-2 (Contract Summary) and submitted for evaluation in Table T-3 (Contracts for Aircraft Maintenance Experience) meet all of the requirements identified below:

a. Performed as the prime on a US Government contract;

b. Contract reference at the same physical location and the same CAGE code/DUNS as the entities identified in Table T-1

(Offeror Summary) unless the Offeror provides an acceptable explanation based on the considerations in Volume 1 (Technical), Section 1.2.2. If the contract reference is for the prime identified in Table T-1 (Offeror Summary), the contract reference shall additionally be at the same physical location and shall have the same CAGE code identified in Block 15A on Standard Form (SF) 33, Solicitation, Offer, and Award;

c. Performance within five years of the solicitation release date; and

d. Annualized dollar value of aircraft maintenance (as defined in Section J Attachment 1 (CMMARS PWS)) work executed greater than or equal to $10M (do not include parts/ material). In Annex A the Offeror shall provide a signed letter certifying the dollar value of aircraft maintenance work (e.g., charged to aircraft maintenance CLINs) invoiced for each year of performance on each contract reference.

REFERENCE: Solicitation N6134018R1199

PAGE NUMBER: 78 PARAGRAPH: 1.3.1

1) No, the evaluation criteria reflect the CMMARS requirements. The commercial contracts for commercial aircraft utilize different procedures than US Military government procedures for commercial derivative aircraft. In addition, the MAC provides for support of specific military-use only aircraft. CMMARS includes the Navy’s largest and most complex Platform-Level CLS requirements. The Government requires MAC holders who have the requisite level of experience and technical capability to perform as a prime contractor for commercial aircraft that have been modified for military use as well as military aircraft. Please see the solicitation for final requirements.

2) No, the government does not intend to allow more than one contract reference to cumulatively satisfy the requirement of 1.3.1.d. Please see the solicitation for final requirements.

FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY: CONTROL NUMBER: PPSC-071

PREPARED BY: DATE:

SUBJECT: CMMARS/ Management Experience Requirement

SPECIFIC QUESTION:

1. What are the specific evaluation criteria that you will be using to differentiate a submitted past performance contract being deemed to be an “augmentation” type contract versus a “full services” type contract?

2. Will the Government consider AES’s FRC, SW contract as fulfilling the Management Experience Requirement in

Section L, paragraph 1.3.3. (See information below). If not, see question 1.

Management Experience Requirement “The Offeror shall demonstrate (using authoritative documentation regarding contract performance) that contract reference(s) identified in Table T-2 (Contract Summary) and submitted for evaluation in Table T-3 (Contracts for Aircraft Maintenance Experience) requires the Offeror to perform and manage maintenance for the aircraft to be Safe for Flight/Ready for Issue and to meet scheduled availability. The contract reference must place management responsibility for meeting the maintenance requirements on the Offeror. For example, the contract reference must require the Offeror to manage and be responsible for planning (how the Offeror meets contract requirements), controlling (implementation of standards to meet contract requirements), and organizing and staffing qualified personnel to meet contract requirements.

Examples outside of this definition are contract references requiring manpower without the responsibility of managing maintenance for the aircraft to be Safe for Flight/Ready for Issue to meet schedule availability (e.g., some TOs under the Air Force CFT).”

AES/FRC SW Contract Information:

AES is a graduated 8(a) and an Accredited Small Business in several NAICS Codes: 336411, 336412, 336413, 541712, and 541715.

Fleet Readiness Center, Southwest : AES, Inc. Prime:

* Contract #: N68936-10-C-0062

* Contract Value: $289M over 6 years and 9 months.

* Type of Work:

o AES provided depot level maintenance, modification and repair services, business program support, and technical support services to assigned U.S. Navy aircraft and peripheral systems.

* Physical location of effort:

As Prime contractor, AES oversaw or directly managed the staffing at nine different locations: North Island, San Diego, CA; NAS Whidbey, WA; NAWC-WD, Pt. Mugu, CA; MCAS, Miramar, CA; MCAS Yuma, AZ; MCB, Camp Pendleton, CA; MCAS, Kaneohe, HI; NAS Lemoore, CA; Nellis AFB, NV. These locations have fluctuated over the course of the contract.

* Scope of effort:

o AES was the Prime Contractor and as such was responsible for performing depot level maintenance on essentially all of the following aircraft: AV-8, C-130, C-2, E-2, EA-6B, F/A-18, H-1, H-53, H-60, P-3, F-35 and V-22. AES has established and approved GOPs for the handling of all aircraft. AES is also familiar and in full compliance with Work Task Guidance, Determination, and Service Guidance methods specific to FRCSW. AES recognizes and requires strict adherence of its employees to the Tool Control Program as implemented at FRCSW.

o As Prime Contractor, AES was intimately familiar with the entire FRCSW Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul process from Induction to Final Paint. AES directly employs Artisans who perform at every stage of the process.

o As Prime Contractor, AES has managed in excess of 500 employees either as AES employees or through our two Subcontractors. AES provides an efficient management structure including a Program Manager and multiple Supervisors and Work Leads to ensure the oversite and communication critical to a high performing team. AES also employs a dedicated Environmental Health and Safety Officer to oversee our Medical Surveillance Program and ensure industrial hygiene compliance. AES also performed ready for flight inspections and presented the results to the FRC.

REFERENCE: CMMARS Draft Solicitation, Section L, Para 1.3.3.

PAGE NUMBER: 79 PARAGRAPH: 1.3.3

1. What are the specific evaluation criteria that you will be using to differentiate a submitted past performance contract being deemed to be an “augmentation” type contract versus a “full services” type contract?

The following information is general in nature and does not address the specific contract reference in the question.

Section M, 1.3.3 states, “For example, the contract reference must require the Offeror to manage and be responsible for planning (how the Offeror meets contract requirements), controlling (implementation of standards to meet contract requirements), and organizing and staffing qualified personnel to meet contract requirements.”

The Government will review the Contract Reference to ensure the contractor is responsible for planning, controlling, organizing, and staffing key maintenance programs and processes required by the maintenance program (e.g. NAMP) such as Maintenance Control, Quality Assurance, Safe for Flight/Ready for Issue to meet contract performance such as availability. Artifacts such as the monthly maintenance plan or other contract documents must list/require the contractor or contractor personnel as the Program Manager for maintenance programs required by the contract.

CMMARS is for platform-level CLS so the scope of the maintenance programs should be for entire platform(s).

As a point of clarification, the CMMARS draft solicitation contains a Technical volume and does not contain a Past Performance volume.

Please see the final solicitation for any subsequent revisions.

2. Will the Government consider AES’s FRC, SW contract as fulfilling the Management Experience Requirement in

Section L, paragraph 1.3.3. (See information below). If not, see question 1.

The Government will not evaluate offeror’s potential proposal response in advance of the solicitations release.

FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY: CONTROL NUMBER: PPSC-072

PREPARED BY: DATE:

SUBJECT: RFP L.PART A.3. Proposal information must be structured such that its paragraph numbers/letters correspond to the proposal instructions paragraph numbers/letters, although the Offeror may add lower tier sub paragraphs.:

SPECIFIC QUESTION: L.PART B.1.3.1.d.

In Annex A the Offeror shall provide a signed letter certifying the dollar value of aircraft maintenance work (e.g., charged to aircraft maintenance CLINs) invoiced for each year of performance on each contract reference.

Question: To place this requirement into Annex A for each contract cited and to use the same Paragraph Number as the solicitation (1.3.1.d) will not correspond with the other Paragraph numbers for each of the sub-paragraphs below each contract.

Will the Government please clarify if the Offeror is to use the solicitation paragraph number no matter if the paragraphs numbers will not be in sequence?

REFERENCE: DFRP

PAGE NUMBER: 78 of 84 PARAGRAPH:1.3.1.d.

Please see the solicitation.

The Government intends to revise element 1.3.1.d to remove the ambiguity.

Please see the final solicitation for revisions.

FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY: CONTROL NUMBER: PPSC-075

PREPARED BY: DATE:

SUBJECT: Table G-3, Annex B and L.PART B.1.3.5, Small Business Utilization

SPECIFIC QUESTION: Table G-3 titles Annex B as the Small Business (SB) Individual Subcontracting Plan (ISP) and Volume 2 – Contract Administration L.PART B.2.1.c requires the Offeror to place the SB ISP as part of Annex B.

However for L.PART B.1.3.5 Small Business Utilization, the solicitation does not state where this requirement should be placed.

Question: Will the Government please clarify if the Offerors are to place this requirement into Annex B as well?

PAGE NUMBER: 72 of 84 PARAGRAPH: 3 and 1.3.5.

Please submit all Small Business information in Annex B (Small Business).

Please see the final solicitation for any subsequent revisions.

FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY: CONTROL NUMBER: PPSC-076

PREPARED BY: DATE:

SUBJECT: RFP L.PART A.3. Proposal information must be structured such that its paragraph numbers/letters correspond to the proposal instructions paragraph numbers/letters, although the Offeror may add lower tier sub paragraphs.

L.PART B.1.3.5, Small Business Utilization

SPECIFIC QUESTION: If Offerors are required to place Small Business Utilization into Annex B, the structuring of the paragraph numbers will not correspond with each other (i.e., SB ISP starts at L.PART B.2.1.c and Small Business Utilization starts at L.PART B.1.3.5).

Will the Government please clarify if this is the Government intention?

PAGE NUMBER: 79 of 84 PARAGRAPH: 1.3.5.

Yes. The Government understands that the numbering within Annex B will not be sequential as it is tied to the two different Small Business requirements (e.g., Volume 1, 1.3.5 and Volume 2, 2.3).

FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY: CONTROL NUMBER: PPSC-077

PREPARED BY: DATE:

SUBJECT: Table G-2 – CMMARS Offeror Electronic File Naming Convention

SPECIFIC QUESTION: Volume 1, Technical has a naming convention of Vol 1 Tech#.docx and each of the Tables, Volume 2 - Contract Administration, and Annexes A and B have their own naming conventions.

Question: Will the Government please clarify as to what the Offeror is to provide for the naming convention Vol 1 Tech#.docx?

PAGE NUMBER: 71 of 84 PARAGRAPH: 2.1.7, Table G-2

Please use “Vol 1 Tech” in the name of the files. The # can be used for numbering (e.g., 1, 2, 3) in case there is more than one file submitted for the Technical Volume.

FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY: CONTROL NUMBER: PPSC-078

PREPARED BY: DATE:

SUBJECT: CMMARS DRFP

SPECIFIC QUESTION:

Table G-3 requires both paper and electronic copies of Annex A.

RFP page 76, second paragraph requires only electronic copies for Annex A.

The length of the SOW/PWS and associated documentation will result in a large number of printed pages. For example, we have a single Monthly Maintenance Plan that consists of over 900 pages just by itself.

Please clarify the requirement for Annex A. Are offerors required to provide documents in electronic format only or electronic and paper

REFERENCE: RFP

PAGE NUMBER: 72 Table G-3

PAGE NUMBER: 76 PARAGRAPH: 2

The Government requests a paper copy for the contracts file. There is not a suggested page count for the electronic copy of Annex A. However, for the printed copy of Annex A, please provide only the portions of the documents needed to demonstrate the contract reference meets the requirements identified.

Please see the final solicitation for any subsequent revisions.

FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY: CONTROL NUMBER: PPSC-079

PREPARED BY: DATE:

SUBJECT: CMMARS DRFP

SPECIFIC QUESTION:

The RFP states “In Annex A, the Offeror shall provide an electronic copy of the complete final versions of the SOW/PWS and supporting contract documentation, signed plans (e.g., Monthly Maintenance Plans), signed documents (e.g., designation, assignment, certification, or appointment), and/or letters delivered to and signed or accepted by the Government that clearly show that the contract reference meets all of the requirements identified in 1.3 (Evaluation Elements). A requirement not specifically identified in the SOW/PWS or otherwise demonstrated through documents as discussed here will not be considered.”

Please clarify the following:

1. The paragraph requires a list of contract items shall provide:

a. Final versions of the SOW/PWS

b. Supporting contract documentation

i. Please provide specific contract document examples that the Govt sees as offering conclusive proof of contractor responsibilities.

c. Signed plans

i. MMPs are not normally signed by the Government. MMPs are prepared for and delivered to the Government. Please verify the requirement for a MMP signed by the Government.

ii. Does submission of the most recent Monthly Maintenance Plan meet the requirement or are other documents required in addition to the MMP? If documentation is required in addition to the MMP, please give specific examples of what is required.

d. Signed documents (e.g., designation, assignment, certification, or appointment)

i. Since designations, assignments, certifications and appointments are all part of the MMP, does providing the most current MMP suffice for meeting this requirement? If not, please provide additional clarification on the specific documents required that will be deemed sufficient.

e. And/Or letters delivered to and signed by or accepted by the Government that clearly show that the contract reference meets all of the requirements.

i. Please clarify if a signed Government letter by itself meets all the requirements listed in this paragraph from 1a through 1.d or if a signed Government letter only replaces the requirement for “Signed Documents.”

REFERENCE: RFP

PAGE NUMBER: 76 PARAGRAPH: 2

a. The Government is requesting the final versions of the SOW/PWS (contract reference) that contain proof the Offeror meets the CLS managerial responsibilities and requirements of Quality Control/Assurance and Maintenance Control to include aircraft release Safe for Flight/Ready For Issue.

b. The Government is requesting the final versions of the SOW/PWS (contract reference) that contains conclusive proof of contractor responsibilities and requirement of Quality Control/Assurance and Maintenance Control to include aircraft release Safe for Flight/Ready For Issue. Whenever, the SOW/PWS (contract reference) does not clearly prove that the Offeror meets the CLS managerial responsibilities and requirements of Quality Control/Assurance and Maintenance Control to include aircraft release Safe for Flight/Ready For Issue, the Government requests the Offeror provide supporting contract documentation as needed to provide proof in lieu of or in addition to a SOW/PWS. Examples of specific supporting contract documentation may include a monthly maintenance plan (MMP) that clearly shows the contract reference meets the CLS managerial responsibilities requirements of Quality Control/Assurance and Maintenance Control to include aircraft release Safe for Flight/Ready For Issue.

c. When applicable submit MMPs or equivalent documents signed by the Government. If MMPs are not required to be signed, the Offeror shall submit documents the Government verified, reviewed or approved.

Submission of a recent MMP or an equivalent document may meet requirements identified in 1.3 (Evaluation Elements).

However, the Government does not require submission of a MMP when an Offeror provides a SOW/PWS (contract reference) that meets the CLS managerial responsibilities and requirements.

If a MMP or equivalent document is not available or does not contain clear proof of the Offeror’s managerial responsibilities and requirements of Quality Control/Assurance and Maintenance Control to include aircraft release Safe for Flight/Ready For Issue, the Government requests the Offeror provide any letters of designations, assignments, certifications and appointments as conclusive proof of managerial responsibilities.

d. Submission of a recent MMP or an equivalent document may meet requirement identified in 1.3 (Evaluation Elements).

The Government simply requires one conclusive contract reference that proves the Offeror meets managerial responsibilities and requirements of Quality Control/Assurance and Maintenance Control to include aircraft release Safe for Flight/Ready For Issue. Contract references may include SOW/PWS, MMP, or any other documents that proves that the Offeror deems as conclusive proof that it meets the CLS managerial responsibilities and requirements.

e. A letter signed by the Government that clearly proves the Offeror meets CLS managerial responsibilities and requirements of Quality Control/Assurance and Maintenance Control to include aircraft release Safe for Flight/Ready For Issue may be sufficient proof as it applies to the subject requirement in question (1.a through 1.b above). Other contract references may include SOW/PWS, MMP, or any other documents that proves that the Offeror meets the CLS managerial responsibilities and requirements.

FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY: CONTROL NUMBER: PPSC-080

PREPARED BY: DATE: