Solicitation_W56HZV-15-R-0139_Additional_Industry_Questions_(22_Sep_16).pdf

REF # Section of RFP Responses

1 PWS 3.2.1.2 The Government will not revise Section C.3.2.1.2.

2 Glossary This is a performance based effort and the contractor shall propose the personnel it deems necessary to support meeting IOC. IOC is initial stand up of 50% planned personnel, IAW CDRL A021, and equipment, to support maintenance and supply chain management training and mentoring and CLS at all locations in Attachment 0002 and IAW Sections C.

3 Glossary No, the Government will not eliminate the IOC requirement. The incumbent contractors will comply with FAR Clause 52.237‐3 Continuity of Services. Additionally, in accordance with Section C.2.6, the NMS contractor will coordinate with the Government and the incumbent contractor on the transition of work. Contractor shall fully perform work by FOC.

4 PWS 2.6 Phase-In

The requirement of IOC is stated in C.2.6 and further defined in the Glossary. Since the requirement of IOC is in C.2.6, any definition of IOC is thus a requirement of C.2.6. As such, PWS addresses the tasks to be performed while the glossary defines what that term means in full.

The purpose of the priority list is to assist the contractor in which sites may require more work than others and thus, would require attention prior to other sites. In addition, it provides a mechanism for the Government to communicate which sites it may prefer to be up and running first.

5 Amendment 2, L.4.5.6.2, This is not a typo. The correct citation is AFARS 5152.225‐5900.

6 Attachment 2. Industry Questions 31 August

Amendment 0004 updated Attachment 0002 to remove CLS at the RLSCs.

7 Attachment 2 The PWS and Attachment 0002 state the requirements of the contract. As this is a performance based effort it is up to the contractor to determine the details of the training to be provided to the ANDSF.

8 Attachment 2 The EMS sites for the MOI are currently in existence and are being utilized by the current contractor.

9 Attachment 2 Minimum training requirements include performance at the RLSC for MOD and RMC for MOI. Amendment 0004 updated Attachment 0002 to reflect these changes.

10 Attachment 2 Amendment 0005 will update Attachment 0002 to reflect the additional training requirements at NLC Wardak.

Discussion: RLSC ‐ EMS.

Question: Attachment 2 released 30 August shows no CLS at RMC or RLSC. The answer to question 30, Industry Day Questions 31 August says “Attachment 0002 will be updated to include RLSCs. The ANA conducts its maintenance efforts at RLSCs. The contractor does perform CLS at these locations. This change will be incorporated in Amendment 0002.” Will the Contractor be required to conduct CLS at the RMC and RLSC or is Attachment 2 correct and CLS will not be conducted at these sites

Discussion: AFARS 5152.225‐5900 Question: Please advise if this was a typo and should be “DFARS 5152.225‐5900?

NMS SOLICITATION W56HZV‐15‐R‐0139 Industry Questions & Answers (22SEP16) Questions

Discussion: PWS states that the contractor shall provide all parts for the Contact Teams. This seems inefficient and costly requiring the contractor to stock inventory for a broad range of equipment, when there should be adequate supply of parts within the ANDSF/NMS system.

Question: Will the USG consider revising the PWS to allow the contractor to draw the required parts from the ANDSF system as is provided for all other work orders.

Discusson: IOC requirement is to stand‐up 50% planned personnel and equipment to support maintenance and supply chain management training and mentoring and CLS at all locations in Attachment 2.

Question: For a new contractor, the CMF has to be facilitized and security placed on site. Using APPF security, the process to contract and provide MOI certified APPF static Security Guards will take between 75 – 90 days to be completed. This includes equipment and leadership. Will the government reconsider adjusting its 60 day IOC timeline to enable the new contractor to meet GOIRA‐MOI requirements to contract and field APPF Static Security Guards?

Discussion: The glossary defines IOC and FOC as 60 and 120 day milestones. It further states that at IOC, the contractor is to have 50% of its staff and equipment in place to “support maintenance and supply chain management training and mentoring and CLS at all locations.” This is particularly crucial since the only thing that is priced in Phase In is labor, with the IOC and FOC being a part of Phase In, it is impossible for the contractor to estimate, and the USG evaluate, the proposed FFP costs that are in Phase In versus when training and mentoring and CLS begins under the cost reimbursement CLINs.

Question: Given that there are incumbent contractors who will continue to operate their current contract at these locations under their FFP contracts, how is the incoming contractor going to be able to occupy the same space and presumably perform work. For example;

who controls parts inventory, how will tools and bay space be shared, who would control work order assignment, how will OR rates be monitored, etc.? Given the impracticality of this type of Phase In, will the USG consider revising these terms by eliminating the IOC requirement and stating that at FOC the contractor will assume all contract responsibilities at that time?

Discussion: The reference does not prescribe anything about beginning to “support maintenance, …” as noted in the Glossary for IOC during Phase In. It further states that the Government will inform the contractor of the priority for standing up each of the regional locations.

Question: It appears that the Glossary is adding requirements to the PWS Phase‐In responsibilities. Is this the Government’s intent? If all sites are to be operational and fully stood up at 120 days, what is the purpose of the priority listing??

Discussion: RLSC ‐ RMC Question: Along with performing maintenance RLSCs and RMCs are the warehouse facilities for the Regions. Should Warehouse Supply Chain management and Warehouse Supply Training be conducted at these sites?

Discussion: EMS Question: This is the first mention of EMS for the MOI. Do these sites currently exist and are they being operated by the incumbent contractor

Discussion: EMS ‐ RLSC ‐ RMC Question: With addition of EMS for the MOI and RLSC for the MOD, there is now more of a distinct three level maintenance system and a clear separation between Training and CLS that matches the solicitation. Is it the government’s intention that Training be conducted at both the MOD EMS and RLSC, but only at the MOI RMC and not the MOI EMS?

Discussion: Paragraph AC, Page 12. Update Section C.3.5.1 Question: The last line of the updated paragraph reads “Upon completion of the NMS contract, the CMF workload will be proportionally split and transition to the National Logistics Center (NLC) in Wardak and MOI Reginal Logistics Support Center in Kabul.”

Attachment 2 indicates no maintenance training being conducted at NLC Wardak. Where will the trained personnel come from to assume operations upon transition and prior to that maturation of the repair capabilities of the MOI?

11 Attachment 11 Amendment 0003 corrected Attachment 0011.

12 Attachment 2 Amendment 0005 will update Attachment 0002 to reflect the additional training requirements at NLC Wardak.

13 Attachment 2 and 19 The contractor will have control access and keys for all buildings listed in Attachment 0019, with the exception of the CSD and Central Workshop.

14 3.2 Contractor Logistic Support Attachment 2.

A ANDSF representative from the RLSC or RMC will be made available to conduct the joint inspections with the contractor.

15 Questions At this time, extensions have been provided that require proposal submission by 1PM EST on 04 October, 2016. Please monitor FBO should any further extensions be issued. Additionally, a special notice has been issued to inform industry the Government will no longer answer questions regarding Solicitation W56HZV‐15‐R‐0139.

Attachment 2, Amendment 2 Question 58.

The reference to Section C.3.2.3.2 under CLIN 0002 (CWS) is correct . Reference the second sentence in paragraph C.3.2.3.2 that states "In addition, the contractor shall provide Class IX parts for ANDSF maintenance." Class IX parts may be required at the CWS.

This requires the contractor to provide the parts it deems necessary to support ANDSF maintenance during the first two years of contract performance.

Reference: Answer to question 58 states there is no CLS at the CWS, however revised Attachment 2 indicates Contractor managed Parts responsibility at the CWS.

Question: Is the reference to CMP a mistake or was CLS overlooked at CWS? With the volume of work orders required to maintain 50% contractor completion some control over the National Maintenance site would seem sensible.

Discussion: Amendment Two adjusted CLIN’s 11 and 12, but those adjustments are not reflected in Attachment 11.

Question: Will a revised Attachment 11 be issued that reflects the CLIN changes in Amendment Two?

Discussion: Amendment Two added CLIN 11 AB – CLS for NLC Wardak. Attachment 2 does not list any maintenance training requirements at NLC Wardak, only Warehouse training.

Question: Is it the USG’s expectation that the contractor provides CLS maintenance without any corresponding maintenance training at the NLC?

Discussion: Joint Inspections and Induction of Equipment Question: The contractor is responsible for Facility Management at NLC Wardak. This indicates that the contractor will control access and have the keys. Will this be for both buildings listed in attachment 19 or only one of them?

Discussion: Joint Inspections and Induction of Equipment

3.2 states “The contractor shall conduct joint inspections with the ANDSF for inductions of equipment (vehicles and ground equipment) into the ANDSF manual and electronic maintenance systems. The contractor shall determine, in collaboration with ANDSF, which equipment will be repaired by the contractor and which will be repaired by the ANDSF. The contractor and the ANDSF shall determine the appropriate maintenance level (regional or national) IAW Attachment 0017. In the event of a disagreement as to distribution of work orders, the COR will provide resolution.” With the addition of the RLSC and MOI EMS there seems to be no site with Dedicated CLS that would have ANDSF personnel assigned.

Question: Based on the Amendment 2 addition of MOD RLSC, and MOI EMS sites, what ANDSF representation will be available for conduct of joint inspections?

Discussion Questions unanswered Question: In light of the number of questions not answered in the first round, plus these questions, will the government please issue a notice of extension as soon as possible? Many of the questions asked are key to proposal submission and incorporating the government answers into the proposal will require a significant amount of time to ensure compliance.