Attachment_0039_-_Industry_Questions_and_Answers_(East).pdf

W58RGZ-16-R-0006

Attachment 0039 - Industry Questions and Answers - East

RFP Area PWS Page Reference

PWS

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference

Discussion Answer

Attachments 0004 and 0024

17 3.1.1 Attachments 0004 and

Attachment 0004, 2.4 Primary Sites, 2.4.1 Huntsville, AL (Program Management) and Attachment 0024, 2.1.1, "The AFMD Regional Program Management postion shall be located in Huntsville, AL…". There are no mission capabilities defined in Attach 0024 for Huntsville.

Will the Government please clarify that the sole Mission of Huntsville, AL is Program Management and there are no other mission requirements comparable to those listed for the other primary sites in the AOR?

The Offeror can locate key personnel wherever they need to provide the best performance on this contract. The Government will have a Regional Manager (Regional COR) located at Ft. Campbell. AFM Headquarters (Program Office) and the Government Contracting Officer (KO) will be located in Huntsville Alabama.

Attachment

17 3.1.1 Attachment 0024 PWS 3.1.1 states in part "Regional PM Headquarters shall be located in the same regional area as the Government Regional COR to facilitate daily business with Regional personnel. The location of the Government Regional COR shall be identified in Attachment 0024 Capabilities and Missions by Location" There is no location identified for a Government Regional COR in Attachment 0024.

Will the Government please identify the location of the Government Regional COR?

See answer to 1.

Attachments 0004 and 0024

50 3.2.3.3 Attachments 0004 and

Attachment 0024, 2.4, Combat Aviation Brigade (CAB/Unit Support) lists

2.4.5 Katterbach Kaserne, Germany. Attachment 0004 has no listing for Katterbach Kaerne, Germany

Will the Government please clarify the status of Katterbach Kaserne, Germany? Is it an AOR site for AFM East and if so, is it a primary, secondary or satellite site?

See updated Attachements 0004 and 0024.

Attachment

33 3.2.1.2 Attachment 0024 PWS 3.2.1.2 states "The Contractor shall provide Site Supervision Personnel for each site as defined in this Contract IAW Contract Attachment 0024 Capabilities and Missions by Location or added via Contract modification." Attachment 0024, 5.2 Site Supervision, 5.2.1 These skill sets shall be located at each of the locations identified in paragraph 2.2." Paragraph 2.2 identifies only Fort Campbell, KY and Fort Bragg, NC.

Is it the Government's intent that the Contractor shall provide Site Supervision Personnel at only Fort Campbell, Ky and Fort Bragg, NC? If not, will the Government please clarify the sites at which the contractor shall provide Site Supervision Personnel.

The Offeror describes their Organizational Approach in their Comprehensive Management Plan per Attachment 0027, see page 6. At a minimum site supervision personnel shall be as per Attachment 0001 paragraph 3.2.1.2 and Attachment 0024 paragraph 5.2.

Attachment 0028, 2.7.1

Attachment 0028, 2.7.1 Attachment 0028, Paragraph 2.7.1 states " The Contractor shall have SPOT LOA/LOI, see paragraph 0, to obtain a CONUS Replacement Center (CRC) reservation.

Will the Government please identify which paragraph is "0"? Should be paragraph 2.4 SPOT. See next revision of Attachment 0028.

Attachments 0004 and 0024

35 3.2.1.9 Attachments 0004 and

Attachment 0024, 5.3.7 identifies Hohenfels, Germany and 5.3.8 identifies Soto Cano, Honduras as locations requiring support for Maintenance Test Flight Operations. Attachment 0004 does not identify either location as an AFM East AOR site.

Will the Government please clarify that Hohenfels, Germany and Soto Cano, Honduras require only MTP and crew/non-crew member support.

Maintenance will be not be provided by this AFM East contractor?

See Attachment 0004 paragraphs 2.6.2 and 2.7.5.

Attachments 0004 and 0024

Attachments 0004 and

Attachment 004 lists Kuwait (2.5.5) as a Southwest Asia support site.

Stuttgart, Germany; Stuttgart Army Airfield (Illesheim) (2.7.4) and Wiesbaden, Germany; Wiesbaden Army Airfield (Illesheim) (2.7.5) as satellite sites in the AFM East AOR. Attachment 0024, Capabilities and Missions by Locations does not list them.

Will the Government please clarify the capabilities and missions of Kuwait, Stuttgart and Wiesbaden?

See upated Attachments 0004 and 0024.

Attachment

55 3.2.4.9.1 Attachment 0024 PWS 3.2.4.9.1 states "The Contractor shall operate an ALSE maintenance shops to include ALSE shop leadership and ALSE technicians, see Contract Attachment 0024 Capabilities or Missions by Location. Attachment 0024

5.8.1 states "These skill sets shall be located at each of the locations identified in Paragraph 2.2." Paragraph 2 identifies only Fort Campbell, KY and Fort Bragg, NC. The table in 4. Back Shop Support by Location also identifies Germany and SWA.

Is it the Government's intent that only Fort Campbell, KY and Fort Bragg, NC shall have Contractor ALSE back shop support? If Germany and SWA are to be included, should that capability be supplied for each individual site in those areas of responsibility? Is the table merely notional and the contractor should plan for ALSE Shops in the other locations listed?

ALSE capabilities should be identified at Ft. Bragg and Ft. Campbell in paragraph 4 of Attachment 0024. See the next updated Attachment 0024.

RFP

Attachments

RFP Attachments There was no Attachment 11 embedded in the RFP posting. Will the Government provide Attachment 11 ? No.

Attachment

pg. 9, AFM East Scenario #2: OCONUS US Forces Contingency Operations Support

The Scenario states that the contractor will be responsible for phase maintenance, the deployed forces will be responsible for all other scheduled and unscheduled maintenance and non-contractor field teams will support any on-site depot work. There is no discussion of the division of labor for supply operations (including tool room functions), back shop support or flight operations support (including MTPs).

Will the Government define the Contractor's responsibilities, if any, for supply operations, tool room support, back shop support and maintenance test flight operations?

No. The Government will not provide any more information other than what is given in the scenario. Per Attachment 0027 instructions, “The Offeror’s scenario responses will be evaluated on their overall interpretation of the PWS requirements and the approach to accomplish each scenario’s effort, identification of appropriate resources, and application of processes and resources to provide timely and cost effective solutions to the presented problems.”

RFP Area PWS Page Reference

PWS

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference

Discussion Answer

1.3 Scope 6 1.3 Scope PWS 1.3 lists AIMS in the scope of work for this contract. It is not identified anywhere else in the PWS nor is it in Attachment 0024.

Is AIMS still a mission for AFM East that the contractor should plan to support?

Yes, AIMS is still in the scope for this PWS.

Attachment

Para 2.9, 2.9.1 Attachment 2.9.1 states "The Contractor shall have a SSS assigned to SWA activities to support SSS requirements in the PWS. There is no clarification whether the Government requires an SSS at each SWA location or an SSS position that will be responsible for supporting SSS requirements in the PWS for all SWA locations.

Will the Government clarify whether an SSS is required at each SWA location or a single position assigned to support SWA activites at the SWA locations?

Refer to PWS paragraph 4.2.2. Site Safety Specialist (SSS). See next revision of Attachment 0024.

Attachment 0024 and 0028

Att 24 Para

5.12 and

5.12.1 and Att 28, 2.7.2

Attachment 0024, 5.12 and 5.12.1 and Attachment 0028, 2.7.2

Attachment 0028, 2.3.1 states "The contractor shall provide a Program Management cell for theater operations as defined in Contract Attachment 0024 Capabilities or Missions by location." Attachment 0028, 5.12 states "Contractor's Theater Supervision (PWS paragraph 4.11.5.2). Attachment

5.12.1 states "Contractor's Theater Supervision shall be collocated with the Government Regional Management cell currently located at Bagram Airfield near Kabul, Afghanistan." There is no PWS paragraph 4.11.5.2.

Will the Government please clarify the correct PWS referenced paragraph in Attachment 0024, 5.12? Will the Government define in more detail what positions are required in the "Program Management cell discussed in Attachments 0024, 5.12 and 0028, 2.3.1?

The PWS paragraph reference in Attachment 0024 paragraph 5.12 should be PWS

3.1.1.10 and 4.9. See updated Attachment 0024 for these changes. Also see Attachment 0027 page 6 Comprehensive Management Plan: 1) Organizational Approach (Program Management). The Offeror provides their approach to Program Management and Theater Supervision in their CMP.

Attachments 0004, 0024 and 0028

Attachments 0004, 0024 and 0028

Attachment 0004, 2.5 states "AFM-East support for Southwest Asia and supporting operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kuwait. 2.5.1-2.5.7 lists each individual site. None of these sites are listed in Attachment 0024 or 0028.

Will the Government clarify the capabilities and missions at each of these SWA sites?

No.

Attachment

Attachment 0004 Attachment 0004, 3.2 identifies Secondary Sites as LRC-A with Gvernment staff and denoted by black stars.

Will the Government verify that, all Afghanistan and Iraq sites listed in Attachment 0004 2.5 are considered secondary sites?

The information in Attachment 0004 is correct.

Attachment

Attachment 0004 Attachment 0004, 3.1 identifies Primary Sites as LRC-A with Supervisor and denoted by green stars.

Will the Government verify that Kuwait is considered a primary site? The information in Attachment 0004 is correct.

Section L "Atch 0027, L-24.3)d)iv) (3)(C)1) Page 24 of 36" and "Atch 0010 - AFM East T&M Labor Rate Tables T&M OCONUS tabs"

The referenced paragraph states, "For proposal purposes, the Offeror shall assume that the OCONUS effort will occur in Honduras and Egypt when proposing in the OCONUS T&M Labor Rate Table and OCONUS OT T&M Labor Rate Table."

For proposal purposes, is the offeror to assume that OCONUS work in CLIN 1X20 is to be 50% Egypt and 50% Honduras? If not will the Government please provide percentages for contract performance by location for CLIN

1X20 OCONUS?

See revised Section L. **Offerors should note that the breakout of work by location is only an estimate as the locations of contract performance are unknown at this time.

For this reason, any employee compensation or employee costs related to the assignment of employees to overseas areas will be captured in the Cost (no fee) CLINs.

Attachment 0010 and 0040

"Atch 0010 - AFM East T&M Labor Rate Tables Stewart (HAAF) tabs" and "Atch 0040 - Wage Determination 99- 0316 & CBAs (East) CBA Hunter AAF"

It seems the offerors are being instructed to use the Hunter CBA to price the Stewart employees.

Can the Government please confirm that the Hunter CBA is to be used for the Ft Stewart site?

The airfield that supports Ft. Stewart is Hunter Army Airfield. These two names are used interchangeably.

RFP Area PWS Page Reference

PWS

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference

Discussion Answer

Section L "Atch 0027, L-24.3)d)iv) (3)(a)1) and Table 2" "Atch 0044 - Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Guidelines (East) 1. Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Requirements

The referenced paragraph states that FFP CLIN 1X00 is to be inclusive of all costs necessary for the overarching regional management of the applicable region. The paragraph also says that the offeror shall utlize Table 2 when costing FFP CLIN 1X00. In order to provide overarching regional management, many other job functions are required other than what is listed. In order to comply with current and approved accounting disclosure statements, many companies are required to charge direct for the job functions other than those listed in Table 2. In order to stay compliant with approved dislosure statements, many companies are not allowed to include the cost for the job functions necessary for the overarching regional management as a component of overhead or any other burden.

Will the Government allow offerors to add labor categories and hours to Table 2 in order to account for the direct labor charges required for overarching regional management required to perform tasks outlined in the PWS and directed to be part of the FFP in Attachment 0044? If not, how can the companies recover the costs for this labor without violating their disclosure statement?

No.

Attachment

Atch 0024 Atch 0024, Paragraph 5.1.1, states, in regard to STAMIS Field Support, "These skill sets shall be located at each of the locations identified in paragraph 2.2. Exceptions shall be provided by the Contractor to the COR for approval." Section 2.2 identifies only Ft. Campbell, KY and Ft. Bragg, NC.

Is it the Government's intent to initially have STAMIS Field Support at only Ft. Campbell and Ft. Bragg?

Yes per Attachment 0024 paragraph 5.1.

Attachment

Atch 0024 Atch 0024, Paragraph 5.2.1, states, in reqard to Site Supervision, "These skill sets shall be located at each of the locations identified in paragraph

2.2. Exceptions shall be provided by the Contractor to the COR for approval." Paragraph 2.2 identifies only Ft. Campbell, KY and Ft. Bragg, NC.

Is it the Government's intent to initially have Site Supervision at only Ft.

Campbell and Ft. Bragg?

See answer to 4.

Attachment

Atch 0024 Paragraph 5.9 Site Safety Specialist (SSS) references PWS paragraph

4.2.1.1 and Paragraph 5.10 Additional Duties Safety Offider (ADSO) references PWS paragraph 4.2.1.2.

Will the Government please verify that the PWS paragraphs referenced should be 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 respectively?

For Attachment 0024 paragraph 5.9, the PWS reference should be 4.2.2. For paragraph 5.10, the PWS reference should be 4.2.3. See the next updated Attachment 0024.

Attachment

Atch 0024 Paragraph 5.12 Contractor's Theater Supervision references PWS paragraph 4.11.5.2. Paragraph 4.11.5.2 does not exist in the PWS.

Does the Government intend to add a paragraph to the PWS that addresses Contractor's Theater Supervision?

See answer to 13.

Attachment

Atch 0028 Paragraph 2.7 CONUS Replacement Center (CRC) Attendance refers to the Individual Replacement Deployment Operations (IRDO at Camp Atterbury,Indiana.

This location appears to be in error. Will the Government confirm that the CRC location should be Ft. Bliss, TX?

See next revision of Attachment 0028 and 0008.

Attachment

Atch 0004 Atch 0004 Change History, dated 10 April 2018, identifies paragraph 2.5.7 as being deleted; however, paragraph 2.5.7 still exists on page 4 of 6.

Will the Government provide clarification pertaining to the deletion of paragraph 2.5.7 Kabul, Afghanistan?

Paragraph 2.5.8 was actually deleted. The information in the main body of Attachment 0004 is correct. The Change History typo will be corrected on the next revision.

Attachment

Atch 0007 In attachment 0007 AFM Skill Classification Crosswalk the safety manager position is defined in attachment 0013 as Additional Duty Safety Officer, Site Safety Specialist, and Regional Aviation Safety Officer.

Does the Government intend to add this position to Attachment 0010 T&M CONUS and OCONUS?

The Offeror explains their unique corporate approach in the Comprehensive Management Plan (CMP).

ADSO – See PWS paragraph 4.2.3 “…shall appoint ADSO who may have other responsibilities…” SSS – See PWS paragraph 4.2.2 “…but they may have other responsibilities…” ASO – See PWS paragraph 3.1.3 and Attachment 0044.

Attachment

Atch 0007 In attachment 0007 AFM Skill Classification Crosswalk the Administrative Assistant position is listed.

Does the Government intend to add this position to Attachment 0010 T&M CONUS and OCONUS?

See “General Clerk I” in Attachment 0010.

Section L N/A N/A Pg. 24 In section L, bidders are instructed to use only US Hires in all OCONUS locations but Germany.

Are bidders permitted to propose NATO, UK, or German workers for non- TESA positions in Germany?

See answer to 30.

Section L N/A N/A Pg. 24 In section L, bidders are instructed to use only US Hires in all OCONUS locations but Germany.

Does the Government have a preference for any particular mix of nationalities for the Non-TESA T&M work in Germany?

See answer to 30.

Section L N/A N/A Pg. 24 In section L, bidders are instructed to use only US Hires in all OCONUS locations but Germany.

Is the Government willing to pay a premium to attract US hires to do T&M work in Germany or would the Government rather save money and encourage bidders to propose relatively inexpensive NATO personnel for the Non-TESA positions?

See PWS paragraph 4.1.3. Common Access Card (CAC).

RFP Area PWS Page Reference

PWS

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference

Discussion Answer

Section L N/A N/A Pg. 24 In Section L, bidders are instructed to assume that the OCONUS effort will occur in Honduras and Egypt when proposing in the OCONUS T&M Labor Rate Table.

What percentage of the OCONUS work in the OCONUS T&M Labor Rate Table should offerors assume will take place in Honduras and what percentage in Egypt?

See revised Attachment 0027.

Section A N/A N/A Pg. 3 Section A-3 states "Section L of this Draft RFP requires offerors to mail the Past Performance Questionnaire at Attachment 0020 of this solicitation to all contractual, technical and administrative points of contact for each contract submitted in the Past Performance proposal." In Section L, instructions state "Offeror shall complete Part 1 of the Past Performance Questionnaire and e-mail the questionnaire to both the Government contracting activity and technical representative responsible for the past/current contract."

Will the Government please confirm Offerors are to submit the Past Performance Questionnaire via email in accordance with Section L? If so, will the Government please update Section A-3 to reflect this requirement and change reference to Final RFP?

See updated Section A of the RFP.

Section L N/A N/A P. 4 Section L.2.h. Proposal Files Format states "All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date, and solicitation number in the header and/or footer."

Will the Government confirm whether all attachments and supporting documentation referenced in each Volume also need to meet this formatting requirement (e.g. Entry Gate criteria documents)?

See Attachment 0027.

Section L N/A N/A P. 5 Section L.2.j. states "Proprietary information shall be clearly marked." Will the Government confirm whether including the language in FAR 52.215- 1 regarding the restriction on disclosure and use of data is sufficient to meet this instruction?

Yes.

Section C 26 3.1.10 Paragraph 3.1.10 requires the contractor to manage and account for all

GFP IAW AR 735-

5, DA PAM 710-2-1, DA PAM 710-2-2, and FAR 52-245-1. There are considerable variances between the army regulations and the FAR for management of

GFP.

In the performance of the contract, will the Government clarify which takes precedence AR 735-5, DA PAM 710-2-1, DA PAM 710-2-2, or FAR 52.245- 1 when managing GFP?

The Contract and the FAR are aligned accordingly and support each other. The order of precedence is Contract before Army Regulations (AR) then Department of the Army Pamphlets (DA PAM).

Section J N/A N/A Attachment 0040 Per Section L, for evaluation purposes only, the Government has incorporated the applicable CBAs (Fort Drum and Fort Stewart/HAAF) as outlined in Section J, Attachment 0040 of this RFP.

Will the Government confirm all applicable CBAs currently in effect within the AFM East program footprint have been included with this RFP?

Yes.

Section M N/A N/A 3.0 Cost/Price; T&M Evaluation

For evaluation purposes, the Government has also incorporated the CBAs Fort Stewart and Fort Drum as outlined in Section J, Attachment 0040 of this RFP.

Are offerors required to bid the bonafide benefits (labor and benefits) specified in the applicable CBAs for all years or only the first year?

All years.

Section L N/A N/A Section L24 - Cost (No Fee) OCONUS Differentials/Allowances

OCONUS differentials are defined as additional allowances and benefits paid to employees for assignment to foreign areas in excess of an employee’s base compensation, including but not limited to those referred to by the DSSR as Danger Pay, Post Hardship Differential, Living Quarter Allowances, and COLA, as well as R&R allowances, sign-on bonuses, completion bonuses, housing, foreign service premiums or allowances, miscellaneous bonuses, benefits, and allowances, etc.

Under the narrative for the reimbursable CLIN referenced, it states "benefits". Is the Government referring to employee health and welfare benefits?

Country-specific employee compensation in excess of base compensation is captured in the Cost (no fee) OCONUS Differentials/Allowances CLIN. If "health and welfare benefits" are the same "health and welfare benefits" that a CONUS employee would receive, then they are not included in the Cost (no fee) OCONUS Differentials/Allowances CLIN plug numbers. Any additional benefits paid to employees (above what CONUS employees would receive) because of assignment to foreign areas are captured in the OCONUS Differentials/Allowances CLINs.

Section M N/A N/A Pgs. 9-10 Section M Small Business Participation states "All Offerors will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of U.S. small businesses in the performance of this acquisition." The color ratings described in Table 4 do not provide specific SB percentage goals.

Will the Government state what small business percentage goals an offeror must propose in order to receive a BLUE color rating?

IAW Section M - Section 4, Small Business Participation - ** Note - The adjectival rating will consist of the first six elements described above and will not include the percentage of small business participation. The percentage of small business participation will be provided to the SSA/SSAC as a separate percentage in addition to the adjectival rating. In this way the SSA/SSAC will be able to compare the Offerors' quality of the small business proposal in addition to the amount of small business participation.

RFP Area PWS Page Reference

PWS

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference

Discussion Answer

Section M N/A N/A Pgs. 9-10 Section M Small Business Participation states "All Offerors will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of U.S. small businesses in the performance of this acquisition." The color ratings described in Table 4 do not provide specific SB percentage goals.

Are all the socio-economic categories required to be proposed in order for an Offeror to receive a BLUE color rating?

IAW Section L Small Business Participation e) Volume V - Small Business Participation- There is no minimum Small Business Commitment goal for this requirement. This is a competitive requirement; therefore, the Offeror should propose its best effort for all socioeconomic categories.

Also, refer to Table 11 ** Note: Provide the information by base year, each option year, and a summary of the base and option years. Zero percent (0%) is not a goal.

Section M N/A N/A Pgs. 9-10 Section M Small Business Participation states "All Offerors will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of U.S. small businesses in the performance of this acquisition." The color ratings described in Table 4 do not provide specific SB percentage goals.

Are Offeror’s allowed to propose and receive credit for Small Business participation for non-labor efforts that will be utilized during program execution?

Yes, IAW Section L, Volume V - Small Business Participation, (i) 1. Include only first tier U.S. subcontractors in all calculations.

Section L N/A N/A Pg. 14 and Attachment 0010 Note 2

Per NOTE 2, the assigned hours provided in this column (Column B) are for proposal purposes only. For each contract Project Labor Category, the Offeror shall distribute the assigned hours between "T&M_Prime" labor rate table and the "T&M_SubX" labor rate table.

Are Offerors allowed to deviate from the hours provided in the RFP tables and Attachment 0010? If not, does the Government anticipate negotiating after award the number of hours and positions for labor categories where this is only 1 hour listed (e.g. Site Supervisor)?

No.

Att 0027, para 3.d.iii.2.

(3.d.iii.3.)

N/A N/A N/A Paragraph states: “For evaluation purposes only, the Government has incorporated the applicable National Wage Determinations as outlined in Section J, Attachment 0040 of this RFP. The RFP specified labor categories have been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the AFM East T&M (CPFF LOE) Labor Rate Tables, Attachment 0010.” The 57. Flight Engineer (31051) is not present in the Attachment 0040 – Wage Determination 99-0316 and CBAs provided by the Government.

What is the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination category to map the 57.

Flight Engineer labor category to Attachment 0010 as indicated in Attachment 0027, and what is the appropriate rate for the SCA labor category?

All RFP specified contract labor categories that have applicable SCLS wage determination categories have already been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the solicitation.

Att 0027, para 3.d.iii.2.

(3.d.iii.3.)

N/A N/A N/A Paragraph states: “For evaluation purposes only, the Government has incorporated the applicable National Wage Determinations as outlined in Section J, Attachment 0040 of this RFP. The RFP specified labor categories have been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the AFM East T&M (CPFF LOE) Labor Rate Tables, Attachment 0010.” The 46. Fuel Distribution System Operator (Fuel Handler) (23312) is not present in the Attachment 0040 – Wage Determination 99-0316 and CBAs provided by the Government.

What is the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination category to map the 46.

Fuel Distribution System Operator (Fuel Handler) labor category to Attachment 0010 as indicated in Attachment 0027, and what is the appropriate rate for the SCA labor category?

All RFP specified contract labor categories that have applicable SCLS wage determination categories have already been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the solicitation.

Att 0027, para 3.d.iii.2.

(3.d.iii.3.)

N/A N/A N/A Paragraph states: “For evaluation purposes only, the Government has incorporated the applicable National Wage Determinations as outlined in Section J, Attachment 0040 of this RFP. The RFP specified labor categories have been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the AFM East T&M (CPFF LOE) Labor Rate Tables, Attachment 0010.” The 60. Quality Control Inspector (99610) is not present in the Attachment 0040 – Wage Determination 99-0316 and CBAs provided by the Government.

What is the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination category to map the 60.

Quality Control Inspector labor category to Attachment 0010 as indicated in Attachment 0027, and what is the appropriate rate for the SCA labor category?

All RFP specified contract labor categories that have applicable SCLS wage determination categories have already been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the solicitation.

Att 0027, para 3.d.iii.2.

(3.d.iii.3.)

N/A N/A N/A Paragraph states: “For evaluation purposes only, the Government has incorporated the applicable National Wage Determinations as outlined in Section J, Attachment 0040 of this RFP. The RFP specified labor categories have been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the AFM East T&M (CPFF LOE) Labor Rate Tables, Attachment 0010.” The 58. NDI Quality Control Inspector (99610) is not present in the Attachment 0040 – Wage Determination 99-0316 and CBAs provided by the Government. Att 0010 lists the SCA category as 92000.

Is the appropriate SCA labor category 92000 for NDI Quality Control Inspector? If not, what is the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination category and rate?

Yes.

RFP Area PWS Page Reference

PWS

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference

Discussion Answer

Att 0027, para 3.d.iii.2.

(3.d.iii.3.)

N/A N/A N/A Paragraph states: “For evaluation purposes only, the Government has incorporated the applicable National Wage Determinations as outlined in Section J, Attachment 0040 of this RFP. The RFP specified labor categories have been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the AFM East T&M (CPFF LOE) Labor Rate Tables, Attachment 0010.” The 52. Avionics Technician SCA labor category is not present in Att 0010 or Att 0019, and is not listed in the Attachment 0040 – Wage Determination 99-0316 and CBAs provided by the Government.

What is the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination category to map the 52.

Avionics Technician labor category to Attachment 0010 as indicated in Attachment 0027 and what is the appropriate rate for the SCA labor category?

All RFP specified contract labor categories that have applicable SCLS wage determination categories have already been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the solicitation.

Att 0027, para 3.d.iii.2.

(3.d.iii.3.)

N/A N/A N/A Paragraph states: “For evaluation purposes only, the Government has incorporated the applicable National Wage Determinations as outlined in Section J, Attachment 0040 of this RFP. The RFP specified labor categories have been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the AFM East T&M (CPFF LOE) Labor Rate Tables, Attachment 0010.” The 31. ECO/HAZMAT Technical Inspector SCA labor category is not present in Att 0010 or Att 0019, and is not listed in the Attachment 0040 – Wage Determination 99-0316 and CBAs provided by the Government.

What is the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination category to map the 31.

ECO/HAZMAT Technical Inspector labor category to Attachment 0010 as indicated in Attachment 0027, and what is the appropriate rate for the SCA labor category?

All RFP specified contract labor categories that have applicable SCLS wage determination categories have already been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the solicitation.

Att 0027, para 3.d.iii.2.

(3.d.iii.3.)

N/A N/A N/A Paragraph states: “For evaluation purposes only, the Government has incorporated the applicable National Wage Determinations as outlined in Section J, Attachment 0040 of this RFP. The RFP specified labor categories have been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the AFM East T&M (CPFF LOE) Labor Rate Tables, Attachment 0010.” The 32. Safety/OSHA Technical Inspector SCA labor category is not present in Att 0010 or Att 0019, and is not listed in the Attachment 0040 – Wage Determination 99-0316 and CBAs provided by the Government.

What is the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination category to map the 32.

Safety/OSHA Technical Inspector labor category to Attachment 0010 as indicated in Attachment 0027, and what is the appropriate rate for the SCA labor category?

All RFP specified contract labor categories that have applicable SCLS wage determination categories have already been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the solicitation.

Attachment

N/A 3.d.iii.2.

(3.d.iii.3.)

Attachment 0027 Paragraph states: “For evaluation purposes only, the Government has incorporated the applicable National Wage Determinations as outlined in Section J, Attachment 0040 of this RFP. The RFP specified labor categories have been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the AFM East T&M (CPFF LOE) Labor Rate Tables, Attachment 0010.” The 63. ALSE Technical Inspector SCA labor category shows 23021 in Att 0010 and 23090 in Att 0019, which is not listed in the Attachment 0040 – Wage Determination 99-0316 and CBAs provided by the Government.

Is the appropriate SCA category 23021 for ALSE Technical Inspector? If not, what is the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination category and rate?

The ALSE Tech is SCA 23090. The ALSE TI is similar to 23090 but more of an inspector. See updates to both Attachments 0010 and 0019.

Attachment

N/A para 3.d.iii.2.

(3.d.iii.3.)

Attachment 0027 Paragraph states: “For evaluation purposes only, the Government has incorporated the applicable National Wage Determinations as outlined in Section J, Attachment 0040 of this RFP. The RFP specified labor categories have been mapped to the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination categories in the AFM East T&M (CPFF LOE) Labor Rate Tables, Attachment 0010.” The 17. Ground Inspector SCA labor category is not present in Att 0019, and is not listed in the Attachment 0040 – Wage Determination 99-0316 and CBAs provided by the Government. Att 0010 lists the SCA category as 23380.

Is the appropriate SCA category 23380 for the Ground Inspector? If not, what is the appropriate SCLS Wage Determination category and rate?

Ground Inspector is SCA 23380. See updated Attachments 0019 and 0025.

Attachment

N/A para 2.7.8 Attachment 0004 Kosovo Force (KFOR) is listed as a Satellite Maintenance Support Site, however there is no associated primary or secondary site listed.

What is the associated primary or secondary site for Kosovo Force? The primary site for KFOR is Illesheim. See the updated Attachment 0004.

RFP Area PWS Page Reference

PWS

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference

Discussion Answer

Attachment

N/A para 2.5 Attachment 0004 Paragraph lists the support sites for South West Asia, but does not categorize them as primary, secondary, or satellite sites.

What types of sites are the these? If satellite, what is the associated primary or secondary site?

Refer to Appendix A - AOR Map.

Section L Page 19 of

Section iv.3.a.1

FFP The PWS contains requirements for Contracts and Subcontracts Management, however, the labor categories listed in Table 2 does not include Contracts related personnel.

How should the offeror account for contract management costs? The labor cateogories and hours to be utlized for proposing on FFP are provided in Section L.

Attachment

N/A para 2.1.2 N/A Paragraph states other Program Management positions shall be located with the Government Regional Management or at a different CONUS location as described in the CMP.

Where is the Government Regional Headquarters located? See answer to 1.

Attachment

N/A para 2.6.1 Attachments 0024 Paragraph shows JRTC as a secondary site at Ft Polk, LA, but has Ft Campbell in parentheses.

Is JRTC at Ft Polk associated with Ft Campbell? Is it a secondary or satellite site?

The primary site for JRTC is Ft. Campbell. See the next updated Attachment 0004.

Attachments 0004 and 0024

3.2.1.2 Table 2 Attachment 0027 PWS paragraph requires the contractor to provide Site Supervision Personnel for each site. Att 0027 Table 2 only provides four Maintenance Managers. Att 0010 lists the Site Supervisor but does not have enough hours for Site Supervision Personnel at each site.

How will the Government allow the contractors to provide Site Supervision Personnel at each site as required by the PWS?

The hours provided in Attachment 0027 Table 2 and Attachment 0010 are all for proposal purposes only. See also answer to 4A.

Attachment 0010 and 0027

N/A N/A Attachments 0004 and

Katterbach Kaserne is not listed in Att 0004; however, is listed in Att 0024 as a CAB Support Site.

What is the classification of the Katterback Kaserne site? Additionally, if Katterbach is a Satelitte site, what is the associated Primary or Secondary Site?

Katterbach Kaserne is a Combat Aviation Brigade (CAB) unit support site attached to Illesheim Germany.

Attachment 0024 and 0027

N/A Att 0024, paragraph

2.2 (Reset)

Attach (Section L) paragraph 3)d)iv)3)(b) 1)

N/A Att 0024 indicates reset activities at Fort Campbell, KY and at Fort Bragg, NC.

Att 0027 (Section L), paragraph 3)d)iv)(3)(b) 1) states " … the Offeor shall assume all work for the Reset effort will occur at contract site Fort Campbell when proposing amounts for these CLINs."

Request the Government clarify Reset locations?

Is it the Government's intent to perform reset at both Ft. Campbell and Bragg?

If true, should the offerer also propose amounts for CPFF LOE Reset CLINs for Ft. Bragg?

Attachment 0024 is correct. Notice the instructions in Attachment 0027 for the paragraph sited “For proposal purposes, the Offeror shall assume all work for the Reset effort will occur at contract site Fort Campbell when proposing amounts for these CLINs.”

Attachment

N/A paragraph 2.6

Attachment 0004 Att 0024, paragraph 2.6 identifies CONUS LUH locations. Request the Government provide any OCONUS LUH locations? See updated Attachment 0024

Attachment paragraph 2.5

Attachments 0004 and

Att 0004, paragraph 2.5 identifies AFM-East support for South West Asia and supporting operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Kuwait; however, Att 0024 does not identify any mission requirements for those locations.

Request the Government provide support required at SWA locations? No.

Section L Page 34 of 36, para.

12.a.

Paragraph 12.a. states "If possible, submit last three years electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS) showing evidence of goal attainment or progress toward goal attainment."

Will the Government exclude the eSRS reports from the page limitation for the volume to make room for significant content to be provided in other sections?

The eSRS reports are excluded from the page limitation for the Small Business Participation Volume.

Att 0007 Skill Classification Crosswalk

Attachment 0007 - the Governments file is set up with a font of Arial 12pt. Will the Government confirm that the 12pt font currently embedded in the crosswalk can be reduced to the 8pt font minimum requirement for tables as outlined in section L in order to accommodate a more printer friendly format for hard copy submission and to reduce paper waste? Or consider electronic submission only?

No.

Section L 24 Att. 10 “For the Germany and Germany OT T&M rate tables, the USG Project Labor Categories that must comply with the requirements of TESA have been identified in Attachment 0010.”

No such designation is provided. Will TESA requirements be provided? See revised Attachment 0010.

Section L 24 Section L, page 24 does not indicate where the CONUS MWO work will be accomplished

Will locations of MWO work be identified? See Attachment 0024 Capabilities and Missions By Location paragraph 2.3.

Modification Work Orders (MWO).

RFP Area PWS Page Reference

PWS

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference

Discussion Answer

Section L Page 19 3a) FFP Program Management Section L states "There will be no OCONUS Regional Management." Per the RFP mandated hours, over half of the workforce will be located OCONUS with LRC-A sites located in Illesheim, Germany and Kuwait. In order to provide 24 hour coverage on a global scale it seems appropriate to place over half of the Program Management at either or both of the LRC-A designated locations. Can offerors propose any of the FFP management CLIN personnel to be co-located with the proposed workforce and on site government oversight?

No.

Section L 19 Table 2 FFP PROGRAM

MANAGEMENT

FFP Program Management TABLE 2 FFP PROGRAM MANAGEMENT includes 30,720 hours per year which indicates that on 1920 hour man year there are a total of 16 FTEs.

Will the government consider allowing a portion of the FFP Program Management staff to be located OCONUS? If so will the government consider aligning the hours per year with a 48 hour work week which would agree with the PWS direct workforce?

No.

14 2.8.1 NET training Government Provided NET What is the minimum required employment period per instance of government provided NET. (After training is government provided)

In the PWS paragraph 2.8.1, see “appropriately justified to the PCO or COR.” These situations will be evaluated on a case by case basis.

15 2.5 PWS 2.8.5 OJT and Cross Training Will all OJT and Cross Training hours and cost be government provided? No.

Attachment

21 3.1.8.5 CDRL A010 Paragraph 3.1.8.5 states “The Contractor shall provide an Equipment and Facilities Report IAW DI-MISC-81423 (CDRL A010). The Equipment and Facilities Report shall be for those areas requiring maintenance or having substandard tooling/facilities.”

The Contract does not include a RFP specifically for facilities inspectors, only for aviation maintenance related postions. Is the contractor responsible for inspecting facilities for structural faults, electrical faults, etc.? Or is a means of identifying and communicating facility discrepancies noted in the standard course of performing aircraft maintenance in these facilities in accordance with PWS 3.1.8.5?

This report is to notify the Government of facilities or equipment in need of additional attention or repair. These activities are coordinated by the Government.

Attachment

3.2.3.8.1 Attachment 0024 Paragraph 3.2.3.8.1 states “The Contractor shall provide a Downed Aircraft Recovery Team (DART) IAW AR 5-9, FM 3-04.513, MDS specific TM(s), and per COR directive.”

Does this apply throughout the AOR including SWA? Which specific locations? Can this requirement be more specific by country and added to Attachment 0024 for clarification?

Does not apply to SWA or Eqypt. DART requirements will be dependent on security considerations and will be executed per COR directive.

73 4.6.2 Technical Reference Library

Paragraph 4.6.2 states “The Contractor shall establish and maintain a complete technical reference library for assigned or supported aircraft and systems IAW TC 3-04.7.”

TC 3-04.7 no longer exists as a current publication on APD (Army Publishing Directorate). Please clarify this requirement.

Paragraph 4.6.2 of the PWS states “IAW ATP 3-04.7.” The publication ATP 3-04.7 is available on the Army Publishing Directorate (APD).

Attachment

15 2.9 Attachment 0013 Position Qualifications (East) Does the OCONUS workforce require a valid US State Drivers Licence or is the host country equivalent sufficient?

See Attachment 0028 Additional OCONUS Requirements.

Attachment

14 2.8.3 2.3 2.8.3. Crewmember/Non-Crewmember Records. "The Contractor shall manage all crewmember/non-crewmember records (to include COR identified Government personnel)"

This statement appears to conflict with PWS 2.3 which states " Under no circumstance will the government assign tasks to, or prepare work schedules for individual contractor employees". Will the government clarify and/or consider removing or revising the COR identified personnel statement?

No. PWS paragraph 2.3 is for Non-personal services that are outside the scope of this contract. Paragraph 2.8.3 is about managing aviation related records (typically called flight records). In some cases, a Government pilot may be used and their aviation related records will be managed by the Contractor at the direction of the COR. This task falls within the scope of this contract.

Attachment

53 3.2.3.14.4 3.2.3.14.4 "The Contractor shall provide training to FMS customers related to aviation maintenance"

Is this to be considered classroom type training or hands on type training? If hands on, will the training be conducted on a mock up or CAT-C aircraft? If training is conducted on CAT-A, who will be certifying safe for flight?

Typically this is over-the-shoulder training. None of this training will require Contractors to quality inspect or certify FMS customers or their work.

Attachment 0010 - Amendment 1

In Attachment 10, the wage determination job code for ALSE Tech was changed to SCA code 23090. SCA job code 23090 does not exist in WD 99- 0316, however the rate of $28.93 remains unchanged from the original RFP release.

Should the contractor use the rate of $28.93 for pricing purposes for ALSE Technician?

See updated Attachment 0010.

Attachment 0010 - Amendment 1

In Attachment 10, the wage determination job code for ALSE Tech Inspector was removed, however the rate of $28.93 remains unchanged from the original RFP release.

Should the contractor use the rate of $28.93 for pricing purposes for ALSE Technician Inspector?

See updated Attachment 0010.

RFP Area PWS Page Reference

PWS

Paragraph Reference

Additional Cross Reference

Discussion Answer

Attachment 0010 - Amendment 1

The changes to ALSE Tech and ALSE Tech Inspector were made to all CONUS based tabs in the base year, however the changes were not made in any of the option years in all tabs affected.

Can the government please correct or make appropriate edits? See updated Attachment 0010.

Attachment 0004 Areas of Responsibility (East Region)

N/A N/A Paragraph 2.6.3 and 2.7.4

In Attachment 0004, paragraph 2.6.3 lists Wiesbaden as a Secondary Site with no corresponding AFM Primary Site; however, paragraph 2.7.4 lists Wiesbaden as a satellite site.

Will the Government clarify whether Weisbaden is a Secondary Site or a Satellite site?

See updated Attachment 0004.

Attachment 0004 Areas of Responsibility (East Region)

N/A N/A Appendix A - AOR Map In Attachment 0004, Appendix A reflects Stuttgart as a satellite site;

however paragraph 2.7 does not list Stuttgart.

Will the Government clarify whether Stuttgart is a satellite site, and if so, who is the associated primary or secondary site?

See updated Attachment 0004.

Attachment 0004 Areas of Responsibility (East Region)

N/A N/A Appendix A - AOR Map and Paragraph 2.4

In Attachment 0004, Appendix A lists Saudi Arabia as an LRC-A w/Supervisor, which classifies this site as a Primary Site; however, Saudi Arabia is not listed in paragraph 2.4 as a Primary Site.

Will the Government clarify the classification of the Site Saudi Arabia, and if a Primary Site add to paragraph 2.4?

See updated Attachment 0004.

Attachment 0004 Areas of Responsibility (East Region)

N/A N/A Appendix A - AOR Map and Paragraph 2.6 & 2.7

In Attachment 0004, Appendix A reflects Aberdeen as a LRC-A with Gov't Staff, which classifies it as a Secondary Site; however paragraph 2.7 lists Aberdeen as a satellite site.

Will the Government clarify whether Aberdeen is a satellite site or secondary site?

See updated Attachment 0004.

Attachment 0004 Areas of Responsibility (East Region)

N/A N/A Appendix A - AOR Map and Paragraph 2.6 & 2.7

In Attachment 0004, Appendix A reflects Sinai (MFO) as a LRC-A with Gov't Staff, which classifies it as a Secondary Site; however paragraph 2.7 lists Sinai (MFO) as a satellite site.

Will the Government clarify whether Sinai (MFO) is a satellite site or secondary site?

See updated Attachment 0004.