LSF_INDUSTRY_DAY_QUESTIONS_ _ANSWERS_(Q As)_(2).pdf

LOGISTIC SUPPORT FACILITY MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY (LSFMA) REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS

A B D

DATE 5-May-16

RFP # W58RGZ-16-R-0070

TITLE Industry Day - Questions and Answers (Q&As)

Q&A # QUESTIONS RESPONSE

What is the justification for the requirement to have a facility to be within 60 miles of Huntsville?

Since the LSF's inception in 1999 it has operated as a rapid response ordering based contractual vehicle to satisfy immediate/near term operationally based requirements. The 60 mile proximity to Redstone Arsenal is based on the schedule savings, cost savings (including substantial internal Government cost savings), and technical synergy derived from having the Army approving offices (i.e., Program Office, Engineering, Logistics, Contracting, and Test) and the contractor located within the immediate vicinity. The ability to bring all parties together to solve technical issues in real time has significant savings in both schedule and cost by minimizing lost productivity and eliminating the need for TDY expenses.

This approach allowed the Government to move to a Multiple Award approach that allowed the benefits of continued competition to the Government without requiring a substantial increase in oversight personnel.

Will TOs be limited to efforts that primarily must be performed within 60 miles of Redstone

The awarded contracts will allow for Delivery Order support of Commercial Derivative Aircraft to be performed outside the 60 mile radius (see Paragraph 5.3.) The basis for this exception is that the Government felt that requiring small business to have FAA Part 145 capability as part of the requirement would be a barrier to entry and have the effect of limiting competition. The Government recognized that the best course of action was to allow small business to subcontract to meet this capability and due to the limited number of requirements and sources that the 60 mile requirements would not be a required for these actions. The FAA has primary oversight for engineering and logistics documentation for these requirements and since the FAA has a nationwide presence, this did not require the LSF to incur additional oversight costs.

Will TOs with the primary place of performance located OCONUS be allowed.

The awarded contractors shall have the ability to support action that may occur OCONUS. It is important for the offers to understand that the LSF is just one part of an Government organizational structure responsible for the execution of modification efforts. Modification Work Orders (MWOs) developed by the LSF are often installed by AFMD contractors, Army aviation unit personnel, or Army depots. The installations are often done in concert with other aircraft work to minimize cost and aircraft downtime.

The vast majority of OCONUS modification installations have been performed by AFMD personnel and offerors interested in competing for that work should review upcoming AFMD contract actions. LSF OCONUS activities are expected to be very limited and would result only as a peculiar necessity of an otherwise standard Delivery Order

Do all facilities, particually Logistics facilities, have to be within 60 miles?

Especially if the facility is not involved in day-to-day operations, i.e storage?

Yes because storage typically supports short term activities that support quick reaction requirements.

5 What lessons are learned on LSF IV and how are they being applied to LSF V?

They were shown in the presentation.

6 Do we need to have a fully compliant paint booth at the primary facility or can paint work be performed at another site?

At another site

Why are FAR 145 repairs, which will not be geographically restricted appropriate for this geographically restricted contract?

The purpose of this contract is not geographical but to bring an economy of scale of fast reaction requirements which this support provides.

How will having an LSF prime act as a pass-through for another FAR 145 facility reduce Army cost?

Aviation is a subcontract intensive industry. Historically and is still true today, an average of 70% or better of aviation efforts, including OEM level aircraft assembly and modifications, are subcontracted efforts. FAA FAR 145 efforts are in-line with aviation activities.

9 Which of the 8210.1 do you expect to use, the older Revision B or the current Revision C?

It will be the current Revision of 8210.1 at time of award.

LOGISTIC SUPPORT FACILITY MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY (LSFMA) REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS

A B D

DATE 5-May-16

RFP # W58RGZ-16-R-0070

TITLE Industry Day - Questions and Answers (Q&As)

Q&A # QUESTIONS RESPONSE

Congratulations on LSF 4 for moving to 2 awardees. We understand the work share of the current contract is primarily with one of the two awardees, how do your foresee more active competition at the task order level?

All awardees have an equal opportunity to receive awards on each Delivery Order (DO)/Task Order (TO).

11 Does the scope of the LSF include MI-17 Aircraft? At present MI-17 Aircraft are precluded from the LSF.

You said that task orders issued under the contract would be competed.

Will there be penalties issued if a contract holder does not bid?

No penalties are issued. However, a rationale for not bidding is requested.

(1) What is the determination of the RSA 60 miles? (2) Where is the center of measurement? (3)Will the facility required for contract need to be leased prior to award or upon award?

(1) See Question #1 (2) Redstone Arsenal (3) No but proof of conditional lease is required.

14 (1) Why 60 miles? (2) How is distance determined straight line, highway, etc?

(1) See Question #1 (2) 60 miles from Redstone Arsenal boundary

15 All additions to current task orders are completed or only initial All new work is required to be competed or an Exception to Fair Opportunity (EFO) in accordance with (IAW) 16.505

In an attempt to increase competition will the United States Government (USG) consider increasing the number of awardees? It was stated that this was not a Services Contract. By Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) regulation at least 3 quotes are obtained. Average TO/DO is around $7M

At this time we have a minimum of 2 and the maximum is unknown

With the first three contracts being single awards and the fourth being two awards, do you anticipate this contract being more than two awards?

We anticipate a minimum of two. A maximum number has not been determined.

How will the sample tasks be determined to ensure no advantage to the incumbents - work they have already done under the contract?

The sample task orders are independently developed by the government and are not based on work already done under the contract. All bidders have equal opportunity.

Will the attendee list be published? Does anyone in the room have a problem with their names being published?

If so, please let us know. No attendee provided a negative answer at Industry Day, nor have we received to date a notice of their being a problem, therefore the list of attendees will be posted to FedBIZops.

21 Please define your view of reasonable and realistic pricing? Will be defined in Section L of the draft and formal Request for Offerors Proposal (RFP)

If all proposals submitted meet the requirements for TO and pricing will they all get an award? LSF IV had 7 proposals but only 2 were selected.

Assumption is only 2 made the criteria cut.

Only two offerors fully met the requirements of LSF 4. We have a minimum of 2 awards. Maximum has not been determined.

The overall contract is being awarded as a Best Value but Delivery Orders are being awarded as Low Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA). Can you provide rationale as to why you would use two different approaches?

The base contract(s) will be awarded as a best value. Individual Delivery Orders source selection processes are determined on a requirement by requirement basis and may be performed using either a best value or an LPTA approach (i.e., there is not a source selection singluar requirement per

DO)

24 When will the slides be posted to FEDBIZ? Hopefully within 2 weeks

25 Do you anticipate holding additional Industry Days in the future? Presently there are no plans to host another industry day, but the USG reserves the right to conduct if required.

26 Will a list of attendees be published? See Question 20

The option periods for the base contract have the potential to reduce the ability of a small business to compete for this contract. You pointed out that there are substantial costs for facilities, and equipment necessary to compete for a lease award. The ability to be able to recover costs of facilities and equipment for a shorter period than five years is a significant risk for a small business. This could have the effect of reducing competition. Will the USG consider eliminating the option periods especially since it will have continuning competition under the multiple award concept? The competetion increases the risk of being able to recover cost and a larger period would be better.

Currently this is planned as a 5 year IDIQ comprehensive award with no options to the base contract(s) - Individual DO/TO may have options.

Sheet1