Answers_to_Questions_26JAN17.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 55 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Fort Rucker Aviation Maintenance Services
- Solicitation number
- W9124G-17-R-0002
About this file
Answers to questions 49-167
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 81 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
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
Questions
| # | Document | RFP Section / Paragraph | Comment/Question | Government Response | |
| 49 | PWS | 4.6.2 and 4.6.3.2 | PWS 4.6.2 states "shall establish, maintain and submit a complete Quality Management Plan IAW DI-MGMT-80004A" - PWS 4.6.3.2 states "audits on the Contractor's QMS IAW the Quality System Plan. The Contractor shall present the Quality System Plan to the Government prior to each audit." Question: Can the Government please clarify if Offeror needs to provide a Quality System Plan or Quality Management Plan? | Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 4.6.3.2 will be changed to remove the term "Quality System Plan" and replaced with "Quality Management Plan." This revision will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. | |
| 50 | Army PWS | 4.9 Transition | PWS 4.9, Transition, states "The Contractor shall follow the transition plan submitted as part of the proposal and keep the Government fully informed of status throughout the transition period." The Final RFP Section L requirements for Volumes I and II contain no mention of Transition or a Transition Plan. a. Does the Government intend to add a transition requirement to Section L? b. If not, does the Government intend to remove this requirement from the PWS? | Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 4.9 will be revised to read the following in the next solicitation amendment: "The Contractor shall provide the results of their initial transition assessment and planning for transition to the Government within ten days of the contract transition start date. The assessment and planning shall address personnel, equipment, supplies, and procedures necessary to fully execute the program and ensure a smooth transition. The Contractor shall keep the Government fully informed of their transition status throughout the transition period and provide a weekly update. Throughout the phase-in/phase-out periods, it is essential that attention be given to minimize interruptions or delays to work in progress that would impact the mission. See CDRL A001." | |
| 51 | Army PWS 3.1.2 | ||||
| AQL 1 and 2 | Aircraft Acceptance, Performance Standard | Will these aircraft still be considered accepted if the return to base field is due to an uncontrollable error, pilot error, or precautionary landing? | No. IAW Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 3.1.2 and the acceptance window definition, aircraft that return to base field within their acceptance window are still within their acceptance window and not yet accepted. | ||
| 52 | Army PWS 3.1.2.1.a. | Aircraft Acceptance, Performance Standard | If PWS 3.1.1.2 deficiencies are corrected with the 30-minutes post rejection, will the rejection be overturned? | No. IAW Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 3.1.2.1.a the Contractor shall receive an automatic reject for the aircraft not meeting requirements of Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 3.1.1.2. These aircraft can be re-issued as a spare once the deficiency is corrected if they meet the aircraft spare timeline. | |
| 53 | Army PWS 3.1.2.1.a. | Aircraft Acceptance, Performance Standard | If a spare is provided because maintenance defects cannot be corrected in the 30-minute post rejection timeframe, will the rejection be overturned? | No. Rejects are not overturned unless the reject meets the requirements of the IRAP process IAW Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 3.1.2.1.1. | |
| 54 | Army PWS 4.6.2.b | Quality Management Plan | Will the contractor Quality personnel or leadership be allowed to participate in all scheduled/unscheduled government second party audits? | There is no prohibition on Contractor Management being present as observers during Government scheduled/unscheduled second party audits. The Government does not require their presence to conduct any audit. Contractor Management will be notified in writing, whether they were present or not, of all findings. | |
| 55 | Army PWS 4.7.3.1, 4.7.3.1.1, 4.7.3.1.2, 4.7.3.1.3 | Accident/Incident Notifications |
Aircraft Accidents/Incidents Property Damage
| Personnel Injury | In what timeframe must the contractor notify the Government of each? | IAW with CDRL A011, initial notification is due immediately following each incident. Subsequent report is due 15 calendar days after each accident/incident and a monthly roll-up of all contractor accidents is due NLT the 15th day of the following month. | |||
| 56 | Army PWS 5.2.7.1 | Controllable Reject | What is the definition of an uncontrollable reject? If it is the opposite of a controllable reject, that means it would be a newly discovered fault or deficiency that would be undiscoverable by a proficient maintenance crew. It would also mean a maintenance deficiency that has sufficient detail regarding previous corrective action sign-offs which adequately show the fault was corrected or within allowable limits of aircraft technical guidance. As such, an uncontrollable reject would be one that is completely out of the control of the contractor, so will these types of rejects impact the contractor's reject rate? | The Government has not defined uncontrollable rejects. The reject rate is defined in Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 5.2.76 as "...the number of aircraft rejected minus approved IRAPs divided by the total number of issued aircraft. These aircraft and systems are not 100% reliable; therefore, an allowable reject rate per fleet is established using historical data. The reject rate for each fleet will be measured on a monthly basis. All rejects are the Contractors responsibility". | |
| 57 | Army PWS | 3.1.1.8.2.b | PWS 3.1.1.8.2.b. Standard: States “The Contractor shall ensure the total number of faults uncorrected longer than 20% of the MDS phase, Cycle Service Program (CSP), or Progressive Inspection Program (PIP) interval hours shall not exceed 50% of the allowable uncorrected faults in Table 1- Maximum Reject Rate and Allowable Shortcomings standard per MDS”. TDR Document 04 - Aircraft Phase Data Entered Phase 29 April 15 to 1 Dec 16 does not reflect any UH-72 Phase, CSP or PIP historical data. In addition, we found no reference to Phase, CSP, or PIP intervals in TDR Document 52 - UH-72 Maintenance Manual BK117C2_AMM_EN_UH_72_2016.03.21_D0. Question: Has an inspection interval been established for the UH-72, and if so will the Government provide that interval? | Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 3.1.1.8.2.b will be revised in solicitation amendment 0002 by adding AQL: 2) The inspection interval of 400 hours shall be used on the UH-72A for the purposes of determining the total number of allowable faults uncorrected longer than 20% of the MDS phase, Cycle Service Program (CSP), or Progressive Inspection Program (PIP). | |
| 58 | 3.1.2.1.c | ||||
| AQL 2 | Aircraft Acceptance, Performance Standard | What criterion will be used, or is this subjective to the crew present? | The Government Flight Crew can extend the 30-minute repair time at its discretion. | ||
| 59 | Army PWS 3.1.2.1.d | Aircraft Acceptance, Performance Standard | Who provides dispute resolution in order to give the contractor a fair decision so that the reject rate is not unnecessarily impacted? | In the event of a disagreement regarding the airworthiness of the aircraft between the Government Flight Crew and the Contractor, a spare aircraft shall be issued. If the Contractor believes the reject to be invalid, the Invalid Reject Assessment Process (IRAP) detailed in Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 3.1.2.1.1 and Attachment 0008 should be used. | |
| 60 | Army PWS 3.1.2.1.1.b. | Aircraft Acceptance, Performance Standard | If a part fails due to manufacturer defect, will consideration be given? | Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 3.1.2.1.1 states the Contractor shall not submit consideration for parts failure using the IRAP process. These aircraft and systems are not 100% reliable; therefore, an allowable reject rate per fleet is established using historical data. The reject rate is defined in Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 5.2.76. The contractor is always able to discuss consideration for manufacturer defect through correspondence with the KO. | |
| 61 | Army PWS 3.1.2.2.b and c | Aircraft Acceptance, Performance Standard | What is the transfer criteria? | Transfer criteria is established in TM 1-1500-328-23 and amended by the PM office based on future Army utilization of the transfer aircraft. The Contractor is provided written transfer criteria from the Government for transfer aircraft. | |
| 62 | Army PWS 3.2.1.a | ||||
| Second AQL | Perform Logistics and Supply Operations | Does this mean that no mistakes are allowed, that the entire spectrum of material and supply operations must have zero discrepancies? | No. Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 3.2.1.a AQL 2 applies to the Paragraph 3.2.1.a standard which states "The Contractor shall use only a Government approved material and property control procedure for all requisitions processed in support of this contract and abide by all regulatory, service and contractual requirements". The AQL does not apply to the entire 3.2.1. requirement in the PWS. | ||
| 63 | Army PWS 4.3.11.2 | Lease of Commercial Facilities | Will the contractor be reimbursed for such? | Yes, if the Government has authorized facilities and cannot provide suitable facilities, reimbursement is authorized by equitable adjustment in accordance with the FAR 52.245-1 Government Furnished Property and the KO authorized the ex | |
| 64 | Army PWS 4.4.11.3 | ||||
| and 4.4.11.4 | Endangered Species Habitats | ||||
| Wetlands | Do these areas exist on any Ft. Rucker property? Please identify. | Yes, these areas do exist on Fort Rucker. The Government is gathering this data and will include this data in the TDR. |
| 65 | Army PWS 2.3.1.1 | Key Personnel | Are these billable positions? | Key personnel should be included in the total price or cost of the appropriate CLIN, consistent with the contractors Disclosure Statement and/or normal company practice for cost accounting. |
| 66 | Army PWS Attachment 0001 | 4.3.7 Delivery of CAP | PWS para 4.3.7 makes reference to A001 - Data Accession List for delivery of the annual CAP report required under 4.3.7. Is this the correct CDRL reference? | The contractor must track this data and the Data Accession List provides reports in standard contractor format for information purposes. The Government does not require any specific format for this report so CDRL A001 is referenced correctly. |
| 67 | Army PWS Attachment 0001 | 4.3.8 Government owned vehicles. (4.3.6.c and 4.3.6.d) | Please correct paragraph numbering from 4.3.6.c and 4.3.6.d to 4.3.8.c and 4.3.8.d | The numbering sequence for PWS Paragraphs 4.3.8.c and 4.3.8.d were corrected and this change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 68 | Attachment 0001, Army PWS | Paragraphs 4.5.1 and 4.5.3 | Army PWS paragraph 4.5.1 states: "The Government will provide the latest Army approved software (i.e.: Internet explorer, Microsoft Office Suite and Products, Standard Army Management Information Systems, and other military required operating applications/systems) to be used on the .mil infrastructure." |
Army PWS paragraph 4.5.3 states: "The Contractor shall use Computer Hardware, Enterprise, Software and Solutions (CHESS) or current required system for all Government computer hardware, enterprise, and software acquisitions. The Contractor shall provide as Contractor acquired property IT equipment and software required in the successful performance of this effort except as provided by the Government. ... The Contractor shall be assigned in writing from the KO to use CHESS as the mandatory source for IT purchases under the CAP CLIN."
| 1. Please verify that any COTS hardware and software required for computers, networking systems and servers supporting the .MIL infrastructure should be acquired as CAP under CLIN X003AB. | Yes. The offeror is correct. | |||
| 69 | Attachment 0001, Army PWS | Paragraph 4.5.1 | This PWS paragraph states: "The Contractor shall manage and maintain all Government data related to performance of work under this contract on the .mil system utilizing the DOD Information Network IAW AR 25-30 and AR 25-2. All such Government data shall be transferred through the .mil network." However, TDR document 58-Software_GOTS_COTS states several GOTS software packages are resident "On a commercial network; not .MIL". |
1. Please verify that none of these GOTS software packages are currently operating using systems listed in TDR document "01-ADP Inventory Report May and NOV 16".
2. Suggest updating the PWS to reflect that some contract data will be processed using a commercial network. 1. The following GOTS programs will exist on the commercial network as they do not have proper authorization to exist on the government network: ELAS, WEBASA, QDARs.
2. Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 4.5.1 will be revised to add "This does not apply to the TH-67 aircraft." in solicitation amendment 0002.
| 70 | Attachments | CDRLs_A031_to_A040_and_A042 | CDRL A040 lists first submission date as 30 DAC, which would fall into the transition period; however, the majority of the PWS requirements are related to things that occur after performance starts (e.g., readiness rates, up or down aircraft reports, etc.). Question: Can the Government please clarify the requirements for CDRL A040? | CDRL A040, Block 12 will be changed to 30 days After Contract Performance (ACP) (30 ACP). This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 71 | 13-Contractor Acquired Property (Not yet reflected on Attachment 0009 or 0010) | The referenced document contains a list of over 40,000 items that appear to have been acquired by the current contractor but not yet loaded to the automated property tracking system used to produce Attachments 9 and 10. This document lists many ADP-type items, to include laptops, servers, routers, telephones, etc. Some of these items also are listed in Army TDR document "01-ADP Inventory Report May and NOV 16" with purchase dates as long ago as Feb 2007. Questions: |
1. Will these items be loaded into the automated property tracking system prior to the transition of the contract or must the new contractor accomplish this during transition?
2. Is everything on this list considered as Government Furnished Property even though it is not listed in Attachments 9 and 10 of the solicitation?
3. Are all ADP-type items on this list available to support the .MIL network infrastructure? Or do they support some other network?
4. Does the Government know if there are ADP-type items listed in this document that do not appear Army TDR document "01-ADP Inventory Report May and NOV 16"? 1. Items are currently loaded in the contractor's automated system for their stewardship records. They have not yet been added to the APSR for the Government. Once delivery happens on the current contract they will be added to Attachment 0009 and 0010.
2. Once delivery of CAP occurs it will be considered GFP.
3.There are some items that will be able to support the .mil and other ADP items that will support the contractors infrastructure. 4.No. TDR Document "01-ADP inventory report May and NOV 16" was provided in the TDR as a request for information pertaining to current (W58RGZ-12-C-0123) contract historical data. The items listed are provided for information and will not all be provided for the next contract. All property being provided will be listed in the provided Attachment 0009, Attachment 0010, or in the TDR document titled 13-Contractor Acquired Property (Not yet reflected on Attachment 0009 or 0010).
| 72 | Attachment 0017, USAF PWS | Section 2.2 | PWS Section 2.2 refers to tracking repair parts and calls out CDRL A039; however, CDRL A039 is the Strike Plan. Question: Can the Government please clarify which CDRL should be referenced in PWS Section 2.2? | Attachment 0017, AF PWS, will be revised to reflect CDRL A040. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 73 | RFP Section A | 6 | This paragraph states that Attachment 0015 has the Wage Determination for Fort Rucker Area; however, Attachment 0015 is the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Question: Will the Government provide the wage determination for the Fort Rucker area? | Yes. The correct and current wage determination will be included in solicitation. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 74 | Section B | Page 9. CLIN X004AB | CLINs X004AB state in the description "The costs and expenses payable under this subCLIN are to support Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraph 2.1.13, which refers the offeror to Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 4.9 for the Phase-Out Requirements." However, paragraph 2.1.13 does not appear in the AF PWS. Please clarify the applicable paragraph references. | CLIN X004AB reference to Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS will be revised to read paragraph 5.12 and Air Force PWS, paragraph 5.12 will be revised to read "Transition" This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 75 | Section B | Page 13. CLIN X007AB | CLINs X007AB state in the description "See Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraphs 2.1.18 and 3.1.7.4. " However, these paragraphs do not appear in the AF PWS. Please clarify the applicable paragraph references. | CLIN X007AB reference to Attachment 0017, AF PWS will be revised to read, "See Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraph 5.10." This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 76 | Section B | CLINs X007AB | CLINs X007AB state in the description "See Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraphs 2.1.18 and 3.1.7.4. " However, these paragraphs do not appear in the AF PWS. Question: Please clarify the applicable paragraph references. | CLIN X007AB reference to Attachment 0017, AF PWS will be revised to read, "See Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraph 5.10." This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 77 | Section B | Page 14. CLIN X007AC | CLINs X007AC state in the description "Excludes local purchase for subCLIN X007AB and is in accordance with Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraph 3.1.7. 3.1.11.20.5, and 4.1." However, paragraphs 3.1.7. and 3.1.11.20.5 do not appear in the AF PWS. Please clarify the applicable paragraph references. | CLIN X007AC reference to Attachment 0017, AF PWS will be revised to read, "See Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraph 5.10." This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 78 | Section B | CLIN 003AB | CLIN 003AB states: "The Government will reimburse the contractor for the allowable, reasonable and allocable actual cost of materiel, equipment, special tools, and special test equipment in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 31. ... See Attachment 0001 PWS paragraphs 4.3.1 and 4.9.2." Army PWS paragraph 4.3.1 states: "The Government will furnish the materiel, equipment, special tooling, special test sets specified in Contract Attachment 0009-Material and Equipment." Question: Please verify that costs for the contractor to acquire replacement items or obtain repair services for the GFE items listed in Atch 9 will be included under CLIN X003AB, Contractor Acq Prop (CAP) and Services. | Yes, the items on Attachment 0009 are GFE and replacement items and repairs services will be included under CLIN X003AB, Contractor Acquired Property (CAP) and Services, if they cannot be acquired through the Government supply system. Note: During the phase-in/phase-out transition an inventory will be conducted and Attachment 0009 and Attachment 0010 may be revised. Once the contract close out inventory is complete the general use GSA and motorized CAP vehicles on Attachment 0009 will be moved to Attachment 0010 "As is". The Government will provide initial repair parts for Attachment 0010. When those parts are depleted it will be at the Contractor's cost to replace. Replacement costs are part of the FPIF CLIN X002 and or CLIN X006 for Army and Air Force, respectively. |
| 79 | Section B | CLINs X007AC | CLINs X007AC state in the description "Excludes local purchase for subCLIN X007AB and is in accordance with Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraph 3.1.7. 3.1.11.20.5, and 4.1." However, paragraphs 3.1.7. and 3.1.11.20.5 do not appear in the AF PWS. Question: Please clarify the applicable paragraph references. | CLIN X007AB reference to Attachment 0017, AF PWS will be revised to read, "See Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraph 5.10." This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 80 | Section B | CLINx X004AB | CLINs X004AB state in the description "The costs and expenses payable under this subCLIN are to support Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraph 2.1.13, which refers the offeror to Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 4.9 for the Phase-Out Requirements." However, paragraph 2.1.13 does not appear in the AF PWS. Question: Please clarify the applicable paragraph references. | CLIN X004AB reference to Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS will be revised to read paragraph 5.12 and Air Force PWS, paragraph 5.12 will be revised to read "Transition" This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 81 | Schedule B | CLIN X003 AE | What Army Training is to be provided on a Cost Reimbursable, non-fee bearing basis? | None at the present time. If Government required special training is required, the Contractor will be notified IAW Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 4.2.36.2.b. |
| 82 | Schedule B | CLIN X005 CAP Delivery | CLIN 0005 has no CLIN type but requires an Estimated Cost. The CAP itself is acquired (priced) under SLINs X003AB, X0007AB, and X015AC. What is being priced on CLIN 0005? Is it a non-fee bearing Cost Reimbursable CLIN? | CLIN 0005 is a delivery only CLIN for Contractor Acquired Property. The offeror is correct, this will be a Not Separately Priced (NSP) CLIN. |
| 83 | Schedule B | CLIN X003 AB Contractor Acquired Property & Services (CAP) | CLIN X003AB makes reference to Army PWS paragraph 4.3.1 which discusses Government furnished property vs. CAP. Would a more accurate reference be to PWS para 4.3.7? Is this also where the IT purchases will be funded IAW PWS 4.5.3? | CLIN X003AB incorrectly references Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 4.3.1. All CAP, including IT, supporting the Army Maintenance Program will be purchased under CLIN X003AB. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 84 | Schedule B | CLIN X0007AB CAP and Services - Air Force | CLIN X007AB refers to Attachment 0017, AF PWS, para 2.1.18 and 3.1.7.4. The latest USAF PWS does not include those paragraphs. Please correct the references. | CLIN X007AB reference to Attachment 0017, AF PWS will be revised to read, "See Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraph 5.10." This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 85 | Section B, Solicitation | NA | How will the Government handle over and above issues since there is no over and above CLIN in the current CLIN structure? It is unrealistic to think that the provided historical data will accurately capture all possible events and scenarios for the next ten years, especially with ongoing aircraft transfers, ARI modifications, and fluctuating student loads. This is particularly critical since the main CLINs will be FP. | This solicitation was developed for providing a data driven solution. Offerors must assess the history and the projections in developing a solution for providing the maintenance that supports the training mission for both the Army and AF rotary wing forces. Offerors are required to provide maintenance on aircraft assigned based on the projections. Major changes will be handled as part of normal contract administration as noted in Section H-001 and other changes through the risk mitigation provided by an FPIF contract type. |
| 86 | Schedule B | CLIN X007AC Local Purchase - Air Force | CLIN X007AC refers to Attachment 0017, AF PWS, para 3.1.7 and 3.1.11.20.5. The latest USAF PWS does not include those paragraphs. Please correct the references. | CLIN X007AC reference to Attachment 0017, AF PWS will be revised to read, "See Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraph 5.10." This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 87 | Schedule B & Section L | CLIN X002 & 1F(d)(2) | Based on the CLIN Structure and Section L, it appears that the Government would like to segregate Material and ODCs from labor, but this is not consistent with CLIN x002. Question: Will the Government clarify the handling of pricing for material and ODCs (except vehicles clarified in Government Response dated 12/28/16 line 17) in purely FPIF CLINS? | It is not the Government's intent to segregate normal materials and ODCs from labor within the CLIN structure. The FPIF CLINs (X002, Army and X006, Air Force) should cover the entire costs necessary for providing the required maintenance including labor and normal ODCs. The ODC CLINs (X003, Army, X007, Air Force, and X0015, MI-17) are for specifically authorized travel, contractor acquired property, services, local purchases, and training. These specifically authorized costs shall be authorized in advance by the Government. The dollar amounts for CLINs X003 and X007 are Government estimated amounts; the 'plug' amounts (less any materials overhead or handling fee) have been provided in Attachment 0020 of the solicitation. The solicitation is amended for revising CLINs X003 and X007 to read "Government Specifically Authorized ODCs" to differentiate them from the cost elements of the contractor provided CLIN X002 and CLIN X006 turnkey maintence efforts. Attachment 0020 will be also be changed to clarify this. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 88 | Section L | L.I.A.2), L.I.E I, and L.I.E.J | L.I.A.2) states "The offeror's proposal shall consist of seven volumes". It identifies Volume VI as Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Volume VII as Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations. L.I.E.I is titled VOLUME VI - SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN and L.I.E.J is titled Volume VI - SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS. Is it the Government's intent for L.I.E.J to be Volume VII or does the Government intend to include the Small Business Subcontracting Plan in the Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations Volume? | This was a typographical error. L.I.E.J. is Volume VII -- SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 89 | Section L | L.I.F(d)(2)(I) VOLUME III COST/PRICE | Please correct typo referring to CLIN X001 as the FPIF Maintenance Army CLIN. It should be X002. | This was indeed a typo, the FPIF Maintenance Army CLIN is X002. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 90 | Section L | NA | Section L still contains several areas that are not aligned with other sections of the RFP. For example the start date is still listed as 1 Oct 2018 (I.F.e.1)) which contradicts several other places in the RFP as well as KO guidance. Again primarily in the cost section of L several CLINs are called out that do not align with the CLIN schedule in section B. Will the Government please revise these sections so that any confusion and possible errors are eliminated? | The Amendment 0001 standardized the period of performance for the first year. While the award will be planned for FY17, the phase in period of performance will begin 1 October 2017 (FY18). Full performance will begin following the 2.5 month phase-in. Incentives will apply beginning the quarter after the phase-in is complete. The solicitation was scrubbed for ensuring consistency eliminating confusion. The expected contract performance phase-in date is 1 October 2017. The phase-in period will last 2.5 months and the base period will be 9.5 months of performance; regardless of award date. The option periods will be for one full year each. The Section L Cost Instsuctions were unclear. This change will be in solicitation amendment 0002 |
| 91 | Section L | FAR 52.215-20 - Requirements for Cost or Pricing Data or Information Other Than Cost or Pricing Data (OCT 2010)--Alternate III (Oct 1997). (pg 292) | Reference is made to Section L, pg. 292 contains FAR 52.215-20, Requirements for Cost or Pricing Data or Information other than Cost or Pricing Data (OCT 2010) –Alternate III (OCT 1997). FAR 15.403-1(b) states in part “The contracting officer shall not require certified cost or pricing data to support any action (contracts, subcontracts, or modifications) (but may require data other than certified cost or pricing data as defined in FAR 2.101 to support determination of a fair and reasonable price or cost realism)- (1) When the contracting officer determines that prices agreed upon are based on adequate price competition…" This program has been announced as a full and open competition and would appear to meet the exception requirements to certified cost or pricing data. Question: Will the Government delete this clause from Section L? | No. This clause is valid, yet the offeror is correct the Alternate III is incorrect. The Solicitation will be amended to add Alternate IV to FAR 52.215-20. "Alternate IV (Oct 2010). As prescribed in 15.408(l), replace the text of the basic provision with the following: (a) Submission of certified cost or pricing data is not required." Certified cost and pricing data is not required. Other than certified cost and pricing data is required. This change will be corrected in solicitation amendment 0002 |
| 92 | Section L | L.1.F.d.4 | The requirement states that the indirect rates proposed will become part of the contract. Question: Is it the Government's intent to only allow these specific pools (indirect rates) to be charged? Are they to be billed at actual DCMA-approved incurred rates throughout the resultant contract, fixed rates, or ceiling rates? | The offeror is correct the solicitation inappropriately states "If a handling rate, G&A rate or any other indirect rate, will be applicable to the NTE CLINs, provide the rate with your cost proposal, as such rate will then become part of the contract." If the offeror proposes no material handling rate, that committment will be incorporated into the contract and a material handling rate will not be modified into the contractor later and would be considered an unallowable cost for any Government contract. This change will be in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 93 | Section L | L.I.A, L.I.J.b | In Section L.I.A of the final RFP, the Government deleted the requirement to provide a commitment letter from the Project Manager; however, the requirement still exists in L.I.J.b. Question: Does the Government still require the Offeror to provide a commitment letter from the project manager? | No. The solicitation will be revised in solicitation amendment 0002 that a commitment letter for the program manager is not required. |
| 94 | Section L | L.I.E.a.4 | The RFP states "Given the data provided in the TDR regarding average age and experience of proposed workforce ..." Question: Given that the TDR does not include the average age and experience of the proposed workforce, on what basis should the Offeror explain the human capital approach? | The offeror is correct. Section L, a. SUBFACTOR 1 - VOLUME I – ARMY MANAGEMENT APPROACH, #4 will be changed to remove "Given the data provided in the TDR regarding average age and experience of proposed workforce". It is revised to read "Given the workforce statistics in TDR #57 ...." This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 95 | Section L | L.I.F.b.2 | The RFP states that Offerors are required to submit BOEs and that the "BOEs shall clearly demonstrate a crosswalk to the technical proposal and to information used from the TDR. This submission requirement also applies to all proposed subcontractors." Question: Can the Government please clarify what the proposed subcontractors are required to provide (i.e., since they would not be able to provide a crosswalk from the prime's technical proposal)? | The Prime Contractor shall clearly demonstrate a crosswalk to the technical proposal and to information used from the TDR. This includes the Prime Contractor providing this information concerning the work and tasks that will be performed by any and all subcontractors. |
| 96 | RFP Section L | B.1 | Paragraph B.1 describes the proposal submission requirements. Question: For Subcontractors providing a Cost/Price Proposal, can the Government please confirm that the subcontractors are required to submit a separate, sealed package DVD-R #3? | The prime contractor may include Subcontractor's cost information on the required DVD-R. In the understandable event a subcontractor or the Prime wishes to submit the subcontractor cost and pricing volume III separately, that is acceptable. Subcontract pricing submissions shall be required in accordance with the provisions in FAR 15.404-3(c). This will be added to solicitation amendment 0002 with wording substantially the same as "For all subcontracts meeting or exceeding the threshold of FAR 15.404-3(c)(1) the Prime offeror shall submit or cause to be submitted Volume III cost data on DVD-R. Because some subcontractors may have confidentiality concerns, this may be submitted on an additional DVD-R, and may be submitted from the subcontractor directly to the Government. If this information is submitted separately, it shall be submitted at the time and place stipulated in the solicitation and in the formats required in the solicitation. Late submissions will be addressed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(c)(3) Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals." This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 97 | RFP Section L | J | Paragraph J states Volume VI is the Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents, and Paragraph B.4 refers to Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents as Volume VII. Question: Can the Government please confirm that Volume VII is Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents? | This was a typographical error. L.I.E.J. is Volume VII -- SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 98 | L.1. | G. Volume IV- Past Performance | States "All other recent and relevant past performances will be listed on the Past Performance Contact Sheet (attachment 19)." Question: Is this requirement limited to those subcontractors that submitted a PPIS (Attachment 18)? | This requirement is limited to major subcontractors that submitted a PPIS (Attachment 18) |
| 99 | L.1. | G. Volume IV- Past Performance | States "All other recent and relevant past performances will be listed on the Past Performance Contact Sheet (attachment 19)." Question: Is this requirement limited to major subcontractors or can offeror's list any other subcontractors that is on the Offeror's team? | This requirement is limited to major subcontractors that submitted a PPIS (Attachment 18) |
| 100 | L.I.E.a and L.I.E.a.11 | Subfactor 1-Volume I-Army Management Approach. L.I.E.a and L.I.E.a.11 | The first paragraph under Subfactor 1 allows the offeror to attach changed pages from the solicitation outside of page count for proposed enhancements. Does this allowance (for changed documents outside of page count) also apply to the changed documents required for the incentive plan (L.I.E.a.11), which may not necessarily be "enhancements," but may require extensive proposed changes to Attachment 0008? | Section L.I.E.a states slip pages are not in the page count limit, which will include changes to Attachment 0008. The explanation and justification for the changes should be discussed in the integrated technical approach, which will be included in the page count. Please see the revised language in Section L clarifying the Goverment's requirement. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 101 | Section L and Attachment 0008 | L.1.E.a.11) and Attachment 0008 | If the offeror chooses to propose incentives other than but similar (i.e.: different measures) to those presented in Attachment 0008, will the offeror be deemed non-compliant and/or receive a Weakness during the evaluation phase? If proposing alternative incentives is acceptable, how will the Government ensure that discussions are held with all offerors prior to award to ensure clarity and fairness of Incentive Options during the evaluation process? | Offers that include different incentive pools and share ratios will meet the standard as long as fully justified as part of the integrated approach. Changes in incentive pool value and share ratio will be standardized within the TEP. |
However, any change to threshold mission requirements in the Daily, Monthly and Quality incentives that reduce the threshold minimum would either be deficient or require an amendment. The solicitation will be amended (solicitation amendment 0002) to clearly communicate changes must not reduce the requirement.
The Government intends to hold discussions with the contractors deemed in the competitive range to ensure clarity prior to award. Unless one contractor proposes to reduce threshold minimums, incentive changes proposed by one contractor will not be shared with other contractors.
| 102 | Attachment 0008 | |
| Incentives Determination Criteria | 2.3 SIF - Mission Performance (Aircraft Availability Commitment Target (AACT)) (SIF – |
MP (AACT)) ($300,000 annually).
| Page 15 of 19 | Paragraph 2.3 and sub paragraphs provide a detailed analysis on incentive calculations by aircraft. For situations out of the control of the contractor (e.g., USG-controlled issues, weather), will the USG adjust the availability targets accordingly? | Yes, see Attachment 0017, Air Force PWS, paragraph 6.1.1. | |||
| 103 | Attachment 0008 | 1.4.1 Supplementary Incentive Fee-Quality Assessment. 8.4.1.1-8.4.1.3 | Please confirm the references to 8.4.1.1 through 8.4.1.3 at end of second paragraph should be corrected to read 1.4.1.1. and 1.4.1.3 | Offeror is correct. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. | |
| 104 | Attachment 0008 | 1.4.1.1 Measurement 1 Incentive Measurement Procedures: Corrective Action Request (CAR) Deductions. 8.4.1.5 | Please confirm the reference to 8.4.1.1.5 should be corrected to read 1.4.1.1.5. | Offeror is correct. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. | |
| 105 | Attachment 0008 | 1.4.1.2 Measurement 2 Incentive Procedures: Percentage of Pass/Fail Inspections | Please confirm the reference to 8.4.1.2.1 should read 1.4.1.2.1. | Offeror is correct. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. | |
| 106 | Attachment 0008 | 1.4.2 Supplementary Incentive Fee – Quality of Issue (SIF-QI) | Please confirm the reference to Attachment 000, Performance Work Statement, in the first bullet under Table 6 should read Attachment 0001, Army Performance Work Statement. | Offeror is correct. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. | |
| 107 | Attachment 0008 | 2.4.1.2 Measurement 2 Incentive Procedures: Percentage of Conforms/Non-conforms Evaluations. | Please confirm the reference to Table 2 should read Table 8. | Offeror is correct. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. | |
| 108 | Attachment 0008, Incentive Determination Criteria | ||||
| Attachment 0006, Aircraft Daily Status Reporting Template | Para 1.3.1 | This paragraph and numerous other paragraphs in this document refer to "the number of measured fleets". However, the number is not specified nor are the grounds upon which to determine that number specified. Questions: |
1. Are the specified "fleets" the same as those listed in PWS Table 1 or as they are listed in Attachment 6, Aircraft Daily Status Reporting Template?
2. Are the TH-67C considered a separate fleet from the TH-67I or are they all part of the same fleet? (Table 1 in the PWS has them together, Atch 6 has them separate)
3. Are the UH-72A BWS considered a separate fleet from the Cairns UH-72A or are they all part of the same fleet? (Table 1 in the PWS has them together, Atch 6 has them separate)
4. Are the UH-60A+ Med listed in Atch 6 considered a separate unique fleet and are they included under the Incentive Determination Criteria?
5. Are the helicopters at Fort Benning listed in Atch 6 considered their own separate fleet and are they included under the Incentive Determination Criteria? 1. The specified fleets will be listed in the updated TDR document titled " 56-FY18-FY27 Projected Flight Hour Program". This document will be updated to reflect the "fleets" and posted in the TDR.
2. The Cairns TH-67C, Cairns TH-67I, and Shell TH-67C fleets are separate. TDR document " 56-FY18-Fy27 Projected Flight Hour Program" will be updated to reflect this.
3. The Cairns UH-72A and Shell UH-72A aircraft are separate fleets.
4. The UH-60 MEDEVAC aircraft are a separate fleet. Attachment 0008 Paragraph 1.3 states "aircraft fleets with a density of less than 10 aircraft or negligible student load as determined by the Government will not be incentivized for mission performance." 5. Aircraft at Fort Benning are maintained under a different contract and are not currently a USAACE fleet or incentived by the Fort Rucker Aviation Maintenance contract. These changes will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002.
| 109 | Attachment 0008 | 1.3.2 Supplementary incentive Fee - Monthly/surge mission Performance (SIF/MSMP) | Para 1.3.2 makes reference to Attachment 0022 which is Army Draft QASP. Should reference be to Attachment 0005 - Mission Performance Calculations? | Yes, offeror is correct. Attachment 0008 reference to Attachment 0005 will be revised. This change will be reflected in solicitation amendment 0002. |
| 110 | Attachment 8 | NA | With the introduction of reduced payments in the final RFP it appears the Government has shifted additional cost risk to the contractor. In light of this arrangement how does the Government intend on mitigating the effect of shortages of aircraft parts or transferred aircraft that do not meet standards as well as a number of other areas where the contractor has no control? This affects the contractors ratings for both reduced payments and incentives as well as impacts the FP resources. | This solicitation is designed for focusing on supporting the training mission. The final solicitation merely clarified the Attachment 0008 incentive structure regarding failure to meet the threshold per fleet. The breach of threshold has significant impact on the Army and AF missions. This solicitation is designed for ensuring that a balance between cost control and mission performance is optimized. The contract threshold is based on a fractional number of aircraft on site requested for training. In the Army case, the Contractor is not obligated to provide aircraft over the concurrency rate established in Attachment 0002. Unique circumstances will be part of normal contract administration. The Government will deal with sub-standard Government Furnished Property on a case by case basis including extending or adjusting acceptance window if Government Furnished Property is not to standard. |
| 111 | Attachment 8 | Para. 1.3.1: Supplementary Incentive Fee - Daily Mission Performance (SIF-DMP) | This is a FPIF contract. If a performance metric is not met, then the contractor does not receive the incentive for that metric. However, the RFP also adds in large financial penalties for not meeting 100% DMP for 7 or more days in a month. Therefore, there are actually 2 penalties for DMP: (1) loss of incentive, and (2) financial penalty. Is it the Government's intent to penalize the Contractor twice (i.e., financial penalty to target and loss of incentive) for the same failure of performance? | The contract is designed to incentivize performance not penalize contractors. The threshold is considered neutral. However, the Government is providing a monetary incentive to increase 100% DMP more than 6 days per month. Not earning the incentive is not a penalty. |
| 112 | Attachment 8 | Para. 1.4.2: Supplementary Incentive Fee – Quality of Issue (SIF-QI) | While the Government provides a detailed definition of controlled rejects as well as the IRAP process to reclaim, will the Government provide a definition of Uncontrolled Rejects to ensure a common understanding? | The Government has not defined uncontrollable rejects. The reject rate is defined in Attachment 0001, Army PWS, paragraph 5.2.76 as "...the number of aircraft rejected minus approved IRAPs divided by the total number of issued aircraft. These aircraft and systems are not 100% reliable; therefore, an allowable reject rate per fleet is established using historical data. The reject rate for each fleet will be measured on a monthly basis. All rejects are the Contractors responsibility." |
| 113 | Attachment 8 | Entire Document | This is a Fixed Price Incentive Fee contract. This structure encourages the contractor to minimize costs, and rely on performance incentives to generate profit. However, the large financial penalties throughout this RFP encourages the contractor to add in Risk costs in the proposal based on the various penalties. Is it the government's intent for the contractor to include cost of these risks in the base fee to offset the penalties? | The incentive plan detailed in Attachment 0008 is meant to incentivize not penalize the contractor. The government intends to award to a contractor it believes will meet the thresholds. |
The FPIF contract is a contract type used for optimizing cost and performance and balancing risk. The Government will not mandate how an offeror accounts for risk of failing to meet the required thresholds. The thresholds are considered achievable and implementation of the accountability decrement from target profit is considered unlikely.
114 Attachment 1//Attachment 8 Para. 3.1.1.8.2 (Attachment 1)/1.4.2 (Attachment 8): The Contractor shall manage maintenance to minimize uncorrected faults./The SIF-QI incentive rewards the contractors ability to provide the customer quality aircraft...The available monthly pool of $300,000 is subject to the following deductions for each occurrence; $500 per aircraft Alternate issue, $1500 per aircraft Progressive issue, $1500 per controllable reject, and a $50,000 deduction for each fleet that exceeds the allowable monthly reject rate (see
| Attachment 0001, Performance Work Statement, Table 1- Maximum Reject Rate and Allowable Shortcomings). | Is the Contractor penalized when the "Uncontrolled" reject rate exceeds the allowable reject rate in Attachment 1, Table 1? | The Government has not defined uncontrollable rejects. The reject rate is defined in paragraph 5.2.76 as "...the number of aircraft rejected minus approved IRAPs divided by the total number of issued aircraft. These aircraft and systems are not 100% reliable; therefore, an allowable reject rate per fleet is established using historical data. The reject rate for each fleet will be measured on a monthly basis. All rejects are the Contractors responsibility." | |
| 115 | Attachment 0009 | Material and Equipment (15 total files) TDR document "01-ADP Inventory Report May and NOV 16" | |
| TDR document 58-Software_GOTS_COTS | The 15 documents in Atch 9 provide a comprehensive listing of Government-Furnished items. Within the TDR is also a document entitled "01-ADP Inventory Report May and NOV 16", which provides a comprehensive list of ADP items, some of which also appear to be listed in the Atch 9 document. Question: |
1. Please verify that all of the items listed in the TDR document "01-ADP Inventory Report May and NOV 16" are also to be Government Furnished for use by the contractor in support of this contract.
2. Please verify that these ADP systems are all connected within the .MIL infrastructure and are not part of any contractor-provided corporate system or the "commercial network" listed in TDR document 58-Software_GOTS_COTS. 1. TDR Document 01-ADP inventory report May and NOV 16 was provided in the TDR as a request for information pertaining to current (W58RGZ-12-C-0123) contract historical data. The items listed are provided for information and may not all be provided for the next contract. All property being provided will be listed in the provided Attachment 0009, Attachment 0010, or in the TDR document titled 13-Contractor Acquired Property (Not yet reflected on Attachment 0009 or 0010).
2. ADP systems that can reside on the government network will reside there; generally all GOTS have the proper authorities to reside on the government network. Three GOTS systems QDARS, WEBASA, and ELAS will reside on the commercial network if used. The COTS systems will reside on the commercial network.
| 116 | TDR. Attach 9 & 10 | Attachment 9 (#1 - #15); | |
| Attachment 10 (#1 and #2) | TDR Attachment 9 (#1 - #15)and Attachment 10 (#1 and #2) lists all Government Furnished Property/Equipment. There are no assets to transport material listed in TDR Attachment 9 (#1 - #15). Question: It is our understanding that there are assets on current contract to transport material, but will these assets be available for the duration of the Ft. Rucker Maintenance Aviation Services (W9124G‐17‐R‐0002) contract? Please advise. | The current contract (W58RGZ-12-C-0123) has GSA vehicles to support the effort. The new contract states the Contractor shall provide all vehicles and equipment not provided as GFP necessary to support PWS requirements. GFP is listed Attachment 0009, Attachment 0010, or in the TDR document titled 13-Contractor Acquired Property (Not yet reflected on Attachment 0009 or 0010). GSA vehicle information for the new contract is provided on TDR document 21-FY16 GSA fleet data and utilization and includes data on which will remain GFP. |
117 Section M NA With the relatively open evaluation criteria in Section M, coupled with the ability to change PWS requirements, how does the Government intend on conducting a best value tradeoff source selection? There is virtually an unlimited number of possible trade offs the Government will have to consider. While not specific, it would appear that the offeror is referring to the Technical criteria. As addressed throughout the draft stage, offerors are not requested to parrot the Government PWS, they are requested to demonstrate a thoughtful analysis driven by the specific items of interest. Enhancements, including the cost for implementing them, must be specifically justified for providing a defined benefit.
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .