AHFTS_QA_SET_1.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 43 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Advanced Helicopter Flight Training Support
- Solicitation number
- W9124G18R0009
About this file
Q&A's Set 1
View the file
Other files
Show all 27
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
Summary
| Advanced Helicopter | ||||
| SOLICITATION: W9124G18R0009 | ||||
| Industry Questions & Answers | ||||
| Reference | Question(s) | Government Response | ||
| 1 | Attachment 6 - IGCE | Line 14: The formula for these cells (Columns B-H) only includes the data from lines 6-11. Should the data from line 12 also be included? | ||
| Cell C20: Is 66 the correct number? Based on information in A8-A12 the requirement appears to be 76. | The Government has disclosed the IGCE to all potential offerors in order to neutralize any competitive advantage that may result from the prior disclosure of this information. The Government will not comment further upon this document or information. | |||
| 2 | Attachment 6 - IGCE | Line 14 (Fringe Cost) attempts to capture the total of the salaries above (Lines 6-12). However, the formula in cell B14 only captures B6..B11, and misses B12 ($821K in Base Year). This results in a miscalculation of fringe costs, G&A, and profit that carries throughout the entire contract – resulting in a total contract values that is over $3M too low. Question. Will the government please correct or clarify the discrepancy. | The Government has disclosed the IGCE to all potential offerors in order to neutralize any competitive advantage that may result from the prior disclosure of this information. The Government will not comment further upon this document or information. | |
| 3 | CDRLs 002 and 003 | Will the government please clarify the submittal requirements for CDRLs 002 and 003? For these CDRLs submittal information indicates the initial submittal is due the 3rd workday after Sept 30, and annually thereafter. For this program, when would the first submittal for CDRLs 002 and 003 be due? | The contractor shall submit the initial deliverable for CDRLs 01, 02 and 03 on the third business day after September 30th, as indicated on those forms, or at the end of the phase-in period, whichever occurs earlier. | |
| 4 | CDRL 1 | This CDRL references a monthly staffing report, but there is no reference to this report in the PWS. Will the Government please update the PWS to include the monthly staffing report? | Please see Amendment 02 which provides revised Exhibit 1-CDRL's. CDRL 1 references Section C 5.6 of the PWS. | |
| 5 | CLIN 0001 | CLIN 0001 Phase In: Given that there is an incumbent contractor not subject to bidding phase-in cost, would the government consider making this CLIN cost reimbursable or Firm Fixed Price against a Government provided not to exceed plug number? | The Government will not provide a "plug" number for this CLIN. | |
| 6 | Contract Volume | Does the Government intend for Offerors to provide a Contract Volume? | See revisions to Section L and M in Amendment 02. | |
| 7 | Contract Volume | Factor 1 – Technical Capability requirements description is vague when compared to Factor 2. Question: Does the government have a preference as to format our outline of the technical capability description? For example, would an outline for this Factor matching the PWS outline be acceptable? | The Government does not have a preference. The format described in the question is acceptable; regardless of format, it is incumbent upon offerors to address, clearly and completely, all areas of the PWS in their Technical Capability proposal. | |
| 8 | Clauses 52.222-48 | The RFP indicates that this effort is exempt from this clause, however Wage Determination Lists were provided. | Please see Amendment 02 which removes the X in front of the clause 52.222-48 contained within 52.204-8 under Section K. | |
| 9 | Clauses 52.222-52 | The RFP indicates that this effort is exempt from this clause, however Wage Determination Lists were provided. | Please see Amendment 02 which removes the X in front of the clause 52.222-52 contained within 52.204-8 under Section K. | |
| 10 | Employee Training Agreement | Can you please confirm that PWS 1.6.17 is the only PWS paragraph that describes the requirements for the Employee Training Agreement? There are references to section 4.1 of the PWS, which existed in the Draft RFP but was deleted from the Final RFP. |
| PWS 1.6.17 discusses the Employee Training Agreement. PWS 3.7 references the agreement but states that the training agreement criteria is listed in PWS 4.1. Section H describes the Training Agreement Deduction. Section L of the RFP and the corresponding Section M both also refer to PWS 4.1 as being the PWS paragraph that describes the agreement. However, there is no PWS 4.1 in the Final RFP. | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation for corrections to all references to section 4.1. This has been changed to reflect section 1.6.17 in the RFP. | |||
| 11 | Employee Training Agreement | RFP, Section L Page 69, Volume I, Factor 2, Staffing and Management Approach states “Proposed plan to execute the Employee Training Agreement Program specified in PWS 4.1 and a copy of the agreement that the Offeror / Contractor intends to enter into with its affected employees.” However, there is not a Section 4.1 in the PWS. Can the Government please clarify that the correct PWS reference is PWS 1.6.17? | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation for corrections to all references to section 4.1. This has been changed to reflect section 1.6.17 in the RFP. | |
| 12 | Employee Training Agreement | The last bullet refers to the plan to execute the Employee Training Agreement Program specified in PWS 4.1 and a copy of the agreement that the Offeror / Contractor intends to enter into with its affected employees. | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation for corrections to all references to section 4.1. This has been changed to reflect section 1.6.17 in the RFP. | |
| 13 | Employee Training Agreement | Is the "copy" of the proposed Employee Training Agreement included or excluded in the 50-page limit for Volume I? | Included | |
| 14 | FBO | The Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website shows a change on July 5, 2018 as a modification/amendment. There are no new or revised documents to the change, including an amendment document. Can the Government clarify what are the changes on July 5, 2018? | No changes were made. | |
| 15 | Federal Government Holidays | PWS 1.6.3 and 1.6.4 discusses Federal Government Holidays and Hours of Operation. However, the 2 week period normally associated with the “Holiday Xodus” over the Christmas and New Year’s holiday is not discussed. Similarly, Days of No Scheduled Activities (DONSAs) are not discussed. |
Question 1: Can the government identify the number of training days for each contract period?
Question 2: Can the government confirm if the Holiday Xodus is included in the training calendar provided by the government?
Question 3: Are the DONSAs included in the training calendar as provided by the government and/or are they coordinated by the contractor for government approval? 1. The Government cannot identify the actual number of training days for each contract period. The contractor is required to provide training as stated in sections 1.6.3, 1.6.4, 5.3.1.2, 5.3.1.3 and other PWS provisions.
2. Holiday Exodus and DONSA's are scheduled for the benefit of the students; therefore, contractors are still required to perform any training or other contract requirements, unless the facility is closed as specified in PWS Section 1.6.4.
| 16 | Government/Contractor Provided Items | PWS paragraph 3.3 states that the “Government will provide applicable flight suits, flight gloves, Aviation Life Support Equipment (ALSE) and safety equipment.” Does this include flight line boots? What other safety equipment does the government provide? | Attachment 3 in Amendment 02 identifies the equipment that will be issued to the contractor's employees. |
| 17 | Model Contract, Page 43 of 83 | In Clause 52.252-1 it states, "The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer." There is not a requirement in Section L to deliver a "Contracts" volume. In what volume should these types of data be submitted? Is the Government expecting a Model Contract to be submitted with the proposal? | See revisions to Section L and M in Amendment 02. |
| 18 | NRCM FIs | PWS 5.4.2 specifies a requirement for CH-47 FE NRCMs but no requirement for CH-47 FIs. In 1.6.11.3.1/2 NRCM Flight Instructor qualifications are described in detail. Please clarify if there is a requirement for NRCM FIs. | There is no current requirement for NRCM Flight Instructors (FI). |
| 19 | OCI | Based on our review of the RFP package, it appears that FAR Part 9.5 OCI language was not included in the solicitation requirements. Is it the intent of the USG to incorporate an OCI requirement to this RFP to preclude potential offerors from engaging in acts that could present the appearance of an OCI concern while performing work on other USAACE contracts that are associated with or provides Helicopters Maintenance for the Advanced Flight Training Support Contract? | Amendment 02 incorporates an OCI provision. |
| 20 | Past Performance | The Evaluation of Past Performance lists the areas of evaluation as: Quality of Service, Schedule, Business Relations, and Customer Satisfaction. These do not map to the questionnaires provided as Attachment 5 (Performance, Managerial, Personnel/Experience, Contractual Issues). | Please see amendment 01 to the solicitation which provides a revised Attachment 5 PPQ |
| 21 | Past Performance - Consent Letters | Please confirm consent letters are only required for companies performing a significant portion of the proposed effort (25%). | Correct. |
| 22 | Past Performance - PPQ | It appears that the subjects listed in the table do not apply to this procurement. Would you please review and confirm the contents? | Please see amendment 01 to the solicitation which provides a revised Attachment 5 PPQ |
| 23 | Past Performance - PPQ | Section J Attachment 5 as Past Performance Questionnaire. The header on the document says Attachment 6. | Please see amendment 01 to the solicitation which provides a revised Attachment 5 PPQ |
| 24 | PPQ | In preparation of our proposal submission of the subject opportunity a question/clarification request was raised in regards to (1) the PPQ - the RFP's Attachment 5 (PPQ) appears to be for a different solicitation; and (2) the Relevant Contracts Format - the RFP indicates that a specific sheet will be required for the "Specific Relevant Contracts Format" and is referred to as Attachment 5 - which is the questionnaire. Can you please provide clarification and/or revised version(s) as necessary? | Please see amendment 01 to the solicitation which provides a revised Attachment 5 PPQ |
| 25 | PPQ | The PPQ file identified as Attachment 5 has "Attachment 6" as the title at the top of the first page. Should this title text read "Attachment 5"? | Please see amendment 01 to the solicitation which provides a revised Attachment 5 PPQ |
| 26 | PPQ | The PPQ file "Attachment 5" appears not to be the appropriate PPQ for Relevant Past Performance for this effort. For example, on the document's second page, under BACKGROUND INFORMATION, Item #3, the second table (with "Primary Mission" and "Secondary Mission" columns) contains factors which are outside the scope of the typical Relevant training provided by Offerors. We do not see how this PPQ can be given to our Relevant customers and yield productive information for the Government. | Please see amendment 01 to the solicitation which provides a revised Attachment 5 PPQ |
| 27 | PPQ | Section L, Volume II: Factor 3 – Past Performance instructions, one of the bullets under Paragraph #5 is Specific Relevant Contracts Format. This seems to ask for a detailed description of each Past Performance effort including rationale for asserting relevance. We are confused by the first sentence under this bullet: "Sheets in accordance with Attachment 5." Does this simply mean that our Past Performance examples described in Volume II must be the same contracts for which we are soliciting Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 5)? | Yes, as stated in Section L, Volume II: Factor 3 - Past Performance Questionnaire section of the RFP "See Attachment 5, Past Performance Questionnaire. For the contracts identified on each Specific Relevant Contract Reference, the offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts. " |
| 28 | PPQ - Proposal Due Date | If "Attachment 5" is replaced with a revised/new document, will the Government extend the proposal due date, to allow adequate time for customers to respond to the PPQs? | Please see Amendment 01 for revised closing date of the RFP. |
| 29 | PPQ | Page 2 of 3 in ATTACHMENT_5_-_Past_Performance_Questionaire_(002) includes a table of contract attributes to be used to assess relevance to the AHFTS contract. However, these attributes do not appear to clearly align with the requirements of this solicitation. – for example: Training Opposing Forces, Training Brain (TBOC), War gaming Experimentation, Test, & Evaluations, Foreign Military Studies Office (FMSO), University of Foreign Military & Cultural Studies (UFMCS), etc. Please confirm this is the correct list of items for relevancy. | Please see amendment 01 to the solicitation which provides a revised Attachment 5 PPQ |
| 30 | PPQ | Is it the Government’s intent to receive from the offeror Sections 1, 2 and 3 of the Attachment 5, PPQ as our submission for the Specific Relevant Contracts section of the PP volume? And then to receive, from our customers directly, the completed Attachment 5 in its entirety? | Offerors shall submit their past performanec references on Attachment 5, Specific Relevant Contracts Format, with their proposals; the Government will only accept Past Performance Questionnaires directly from an offeror's customer. |
| 31 | Pricing | In Volume IV of the Price Proposal section, the first bullet states that the price narrative should explain details including fully burdened rates used, however the 3rd bullet down states the pricing worksheet requires unburdened rates. Can the government please confirm that we should be using unburdened rates? | Please see Amendment 02 to the RFP which requires unburdened hourly rates. |
| 32 | Pricing | On the Summary Roll Up tab the Subcontractor Price that is on the individual tabs is not included in the pricing for the Roll Up. Please clarify. | Please see Amendment 02 to the RFP which provides a revised Attachment 4-Pricing Worksheet |
| 33 | Pricing | OY1 Total Direct Labor on the Summary Roll Up tab only picks up the first line of direct labor entries (Cell E3) whereas it should pick up the total (Cell E16) as on the other OY entries for Total Direct Labor. Please clarify. | Please see Amendment 02 to the RFP which provides a revised Attachment 4-Pricing Worksheet |
| 34 | Pricing | Would the government be responsive to removing the 2080 hours per year in the Summary Roll Up tab header? The direct labor hours required to perform the effort each year is provide in the base and option year tabs. | Please see Amendment 02 to the RFP which provides a revised Attachment 4-Pricing Worksheet |
| 35 | Pricing | Should the Schedule B (Item No 0001 - Net Amount) cell F15 pull from the Summary Roll-Up tab B12 (Firm Fixed Price) cell? It is currently pulling from B5 cell (Total Direct Labor), which is not including all of your required build-ups. | Please see Amendment 02 to the RFP which provides a revised Attachment 4-Pricing Worksheet which removes Schedule B tab since you are required to fill out section B as part of a completed and signed SF-33 IAW Section L & M of the solicitation. |
| 36 | Pricing | Should the Summary Roll Up tab in the pricing worksheet include the Subcontractor Price? | Please see Amendment 02 to the RFP which provides a revised Attachment 4-Pricing Worksheet |
| 37 | POC | I am confused as to who the proper POC is & what contracting office is making the solicitation. The RFP Standard Form 33 indicates Issued By MICC – Fort Rucker in Block 7 (& also indicated as the submission address in Block 8). Section L requires submission of Past Performance Questionnaires, as well as our questions on the RFP/PWS to you or Linda Whitlock at MICC-Eustis. FBO also indicates you & Ms. Whitlock as the POC & Contracting Officer. Which MICC is it accurate to indicate as making this solicitation? | MICC Fort Eustis is responsible for soliciting and awarding this contract; MICC Fort Rucker is responsible for administering the contract. |
| 38 | PRS | Page 2, Performance Requirements Summary. Item 4 indicates an AH-64D Flight Training Requirement for 82 student daily, but PWS 5.4.2 indicates 64 students daily. Question: Can the government clarify this requirement? | The AH-64 daily student load is 64 |
| 39 | PWS | There are multiple references to the Employee Training Agreement Program at "PWS 4.1". Should this reference be to PWS 1.6.17? | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation for corrections to all references to section 4.1. This has been changed to reflect section 1.6.17 in the RFP. |
| 40 | PWS, Page 13 | Para. 1.3 specifies the Objectives of the USAACE include - "Support of EURO-NATO and Foreign Military Training." Will the resultant contract have FMS requirements? If so, will the successful offeror be provided the FMS Case Number? | This contract does not involve Foreign Military Sales (FMS). |
| 41 | PWS, Sect L, and Section M - PWS - pages 22 - 23, Section - pag 41, and Section - pag 77 | Several pages throughout the RFP refer to para 4.1, Employee Training Agreement, presumably in the PWS. However, the PWS does not contain any such reference. Please clarify. | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation for corrections to all references to section 4.1. This has been changed to reflect section 1.6.17 in the RFP. |
| 42 | PWS 1.3 | Third bullet refers to support for EURO NATO and Foreign Military Training, but there is no further reference to international training in the PWS. Question: Will the winning contractor be required to obtain Technical Assistance Agreements (TAAs) or coordinate other export control activities in conjunction with this contract? | No |
| 43 | PWS 1.6.10 | PWS 1.6.10 outlines Key Personnel performance and qualification requirements. Question: Does the government expect that these KPs will not be active instructors as well? In other words, would it be acceptable for one or both KPs to be active instructors as long as one were always available between the times specified in PWS 1.6.10.1? | There is no expectation that the KPs serve in any instructor role. |
| 44 | PWS 1.6.20 | PWS 1.6.20 indicates that the phase-in will be a maximum of 30 days Does this mean the phase-in could potentially be shorter than that amount of time? | No |
| 45 | PWS 5.4.2 | 5.4.2 outlines a very robust training schedule with a lengthy daily flying window supporting three separate aviation battalions. However, the PWS does not outline any contractor scheduling requirements at all. Question: Should bidders assume that contractor personnel will simply be integrated into the daily scheduling process within each unit? If so, how is individual availability due to vacation, sick, etc. accounted for in the scheduling process? | The government maintains the training schedule based on the flow of students throughout the year. The contractor’s requirements are defined in PWS paragraph 5.4.2. It is up to the contractor to determine their manning levels to account for vacation, sickness, etc. in accordance with their companies leave/benefits policies. |
| 46 | PWS 1.6.11.3.2 | 1.6.11.3.2 outlines experience requirements for Non Rated Crew Member Flight Instructors (FIs) and Flight Engineers (Fes), but PWS 5.4.2 appears to require only CH-47 FE NRCM personnel (non-instructor). Question: Can the government confirm that CH-47 FE NRCM personnel will perform only crew duties and no instruction? | There is currently no requirement for any NRCM to perform Flight Instructor (FI) duties. |
| 47 | PWS | Evaluation Criteria states ""Whether the Offeror identified the names of the Key Personnel who will perform under this contract, provided resumes that clearly demonstrate that they satisfy or possess all applicable certifications, security clearances, and other qualifications required for their designated positions and provided Letters of Commitment signed within 60 days of the due date for proposal submission." Question: The NISPOM (DoD 5220.22M) paragraph 7-101a.(1) states, “..A security requirements clause and a Contract Security Classification Specification shall be incorporated in the solicitation and in the subcontract..”. Please clarify if the security requirements clause and a Contract Security Classification Specification will be incorporated in the solicitation and a DD254 issued with the contract? | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation which states a Special Agreement Check and Tier 1 investigation using SF-85 to obtain and maintain a Government issued CAC is required . No DD254 is required. No security clearance is required. |
| 48 | PWS | Reference 1.6.20 and Section M, Evaluation of Factor 2: Both sections reference security clearances. Please clarify whether personnel will require security clearances. | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation which states a Special Agreement Check and Tier 1 investigation using SF-85 to obtain and maintain a Government issued CAC is required . No DD254 is required. No security clearance is required. |
| 49 | PWS 1.6.7 | Sixth bullet outlines security classifications up to the Top Secret level. However, PWS 1.6.11 does not specify personnel security clearance levels for any of the positions identified. Question: Can the government clarify personnel security requirements for this contract? | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation which states a Special Agreement Check and Tier 1 investigation using SF-85 to obtain and maintain a Government issued CAC is required . No DD254 is required. No security clearance is required. |
| 50 | PWS, Page 15 | “The contractor shall comply with FAR 52.204-2, Security Requirements. This clause involves access to information classified "Confidential," "Secret" or "Top Secret" and requires contractors to comply with (1) the Security Agreement (DD Form 441), including the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (DoD 5220.22-M) and (2) any revisions to DoD 5220.22-M; notice of which has been furnished to the contractor.” Question: Is this a classified contract? When will the DD254 be provided? | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation which states a Special Agreement Check and Tier 1 investigation using SF-85 to obtain and maintain a Government issued CAC is required . No DD254 is required. No security clearance is required. |
| 51 | PWS 5.4.2 | 5.4.2, second note indicates that NRCM CH-47 FE personnel will perform Crew Chief duties for the UH-60 when not instructing students. Question: Are CH-47 FEs typically qualified to perform CE duties on another aircraft, or is training required? | NRCM instructors are not a requirement under this solicitation. |
| 52 | PWS 5.4.4 | PWS 5.4.4 outlines the weekly Temporary Student Capacity Variations (TSCVs) allowed under this contract prior to incurring a financial deduction. These work out to:UH-60 IP – 2 of 80 = 2.5% UH-60 ME – 2 of 60 = 3.33% AH-64 IP – 2 of 320 = 0.625% CH-47 IP – 2 of 80 = 2.5% CH-47 FE – 0.5 of 25 = 2% Question: Would the government consider revising these TSCV thresholds to make the percentages more consistent across the platforms? If not, could the AH-64 IP requirement be adjusted to be more consistent with the others? (e.g., 8 of 320 would be 2.5%, matching the UH-60 and CH-47 IP TSCVs) | No. The TSCV calculation is not based on a percentage of student load. The training of students is the mission of the USAACE, so the maximum students must be trained every day. |
| 53 | PWS 5.6 | PWS 5.6 describes a Bi-Weekly Manpower Report requirement, but Solicitation Exhibit 1 indicates that this is a monthly requirement? Question: Can the government clarify these requirements? | Monthly |
| 54 | PWS | Neither PWS Part 6 nor the main solicitation flow down the requirement for adherence to DCMA Instruction 8210.1C, Contractor’s Flight and Ground Operations. Question: Should bidders expect to be required to meet the Contractor responsibilities outlined in this instruction under this contract? | DCMA Instruction 8210.1C is a joint service document. For the U.S. Army, it is called AR 95-20 and it is referenced in PWS Part 6 as the fourth regulation listed. |
| 55 | PWS Paragraphs 1.6.16.1 through 1.6.16.5 | sections do not request Contractor’s proposed processes or plans for new hires, conducting or tracking refresher and recurrence training, qualification training or evaluations, and do not request that Contractors describe their systems and processes to avoid an employee entering the non-qualified workforce. Would the Government please clarify the PWS to provide any advanced stage designation/certification requirements specific to USAACE/AHTFF training (i.e. minimum hours to be designated an NVG IP or Instrument Examiner? | The flight training support to execute the advanced rotary wing training courses consists of all modes/types of flight (D, N, NVG, INST). There is no contract requirement nor intent to designate a contract personnel Instrument Examiners, Standardization Instructor Pilots. All requirements are contained within the PWS. |
| 56 | PWS Paragraph “1.6.17 Employee Training Agreement” | states, “The contractor shall establish an Employee Training Agreement Program for those personnel hired into positions where training provided by the Government to an employee is recognized as a costly, marketable commodity (primarily, but not excluding, RIT, Aircraft Series Qualifications, etc.). This training agreement between the contractor and the employee is to help ensure that a contractor employee who accepts training at Government expense under this contract is willing to incur an obligation to work under the contract for a period of two (2) years.” |
“Section H – Special Requirements” of the PWS, goes on to state, “The contractor shall submit, as part of its proposal, a method to compensate the Government for a pro-rata share of the unliquidated training expense…The contractor may submit a written request to the Contracting Officer for relief from this employee training agreement, if the U.S. Army will still receive, either directly or indirectly, an added benefit.”
| What types of “added benefit” will the Government accept when the contractor requests relief from the employee training agreement deduction? | An example of a potential waiver is if a contractor is hired as a DAC who continues to train flight students at USAACE. In this case, the Government is still receiving benefit for the training provided to the former contract employee. | |||
| 57 | PWS Paragraph 5.6 | States Contractor shall submit a Bi-Weekly Manpower Report to the Contracting Officer and Contracting Officer Representative, but there is not a corresponding CDRL in Exhibit 1.Will the Government please provide the corresponding CDRL for this report? | Please see Amendment 02 which provides revised Exhibit 1-CDRL's. CDRL 1 references Section C 5.6 of the PWS for the Manpower Report. | |
| 58 | PWS Part 6 refers to Applicable Publications | Will the Government please clarify that this is a list of all published standards that apply to the requirements in sections 1.6.11, 1.6.12, 1.6.13, 1.6.14, 1.6.15, 1.1.16 and 1.6.17? | The publications listed are referenced for all aspects in the conduct of this contract. | |
| 59 | PWS Part 6 refers to Applicable Publications | Will the Government please provide Offerors a copy of the QASP and any forms utilized for assessing performance of instructors, crew, non-rated crew and flight personnel on incumbent contract? | The QASP is an internal Government document and will not be released. The contractor should develop their own checklists / surveilance guides to evaluate their own performance as part of their Quality Control Plan. | |
| 60 | PWS Part 6 refers to Applicable Publications | Will the Government please additionally provide Offerors any Collective Bargaining Agreement in force and impacting DAC and contracted personnel? | There is no contractor CBA in effect on this contract. | |
| 61 | Quality Control Plan | Where in our proposal response should we provide the Quality Control Plan? Should it be an attachment to the Technical Volume, Factor 2? Please also confirm that is is not part of the Technical Volume page count? | Please see amendment 02 to the solicitation in changes made to Section L. | |
| 62 | Quality Control Plan | Paragraph 1.6.1 states that the QCP will be provided with the proposal submission. Question: Will the Government clarify if the QCP is to be submitted as an annex to the Technical Volume or as a stand-alone document? | Please see amendment 02 to the solicitation in changes made to Section L. | |
| 63 | Quality Control Plan | Please clarify, where the Quality Control Plan (QCP) is presented in the proposal and its impact on page count limits. In PWS 1.6.1, the requirement to provide a QCP appears to ask for considerably detailed information. In Section L instructions, we see no mention of where the QCP is to be presented. Is the QCP to be included in Volume I … or as an attachment to Volume I … or is it to be a separate freestanding document (identified how)? In particular, if it is included in Volume I, will the QCP count against the page limit for Volume I? Our concern is that the amount of information required for the QCP would consume a significant portion of Volume I page count. | Please see amendment 02 to the solicitation in changes made to Section L. | |
| 64 | Quality Control Plan | Is the Quality Control Plan excluded from page count limitations? | Please see amendment 02 to the solicitation in changes made to Section L. | |
| 65 | Section B and Section F, Pages 2 and 28 | CLIN 0002 on page 2 (section B) states an 11-month period of performance. CLIN 0002 on page 38 (Section F) shows a 12-month period of performance POP 28 Jan 2019 to 27 Jan 2020. Please clarify. | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation for corrections to all CLINS Period of Performance dates. | |
| 66 | Section B & F | Section F lists the Period of Performance as 28-DEC-2018 to 27-JAN-2026, however the Summary Roll-Up tab in Attachment 4, Pricing Worksheet lists the Period of Performance as 16 September 2018 - 15 September 2025 | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation for corrections to all CLINS Period of Performance dates and a revised Attachment 4-pricing spreadsheet. | |
| 67 | Section B Item 0004, 1003, 2003, 3003, 4003, 5003, 6003 | This CLIN indicates "The Government has provided an estimate for weekend and holiday hours in accordance with sections 5.3.1.3 & 5.4.2 of the PWS." QUESTION: Should bidders price this weekend and holiday CLIN as a single day? Or should the price reflect support for an entire a weekend (Saturday and Sunday) plus adjoining holiday (Friday or Monday)? | The Government has provided the number of $100,000 for each of the respective CLINS that should be used. No further number is required from the Contractor. | |
| 68 | Section B Item 0004, 1003, 2003, 3003, 4003, 5003, 6003 | This CLIN indicates “The Government has provided an estimate for weekend and holiday hours in accordance with sections 5.3.1.3 & 5.4.2 of the PWS.” QUESTION: The referenced PWS sections do not provide “an estimate for weekend and holiday hours” that should be priced for this CLIN. Will the Government provide an aggregate number of instructor hours that should be priced in this CLIN? | The Government has provided the number of $100,000 for each of the respective CLINS that should be used. No further number is required from the Contractor. | |
| 69 | Section B Item 0004, 1003, 2003, 3003, 4003, 5003, 6003 | This CLIN indicates “The Government has provided an estimate for weekend and holiday hours in accordance with sections 5.3.1.3 & 5.4.2 of the PWS.” QUESTION: Should the price quoted in this CLIN reflect a requirement for weekend and/or holiday support by all ‘training capabilities’ at the density in the bulleted list in PWS 5.4.2? How is the contractor reimbursed if only one section (e.g. UH-60 A/L IPs) performs weekend or holiday support? | The Government has provided the number of $100,000 for each of the respective CLINS that should be used. No further number is required from the Contractor. | |
| 70 | Section B Item 0004, 1003, 2003, 3003, 4003, 5003, 6003 | This CLIN indicates “Not to Exceed $100,000.” QUESTION: Should the maximum Contractor entry for this CLIN be $100,000 even if the calculated maximum exceeds that amount? | The Government has provided the number of $100,000 for each of the respective CLINS that should be used. No further number is required from the Contractor. | |
| 71 | Section C, paragraph 1.4 | The PWS states “The contractor shall perform Flight Training Support for both aircrew and non-aircrew personnel.” QUESTION: Both ‘Aviators’ and ‘Non-Rated Crew Members’ are considered ‘aircrew’ personnel. Will the Government identify the ‘non-aircrew’ personnel that must be trained on this contract? | This is a Flight Training Support contract. Not all positions are providing "training". The CH-47F FE will not be training anyone but will act as a crewmember providing "support" to the flight training being conducted. | |
| 72 | Section C, paragraph 1.6.1 | The PWS states “The offerors shall provide a QCP to the Contracting Officer with their proposals.” QUESTIONS: Section L and M do not indicate the QCP should be submitted or that it will be evaluated. Section L does not contain information on which volume to include the QCP, nor the format, nor page limitations. Section M does not indicate what ratings will be used to evaluate the QCP or what the standards are used to achieve those ratings. Question: Does the Government require submission of the QCP as part of the proposal? If so, will the Government provide in Section L appropriate information regarding the volume to include the QCP, the desired format, and required page limitations, and provide in Section M the evaluation standards and criteria? | Please see amendment 02 to the solicitation in changes made to Section L. | |
| 73 | Section C, paragraph 1.6.11.3.2 | The PWS states “NRCM Flight Instructors (FI) shall have 8+ years as a non-rated crewmember and have been previously designated as an FI in the aircraft identified in paragraph 5.4.2 (as applicable for the position being filled). Flight Engineers (FEs) shall have 5+ years as a non-rated crewmember and have been previously designated as an FE in the aircraft identified in paragraph 5.4.2 (as applicable for the position being | ||
| filled). QUESTION: Rated crewmembers as Instructor Pilots only require 5 years of rated aviator service to perform on this contract as flight instructors, yet Non-Rated Crewmembers require 8+ years’ experience to perform as Flight Instructors. Will the Government consider aligning the lower risk Non-Rated Crewmember experience requirement with the higher risk Rated Crewmember experience requirement? | The Government cannot change its requirement. | |||
| 74 | Section C, paragraph 1.6.19 | The PWS states “Once the contractor employee’s information is registered, the COR will electronically forward the form to the individual contractor employee. Each contractor employee is required to electronically fill out the CAC request form. Once the form is properly filled out and has been vetted/cleared by the ISO, the COR will direct the contractor to go to the designated in-processing facility and obtain the CAC.” QUESTION: Does the COR forward the CAC form to the Contractor employee’s personal email or company email, or is it sent to the Contractor’s assigned .mil email account? | The COR will forward the CAC form to the employers email address of the contractor personnel. | |
| 75 | Section C, paragraph 3.3 | The PWS states “The contractor shall request flight uniforms and safety equipment for new employees after the new employees have provided a current FAA Second Class Medical |
Certificate.
PWS 1.6.12 states “Contractor NRCMs shall maintain an annual current Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Class 3 Medical Certificate through the duration of the contract or, if a member of the National Guard or Reserves, a DD Form 2992 (Medical Recommendation for Flying or Special Operational Duty).”
| QUESTION: Does presentation of the NRCM’s Class 3 Medical Certificate entitle the Contractor to request flight uniforms and safety equipment for the NRCM? | All contract personnel involved with actual conduct of flight will receive the appropriate flight uniforms and/or equipment. | ||
| 76 | Section F, CLIN 0001 | The Delivery Information states the CLIN 0001 Delivery Date as “POP 28-DEC-2018 TO 27-JAN-2019”. |
- Section B, ITEM NO 0001 states “Phase-In Services, The Contractor shall conduct a 30-day Phase-In in accordance with the Performance Work Statement (Section 1.6.19).”
- Section C, 1.6.20 states “[The Phase-In Period] will be up to a maximum of 30 days in duration.”
| QUESTION: Though the CLIN and PWS 1.6.20 specify a maximum 30-day Phase-In period, Section F identifies a 31-day span from 28 December to 27 January. Is the Phase-In period 30 days or 31 days? | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation for corrections to all CLINS Period of Performance dates. | |||
| 77 | Section J, Attachment 2 | The List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments itemizes Attachment 2 as the WD 15-4631 and Attachment 3 as WD 15-451. QUESTION: The supplied Attachment 2 is WD 15-4513 covering Georgia Counties of Clay, Early, Miller, Seminole. PWS 1.6.5 specifies the Place of Performance as the primary work locations shall be on-site at Fort Rucker, Alabama, the surrounding airports, stage fields, and Remote Training (RT) sites within the local flying area. Since all flight operations initiate daily from Fort Rucker, AL it is unclear how a Georgia Wage Determination should be applied to this contract. Will the Government identify the subset of personnel they consider the Georgia Wage Determination to apply to? | Please see amendment 02 to the solicitation which provides one updated wage determination for the AL area only. | |
| 78 | Section J, Attachment 2 & 3 | The List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments itemizes Attachment 2 as the WD 15-4631 and Attachment 3 as WD 15-4513. QUESTION: The supplied Attachment 2 is WD 15-4513 and Attachment 3 is WD 15-4631. Should the Contractor assume the Attachment number and titles are just mis-matched? | Please see amendment 02 to the solicitation which provides one updated wage determination for the AL area only. | |
| 79 | Section J Attachment 5 | Section J Attachment 5 as Past Performance Questionnaire. The header on the document says Attachment 6. Will the Government please clarify that the correct reference on the header should be Attachment 5? | Please see amendment 01 to the solicitation which provides a revised Attachment 5 PPQ | |
| 80 | Sec. L, I, Vol I: Factor 2, bullet 2. | “Proposed organizational chart showing positions, decision authority, and what parts of the organization are responsible for managing and accomplishing each task.” | ||
| Will the government please clarify the level of tasks that should be shown on the organizational chart. Does the government intend that the chart should show the general IP/ME/FE tasks or all the Specific Tasks listed in PWS Part 5? Or some other level of tasks? | Contractor's Organizational Chart should show positions (PM, APM, and if used Fleet Leads, Section Leads, etc.) & what the decision authority is at each level, etc. This encompasses a chart of the internal make-up of the offeror. | |||
| 81 | Section L, General, Volume I: Factor 2 | The 4th bullet requires that bidders Key Personnel “Resumes shall clearly demonstrate that the Key Personnel satisfy or possess all applicable certifications, security clearances, and other qualifications required for their designated positions.” QUESTION: The PWS 1.6.10 identifies two Key Personnel and does not identify any ‘certifications’ for either position. Will the Government identify what certifications they require in resumes for the Key Personnel? | The requirement states all APPLICABLE certifications, security clearances and other qualifications required. Clearly demonstrate the qualification requirements as listed for the positions within section 1.6.10 of the PWS. | |
| 82 | Small Business Participation Plan | Are we required to include the Small Business dollar amounts from the Small Business Participation Plan in Volume IV, Pricing Proposal in order to provide sufficient information to enable the Government to fully evaluate our price proposal? | Yes | |
| 83 | Source Selection Information | Section L, Paragraph A, #4 requires reporting of any information about the solicitation, and refers to Section J Attachment 6. Section J does not refer to this document or requirement. Will the Government please clarify the content in Section J subsumed within the reporting requirement? | This is stating that the source selection information in section J attachment 6, was provided to potential offeror(s). Therefore, that same information in attachment 6 is being provided all potential offerors via the RFP. If any potential offeror or subcontractor had access or received the information in the attachment provided or regarding this RFP, is then required to notify the Government IAW the information & content listed in Section L, Paragraph A #4. | |
| 84 | Subcontracting Plan | Clauses 52.219-9 and 52.219-7003 require the offeror to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan; however, Volume III - Factor 4 is specifically for a Small Business Participation Plan. Please clarify where in the proposal is the offeror to include the Small Business Subcontracting Plan. | Please see Amendment 02 to the solicitation which includes the Small Business Subcontracting Plan | |
| 85 | Subcontracting Plan | Can the Government please provide clarification on what Volume is to be used to submit the Small Business Subcontracting Plan? | Please see Amendment 02 to the solicitation which includes submission of the Small Business Subcontracting Plan specifically | |
| 86 | Table Column (4) | The PRS table Required Service item 3 (in column 1) lists the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) in column 4 as “.5 aircraft support per five-day work week”. QUESTION: Does this mean a FE supporting at least half of a scheduled flight period each day of a five-day work week has achieved the AQL? | The 1:2 aircraft:FE set is a daily requirement. PWS paragraph 5.4.4 states "the maximum acceptable TSCV per five (5) day work week" is .5 aircraft. In a five-day workweek, a single FE can be absent for one day. | |
| 87 | Table Column (4) | Is the use of AMRDEC permissible in lieu of emailing our proposal? | No, please provide electronic copies as stated in Sections L&M. | |
| 88 | Table Column (4) | Does the Government require submission of a completed Section K? If so, which Volume should it be included in? | Please see Amendment 02 for revisions to Sections L and M. | |
| 89 | Table Column (5) | The PRS appears to amend the FFP nature of this solicitation to a FFP-LOE contract. QUESTION: Shouldn’t the quality metric for an FFP CLIN be ‘results’ based (i.e. whether students met performance goals) and not based on the number of instructor hours provided? | The metric is based on the number of students the contractor trains per day, not the student's performance, because the contractor may not be responsible for training the same students from start to finish. | |
| 90 | Table Column (5) | The PRS appears to amend the FFP nature of this solicitation to a FFP-LOE contract. QUESTION: If the Government makes a Labor Hour calculated deduction for substandard quality (i.e. doesn’t give credit for the labor hours billed), isn’t this by definition a T&M or FFP-LOE CLIN? | The Government has determined that a FFP-LOE or T&M contract type is not appropriate, in part, because the Government's requirements are clearly defined. Deductions for defective services, including failing to provide the required level of services, are consistent with FAR 52.246-4 and other remedies. | |
| 91 | Training Days | PWS 1.6.3 and 1.6.4 discusses Federal Government Holidays and Hours of Operation. However, the 2 week period normally associated with the “Holiday Xodus” over the Christmas and New Year’s holiday is not discussed. Similarly, Days of No Scheduled Activities (DONSAs) are not discussed. |
Question 1: Can the government identify the number of training days for each contract period?
Question 2: Are the Holiday Xodus and DONSAs included in the training calendar as provided by the government and/or coordinated by the contractor for government approval? 1. The Government cannot identify the actual number of training days for each contract period. The contractor is required to provide training as stated in sections 1.6.3, 1.6.4, 5.3.1.2, 5.3.1.3 and other PWS provisions.
2. Holiday Exodus and DONSA's are scheduled for the benefit of the students; therefore, contractors are still required to perform any training or other contract requirements, unless the facility is closed as specified in PWS Section 1.6.4.
| 92 | W9124G18R0009_AIP, | |||
| Section B, ITEM NO 0002 | Section B, ITEM NO 0002 states a quantity of 11 months. However, in Section F, CLIN 0002 provides for a POP of 12 months. Please clarify. | See Amendment 02 to the solicitation for corrections to all CLINS Period of Performance dates. | ||
| 93 | W9124G18R0009_AIP, Section B Item 0001 | This CLIN indicates the Phase-In price should be IAW the PWS Section 1.6.19. PWS Section 1.6.19 is titled Common Access Cards (CAC). QUESTION: Should this CLIN be priced IAW the PWS section 1.6.20? | Please see amendment 02 to the solicitation which changes CLIN 0001 to reflect "IAW PWS section 1.6.20". | |
| 94 | Wage Determination | Wage Determination (WD) 2015—4631 Rev 2 (for the State of Alabama, Area: Counties of Barbour, Coffee, Dale) dated 12/30/2016 is not the most recent. According to the DOL website a more recent WD for this same area was identified as WD 2015-4632 Rev 6, dated 01/10/2018. Does the USG plan to amend the RFP to reflect the most recent WD? | Please see amendment 02 to the solicitation which provides an updated wage determination for the AL area only. | |
| 95 | WD | Why did the USG send two wage determination sheets? Which one are we to use? | Please see amendment 02 to the solicitation which provides one updated wage determination for the AL area only. | |
| 96 | Contract Volume | Does the Government require submission of a completed SF-33? If so, which Volume should it be included in? | Include the SF33 in Volume IV. See Amendment 02 for revisions to Sections L & M. |
| 121 |
| 122 |
| 123 |
| 124 |
| 125 |
| 126 |
| 127 |
| 128 |
| 129 |
| 130 |
| 131 |
| 132 |
| 133 |
| 134 |
| 135 |
| 136 |
| 137 |
| 138 |
| 139 |
| 140 |
| 141 |
| 142 |
| 143 |
| 144 |
| 145 |
| 146 |
| 147 |
| 148 |
| 149 |
| 150 |
| 151 |
| 152 |
| 153 |
| 154 |
| 155 |
| 156 |
| 157 |
| 158 |
| 159 |
| 160 |
| 161 |
| 162 |
| 163 |
| 164 |
| 165 |
| 166 |
| 167 |
| 168 |
| 169 |
| 170 |
| 171 |
| 172 |
| 173 |
| 174 |
| 175 |
| 176 |
| 177 |
| 178 |
| 179 |
| 180 |
| 181 |
| 182 |
| 183 |
| 184 |
| 185 |
| 186 |
| 187 |
| 188 |
| 189 |
| 190 |
| 191 |
| 192 |
| 193 |
| 194 |
| 195 |
| 196 |
| 197 |
| 198 |
| 199 |
| 200 |
| 201 |
| 202 |
| 203 |
| 204 |
| 205 |
| 206 |
| 207 |
| 208 |
| 209 |
| 210 |
| 211 |
| 212 |
| 213 |
| 214 |
| 215 |
| 216 |
| 217 |
| 218 |
| 219 |
| 220 |
| 221 |
| 222 |
| 223 |
| 224 |
| 225 |
| 226 |
| 227 |
| 228 |
| 229 |
| 230 |
| 231 |
| 232 |
| 233 |
| 234 |
| 235 |
| 236 |
| 237 |
| 238 |
| 239 |
| 240 |
| 241 |
| 242 |
| 243 |
| 244 |
| 245 |
| 246 |
| 247 |
| 248 |
| 249 |
| 250 |
| 251 |
| 252 |
| 253 |
| 254 |
&P of &N
Sheet1
| 8 | Subcontractors Sealed Packages | 95 | Please verify if our subcontractors are going to be required to submit sealed packages. If so, to what address will they need to submit them?” | |
| 5 | 3 | Section (b) Volume II – Price. “Contractor Pricing Matrix. The Offeror shall complete Schedule B, and three Pricing Matrices (1, 2, and 3) found at Attachment 2 and 2a. The Offeror shall populate all Pricing Matrices for the Base Period and the two (2) Option Periods. The labor category rates for Matrix 1 shall show individual elements of costs rolling up to a fully-burdened rate. Contractor pricing shall be in accordance with FAR 52.215-21 (Requirements for Cost or Pricing Data or Information Other Than Cost or Pricing Data—Modifications). The Offeror shall also complete Attachment 2a (Pricing Matrix 3) and provide price breakdown for PWS tasks identified”. | 95 | Matrix 1 includes some examples of Indirect Rates (i.e., Overhead and G&A), but does not include others, such as Fringe and Subcontractor Handling. Please confirm that Matrix 1 is just an example, and the Offerors should detail all applicable Indirect factors in the Matrix? |
Please also confirm that we do not have to provide Indirect Rate disclosures for subcontractors. This would require sealed bids.
| 17 | 5 | Does the Government require a sealed package with Matrix 1 and Matrix 2 filled out for subcontractors, or do we only fill out Matrices 1 and 2 for the prime? |
| 56 | 1 | Will sealed packages and a certificate of certified pricing data be required by the prime and all Subcontractors providing over $500,000 in effort? |
image1.emf image2.png
File details come from the government source that posted it.