Attachment_-_Questions_and_Responses_0002.pdf

Bureau of Reclamation Solicitation No. 140R3026R0012 Amendment No. 0002

Questions and Responses Yuma Desalting Plant, Operation and Maintenance Support Services - IDIQ

1. Question – Section C.1.1 (Scope) requires O&M "on a 24 hour, 365 days per calendar year basis," and C.4.4 requires "the necessary number of operations shifts…100 percent of all…operations…at all times." However, C.2.4.1.2 (Business Hours) establishes day-shift hours (7:30 a.m.–4:30 p.m., M–F) for maintenance and administrative personnel. Please confirm the Government's intent that only Operations personnel are staffed on a 24/7/365 multi-shift basis, while Maintenance, Administrative, Engineering/Drafting, and QA/Safety personnel are day-shift (subject to exigency callout). If other classifications are expected to be on shift, please identify them.

Response – That is correct, routine around-the-clock coverage applies to Operations personnel only.

2. Question – For the required around-the-clock coverage, does the Government have a preferred or minimum shift configuration (e.g., number of shifts per day, minimum operators per shift) it expects at each operating level (CLIN 1 / 33% / 66% / full operation)? Or is the shift structure left entirely to the offeror, provided 100% coverage is maintained?

Response – The Government does not specify shift configuration or minimum operators per shift, those are left to the offeror. That said, existing configuration at activity level X.3.1 of 12 hour shifts and minimum two operators per shift has worked well for both the Government and previous awardees from both a performance and safety perspective.

3. Question – Please confirm whether shift differentials are required or expected to be included for the 25210 Water Treatment Plant Operator classifications working night/weekend shifts, or whether this is at the offeror's discretion. Wage Determination 2015-5475 (Rev. 30) does not appear to prescribe a night or Sunday differential for these classifications.

Response – On the question of shift differentials, the Government defers to applicable labor laws.

4. Question – Section C.2.4.1.3 requires the contractor to maintain position descriptions stating minimum qualifications, but the solicitation does not define minimum qualifications for the exempt positions (Contract Manager, Plant Superintendent, QA/QC Officer, Safety Officer, QA & Safety Officer, Finance/Personnel Administrator). Does the Government intend to specify minimum education/experience requirements for these positions, or are offerors to propose and define them?

Bureau of Reclamation Solicitation No. 140R3026R0012

Response – The Government does not specify minimum educational or experience requirements for the exempt positions, offerors are to propose and define their own. Pertinent exempt personnel do have to meet the requirements of C.4.5.

5. Question – Are there labor category descriptions available for any of the proposed classifications beyond the SCA Directory of Occupations mapping in Attachment 1B? If not, please confirm that offerors should rely on the SCA Directory of Occupations definitions (per WD 2015-5475) for non-exempt classifications and offeror-developed descriptions for exempt classifications.

Response – Offerors should rely on the SCA Directory of Occupations definitions (per WD 2015-5475) for non-exempt classifications and offeror-developed descriptions for exempt classifications.

6. Question – Attachment 1B (Levels of Performance) lists a combined "QA & Safety Officer" at CLIN 1, but separate "QA/QC Officer" and "Safety Officer" positions at the higher operating CLINs. Please confirm the Government's intent that the QA and Safety functions may be performed by a single individual at the lowest operating level (CLIN 1) and must be staffed as two separate dedicated positions at higher operating levels.

Response – Per Attachment 1B (Levels of Performance) the QA & Safety Officer functions can be performed by one person up to CLIN X.3.1. Above that, the QA and Safety Officer functions must be performed by two people. Please note Attachment 1B with “explanation” in the title is for informational purposes only and is obsolete. Please use Attachment 1B with “offeror complete” in the title when putting together your proposal.

7. Question – Given C.2.6.1(e) requires "one full time employee working a 40 hour shift" as the ES&H professional, please clarify whether the combined QA & Safety Officer at CLIN 1 satisfies the full-time safety-professional requirement, or whether a dedicated 40-hour safety professional is required at all operating levels.

Response – Yes. The combined QA & Safety Officer satisfies the full-time safety-professional requirement up to CLIN X.3.1. Above X.3.1 a dedicated Safety Officer is staffed separately, consistent with Attachment 1B.

8. Question – Attachment 1B classifies all Foreman positions (Operations, Electrical & Instrumentation, Mechanical), the Shift Lead Plant Operator, and the Lead Instrument Mechanic as SCA (non-exempt) classifications. Please confirm the Government's intent that these lead/foreman positions are not expected to hold hiring/firing authority and are properly classified as SCA-covered (non-exempt), such that the SCA wage determination rates and fringe benefits apply.

Bureau of Reclamation Solicitation No. 140R3026R0012

Response – Lead/foreman positions are not expected to hold hiring/firing authority and are classified as SCA-covered (non-exempt). Historically these positions have received rates above SCA minimum due to higher responsibility and to attract and retain qualified personnel. They typically receive the same fringe benefits as other non-exempt personnel. Page C-11, Reference 52.237-3 Continuity of Services.

9. Question – Will the Government provide labor category descriptions and or minimum qualifications for the detailed labor categories?

Response – Other than specific certifications, such as those in C.4.5, C.2.4.3.1 & C.2.4.3.1, the Government does not. Please refer to the response to question 5.

10. Question – In attachment 01CC the Government has included the exempt escalation rate (cell D4) in the formulas for some Foremen positions that are also designated as non-exempt and subject to the Service Contract Act. Likewise with the Exempt overtime factor (cell D7). Can the Government please clarify the exemption status of these positions (Foreman - Electrical & Instrumentation and Foreman – Mechanical)?

Response – Attachment 01CC is a template for the presentation of the offeror’s estimated costs for each position. It is up to the offeror to populate with formulas and factors. To this end, no formulas were provided for fully burdened rates. The Government will remove all remaining formulas in the amended document. Please see Question 8 regarding the status of Foreman positions.

11. Question – In attachment 01CC the fully burdened rates for Consultants (rows 51 and 52) are pre-calculated based on a Consultant O.H. rate (cell D8). Can the Government define what a “Consultant O.H. rate” is?

Response – Please see response to Question 10. It is up to the offeror to populate the fully burdened rates with costs and factors. The Consultant O.H. rate (cell D8) is the single overhead markup percentage the offeror applies to the consultant base rate to calculate the for the two consultant classifications — Professional Engineering Consultant and Principal Management Consultant — which correspond to the subcontracted professional engineering services described in SOW C.9 (and C.5). It is used in lieu of the full employee fringe/G&A stack because these are third-party/subcontracted resources rather than direct hires. Offerors shall enter their proposed consultant overhead percentage in D8. It is up to the offeror to determine which factors apply.

Please see question 10 regarding the use of Attachment 01CC.

12. Question – In attachment 01CC the fully burdened rates for Consultants (rows 51 and 52) are pre-calculated based on a Consultant O.H. rate (cell D8). Can the Government define what a “Consultant O.H. rate” is?

Bureau of Reclamation Solicitation No. 140R3026R0012

Response – See the response to Question 11.

13. Question – Can the Government please provide instructions on what offerors should enter in rows 2-8 of attachment 01CC?

Response – These are common cost factors typically used in service contracts. They are not mandatory nor meant to be all inclusive. It is up to the offeror to determine which of these it uses and how. Offerors should populate these Rows 2–8 are the burden and markup assumptions that drive every fully burdened rate, in paired Exempt and Productive (non-exempt) columns.

Offerors shall enter their proposed percentages (and the overtime multiplier): PT&I, H&W, escalation, G&A, profit, overtime rate, and the Consultant O.H. rate, together with the associated statutory burdens shown (Social Security, Medicare, overhead, 401k match, workers' compensation, and AZ & Federal unemployment). Offerors shall use these inputs to feed the Fully Burdened Rate and Fully Burdened Overtime Rate calculations using their formulas.

14. Question – How will the information in rows 2-8 of attachment 01CC be evaluated?

Response – The burden/markup inputs in rows 2–8 are used to derive the fully burdened labor rates. The Government will evaluate Attachments 01C and 01CC the resulting rates (not the individual inputs in isolation) for fairness, reasonableness, and realism per Part E.4, and to confirm the total ceiling adequately covers anticipated NTE T&M labor hours under CLINs X.7 and X.10.

15. Question – Cell A56 of attachment 01CC indicates that positions in green are “Currently above SCA.” Can the Government clarify what this means?

Response – Currently above SCA" identifies classifications historically paid above the applicable SCA/WD 2015-5475 minimum wage rate for the mapped SCA occupation code, generally due to higher responsibility (lead/foreman roles) or recruitment/retention needs. The highlighting is informational, indicating where historical/market wages have exceeded the SCA floor. Page C-11, Reference 52.237-3 Continuity of Services.

16. Question – Does the Government expect offerors to propose wages above the SCA minimum wage for positions that identified with green text in attachment 01CC?

Response – Offerors are not required to exceed the SCA minimum for the green-highlighted positions; at minimum, offerors must meet the applicable SCA wage and fringe requirements.

The green highlighting is advisory — it signals positions where historical wages exceeded the SCA floor and were realistic pricing matters for recruitment and retention (Page C-11, Reference 52.237-3 Continuity of Services).

Bureau of Reclamation Solicitation No. 140R3026R0012

17. Question – What percentage above the SCA minimum wage should offerors propose for positions that identified with green text in attachment 01CC?

Response – The Government does not prescribe a specific percentage. Offerors should propose rates they determine are realistic to recruit and retain qualified personnel for these higher-responsibility positions (Page C-11, Reference 52.237-3 Continuity of Services).

18. Question – The definitions included in section B-3 of the solicitation_0001 document states that “CLIN X.12 (Phase Out transition) applies to year 5 only.” Can the Government please clarify what offerors should propose for CLIN A.12 in attachment 01C?

Response – Phase-Out Transition (X.12) applies to the final performance period only. In the Base Period, A.12 is to be used only if the optional subsequent period is not exercised (i.e., if the Base Period is the final period of performance). Offerors should price A.12 only under that contingency and should not price Phase-Out in intermediate periods.

19. Question – The definitions included in section B-3 of the solicitation_0001 document states that “CLIN X.11 (Phase In transition) applies to year 1 only.” Can the Government please clarify what offerors should propose for CLIN B.11, C.11, D.11, E.11, and F.11 in attachment 01C?

Response – Phase-In Transition (X.11) applies to the first performance period only. Offerors should not price Phase-In in any period after the first. The current 01C mislabels transition lines in several later periods (e.g., "Phase Out Transition" appears on X.11 lines); the amended 01C will correct the labeling so that only the first period carries Phase-In and only the final period carries Phase-Out.

20. Question – Does the term “Productive” in cells E1 and I1 of attachment 01CC mean “Non- Exempt”?

Response – In the context of the 01CC burden columns, "Productive" corresponds to the non-exempt (SCA-covered, hourly) workforce, as distinct from the "Exempt" column. (Separately, "productive hours" is defined in SOW C.1.6 as actual labor hours worked, excluding training, holidays, and leave.).

21. Question – Under Subfactor D: Staffing, the solicitation requires Offerors to provide signed letters of intent for Key Personnel, as well as demonstrated experience, education, certifications, and specialized skills for all proposed personnel. Given the isolated performance location in Yuma, Arizona, which has a limited pool of specialized industrial water desalination and high-pressure reverse osmosis technicians, these requirements may materially constrain competition by non-incumbent offerors, particularly where qualified incumbent employees are unwilling to provide commitments to competing employers before award. Will the Government amend this subfactor to permit offerors, for positions to be filled following award, to submit comprehensive

Bureau of Reclamation Solicitation No. 140R3026R0012 position descriptions, minimum qualification standards, and a robust recruitment/retention plan for Key Personnel in lieu of signed letters of intent at the proposal stage? Under this approach, Key Personnel qualification documentation and signed commitments will be submitted by a specified post-award deadline before the awardee begins performance.

Response – Page E-12 Subfactor D: Staffing; 3. Signed letters of intent for Key Personnel is removed from this section and No. 3 now “Reserved”.

22. Question – Attachment_01B_Levels_of_Performance_OFFEROR_COMPLETE.xlsx Will the Government provide insight as to what offerors are to fill out in this file? It appears the Government is looking for offerors to add columns to include the base wages for all proposed classifications, is this correct?

Response – Attachment 01B (OFFEROR_COMPLETE) provides the Government's staffing levels by CLIN. Offerors shall enter their proposed base (SCA) wage rate for each listed classification in the designated wage-rate field; offerors are not to alter the headcounts. The staffing counts shown are the Government's levels of performance.

23. Question – Attachment_01CC_Schedule_of_Fixed_Hourly_Labor_Rates- OFFEROR_COMPLETE.xlsx "The following positions are identified as being over SCA minimums: Water Treatment Plant Op - Foreman - Operations, Water Treatment Plant Op - Senior Plant Operator, Water Treatment Plant Op - Relief Plant Operator, Water Treatment Plant Op - Shift Lead Plant Operator, Foreman - Electrical & Instrumentation, Instrument Mechanic - Lead, Foreman - Mechanical, Welder, Combination, Maintenance, Guard II.

Will the Government provide the current wages of these positions?"

Response – The Government is not privy to what rates staff are currently receiving. Offerors should conduct market research and/or contact incumbents for this information.

24. Question – Attachment_01E_Service_Contracts_- _Pricing_Summary__OFFEROR_COMPLETE.xlsx "Will the Government provide insight as to what this file should reflect?

1. Is it the Government's intention for the file to be filled out purely at the Prime level?

2. Is it the Government's intention for the file to be completed to display the Prime's proposed ""service contracts"" only? For example, just the analytical service contracts as listed in the Attachment_19_Current_AL_Small_Service_Contracts.xlsx file.

3. Is it the Government's intention for the file to be for both 1 and 2 listed above?"

Bureau of Reclamation Solicitation No. 140R3026R0012

Response – Yes, Attachment 01E is completed at the Prime level. It reflects the Prime's proposed pricing for service/task-order work, Labor, FCCM (if applicable), and the enumerated Other Direct Costs - broken out by task order, with the rollup to G&A, Fee, and Total. It is not a restatement of the Government's existing small analytical-laboratory service contracts (Attachment 19), which are provided for information only and are the responsibility of the Government. In short: the intent corresponds to item (1)/(2) combined - the Prime completes 01E with its own proposed task-order service pricing and ODCs; it is not a transcription of the Attachment 19 contracts.

25. Question – Attachment_1_Statement_of_Work_.pdf Will the Government provide the minimum level of staffing to be on-site for the Security Guard Services section?

Response – Reference C.7 Security Guard Services. The Government may order Security Guard Services under Optional CLINs A10 – D10 Armed Guard Services and will be determined when and if the option is exercised.

26. Question – 140R3026R0012-Solicitation_0001.pdf & Attachment_01C_Price_Breakdown- OFFEROR_COMPLETE.xlsx "It appears after reviewing the file ""Attachment_01C_Price_Breakdown- OFFEROR_COMPLETE.xlsx"" that the total evaluated price is calculated as the total sum of the CLINs listed below.

Ordering Period 1: A.3.1, A.8.3, A.11

Ordering Period 2: B.3.1, B.8.3

Ordering Period 3: C.3.1, C.8.3

Ordering Period 4: D.3.1, D.8.3

Ordering Period 5: E.5.4, E.8.3, E.11

Ordering Period 6: F.5.4, F.8.3, F.11

However, 140R3026R0012-Solicitation_0001.pdf - Part E13 states the total evaluated price is calculated by the summation of ALL schedule items (CLINs) on Section B in the Attachment_01C_Price_Breakdown-OFFEROR_COMPLETE.xlsx file.

Please verify that the total evaluated price is based off the description listed in 140R3026R0012- Solicitation_0001.pdf - Part E13."

Ordering Period 6, CLIN F.10 lists a quantity of 12, should this be 6?

Bureau of Reclamation Solicitation No. 140R3026R0012

Ordering Period 6, CLINs F.8.1 - F.8.4 NTE values reflect a 12 month POP, should they be divided by 2?

Ordering Period 2, CLIN group B.6 lists B.6.2, B.6.3, and B.6.4. Should these CLINs be B.6.1, B.6.2, and B.6.3?

Ordering Period 1, CLIN A.7 lists a value of $5,000.00. All other ordering periods do not contain a value, is this correct?

Response – The total evaluated price is calculated per Part E.4 (page E-13): the summation of all Section B Price Schedule items in Attachment 01C. The subset of CLINs the offeror listed is not the evaluation basis; all schedule items are summed.

Correct. The B.6 sub-CLINs were mislabeled. They are corrected to B.6.1 (33% operation), B.6.2 (66% operation), and B.6.3 (Full operation), consistent with the X.6 grouping in all other periods.

Order Period 6 (F) represents the six-month option to extend under FAR 52.217-8, the Armed Guard quantity (F.10) and the Materials NTE values (F.8.1–F.8.4) will be adjusted to reflect a six-month period of performance.

27. Question – Attachment_01E_Service_Contracts_- _Pricing_Summary__OFFEROR_COMPLETE.xlsx

This file states that all ODC's are "non fee bearing". Will the Government verify that no fee may be applied to ODC's?

Response – Confirmed. No fee may be applied to ODCs. Attachment 01E designates ODCs as non-fee-bearing (and inclusive of G&A), consistent with Part B.7, which prohibits fee on the cost-reimbursable CLINs (X.8 Materials/Small Chemicals and X.9 Travel).

28. Question – Attachment_01B_Levels of Performance_OFFEROR_COMPLETE-VS Attachment_01B_Levels of Performance_Explanation:

Under CLIN 3.1, why are there 2 different levels of performance totals, 43-42 respectively.

Response – Use the OFFEROR_COMPLETE version of Attachment 01B, which reflects a CLIN X.3.1 total of 43. The 'Explanation' version (showing 42) is obsolete and provided for information only; disregard it where the two conflict.

29. Question – Will the Government be issuing instructions to offerors on what they should include in their proposals (e.g., FAR 52.212-1)?

Bureau of Reclamation Solicitation No. 140R3026R0012

Response – Yes. Instructions to offerors are provided at Part E.1 (FAR 52.212-1, RFO Deviation) and the Addendum at E.2.

30. Question –Will the Government be providing the methodology and/or factors for evaluation of proposals IAW with 49 CFR 15.304?

Response – Yes. Evaluation factors and methodology are provided at Part E.4 (FAR 52.212-2, RFO Deviation), pages E-10 through E-14. Note: the question cites "49 CFR 15.304," which appears to be a typo for FAR 15.304; E-13 expressly states price will be evaluated "in accordance with FAR 15.304.

31. Question –We are interested in this RFP. Can you please provide a link to get it?

Response – .

https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/aa48052656264dce82dbeb9aae580bcf/view

32. Question –Is there any incumbent/recompete or this is a brand-new project? If yes, could you please provide us with their award number or even if the customer bought similar services in the past.

Response – 140R3022D0013.

33. Question – Is certified cost and pricing data required per FAR clause 52.215-20 found on page E-6 of the solicitation_00001 document?

Response – In accordance with 15.403-2(b)(3) Prohibitions on obtaining certified cost or pricing data, “When a commercial product or commercial service is being acquired” This procurement is being awarded in accordance FAR Part 12 (RFO) Acquisition of Commercial Products and Commercial Service. Page E-6, Clause 52.215-20 is removed from the solicitation via Amendment 0002.

34. Question – While Part E includes the Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 providing general instructions to offerors, the solicitation does not appear to specify administrative formatting requirements for the proposal submission. To ensure all offerors submit uniformly formatted proposals for the Government's evaluation, will the Government please issue an amendment providing specific formatting instructions, including maximum page limits for each factor, allowable font sizes, margin requirements, and any exclusions from the page count (e.g., resumes, cover letters, tables of contents)?

Response – No page limitation, Formatting 12 point font Arial or New Times Roman, 1” margins and page numbering limitations are imposed; Reference page E3 added #7 to

Bureau of Reclamation Solicitation No. 140R3026R0012 solicitation. Offerors should submit concise, complete proposals addressing all factors in Part E.4.

35. Question – 140R3026R0012-Solicitation_0001 Evaluation Factor 2 states, "Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) shall be completed and returned by the proposal due date. Nonresponsive references may affect ratings." While Offerors make every diligent effort to ensure former clients complete and submit PPQs in a timely manner, Offerors ultimately possess no control over whether third-party Government or commercial reference points of contact choose to return questionnaires by the solicitation closing date. Under FAR 15.305(a)(2) and established GAO bid protest precedent, agencies may not evaluate an offeror unfavorably or assess negative ratings solely due to the non-responsiveness of an offeror’s third-party customer references. Will the Government please clarify or amend this provision to confirm that an Offeror will not be rated unfavorably or penalized if a designated reference fails to return a PPQ by the proposal due date, provided the Offeror submitted valid point of contact information?

The solicitation requires offerors include an “Index” and “Enclosures List” with their Price proposal. Will the Government clarify what info/data these two elements are to include?

Response – “Nonresponsive references may affect ratings.” Has been removed from solicitation evaluation factor 2 Past Performance page E-12.

The Index should be a navigational listing of proposal contents by section/page. The Enclosures List should itemize all attachments submitted with the price volume (e.g., completed Attachment 01C, Attachment 01CC, and any supporting pricing documentation).