Guard Services Solicitation No. 693JK423R500001 Amendment No. 3 As PUBLISHED in PDF on June 21 2023.pdf

Amendment No. 3

To

FORMAL Solicitation No. 693JK423R500001

For

Guard Services for DOT

This Solicitation Amendment No. 3 provides the following answers to the following questions posed by one or more prospective offerors:

QUESTION 1: Regarding Section C.1.4.2 of the Solicitation’s Statement of Work (SOW): Would DOT consider the possibility of adding, there, a requirement that the “contractor shall maintain post orders and review annually with COR for necessary changes”?

ANSWER 1: DOT has considered and has rejected such a change.

QUESTION 2: Regarding Section C.1.4.5 of the Solicitation’s Statement of Work (SOW): Does that section mean that a qualified/fully certified PSO must wait 10 days prior to assignment? And should any such requirement be struck from the SOW?

ANSWER 2: DOT’s cognizant Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) must sign off on a proposed PSO’s training file prior to that PSO starting and receiving the suitability determination from PERSEC.

And the foregoing process should be completed before a proposed PSO is cleared to begin work on the contract resulting from the subject Solicitation. Accordingly, DOT cannot and is not removing, from Section C.1.4.5 of this Solicitation, any waiting-time for a proposed PSO to be assigned to this Solicitation’s resulting new DOT Guard Services contract.

QUESTION 3: Regarding Section C.4.1.8 of the Solicitation’s SOW: Will DOT please confirm that there is no limit on the number of background/suitability applications that the government can process?

ANSWER 3: Although the subject Solicitation does not go so far as to specify any such limit on background investigations, all offerors must understand: (a) that only background investigations for PSOs working on the DOT Guard Services contract will be completed; and (b) that DOT will not pass along any investigations to other agencies not affiliated with the DOT Guard Services contract; and (c) that all PSOs who leave the DOT Guard Services contract will have their investigation cancelled.

QUESTION 4: Regarding Section C.4.1.9 of the Solicitation’s SOW: What happens in the event that the government experiences pauses/delays in providing investigations?

ANSWER 4: Unlike MOUs/MOAs that are impacted by Continuing Resolutions (CR), DOT investigations are not impacted, except by Government Shutdowns which impact the entire federal government. DOT does not venture any prediction about when any such Government Shutdowns might occur, or about how long any might last.

QUESTION / OBSERVATION 5: Regarding Section C. 5.2.2.1 of this Solicitation’s SOW: FPS standard for medical/physical re-examination is every five (5) years. Also the same for Physical Abilities (C.5.2.3.3) and Drug Screenings (C.5.2.4.1).

ANSWER / RESPONSE 5: DOT is a delegated agency and reviews FPS requirements for Armed Guard Services; and DOT reserves the right to adjust those requirements as it sees fit.

QUESTION / OBSERVATION 6: Regarding Section C.5.2.3.1.2 of this Solicitation’s SOW: These are hazardous/inclement weather conditions where PSOs are normally pulled inside for safety.

ANSWER / RESPONSE 6: Officers are not pulled inside for rain, cold, humidity or wind. These are climates that come with physical demands that all PSOs should be able to perform their duties in. It is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure that adequate coverage and rotations are in place to reduce the risks during extreme weather events.

QUESTION 7: Regarding Section C.5.3.1 of this Solicitation’s Statement of Work: Are these standards consistent with the government agency’s investigation process?

ANSWER 7: Yes. However, current DOT policy is under revision and the subject SOW-section may be modified once the new DOT PERSEC Order is published some time in the future. But DOT is not promising to make any such modification.

QUESTION 8: Regarding Section C.5.3.2.1 of this Solicitation’s Statement of Work: Should “1600.8” replace “Contractor Information Worksheet”?

ANSWER 8: No. DOT has determined that Section C.5.3.2.1 will be left as is.

QUESTION 9: Regarding C.6.2.2 of this Solicitation’s SOW: Does this mean that as FPS makes changes to training requirements that DOT requirements adjust?

ANSWER 9: DOT is a delegated agency and reviews FPS requirements for Armed Guard Services; and DOT reserves the right to adjust those requirements as it sees fit.

QUESTION / OBSERVATION 10: Regarding Section 6.4.1.2 of the Solicitation’s SOW: Exhibit 7 should replace all of the listed exhibits in this section.

ANSWER / RESPONSE 10: Exhibit 7 is GSA Form 3155 Offense/Incident Report. It does not outline training requirements. And DOT has accordingly determined that Exhibit 7 shall not replace all of the listed exhibits in Section 6.4.1.2.

QUESTION / OBSERVATION 11: Regarding C. 6.4.1.3 of this Solicitation’s Statement of Work: Current FPS standard requires 36 hour refresher.

ANSWER / RESPONSE 11: Exhibit 14E Contractor Provided Refresher Training does total 36 hours. There is a typo on page 1 that is Bold 40 Hours just above the Subject – Hours – Scope headers. It does contain the following: “There may be some fluctuation in the actual time covered for each subject, but under no circumstances shall the Instructor provide less than 36 hours of training.”

QUESTION / OBSERVATION 12: Regarding C.9.11.5 of this Solicitation’s SOW: The questioner is concerned that this is out of scope. The questioner points out that no post orders on the contract require performance of these actions. And the questioner refers, further, to Sections C.9.17.2 and C.21.1 of this Solicitation’s Statement of Work.

ANSWER / RESPONSE: 12: C9.17.2 – This is not out of scope. It states that PSOs will not perform duties that are outside the scope of security, such as mopping a wet floor of the lobby or cleaning up something someone dropped, or delivering a package or receiving something on behalf of the government.

QUESTION / OBSERVATION 13: Regarding Section C.9.16.1 of this Solicitation’s SOW: Site specific established procedures do not exist.

ANSWER / RESPONSE 13: They do exist and the DOTSF trains on them during annual Active Shooter training and during Table Top exercises.

QUESTON / REQUEST 14: Regarding Section C.11.1.3 of this Solicitation’s SOW: Add “with exception of SOC operators”.

ANSWER / RESPONSE 14: SOC Operators are not designated as Key Personnel per C.11 (C.11.2 Project Manager, C.11.3 Deputy Project Manager, C.11.4 Facility Commander, C.11.5 Supervisors), DOTHQ SOC Operators are Supervisors, FAAHQ SOC Operators are not. Accordingly, DOT will not be adding the phrase “with exception of SOC operators” to Section C.11.1.3 of this Solicitation’s Statement of Work.

QUESTION / OBSERVATION 15: Regarding Section C.11.2.5 of this Solicitation’s SOW: PM/DPM duties consist largely of access to proprietary information. We recommend the government reduce hours paid annually by 80 hours each (vacation) which will allow these positions to take PTO without backfilling or billing for open posts. Possibly the company suggests billing a fixed price for these roles as opposed to listing them as Exhibit 1 billable hours.

ANSWER / RESPONSE 15: The Government has considered this in the past and found that the PM and DPM were not on-site as much and it resulted in lack of oversight. The government has approved backup persons to account for PTO—such as an alternate Supervisor to back-fill the Facility Commander and same for DPM and PM.

QUESTION / OBSERVATION 16: Regarding Section C.11.3.2 of this Solicitation’s Statement of Work:

DPM hours listed as 1100-1900 vs E-1 lists them as 0900-1700.

ANSWER / RESPONSE 16: This is not work hours, this is hours that the DPM shall be available within 30 minutes by phone or in person to discuss problem areas.

QUESTION / OBSERVATION 17: Regarding this Solicitation’s Exhibit 1: Post hours for 8-hour M-F posts reflect 2088 as opposed to 2080 hours.

ANSWER / RESPONSE 17: There are 261 work days in each year for a total of 2088 hours.

QUESTION / OBSERVATION 18: Regarding this Solicitation’s Training Exhibits: Training hours not reflecting current FPS curriculums.

ANSWER/ RESPONSE 18: DOT is a delegated agency and reviews FPS requirements for Armed Guard Services; and DOT reserves the right to adjust those requirements as it sees fit.

QUESTION / REQUEST 19: Regarding Section C.1.4.2 of this Solicitation’s Statement of Work: Add “contractor shall maintain post orders and review annually with COR for necessary changes”.

ANSWER / RESPONSE 19: DOT declines to make that requested change.

QUESTION / REQUEST 20: Regarding this Solicitation’s Section C.4.1.5 of this Solicitation’s SOW: Does this mean that a qualified/fully certified PSO must wait 10 days prior to assignment? Should this be stricken from the SOW?

ANSWER / RESPONSE 20: DOT’s cognizant Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) must sign off on a proposed PSO’s training file prior to that PSO starting and receiving the suitability determination from PEREC. And the foregoing process should be completed before a proposed PSO is cleared to begin work on the contract resulting from the subject Solicitation. Accordingly, DOT cannot and is not removing, from Section C.4.1.5 of this Solicitation, any waiting-time for a proposed PSO to be assigned to this Solicitation’s resulting new DOT Guard Services contract.

QUESTION / REQUEST 21: Regarding Section C.1.4.8 of this Solicitation’s Statement of Work: Please confirm that there is no limit on the number of background/suitability applications that the government can process.

ANSWER / RESPONSE 21: Although the subject Solicitation does not go so far as to specify any such limit on background investigations, all offerors must understand: (a) that only background investigations for PSOs working on the DOT Guard Services contract will be completed; and (b) that DOT will not pass along any investigations to other agencies not affiliated with the DOT Guard Services contract; and (c) that all PSOs who leave the DOT Guard Services contract will have their investigation cancelled.

QUESTION / OBSERVATION 22: Regarding this Section C.5.2.2.1 of this Solicitation’s SOW: FPS standard for medical/physical re-examination is every five (5) years. Also the same for Physical Abilities (C.5.2.3.3) and Drug Screenings (C.5.2.4.1).

ANSWER / RESPONSE 22: DOT is a delegated agency and reviews FPS requirements for Armed Guard Services; and DOT reserves the right to adjust those requirements as it sees fit.

QUESTION / REQUEST 23: Re: New Guard Services Solicitation 06032013 bl, Solicitation 693JK423R500001, Section L8, Proposal Format, Tab B.1.a – Price Proposal: In this section there is reference to an Attachment A. However, we did not see any such named attachment in the Solicitation documents. Please clarify or if appropriate, please provide this.

ANSWER / RESPONSE 23: All offerors shall please refer to—and shall use, in the preparation of their proposals submitted to DOT in response to this Solicitation—the Excel-file-document which is entitled “Price Template Attachment A for FY 2023 Guard Services Re Compete Solicitation”, and which is being published concurrently with this Solicitation Amendment No. 3 in this Solicitation’s location in the SAM.gov website .

QUESTION 24: Re: New Guard Services Solicitation 06032013 bl, Solicitation 693JK423R500001, Section J – List of Attachments: We see here reference to Appendix 1, Firm Fixed Price Cost Breakdown

Template, which we assume is the Attachment A referenced in Section L.8 under Price Proposal. Is our assumption correct?

ANSWER 24: Yes, that assumption is correct. Accordingly, and as is noted in ANSWER / RESPONSE 23 given above, all offerors shall please refer to—and shall use, in the preparation of their proposals submitted to DOT in response to this Solicitation—the Excel-file-document which is entitled “Price Template Attachment A for FY 2023 Guard Services Re Compete Solicitation”, and which is being published concurrently with this Solicitation Amendment No. 3 in this Solicitation’s location in the SAM.gov website .

QUESTION 25: Re: New Guard Services Solicitation 06032013 bl, Solicitation 693JK423R500001, Appendix 1, Firm Fixed Price Cost Breakdown Template: It doesn’t appear this document was included with the solicitation when it was published. Please clarify or if appropriate, provide this attachment.

ANSWER 25: Same answer as is given for Questions numbered 23 and 24 above: All offerors shall please refer to—and shall use, in the preparation of their proposals submitted to DOT in response to this Solicitation—the Excel-file-document which is entitled “Price Template Attachment A for FY 2023 Guard

Services Re Compete Solicitation”, and which is being published concurrently with this Solicitation Amendment No. 3 in this Solicitation’s location in the SAM.gov website .

This Amendment No. 3 answers no further questions and make no additional changes and provides no further clarifications regarding the subject FORMAL Solicitation published in SAM.gov on June 9, 2023.

QUESTION 26: Re: Guard Services Solicitation Feb 2 Complete Set of Exhibits, Exhibit 1, Post Hours Summary: It appears that the Base Year for each location has total work hours calculated on a full 12-month year. In the Solicitation 693JK423R500001 document, it is discussed that the transition/phase-in period (30 days in duration) is included in the contract’s base year, starting on 10/1/2023 and ending on

10/31/2023. We assume that the total work hours for the base period could potentially be reduced by the transition period hours (one month’s worth), as the incumbent workforce will still be standing post during that time while we perform transition-in activities; is our assumption correct?

ANSWER 26: Yes, that assumption is correct.

QUESTION 27: Re: New Guard Services Solicitation 06032013 bl, Solicitation 693JK423R500001, Note 3:

Request clarification, please: Rather than use Section B.4 Costs and Prices schedule, as the Volume 5 Tab B part a submittal in our price proposal, we are to use the form/format of the IGCE instead – yes?

ANSWER 27: No. All offerors shall instead use the Price Template mentioned in Answers numbered 23, 24 and 25 given above. That is, all offerors shall please refer to—and shall use, in the preparation of their proposals submitted to DOT in response to this Solicitation—the Excel-file-document which is entitled “Price Template Attachment A for FY 2023 Guard Services Re Compete Solicitation”, and which is being published concurrently with this Solicitation Amendment No. 3 in this Solicitation’s location in the SAM.gov website.

QUESTION 26: Re: Guard Services FY2023 Re-Compete Procurement UPDATED IGCE:

1 – Item 0002 appears to be related to Location 10A, Orville Wright FAA Building, but has reference to the SEFC Building listed; please clarify.

2 – Item 0003 appears to be related to Location 10B, Wilbur Wright FAA Building, but has reference to the Orville Wright FAA Building listed; please clarify

3 – Item 0004 appears to be a duplicate of what we assume to be related to Item 0003, the Wilbur Wright FAA Building; please clarify.

ANSWER 26: Yes, each Line item is a separate accounting item for each facility. You will see this throughout the IGCE. The phase in period for the new awarded contract will be 0001 and the associated guard services cost to the outgoing contract for those services would be 0002, 0003, and 0004.

QUESTION 27: Re: New Guard Services Solicitation 06032013 bl, Solicitation 693JK423R500001, Section L8, Proposal Format, Tab B.1.c – Price Proposal: There is mention in this section of potential Collective Bargaining Agreement(s) (CBAs) that may be applicable to this effort. Our understanding is that there is indeed a CBA(s) in place at these locations, one for supervisors, and one for PSOs. Respectfully request your consideration in incorporating these into the solicitation documents, and any other DOL Wage Determinations deemed appropriate for this effort.

ANSWER 27: Although DOT has no involvement in the CBA negotiations: (a) it is the Office Security’s understanding that the DOL wage determinations for the District of Columbia for DOL 27102 Guard II is easy to obtain by prospective bidders; and (b) DOT’s contracting officer is asking that all prospective offerors please e-mail—to james.mowery@dot.gov, and to Terry.Brewster@dot.gov, and to all of the other DOT e-mail addresses specified in the subject Solicitation, by June 22, 2023 if possible—a copy of each particular Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) and each particular DOL Wage Determination which the prospective offeror believes is relevant to the contractor-services to be provided under the contract resulting from this Solicitation. DOT’s contracting officer is asking for that help because he is IT-challenged and because he accordingly has always experienced great difficulty in navigating DOL’s Wage Determination website.

QUESTION 28: Re: Solicitation section L.8: Section H.7 of the solicitation states key personnel for the contract are Project Manager, Deputy Project Manager, Facility Commanders, and Shift Supervisors.

Section C.11.1.1 says key personnel are Project Manager, Deputy Project Manager, Facility Commanders, Supervisors, and Trainers. In Section L.8, it states that all resumes mentioned anywhere in the solicitation shall be included in Volume 3 Tab A. As key personnel lists vary within the solicitation, please clarify.

ANSWER 28: To remove that contradiction, this Amendment No. 3 deletes the job-title “Trainers” from the Key Personnel category mentioned in Section C.11.1.1 of this Solicitation. But this Amendment No.

3 also instructs all offerors to include, in their Volume 3 proposal, a resume for each and every named individual who is mentioned anywhere in the offeror’s proposal.

QUESTION 29: Re: Solicitation Section J: The subject Solicitation’s Appendix 3 provides contradictory instructions. Initially, it states “no past- performance-reference-person will be allowed to provide any completed Past Performance Questionnaire directly to anyone in DOT.” Below that statement, it says, “References shall submit completed questionnaires via email to all of the DOT e-mail addresses specified above.” Please clarify.

ANSWER 29: No person or company that fills in (completes) any Past Performance Questionnaire will be allowed to submit that filled-in Past Performance Questionnaire directly to anyone in DOT. Instead, each person or company that fills in a Past Performance Questionnaire in connection with this DOT Guard Services procurement shall submit that filled-in (completed) Past Performance Questionnaire to the offeror-company for whom that Questionnaire was completed. And that offeror-company shall in mailto:james.mowery@dot.gov mailto:Terry.Brewster@dot.gov turn include that completed Past Performance Questionnaire in the Proposal that the offeror-company e-mails to DOT in response to this Solicitation—unless that offeror-company decides not to use that particular completed Past Performance Questionnaire in its Proposal submitted to DOT in response to this Solicitation.

This Solicitation Amendment No. 3 provides no further answers or clarifications or corrections regarding the subject Solicitation.

James H. Mowery III Contracting Officer, DOT June 21, 2023