2010_0621_pre-proposal_conf_notes_loren.pdf

Solicitation No. AG-03R6-S-10-0045 Bitterroot National Forest

Trapper-Bunkhouse Stewardship IRSC

JUNE 21, 2010 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE NOTES

Attendees of the meeting were as follows:

Name Organization Contact Info Loren Ebner, Contracting Officer (Acquisition)

USFS, Region One (Western MT Acquisition Zone)

Building 24, Fort Missoula Missoula, MT 59804

(406) 329-3858

Jim McCormack, Contracting Officer (Timber)

USFS, Lolo & Bitterroot National Forests

Building 24, Fort Missoula Missoula, MT 59804

(406) 329-3782

Andrew Tasler, Forester USFS, Bitterroot N.F.

(Darby R.D.)

712 N. Main Darby, MT 59829

(406) 821-2479

Luke Skarlupka, Vegetation Management Officer

USFS, Bitterroot N.F.

(Darby R.D.)

712 N. Main Darby, MT 59829

(406) 821-4265

Cole Mayn, Soil & Watershed Program Manager

USFS, Bitterroot N.F.

(Supervisor’s Office)

1801 N. First Hamilton, MT 59840

(406) 363-7155

Regina Reinschmidt, Forestry Tech.

USFS, Bitterroot N.F.

Pat McKinnon, Forestry Tech.

USFS, Bitterroot N.F.

Pat Connell Timberland Forestry Svc. 1925 Mountain View Orchard Corvallis, MT 59828 pconnell1@yahoo.com

Doug Wasileski Pyramid Mountain Lumber, Inc.

915 Hiden Valley Road S Stevensville, MT 59870

(406) 239-2476 dougwas@qwest.net

Joe Fraser Salmon River Wood, Inc. 10947 Sixty Six Lane Missoula, MT 59808

(406) 363-8675 Joe.fraser@rocketmail.com

Dyrk Krueger EFM Inc. 380 Joseph Drive Corvallis, MT 59828

(406) 961-8324 efminc@msn.com

Scott Kuehn Tricon 4375 Old Marshall Grade Missoula, MT 59802

(406) 546-9304?

MontanaForester@yahoo.com

Ryan Conner R&R Conner Inc. 5055 Sawmill Lane Conner, MT 59829 mailto:pconnell1@yahoo.com� mailto:dougwas@qwest.net� mailto:Joe.fraser@rocketmail.com� mailto:efminc@msn.com� mailto:MontanaForester@yahoo.com�

THE MEETING RECORD: The meeting commenced at 0900 hrs at the Darby Ranger District Office. The Government and Contractors present discussed the following items:

• Contracting Officer (CO) Ebner gave an overview of roles of Government employees:

o Contracting Officer Bill Hodges (Acquisition) will be the Contracting Officer for this project who will sign the contract and have full authority on all final decisions related to this contract. CO Ebner will act as his Administrative Contracting Officer during contract administration.

o Contracting Officer Jim McCormack (Timber) is the Timber Contracting Officer for the Lolo and Bitterroot National Forests. CO McCormack has been integrally involved in creation of the contract. CO Hodges and Ebner will consult with CO McCormack on all issues regarding the removal of timber from the National Forest.

o Andrew Tasler (Forester), Luke Skarlupka (VMO), and Cole Mayn (Soils Scientist) are the program personnel who created this project and have been integrally involved in creation of the contract.

o The COR for this contract has not yet been selected and will be designated by the Contracting Officer at the time of contract award.

• Proposals are due by 4:00 P.M. on July 9, 2009 at Building 24 – Fort Missoula, unless the solicitation is amended to extend the due date.

• Section L outlines the elements that Offerors are to address and submit as part of their proposal.

Paragraph L. 7 was reviewed in detail. It is important that Offerors submit their proposals as outlined. Note that “Section A” is one of the first pages of the solicitation (Standard Form 33).

Sections B and K are labeled as such in the solicitation package.

• Section M outlines how the Government will evaluate the offers received. Section M was reviewed in detail. In addition:

o Be advised that the technical proposal identified in paragraph M. 1(a)(2) contains several different elements, all of which are to be addressed. The table in this paragraph is only intended to give some additional explanation to Offerors on SOME of the elements of this evaluation criteria.

o Be advised to review the companion contract requirements for all of the evaluation criteria.

Cross references are provided in the text.

o Offerors asked why there was an evaluation preference for Ravalli and Lemhi Counties. The CO explained that the Forest Service has specific authority to give consideration to local Contractors on stewardship contracts. The CO explained that the Agency wants to give this consideration on this solicitation due to the significantly high unemployment rates in Ravalli and Lemhi Counties to give some encouragement for retention of industry capacity in the local area. The CO explained that the evaluation of this element on this solicitation was structured specifically to give a modest amount of consideration for local Contractors, but not to preclude competition from other Contractors.

o The CO explained the HUBZone Price Evaluation Preference (Paragraph I. 6).

• Section K. Complete certifications in ORCA and in solicitation as necessary. See “Local Contractor

Certification.”

• CO reviewed Sections C-I of the contract. Including the following topics:

o Section E: Requirement for Contractor Quality Control.

o Section F: Section F which deals with contract time, was reviewed in detail. Be advised of opportunities to propose alternate dates (See Sections F, L and M).

o Section F, Contract Time for Optional Units (Government Option): Be advised of the unique nature of Paragraph F. 3 in particular, which specifies how contract time will be granted for Optional units exercised by the Government (at the Government’s option).

o Section F, Contract Time for Research Sub-Units: Be advised of the unique nature of the contract requirements in Paragraph F. 6. There are special requirements relating to the contract time for the Research Sub-Units. There were questions from Contractors concerning excusable delays. The Contracting Officer advises Offerors that it will be incumbent on the Contractor to prove any excusable delays that they allege they are entitled to. The bar for excusable delays is relatively high and is outlined in the contract clause FAR 52.249-8 Default (Fixed Price Supply and Service). When the Government has shut down contract activities due to fires, Contracting Officers have granted additional time under the Default clause. However, this does not necessarily excuse Contractors from neglecting to take advantage of opportunities to execute the work prior to such closure. In addition, Offerors are advised that they will be evaluated in part on how they intend to address execution of the work, including their proposal regarding completion of Research Sub-Units (See Sections L and M).

o Section G, The Contracting Officer reviewed the process for earning and establishing stewardship credits. Offerors are advised that the intent of the Government is that stewardship credits will be earned by the Contractor and that any cash payments to the Contractor will be made after all exchanges of credits have been made for timber removed.

In accordance with Forest Service Handbook policy, at the time of contract award, “Contracting Officers shall clearly state in the award document which line items are being paid with appropriated funds and which line items will be paid with stewardship credits or retained receipts.” (FSH 6309.32, Chapter 4G37) o Section G, We reviewed the requirement for either cash deposits, credits or bonds on hand to cover value of timber to be removed in 60 days.

o Section G. We reviewed Section G, including the earning of stewardship credits.

Contractors are advised that stewardship credits are requested by the Contractor and established once per month.

o Section H: Offerors were advised to contact DOL if they have questions about MSPA and its applicability to their business and workforce.

o Section H, Paragraph H.15. Offerors asked about amount of washing required. CO is considering amendment.

o Section H, Paragraph H.19 Fire Precautions and Control was reviewed. Offerors commented to USFS officials on the PSI requirements of the pumper.

o Section H, Paragraph H.21 was reviewed.

o Section H, Paragraph H.33 was explained by the CO as an enforcement mechanism for the

Contractor workforce commitments made in Offeror proposals.

o Section I, CO reviewed clauses incorporated by reference: Contract Work Hours and Safety

Standards Act, Service Contract Act, Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Contract Act – Price Adjustment, Prompt Payment, Disputes, Changes, and Default.

o Section I, Paragraph I. 5. Options may be exercised at the Government’s option.

• CCR/ORCA. Ensure that your profiles are active and not expired.

• Section B, Schedule of Items. The Schedule was explained. Offerors requested the Government consider allowing separate pricing for optional items. See Amendment No. 01. Some Offerors also requested the ability to submit different pricing for optional timer removal quantities. The Government elected to not change the schedule on this element.

• Appendix A. We reviewed each of the activities in Appendix A. Cole Mayn gave a presentation regarding the objectives of the subsoiling and explained the equipment requirements. Offerors are not required to have the exact implement displayed in the drawings in the attachments, but the Contractor will be required to produce a result that meets the specification requirements, and their proposed equipment will be a part of the evaluation of their proposal by the Government. Questions were raised concerning the subsoiling requirement for temporary roads and track line machine trails. See Amendment 01 for changes to the solicitation.

• Appendix B. Andrew Tasler reviewed the requirements of Appendix B, and specifically discussed the following paragraphs:

We reviewed the provisions / rules for removal of timber. Questions were asked regarding deposits for surface rock replacement. This lead to Amendment No. 01, which is the change in Surface Rock Replacement Deposits. There was discussion on adding provisions for tractor road and temp. road obliteration/scarification to Appendix B. Instead, the change was made in Appendix A, which is also part of Amendment No. 01.

See Amendment No. 01 for a change regarding Road Maintenance Deposits.

• Appendix C. Road Maintenance. There are basic road maintenance requirements which are outlined here. This is a lump sum item and credits will be established upon completion of this work.

• Site Visit. The group proceeded to the project site and there was discussion of unit boundary marking and location of skid trails in research units. Offerors raised questions regarding Government Quality Assurance, which is 100% visual inspection. Due to the small quantity of work in research subunits and the desire for high quality work, the Government has elected not to change the quality assurance plan.