SABER PreproposalSlides .pptx

Air Force Space Command Guardians of the High Frontier

I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e Front Range SABER Pre-Proposal Conference 25 – 26 Aug 2009

FA2517-08-R-5002

UNCLASSIFIED

Agenda Opening Remarks Way-Ahead Schedule Site Visit Itinerary Site Visit Rules of Engagement Contractor Questions & Government Response Questions and Answers Adjourn For Site Visit Tour

I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e

Welcome Opening Remarks Capt Matt Joseph Program Manager SABER

10 Aug – Solicitation Released 25 Aug – Past Performance Questionnaires sent to 10 most relevant contracts 25-26 Aug – Pre-proposal Conf and Site Visit 28 Aug – Entire Vol II (Past Performance) Submitted 10 Sept – Past Performance Questionnaires from 10 most relevant contracts received by Government 24 Sept – Proposals Due

Way-Ahead Schedule

DAY 1: 25 Aug 09

Site Visit Itinerary

DAY 2: 26 Aug 09

Site Visit Itinerary

No cell phones in Cheyenne Mountain No questions regarding the solicitation as a whole will be answered on the site visit. Any overall questions will be recorded and answered via Fed Biz Ops.

Questions regarding individual installations can be asked while on the windshield tour of that installation No pictures will be allowed on any installation Time is short, please do everything possible to keep the visit moving Follow all direction from base personnel If base exercise, must follow all direction Site Visit Rules of Engagement

Page 65 of 72, M-1 Source Selection, paragraph A., 7th line states that the Government proposes to award to up to three contractors. Page 18 of 72, paragraph 6, second sentence states “The contract maximum dollar amount of each individual contract is $300,000,000. This would equate to $900,000,000. Yet page 62 of 72, paragraph h), states “The estimated magnitude of this contract for the base year and all option years is between $150,000,000 and $300,000,000, for all contracts.” This sentence seems to be in conflict with the previous.

QUESTION: Is the maximum dollar amount for each individual contract if there are three contracts awarded accurately depicted below?

Contractor A - $300,000,000 Contractor B - $300,000,000 Contractor C - $300,000,000

ANSWER: Yes, The RFP clearly states that the magnitude of this contract for the base year and all option years is between $150,000,000 and $300,000,000 for all the contracts. To allow for fair opportunity and competition at Task Order Lever (Post Award) each contract (up to three) that is awarded will have a contract ceiling in the amount of $300M.

Contractor Questions and Government Response

Page 01 04 00-6, paragraph 1.5.2 delineates a matrix of Software and RS Means Requirements which is quite extensive for licenses, databases and books. The cost of which is to be included as an indirect cost factored into our bid coefficients.

QUESTION: Is it the intent for each of the contract awardees to provide the entire matrix to the Government and include the total associated costs in their bid coefficients? Or is the total cost for the matrix of materials to be split between the three awardees in

ANSWER:

Section 01 04 00, page 6 para 1.5.2, last line specifically states, " (These figures represent the numbers required from each contractor.)"

Page 64 of 72 states, “If a teaming arrangement is contemplated, provide complete information as to the arrangement, including any relevant and recent past performance information on previous teaming arrangements with same partner. If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide a list of past and present relevant contracts, the total of which may not exceed ten (10) for the teaming arrangement.”

QUESTION: Which proposal Volume should this be located and will it count towards page count?

ANSWER: This refers to Volume II Past Performance Information and it will count towards the page count.

QUESTION: Options 1001 through 4001 indicate “15 March 2010 . . . though 14 March 2011”

ANSWER: Amendment to the Solicitation will be done to change the dates to the CLINS

QUESTION: Are the drawings for the Demonstration Project available in an AutoCad compatible format? And if so can the government provide these for bidders use in preparing their proposals?

ANSWER: The contractor will be given drawings in an electronic format and they will be in an AutoCad format.

QUESTION: Can the government provide the coefficients for the current SABER contract?

ANSWER: Yes, Under previous FOIA requests it was determined that the coefficients do not reveal any labor mix, overhead rate, bonding cost, etc. They also do not reveal any confidential financial information.

QUESTION: Page 31 (a)(3) Sentence appears incomplete.

ANSWER: Will insert the following in the amendment: The Small Business Administration, Denver District, 721 19th Street, Ste 426, Denver Co 80202

QUESTION: 010000-4 Para. 1.5.6.1 Will the government provide the drawings in an electronic format and will they be in an AutoCad compatible format?

ANSWER: The Contractor will be given drawings in an electronic format and the will be in an AutoCad format.

QUESTION: 010000-5 Para. 1.5.9.1 c. “Under the scope of this contract, the complexity will not necessarily require the services of a registered architect or engineer.” If it is determined within a Task Order that the services of a registered architect or engineer is required will those costs be included as a Non-Pre-Priced Item?

ANSWER: Determining whether or not those fees would be non pre-priced will have to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. There is a generic line item in RS Means which covers those fees. This line item however covers a full design whereas the type of design required for the typical SABER project is minimal and very specific.

QUESTION: The following Specification Sections include Tracked Change edits are these the Final versions or is the government planning to issue these specification sections with the noted changes fully incorporated?

ANSWER: Consider all tracked changes to be fully accepted and that these documents are current as part of the solicitation. Each of these documents have been resaved as PDF’s with tracked changes off. They are attached.

QUESTION: Under Specification Section 010400 Para. 1.1.1.3 Will the Contracting Officer issue his/her written consent making GSA pricing available or the purchase of products from 4-Clicks?

ANSWER: e4Clicks needs Contracting to give them a letter/email stating that GSA pricing is okay for the awarded contractors. Some Contracting Officers say that the software is GSA because it is for a government contract. Some Contracting Officers say that because the contractor is purchasing it doesn’t qualify for GSA. So we go with whatever Contracting says. This discount is between 2% and 20% depending on the item.

QUESTION: Specification Section 010400 Para. 1.5.2 indicates that the contractor is to provide the government with copies of software and electronic databases – the quote information provided by 4-Clicks as stated under Para. 1.1.1.3 addresses only annual updates for the software and electronic databases. Do the installations noted in the table at Para. 1.5.2 have the referenced software in the numbers stated? And is the contractor responsible only for the annual updates (even for the base year under the contract) for the software and databases currently owned by the government at each installation?

ANSWER: The short answer is yes. We are not charging any of the bases to purchase the software. The contractors purchased the software for most of the bases at the beginning of the last contract; so the new contract is simply maintaining those seats. Technically Buckley and FE Warren have not purchased the software, but we are just going to roll them into maintenance. So the contractor will only be responsible for annual updates. If the contractor doesn’t own the software already, they will need to purchase it. If they already own it, they won’t.

Q&A

Adjourn For Site Visits!!!

image1.jpeg image2.jpeg image3.jpeg image4.wmf image5.emf