GEODSS_RFP_Questions_Round_2.pdf

FA2517-13-R-8001 GEODSS RFP

Questions and Answers Round 2

Question

Draft

PWS/RFP

Para #

QUESTION ANSWER

1 RFP Section

G Para. 6

Please clarify if paragraph 6 is intentionally missing or if there’s a number correction.

Paragraph 7 will be renumbered to 6. There is no missing paragraph.

2 RFP Section I

FAR Clause

52.228-3

It is our understanding that under FAR 28.309(a) and the broad definition of “public-work contract” at FAR 28.305 that the DBA clause at FAR

52.228-3 is prescribed in all DoD service contracts to be performed

(either entirely or in part) outside of the United States, which appears to include work under this contract at Diego Garcia. We note that FAR

52.228-3 was included in the draft RFP, but removed in the final solicitation. Please elaborate on the basis for omitting FAR 52.228-3 from the solicitation, and clarify whether it is the position of the government that the contractor is not required to provide coverage under the Defense Base Act for its workers located at Diego Garcia.

After further review, this clause will be added back in.

3 RFP Section

J - List of

Documents

The Exhibits/Attachments column appears to be missing attachment references. Does the government intend on providing noted attachment numbers/references in Section J?

The DD254 is considered Attachment 1, the PWS is

Attachment 2, the Maui CBA is Attachment 3, etc. An

Amendment to the RFP will be released and this will be clarified.

4 RFP Section

L B.2.a.(3)

The section states in part: “Total page count will be based on the printed proposal submission.” Our proposal offering will likely end a section on an odd number page and we plan to start a new section on a clean page, which would leave a blank page on the back of the previous section. If we use the term “Page Intentionally Left Blank” will that page be included in our page count?

No. RFP Section L B.2.a.(4) states, "A page is defined as each face of an 8.5 x 11-inch sheet of paper containing information." If the page contains no information it does not count against the page limit.

Round 2

Question

Draft

PWS/RFP

Para #

QUESTION ANSWER

5 RFP Section

L B.2.a.(7)

Tabs are required, but do they count toward page count? No, see above. However, this only applies if the tabs are separate and blank sheets of paper. If the tab is affixed to a sheet containing information, it will count against the limitation.

6 RFP Section

L D.1.a.(6)iii.

Is the Program Manager that is required to be identified in the Past

Performance Contract Citations supposed to be the Program Manager from the client side or the Offeror’s side for which the Past Performance

Citation is being presented?

From the client or Government side. The intent is to be able to call the client or Government POC in case there are questions.

7 RFP Section

L D.1.b.(1)

In Table 1 Proposal Organization the comment below states that the

Relevancy Matrix (Attachment L-1) is excluded from page count limitation. However, in L-5.D.b.1 it does not state the relevancy matrix is excluded from page count. Will the government please clarify if the relevancy matrix is excluded from page count?

The Relevancy Matrix is excluded from the page count.

8 RFP Section

L D.1.b.(1)

Does the Relevancy Matrix (Attachment L-1) require check marks only in the boxes or is there an explanation required as well?

Only check marks are required on the matrix. There is an opportunity for explanation IAW RFP Section L D.1.a.(7).

How the offeror chooses to propose in the Past

Performance Volume is up to them, so long as the terms of

L D.1 are met and the page limit is not exceeded

9 RFP Section

L D.3.a.(2)

The section states in part: “The Government has established contract estimates for Logistics and Travel, under Section B. These numbers should not be adjusted by the offeror.”

There were no numbers posted in Section B for Logistics and Travel.

Would the Government please provide those estimates?

An amendment to the RFP will be issued that contains these numbers. They are: CLINs 1004, 2004, 3004, 4004, 5004 - $150,000.00; CLIN 6004 - $75,000.00.

10 RFP Section

L D.3.a.(2)

The government references the established cost estimates under Section

B for CLIN’s X004-X005. Will the government consider providing these numbers to plug into Section B?

See answer to Question 3 for CLINs X004. For CLINs

X005, these costs will be determined through separate negotiation at a later date if necessary.

11 PWS 1.1.5.1 The section states in part: “The plan shall contain the following information at a minimum:…contingency mobilization, mobilization recall commitments…”

Would the Government clarify the term “mobilization recall commitments” for the purpose of addressing it in the plan?

This is referring to any employees that may have military commitments (i.e. Reserve or Guard) where they may be recalled and mobilized for service.

Round 2

Question

Draft

PWS/RFP

Para #

QUESTION ANSWER

12 PWS 1.1.5.1 Can the government explain what the contractor's role would be during a

Contingency Mobilization and Mobilization Recall Commitments? These two types of contingencies are historically military-centric, and we are having a difficult task understanding the GEODSS contractor's role in them.

This is referring to any employees that may have military commitments (i.e. Reserve or Guard) where they may be recalled and mobilized for service.

13 PWS 1.2.10.2 If the contractor implements an OJT program, does the contractor still need to reimburse the Government? If so, contractors will need to build in this additional cost for unknown expenses of this nature.

The Government provides train-the-trainer type training.

Once the Government training is provided, it will be up to the contractor how they keep the workforce trained. Only if the Government needs to reprovide the same training would the contractor need to reimburse the Government.

14 PWS 2.1.2.2

and 2.1.2.2.1

SOI taskings state “Complete 100 percent of SOI-tasked objects each month”, yet 2.1.2.2.1 provide SOI reporting requirements when an object is not tracked due to [known] limitations. Since this is an obvious technical limitation, how will they be scored in the meantime?

The contractor is only held responsible for SOI taskings under its control. If it cannot accomplish 100% taskings due to a limiting factor (i.e. weather), the actual SOI percentage achieve will be reported, but it will not count as missing the threshold. In these cases, the contractor will provide a letter to the Det Commander stating why 100%

SOI could not be achieved.

15 PWS 4.2.5 This sections states the contractor will “Complete scheduled system downtime for maintenance between 75% and 100% of the estimate. Is there an issue with completing maintenance early? Or are we incorrectly interpreting this requirement? Please clarify.

The intent is to guard against building in a "buffer" of downtime. Downtime should only be scheduled for how long the repair is actually expected to take. There is no issue with completing maintenance early.

16 PWS 6.1.3 Individual Job Order (IJO) coordination may require both site and PMO support. Can the Government provide one or more examples of IJOs for contractors to assess the level or support/coordination required?

IJOs have historically been rare on GEODSS. The sites are supported by the Host, so much of the traditional repair or upgrade work is accomplished by them. A past example of an IJO was hiring a contractor to troubleshoot a fire alarm problem at Det 2. Another example might be providing support to SMC to review technical orders.

17 PWS 6.9 Last sentence of paragraph states “The Contractor shall:”, but no additional information is provided. Will the Government verify that no additional information for Traffic Management is required?

There is no additional information required. "The

Contractor Shall:" will be removed from the PWS after award.

Round 2

Question

Draft

PWS/RFP

Para #

QUESTION ANSWER

18 PWS 8.1.3 Environmental Requirements and Funding states, “Identify all environmental waste requirements…to the Det CC and Host Installation

EMO. Our interpretation of this requirement is for on-site personnel to identify environmental requirement needs and submit to the government for consideration and budgeting purposes. Is this to be approved for contractor purchase or is this to be for government purchase? If contractor purchase, how will this be funded? CR CLIN? Government pay directly? Other?

This text is directly related to the HTSA language. The

21SW currently does not pay for disposal of hazardous waste or other environmental funds like generator permits, etc - the Hosts currently pays these - and per the HTSA the host expects to be notified of any new funding needs in a timely manner so they can out-year budget for the funds.

If the Host stops paying the fees, or if new HW streams materialize that would require additional funds, the Det CC and the Host Installation EMO need to be notified.

The interpretation is correct - Funding identification is for the Host and Det CC to be made aware of additional funding needs if they arise . There is no CLIN for contractor disposal.

19 PWS 9.1 Paragraph states, “The Contractor shall provide all materials, equipment, parts, labor, and associated costs for all maintenance that is foreseeable and can be forecasted to retain RP and RPIE IAW Manufacturer’s recommendations.” Clarification on RP and RPIE Maintenance and support costs. The lack of historical maintenance costs and lack of all manufacturer manuals (to use in estimating periodic maintenance and consumable replacement) on Government RP/RPIE makes reasonable cost of repair/replacement estimation nearly impossible and provides the incumbent team undue advantage in this area of pricing reasonableness.

Can the Government please provide all RP and RPIE manufacturer manuals, or provide historical costs or future expected estimated materials, equipment, and parts costs on Government RP and RPIE?

Historical costs are not available. RP/RPIE listings are available in the Bidder's Library under "Inventories."

Frequencies can be found using O&M manuals for specific equipment type. Manuals can be found on manufactures' website/s.

20 PWS 9.3.1.5 It was noted during the industry day site visit at Socorro that 2 of the 3 telescope tower covers had been replaced and that plans are in place for the final tower to be replaced. It was also mentioned by the Government that there are tower cover upgrades at the other Dets as well. Is there a manufacturer warranty period for this new installs and, if so, what is covered under the manufacturer’s warranty and when does the warranty period begin?

Replacement of the domes is Level II maintenance handled by SMC and is not part of the GEODSS O&M contract. The domes are not part of RP/RPIE and do not fall under PWS chapter 9.

Round 2

Question

Draft

PWS/RFP

Para #

QUESTION ANSWER

21 PWS 9.7 Critical Utility Outages states, “…maintain reliability/availability standard of no more than 535 minutes of total annual downtime due to mission utility failure.” Is this requirement for CDL only? If not CDL, how does the contractor control external utility reliability/availability and how will the contractor be evaluated/graded on this?

This is for Contractor Liable Downtime (CLD) only. The contractor will not be held accountable if downtime is due to circumstances out of its control.

22 PWS 9.10.1 Comprehensive Plan Inputs refers to a “five-years project work forecast”.

Does this plan currently exist? If so, will it be provided as a baseline at contract start?

The five year plan exists, will be provided at contract start, and is currently available in the Bidder's Library under

"FOUO Documents Package 1."

23 PWS 13.2 Joint Inventory during contract transition refers to “inventory of documentation, property, equipment, …” Is there currently and will there be a standardized GFE inventory format and in what format is this information (i.e., Word, Excel, Database)? Or to assist with contract transition/phase-in scheduling and planning, is the format to be contractor defined?

There is no required format - it can be contractor-defined.

24 PWS Section

3, 3.1

This section states that, “When required items become unserviceable, they shall be replaced at Contractor’s expense.” Does this contractor expense requirement apply to when items become unserviceable due to contractor negligence, or at all times regardless of how the GFE/GFP becomes unserviceable?

The intent is that if items become unserviceable due to normal wear and tear or reach the end of their serviceable life, then they will be replaced at contractor expense and become property of the contractor, no longer being on the

GFP list. If a piece of GFP is damaged due to contractor negligence, separate discussion will be held at that time.

25 PWS

Appendix E

The definition for “Normal Duty Hours” includes “…Monday through

Friday, 0730 hrs to 1630 hrs, with one hour lunch…” and “…Day shift workers usually include the managerial staff and administrative staff…”.

Can the Government clarify what functions are included as “administrative staff” and also clarify the distinction between this definition and the requirement for 16/7 hours (as stated in PWS 1.1.5, 2.3.2, 2.4.2, 3.1.3, 7.1.1, 7.1.6, and Appendix D)?

This definition is meant to describe normal duty hours for

Government personnel. As this definition applies to the

Government, the contractor should not feel limited by it in choosing how meet the 16/7 requirement.

Round 2

Question

Draft

PWS/RFP

Para #

QUESTION ANSWER

26 General For clarification, can the Government confirm that the 16/7 requirement is primary for Sensor Operations and other site support tasks (System

Administration, Supply, Logistics, Facilities, Grounds, etc. can be accomplished outside of the daily Sensor Operations 16/7 timeframe? Or is the 16/7 meant for all site support?

Primary Sensor Operations are conducted between civil sunset and civil sunrise. How the contractor chooses to accomplish the remainder of the functions is at its discretion, so long as the minimum site coverage of 16/7 is met.

27 General The Maui CBA includes a labor category for “Driver”. We assume this is for driver support to transport site personnel from the base of the mountain to the operating site. Can the Government clarify the requirement or need for a driver at

Detachment 3 – Maui and if this driver is also to support Government personnel? If a driver is not “required”, is there ample parking space at the site for all contractor personnel?

How the offeror chooses to have their employees get to the site will be up to them. Government personnel are prohibited from riding in contractor vehicles. The parking lot at the top of the mountain is shared with the University of Hawaii's facility, is not paved, and can hold approximately 15 vehicles.

28 General The Collective Bargaining Agreement for the Socorro, NM site is expired.

Will the Government provide the current version?

The follow-on CBA has been negotiated and is currently being signed by the requisite parties. Until it is signed, the current CBA is still governing. Section L-5 D.3.a.(4) of the

RFP states, "For those portions in which FY15 rates

(effective October 2014) are the latest negotiated, use the

FY15 rates in pricing all years, and do not escalate out year labor rates." This will be revised in an amendment to the RFP stating to use FY14 rates for Socorro if they are the latest negotiated. Upon contract award, an equitable adjustment will be made to include the latest rates.

29 General The Socorro NM IBEW CBA document shows an expiration date of April

30, 2014. Will the Government provide an updated CBA or CBA bridge agreement between BAE and IBEW to ensure appropriate pricing and proposal development?

The follow-on CBA has been negotiated and is currently being signed by the requisite parties. Until it is signed, the current CBA is still governing. Section L-5 D.3.a.(4) of the

RFP states, "For those portions in which FY15 rates

(effective October 2014) are the latest negotiated, use the

FY15 rates in pricing all years, and do not escalate out year labor rates." This will be revised in an amendment to the RFP stating to use FY14 rates for Socorro if they are the latest negotiated. Upon contract award, an equitable adjustment will be made to include the latest rates.

Round 2

Question

Draft

PWS/RFP

Para #

QUESTION ANSWER

30 General The Government released an updated CBA Wage Determination (CBA-

2009-2740, Rev 3, 7/3/2012) which expired 4/30/2014 and references a

“modified extension agreement(s)”. Additionally, the CBA provided with the Final RFP as Attachment 4, expired 30 April 2014 and associated labor rates (CBA Schedule A) appear to be valid from 1 Oct 2013 through

30 Sep 2014. To ensure contractor pricing standardization for reasonableness evaluation, is it the

Government’s desire for contractors to bid the 1 October 2013 rates for applicable labor categories? Or is there an updated CBA bridge contract that the Government would like for contractors to use?

The follow-on CBA has been negotiated and is currently being signed by the requisite parties. Until it is signed, the current CBA is still governing. Section L-5 D.3.a.(4) of the

RFP states, "For those portions in which FY15 rates

(effective October 2014) are the latest negotiated, use the

FY15 rates in pricing all years, and do not escalate out year labor rates." This will be revised in an amendment to the RFP stating to use FY14 rates for Socorro if they are the latest negotiated. Upon contract award, an equitable adjustment will be made to include the latest rates.

31 General Both applicable CBAs contain clauses for severance payout due to involuntary lay-off and other conditions. Should the government terminate the contract, the contractor will be liable to payout severance which in the case of HI is 240 hrs (6 weeks) for employees over 10 years .

Additionally, vendors have not been provide a listing of current employee seniority (doesn’t need to have names) or current union employee census data in regards to time of service at site. Does the

Government expect contractors to bid “worse case” since seniority census data has not been provide, or will the government allow vendors to be compensated for contract shut-down/termination?

For the Termination Liability CLINs, the contractor should bid the amount it reasonably thinks it would cost to close the site. However, these will ultimately be only estimates.

All final termination costs will be subject to negotiation IAW

FAR 49.2.

32 General Due to the extensive amount of technical data provided in the FOUO and

Export Controlled bidder’s library data, additional time is required to allow non-incumbent contactors time to review and “digest” all pertinent documents/information. Will the government please consider providing a proposal due date extension of at least one week?

The Government will not extend the RFP due date.