FA2823-15-C-4008-03.pdf

AFTC/PZIOC EGLIN - ASHLEY SMITH

308 WEST D AVE., BLDG 260, STE 130

EGLIN AFB FL 32542-5418

F1T2AZ4297A001

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

See Summary of Changes

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 2

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 23-Apr-2015

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X FA2823-15-R-4008

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

23-Mar-2015

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

23-Apr-2015

CODE

AFTC/PZIO EGLIN - FA2823

308 WEST D AVENUE, SUITE 130 (BLDG 260)

EGLIN AFB FL 32542-5418

FA2823 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE FA2823

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA2823-15-R-4008

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES AMENDMENT 3

The purpose of Amendment 03 is to incorporate additional Base Refuse Questions and Answers.

A. To incorporate Additional Base Refuse Questions and Answers. See Attachment N.

B. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment Title Pages Date Attachment A Past Performance References 1 N/A Attachment B Past Performance Questionnaire 4 N/A Attachment C Financial Responsibility Questionnaire 1 N/A Attachment D Memorandum Template 1 N/A Attachment E Base Affidavit 2 N/A Attachment F Driving Directions 1 N/A Attachment G Hold Harmless Agreement 1 N/A Attachment H Wage Determination 05-3033 10 12/22/14 Attachment I Performance Work Statement 35 01/15/15 Attachment J Bid Schedule **REVISED** 7 N/A Attachment K Refuse Questions and Responses 6 04/11/15 Attachment L Refuse Site Visit List 1 04/02/15 Attachment M Additional Refuse Questions and Responses 1 04/16/15 Attachment N Additional Refuse Questions and Responses 2 04/23/15

(End of Summary of Changes)

Thursday, April 23, 2015

1. Will the Government please post the site visit sign in sheet to FBO.gov?

Answer: Posted

2. Reference Instruction to Offers page 53; Will a teaming agreement’s pages be counted in the Volume II Past Performance page counts, or for any of the page counts in the submittals?

Answer: Teaming Agreements are not part of the page count for Vol II but are required for the submission package. Past Performance from the subcontractors that are part of the Teaming Agreement do count as part of the page count.

3. Reference Evaluation Criteria, page 60, 2.d.: Will the explanation of the prime and subcontractor relationship, and/or the full details of subcontractor’s involvement in the contract be counted in the Volume II Past Performance page counts, or for any of the page counts in the submittals?

Answer: Explanation of Prime and Subcontractor relationship does not need to be explained in the detail of which the question is asking. Subcontractor past performance will be evaluated.

4. Reference Schedule of Supplies and Services; Roll off containers disposal fees: During the site visit, the Government stated that the incumbent contractor utilizes Pointe Center C&D landfill in Crestview for Eglin’s C&D loads. Please confirm. This particular landfill charges by the yard, not by the ton. Furthermore, it would not be in the Governments best interest to take this debris to the WM or Republic transfer stations because the price per ton is extremely high. Can the Government elaborate on how the incumbent is charging Eglin by the ton for C&D at this landfill since the landfill charges by the yard? Would it be possible to change the bid structure to price this line item by the yard?

Answer: A cubic yard of C&D has an average weight. The tonnage is estimated based on the size (Cu Yd rolloff) of the rolloff container being dumped. The landfill used to dump the material is all up to the individual contractors discretion.

5. In conjunction with question 4, is there a set of scales at Eglin that the contractor can utilize?

Possibly at DRMO? If we could utilize scales on Base, we could weigh the C&D load and still bill by the ton for the Roll off containers disposal fees.

Answer: No public scales are available for this purpose on Eglin AFB.

6. The RFP does not define or quantify how subcontractor past performance will be rated, other than to say it will be rated lower than a prime contractor’s experience. How will you assign ratings to prime contractors compared to subcontractors? Is there a percentage or metric that you can provide to shed some light on whether subcontractors will only be rated, for example, 50% as high as primes, 75%, 90%, or whatever the case will be?

Answer: Past Performance regarding first-time Joint Ventures, predecessor companies, key personnel who have recent and relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement WILL NOT be rated as highly as Past Performance information for the Principle Offeror. There is not a matrix as to how Subcontractor performance will be rated. Subcontractor relevancy will be rated the same as the prime contractor level. Confidence will not be rated as highly for subcontractors due to the Government not being privy to the actual subcontracts.

Thursday, April 23, 2015

7. Due to the undefined rating system for subcontractors, the RFP appears to give an unfair advantage to 8(a)s that will not use subcontractors, even if those 8(a)s have less experience than a subcontractor for a competing 8(a). In other words, an offeror with a highly experienced solid waste subcontractor with excellent experience would likely be rated lower than a competing 8(a) with only marginal solid waste experience and no subcontractor. This would result in the government having to select a less experienced team based on which entity, the primes or the subcontractors, have the best experience. Contract competitions are supposed to encourage contractors to team up to pull their resources and capabilities together, not penalize them for teaming up, which is what will happen to any offeror using a subcontractor under this RFP.

Offerors should not be penalized for using a subcontractor to perform work. This penalty does not seem consistent with the FAR clauses that allow teaming arrangements or joint ventures, who also will be rated lower than prime contractors. Would the Government please clarify and consider changing this criteria?

Answer: Past Performance cannot be determined as well with a newly formed Joint Venture or a predecessor company that has no current past performance. Joint Ventures and predecessor companies with prior past performance will be rated the same as 8(a) companies with relevant past performance.

8. It appears that the RFP is slanted in favor of the incumbent contractor on the job, who has gained experience as the incumbent. While that experience may not be as strong as that of a competing 8(a)s subcontractor, the incumbent will have an unfair competitive advantage just by nature of doing the work for the last several years. This evaluation process does not allow other 8(a)s, whose team may be more qualified than the incumbent contractor, to fairly compete for the work. Would the Government please clarify and consider changing this criteria?

Answer: There is no favoritism in the rating system. Incumbents have the same rating as another company with relevant past performance that demonstrates substantial confidence.

9. Reference Schedule of Supplies and Services and Table A-2. The below are the container totals from the Schedule of Supplies and Services (Bid Sheet) and Table A-2 by container size, type (MSW/Recycle), and frequency:

The Schedule of Supplies and Services and Table A-2 have different quantities, and in some cases, different sizes and frequencies altogether. Would the Government please clarify which of the totals are the correct totals? If Table A-2 is the correct totals, will the Government please revised the Schedule of Supplies and Services?

Answer: This issue was revised in an earlier question. The Bid Schedule is the basis of bid.

10. Reference PWS 1.1.6 Points of Collection: If roads are closed due to maintenance, maneuvers, or the like, what is the protocol for collecting containers that might have been missed on that day due to road closures?

Answer: Collection shall be accomplished on the next schedule collection day.

11. Reference PWS 1.1.7 Cubic Yard Capacity: Can the Government clarify that the 8 YD containers should be stand-up 8 YDS with side sliding doors, and not slant top 8’YDs? Or does the Government not have a preference, just as long as they are 8 CY total capacity?

Answer: Either style of 8 yard container is acceptable.