QA Government Response_21Aug17.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 50 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA3002-16-R-0019
About this file
Q&A Government Response
View the file
Other files
Show all 48
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
RFP Q&A
| Question | |||||
| Number | Topic | RFP Reference | Question | Response | |
| C-1 | Site Visit | Incentive Option Period Plan (Atch 11) | The IOP Plan states DP1 is based on satisfactory performance over the base period and option period 1. Is properly timed in the RFP. | DP1 is based on "Satisfactory" or better evaluated performance during the base period of performance. Attachment 11, Performance Incentive Plan has been corrected. | |
| C-2 | RFP Attachment | Incentive Option Period Plan (Attachment 11), paragraph 4.2.1 | Currently paragraph 4.2.1 states: "The SP has achieved CPARS ratings of “Satisfactory” or better in all evaluated performance areas during the base and Option 1 periods." | ||
| After discussion at the Preproposal Conference will the Government revise paragraph 4.2.1 to state: "The SP has achieved CPARS ratings of “Satisfactory” or better in all evaluated performance areas during the base period."? | DP1 is based on "Satisfactory" or better evaluated performance during the base period of performance. Attachment 11, Performance Incentive Plan has been corrected. | ||||
| C-3 | Site Visit | L and M | The RFP is unclear as to whether Offerors should provide pricing information in the SF33, Schedule B. Please confirm. | All pricing information should be completed in the Attachment 14 Price Proposal Workbook. This is clear in Section L, Para L.2.4. | |
| C-4 | Site Visit | L and M | If I don't submit past performance, am I still in compliance with the RFP and still eligible to receive an award. | See Section M, Paragraph M.5. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable”. | |
| C-5 | Site Visit | L and M | There is a cost associated with submitting past performance. Why should a company expend the resources to provide past performance if no past performance is still acceptable past performance? | The Gov't will search for past performance and any relevant performance found will be considered by the Gov't for the purpose of this evaluation. Offeror's are encouraged to submit examples of past performance to assist the Government's evaluation. | |
| C-6 | Section L | L.1.10.2 and L.1.11 | Both the Page Size and Format and Electronic Offers paragraphs of the RFP indicate that all volumes of offeror proposals will be delivered in Microsoft Office 2007 or newer formats. Will the Government allow offerors to submit in Adobe PDF all non-spreadsheet volume information to assure formatting is preserved for narrative text, graphics, charts, graphs, diagrams, schematics and tables? | Offerors may convert documents created in Microsoft Office 2007 or newer formats to an Adobe PDF to assure formatting is preserved for all non-spreadsheet volume information. | |
| C-7 | Section L | L.1.10.3 and L.1.10.4 | Section L.1.10.3 Cross-Referencing states, "The Offeror shall provide a Solicitation Cross Reference Matrix indicating by Section L, PWS, paragraph number, the corresponding proposal paragraph in that section which addresses the referenced item. The matrix shall be added to the Table of Contents under each applicable volume." However, Table 2 under L.1.10.4 Indexing reflects a numbered section (2.5) for a Cross Reference Matrix in Volume II, Technical only, and none for any of the other volumes. Will the Government please clarify if offerors should include cross reference matrices for volumes I and III as 1.1.1 and 3.1.1 respectively under Volume's I and III's tables of contents, or if the Volume II Cross Reference Matrix (2.5) should include a comprehensive cross reference matrix that includes all volumes that have a table of contents? | Volume II, Technical proposal is the only volume that requires a Cross Reference Matrix. The cross reference matrices for Volumes I and III (optional) shall be added to the Table of Contents under each applicable volume in accordance with Section L, Paragraph L.1.10.3. | |
| C-8 | Section L | L.1.10.4 Table 2 - Volume IV Section 4.6 Subcontracting Plan | Table 2 in Section L.1.10.4 Volume IV, Section 4.6 Subcontracting Plan, in the PAGE LIMITS column, L.6.6 is listed, however, there is no L.6.6 in Section L. Will the Government please clarify; (a) if that reference should be L.5.6, and (b) if so, how does that reference apply to page limitations? | Section L, Para L.1.10.4, Table 2, Item 4.6 Subcontracting Plan has been deleted from the from Volume IV requirements. Subsequent section numbering have been updated. Submission of the subcontracting plan is not required at the time designated for proposal submission. The apparently successful offeror, upon request by the Contracting Officer, shall submit a narrative subcontracting plan. If the apparently successful offeror fails to negotiate a subcontracting plan acceptable to the Contracting Officer within the time limit prescribed by the Contracting Officer, the offeror will be ineligible for award. | |
| C-9 | Section L | L.1.10.4 Table 2 Volume IV, 4.6 Subcontracting Plan; Section L.5.6 | Section L.1.10.4 Table 2 Volume IV Section 4.6 reflects a placeholder for a Subcontracting Plan, however, Section L paragraph L.5.6 clearly states that "Submission of a subcontracting plan is not required at the time designated for proposal submission." Will the Government please clarify what information should be provided in Volume IV, Section 4.6? | Section L, Para L.1.10.4, Table 2, Item 4.6 Subcontracting Plan has been deleted from the from Volume IV requirements. Subsequent section numbering have been updated. Submission of the subcontracting plan is not required at the time designated for proposal submission. The apparently successful offeror, upon request by the Contracting Officer, shall submit a narrative subcontracting plan. If the apparently successful offeror fails to negotiate a subcontracting plan acceptable to the Contracting Officer within the time limit prescribed by the Contracting Officer, the offeror will be ineligible for award. | |
| C-10 | Section L | L.3.3.3.1 a); Section M.4.1.3 a) | Sections L.3.3.3.1 a) and M.4.1.3 a) appear to have a sentence repeated at the end of these paragraphs that is already stated at the beginning of these paragraphs. Will the Government remove the last sentence in these paragraphs? | The duplicate sentences included in Sections L.3.3.3.1 a) and M.4.1.3 a) have been deleted. | |
| C-11 | Section L | L.3.3.3.1 e); Attachment 16 | The level of detail requested in Attachment 16 and as instructed in Section L.3.3.3.1 e) will result in a significant number of pages, especially when including all periods of performance (out years). Will the Government consider removing the WBS from the Volume II page limitation of 120 pages and allow it to be submitted as an appendix? | Section L has been updated to exclude the completed Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) from Volume II page limit. | |
| C-12 | Section L | L.3.3.3.1; Section M.4.1.3 | Section M.4.1.3 includes a table with cross references/comparisons between Sections L and M requirements. It appears that the letter designations (a) thru (h) shown for Section L in the M.4.1.3 do not correspond to the letter designations given in Section L.3.3.3.1. It appears that "Critical One Deep" paragraph in Section L.3.3.3.1 is not labeled as paragraph d. Will the Government please confirm this error in paragraph labeling in Section L.3.3.3.1? If an error, remaining paragraphs in Section L.3.3.3.1 need to be relabeled accordingly. | The paragraph number in Section M.4.1.3 (L.3.3.3.1 and M.4.1.3 a) - h)) has been updated to correspond with Section L.3.3.3.1. | |
| C-13 | Section L | L.5.6 | This section identified DoD's goals for 2017. These goals are identified based on total subcontract dollars. Will the goals to be included in the subcontracting plan be based on total subcontracting dollars? | These goals represent the percent of small business subcontracting as it relates to total subcontracting dollars, not the total contract dollar value. | |
| C-14 | Section L | L.5.7 | Does this requirement apply to both Joint Venture arrangements and subcontractor team arrangements? The language contained in this section appears to be specific to joint Venture arrangements. If this section will also apply to subcontract teaming arrangements, what information is required in addition to a copy of the current teaming arrangement? | The requirements of Section L.5.7 do not pertain to subcontracting arrangements. Please see Section L.3.3.1 g) where subcontractor teaming arrangements, Organization relationships, and responsibility divisions between the prime and subcontractors is discussed. Additionally, Section L.4.5 is also applicable to this topic. | |
| C-15 | Section M | M.5.3, Section "Relevant Performance" |
REESE, BRIAN T NH-03 USAF AFPC AFPC/DP2LA: REESE, BRIAN T NH-03 USAF AFPC AFPC/DP2LA:
| Please insert the exact reference to your question, to include Sections L&M or any attachments | In this section it states, "In addition, performance must include a minimum of one additional technical area with performance…" Should Past Performance include (at least) one of the listed Technical Areas, per Functional Area, or all of the Technical Areas PLUS one additional, per Functional Area? (note: in Emergency Management - "Readiness/Emergency Management Ops" is the only Tech Area). | Relevant past performance includes performance of CE requirements related to all functional areas and at least one (1) technical area (in aggregate or individual) | |||
| C-16 | RFP Attachment | PPI Tool Instructions (Attachment 6); https://www.fbo.gov/ | When opening Attachment 6 the document is titled as Section J Attachment "7". This document provides instruction to offerors to access the FedBizOpps website to gain access to the PPI tool by locating the link, PPI Tool.accdb, in item number 3 under the Downloading the PPI Tool paragraph. However, the link does not appear on the FBO site. Will the Government (a) please correct the title of Attachment 6 as Section J Attachment "6" in the document, and (b) please provide further instruction on how to access the PPI Tool? | Attachment 6, title has been updated to reflect "Section J Attachment 6". The RFP was amended to include the "PPI tool" as instructed in Attachment 6. See RFP FA3002-16-R-0019, Amendment 0002, dated 3 Aug 17. | |
| C-17 | Site Visit | PPI Tool Instructions, Section L and Section M | We are having problems accessing the PPI tool from the PDF document. Please verify the link works. | Attachment 6, title has been updated to reflect "Section J Attachment 6". The RFP was amended to include the "PPI tool" as instructed in Attachment 6. See RFP FA3002-16-R-0019, Amendment 0002, dated 3 Aug 17. | |
| C-18 | RFP Attachment | PWS dated 12 June 2017 | The PWS provided with the Final RFP reflects a date of 12 June 2017. This document includes change bars, highlighted text and some pages with "DRAFT" watermarked in the background. Will the Government please confirm that the 12 June version provided with the final RFP is the final or most current PWS? | RFP FA3002-16-R-0019, Amendment 0002, dated 3 Aug 17 included the final PWS, dated 3 Aug 17. | |
| C-19 | Section B | Section B, CLINs 0013 and 0027 | DISCUSSION: Two CLINs listed in the RFP, Section B are missing on Atch 14, Price Proposal Workbook for the Base and all Option Years. | ||
| QUESTION: Will the Government allow Service Providers (SPs) to amend Atch 14, to include CLIN 0013, Sewer/Waste Treatment Plant Ops and CLIN 0027, Schedule Enhancement (with plug number)? | Sewer/Waste Treatment Plant Ops work (previously CLIN X013) should be included/priced under CLIN X010, Sewer/Waste Water System. CLIN X027, Schedule Enhancements is still within the scope of this requirement, however, a FFP CLIN will be added to the contract when enhancement work is necessary via modification to the contract and a price will be negotiated for the work at that time. | ||||
| C-20 | Section F | Section F | Will the Government confirm that Section F CLIN 0026 period of performance is from September 1 to September 30 and not October 1 to October 31? Will the Government confirm that the base year period of performance begins on October 1 and ends on August 31 and not November 1 through September 30? Will the Government confirm that the option years begin September 1 and end on August 31 and not October 1 through September 30? |
Base Year 1 Sep 18 – 31 Aug 19 (includes CLIN 0026, Mobilization Period, 1 Sep 18 – 30 Sep 18) Option Year 1: 1 Sep 19 – 31 Aug 20 Option Year 2: 1 Sep 20 – 31 Aug 21 Option Year 3: 1 Sep 21 – 31 Aug 22 Option Year 4: 1 Sep 22 – 31 Aug 23 Incentive Option Year 1: 1 Sep 23 – 31 Aug 24 Incentive Option Year 2: 1 Sep 24 – 31 Aug 25
| C-21 | Section F | Section F and Section J (Attachment 8) | Section F lists periods of performance 9/1/XX to 8/31/XX+1. Section J Attachment 8 is requesting data by fiscal year (FY). Will the Government consider revising Section J Attachment 8 to reflect contract year (CY) as indicated in Section F? | The FY indicator in Section J Attachment 8 is for Gov't planning purposes and should have no bearing on the contractor's proposal. The contractor shall use the dates indicated by Section F- Deliveries or Performance to complete the Manpower Matrix. |
| C-22 | Section I | Section I |
The Solicitation included FAR Clause 5352.209-9001 POTENTIAL ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST
| (OCT 2010) | (a) There is potential organizational conflict of interest (see FAR Subpart 9.5. Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest) due to . Accordingly: (1) Restrictions are needed to ensure that (state the nature of the proposed restraint and the applicable time period). | |||
| Question: Does the Government intend on stating any nature that may propose restraints and applicable time period into this Clause? | No. At this time the Government has not identified any potential (perceived or actual) organizational conflicts of interest. | |||
| C-23 | Section I | Section I, Clause 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Deviation 2016-O0009) Alternate II and Section L.5.6 | DISCUSSION: At the Pre-Proposal Conference, the Government Contracting Officer verbally stated that a Subcontracting Plan is not required; the RFP Section L.5.6 also states "submission of the subcontracting plan is not required at the time designated for proposal submission." |
However, the Government included Clause 52.219-9 Alternate II in full text in Section I, which states, "Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall include a subcontracting plan...". Therefore, Service Providers (SP)s who do not submit a subcontracting plan with their proposal will be non-compliant with the RFP.
| QUESTION: Will the Government please amend the RFP to delete Alternate II of this clause requiring submittal of a subcontracting plan? | FAR Clause 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Deviation 2016-O0009) Alternate II has been deleted. The basic clause and Alternate I remain in affect. | |||
| C-24 | Section I | Section I, Clause 52.222-33 Notice of Requirement for Project Labor Agreement, Page 105 | DISCUSSION: Refers to both Alternate I and Alternate II: |
"52.222-33 Alt II Notice of Requirement for Project Labor Agreement (May 2010) Alternate I MAY 2010."
| QUESTION: Will the Government please confirm only Alternate II applies? | RFP, Section I, FAR Clause 52.222-33, Notice of Requirement for Project Labor Agreement has been updated to incorporate Alternate II (Alternate I has been deleted) by reference. Additionally, FAR 52.222-34, Project Labor Agreement (May 2010) has been incorporated by reference. | |||
| C-25 | Section I | Section I, Clause 52.245-2 Government Property Installation Operation Services; Section I Clause 52.245-1 Government Property; 52.251-1 Government Supply Sources (APR 2012); and PWS 2.1.2.20 | DISCUSSION: The referenced clause states that Government property identified in attachments in Section J is provided "as is, where is," and that "(b) The Government bears no responsibility for repair or replacement of any lost Government property. If any or all of the Government property is lost or becomes no longer usable, the Contractor shall be responsible for replacement of the property at Contractor expense. The Contractor shall have title to all replacement property and shall continue to be responsible for contract performance." |
This seems to contradict Clause 52.245-1 Government Property, also included in Section I Clause 52.251-1, PWS 2.1.2.20, and the fact that there are CLINs associated with costs for Government property replacement.
QUESTION: Will the Government please clarify the application of Clause 52.245-2? FAR Clause 52.245-1 and PWS Para 2.1.2.20: The contractor has the option to accept the Government Furnished Property in an "as-is" condition. Additionally, the Government makes no warranty with respect to the serviceability and/or suitability of property for contractor performance, therefore, any repairs, replacement, and/or refurbishment shall be at the Contractor's expense. Any GFP repair and replacement will be handled and negotiated between the Government and the Contractor on a case by case basis.
FAR Clause 52.245-2: As prescribed by FAR 45.107 (b), this clause is required in fixed-price service contracts to be performed on Government installation when Government furnished property will be provided for initial provisioning only and the Government is not responsible for repair or replacement.
| C-26 | Section L | L.5.6 (Section J, Attachment 20) | Section L.5.6 states, "(ref: RFP, Section J, Attachment 20) is provided to assist offerors in completing their subcontracting plan. Is the contractor required to submit this attachment as part of its submission of its small business subcontracting plan? | Attachment 20, Subcontracting Plan Checklist and Review is provided to assist the apparently successful offeror complete an acceptable subcontracting plan prior to award of the contract. Completion of the Sub(k) Plan Checklist is optional. |
| C-27 | Section K | Section K, clause 52.204-8(a)(1) and (2) | The NAICS code and small business size standard for this solicitation is blank. Please provide the NAICS code and small business size standard. Note that the FBO Synopsis indicated the NAICS code is 561210 and the small business size standard is $38.5M. | FAR Clause 52.204-8(a)(1) and (2) has been updated. |
| C-28 | Site Visit | Section L & M, Small Business Plan | Why didn't the government require the minimal DoD Small business participation in this solicitation? | Submission of the subcontracting plan is not required at the time designated for proposal submission, however the plan IS required prior to award of the contract. The DoD Small Business participating goals are identified in Section L.5.6. |
| C-29 | Section L | L.1.10.4 Table 2 - Volume III Section 3.2 Executive Summary; Section L.4.2 | Table 2 shows "Unlimited" under PAGE LIMITS for Volume III, Section 3.2 Executive Summary, however, Section L.4.2 states, "The executive summary shall not exceed (2) pages." Will the Government please clarify whether the Executive Summary for the Past Performance volume is page limited? | Although the page requirements for Volume III is "Unlimited", there is a 2 page limit on the executive summary portion of this unlimited Volume. |
| C-30 | Section L | L.5.6 | This section states, "the subcontracting plan is not required at the time designated for proposal submission. The apparently successful offeror, upon request of the Contractor Officer, shall submit a narrative subcontracting plan…". |
Please confirm that the subcontracting plan will not be submitted with the proposal and will not be evaluated as part of the award criteria.
When will the Contracting Officer request the subcontracting plan and how much time will the contractor be given to develop the plan?
When the subcontracting plan only be requested of the apparent successful offeror? Section L, Para L.1.10.4, Table 2, Item 4.6 Subcontracting Plan has been deleted from the from Volume IV requirements. Subsequent section numbering have been updated. Submission of the subcontracting plan is not required at the time designated for proposal submission. The apparently successful offeror, upon request by the Contracting Officer, shall submit a narrative subcontracting plan. If the apparently successful offeror fails to negotiate a subcontracting plan acceptable to the Contracting Officer within the time limit prescribed by the Contracting Officer, the offeror will be ineligible for award.
The apparently successful offeror will have 14 Calendar Days to develop and submit the Subcontracting Plan.
Yes, only the apparently successful offeror will have be required to submit a Subcontracting Plan.
C-31 Section L L.1.19.1, L.3.3.3.1.(e);
Attachment 8 Attachment 16 DISCUSSION: Per the RFP, Amendment 0002 Section L.1.10.1 specifies which parts of the proposal are exempt from page limitations: "Each page shall be counted except the following: the transmittal letter, cover pages, tab-divider pages, title pages, table of contents, lists of tables and drawings, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, cross-reference matrix, and manpower matrix."
The Manpower Matrix is Government-provided Attachment 8, and exempt from page limitations. However, the Government-provided Attachment 16 (WBS) is not included in the exempt list. Government Attachments are normally exempt from page limitations.
L.3.3.3.1.(e) requires Service Providers (SP) to "Provide a complete Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) reference (Ref: RFP, Section J, Attachment 16)..." with Volume II - Technical Proposal.
| QUESTION: Will the Government confirm Attachment 16 - Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), as a Government-provided attachment, is exempt from page limitations, like the other Government-provided attachments? | Section L has been updated to exclude the completed Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) from Volume II page limit. | ||||
| C-32 | Section L | L.1.10.4 Table 2 and L.1.10.5 | Section L.1.10.5 states that, "Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and an explanation for each." However, L.1.10.4 Table 2 does not reflect paragraph number assignments for the Past Performance or Other Contracting Considerations volume outlines for glossaries of abbreviations and acronyms similar to those in the Price Proposal and Technical Proposal outlines. Does the Government intend for offerors to add paragraph numbering at the end of the Past Performance and Other Contracting Considerations volumes to accommodate this requirement, or should they just be added as appendices at the end of volumes III and IV? | ||
| Section L.4.1 Volume Organization has been updated for past performance. A Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms for Volume IV, Other Contracting Considerations is not required. | |||||
| T-1 | PWS Appendix | 10 FG.1 and similar GF Training APPENDIXs in other sections: 11 and 12 | Tables are labeled "GOVERNMENT FURNISHED". Does that mean that the training is available AND the government will pay tuition and per diem costs for SP personnel to attend? | Please refer to PWS Section 2, para. 2.1.2.26 "CLIN X024 shall be used to, furnish costs for travel, per diem and fees for conferences, seminars, classes, etc. as approved by the PMO and CO and listed in Appendix FG of each Section in this contract. For SPs to be reimbursed for cost for travel, per diem and fees for conferences, seminars, classes, etc. that are not listed in Appendix F of the respective Sections in this contract, these cost may be covered with proper coordination through the respective PMO functional area (s) and CO's approval". | |
| T-2 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1, Throughout | Some sections of the PWS suggest that the Contractor will provide program management, and some imply that the Contractor will support the program manager. For Example, Section 10.1.2.3.3, Hazardous Waste, states that the Contractor shall manage all HW program requirements, but Section 10.1.2.3.13 states that the Contractor shall support/assist the Hazardous Materials Program Manager. Will the Contractor serve as the program manager for all environmental programs, or will they support other Contractors or government/military personnel in these roles? | As stated in the PWS, the contractor will have to support/assist/provide feedback to other contractors or government/military personnel in these roles. Yes. The contractor will serve as the PM for the following environmental programs: Air, Water (wastewater/storm water), Pollution Prevention, Solid Waste (except QRP), Hazardous Waste, Toxics (asbestos, Lead-base paint, PCBs), Above/Underground Storage Tanks, Cultural Resources, Spills (IAW SPCC Plan), Natural Resources, Env Budgeting, POL (Used Oil), NEPA/EIAP. Those programs where the SP is the PM is stated in the PWS using the word "Will Manage". This is also stated PWS Section 10 Para. 10.1.2.3. | |
| T-3 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.2.1. | Does RPO facilitate the capitalization process? Who completes the DD Form 1354 upon project completion--project manager, engineer, contractor, RPO, etc.? Is key supporting documentation (KSD), as required by FIAR, provided by project manager/engineer or does RPO have access to KSD via a shared point/drive? Does Resources staff provide RPO with required financial expense report in order to complete capitalization process promptly and accurately after each project is completed? Are work orders closed by resources staff or operations staff? Does the RPO attend pre-construction and final construction meetings? | Yes the RPO facilitates the capitalization process to ensure it is completed in the required time frame. The project manager completes an interim DD Form 1354 at 80% and a final upon project completion. The RPO has access to KSDs via a share point and also provided by project manager for hard copy as required. Yes, the resources staff promptly provides the RPO with the required financial data to complete the process in the real property database. Only resources work orders are closed by the resources staff; operations closes all others. Yes, the RPO attends pre-construction and final construction meetings. | |
| T-4 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3 |
REESE, BRIAN T NH-03 USAF AFPC AFPC/DP2LA: REESE, BRIAN T NH-03 USAF AFPC AFPC/DP2LA:
| Please insert the exact reference to your question, to include Sections L&M or any attachments | PWS states the Contractor shall implement the Environmental, Safety and Occupational Health Management Information System (ESOH-MIS). Has ESOH-MIS been established at Sheppard AFB, and if so is required hardware (printers, etc.) in place and functioning? If not, has hardware been purchased and required communications security oversight begun? | Yes ESOH-MIS has been established at Sheppard AFB and all hardware is in place and functioning. | |||
| T-5 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3 | PWS states Contractor will participate in the Environmental Safety and Occupational Health Council (ESOHC). Will the Contractor be required to serve as the executive secretary for the ESOH Council? | No. The 82 TRW/SE serves as the executive secretary to the ESOH Council. However, the contractor is expected to provide minutes to SE of their portion of the council. | |
| T-6 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3 | Does Sheppard AFB have an existing environmental construction specification to summarize and communicate specific environmental requirements to contractors seeking contract award? | Yes, Sheppard AFB have an existing environmental construction specification to summarize and communicate specific environmental requirements to contractors seeking contract award. The Statement of Work template where the environmental construction specifications are listed has been added to the Technical Library in the publication folder label "SOW Template." | |
| T-7 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3 | Toxics/Asbestos Abatement has been identified as a "Significant Aspect" under the installations Environmental Management System. Have toxic materials surveys been completed for all facilities? Who is responsible for sampling in the event a presumed asbestos or lead containing material must be impacted either by a construction contract or through the installation's facility maintenance organization? | A toxic materials survey has not been completed for all facilities. It will be the responsibility of the contractor to sample for toxics. | |
| T-8 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3 | Is the Contractor responsible to implement/managed the Hazardous Materials Management Program? | The contractor is required to implement/follow requirements of the HMMP for the contractor's shops. However, the contractor is not responsible for program management of hazardous materials. The HMMP is a Government Provided Service listed in Section 2.3.3. | |
| T-9 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3 | Will the Contractor serve as the Environmental Management System Coordinator? | No. The EMS Coordinator/Facilitator is designated as a Government Provided Service listed in Section 2.3.3. | |
| T-10 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3 | This section states that ACES-RP will be updated with environmental data such as "Hazardous Locations" and the IRP. Question: Is ACES-RP currently loaded with this information and if not what is the estimated workload data to do the initial upload and what is the anticipated annual workload estimate to maintain the databases? | Currently the Hazardous Locations tab in ACES-RP is not populated with IRP information. According to the ACES-RP User Guide (version 3.1.1), paragraph 2.4, MAJCOM/CE Squadron policy will dictate if this information is to be maintained. This information is currently being kept in other legacy systems, i.e., EESOH-MIS, STAR APIMS, GEOBASE, etc. If the information is migrated during the life of the contract from these legacy systems and drive additional cost; this cost will be handled through a contract modification. The IRP information at the time of migration will be supplied by the government to the contract. The contractor will be responsible to populate ACES-RP with the information given. | |
| T-11 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3, 10.B.1.1, 12.1.2.1.2.8 | The PWS 10.1.2.3 states that EIAP and NEPA actions are in this section and the workload data for these actions is in Appendix 10B.1.1. However, in Section 12, paragraph 12.1.2.1.2.8 Section "Environmental Planning/National Environmental Policy Act and Environmental Impact Analysis Process (NEPA/EIAP) fall under section 12 "Engineering Requirements". There is no workload data for these actions in section 12. Please clarify which section the NEPA/EIAP actions are to be performed. | Under the current PWS structure, the government placed the NEPA/EIAP workload in Section 10. However, under the revised PWS, this function was taken out of Section 10 and placed in 12. It will be the contractor's business case decision as to which section this function will reside. The workload data in Section 10 should be followed for all NEPA/EIAP actions. | |
| T-12 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3.14 | Does Sheppard AFB currently have any Open Enforcement Actions, and if so how will the transition of responsibility be managed over the transition to ensure ECDs are met? | Currently Sheppard has no Open Enforcement Actions. | |
| T-13 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3.15 | The section states "SP will be required to provide cradle to grave management on post 1984 contamination sites. This requirement excludes the Installation Restoration Program (IRP) which is responsible for pre-1984 contamination." Please describe the cradle to grave reference in terms of funding and specialized training requirements. In addition the AFI's concerning releases and the IRP not addressing contamination after 1984 does not appear to be in sync with this section. Please clarify the relationship with CERCLA/RCRA/1984 and contamination sites that have or will occur after 1984 and the responsibilities of the SP in relation to these events. | Please refer to PWS Section 10 para. 10.1.2.3.10. and the SAFB 705 Plan in the Environmental folder in the Technical Library in the FOUO Folder for the SP responsibility in regards to the Installation Restoration Program (IRP) The contractor will need to inform and work with AFCEC/CZ, CONS, MAJCOM, and PMO regarding funding. As for specialized training requirements, the SAFB 705 Plan list training requirement in Annex F. The relationship with CERCLA/RCRA/1984 and contamination sites that have or will occur after 1984 and the responsibilities of the SP in relation to these events is explained in the PWS Section 10 para. 10.1.2.3.10. and the SAFB 705 Plan. | |
| T-14 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3.2 | Has Sheppard AFB implemented APIMS for air quality monitoring and reporting? | Yes, Sheppard AFB implemented APIMS for air quality monitoring and reporting. | |
| T-15 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3.5 | Is the Qualified Recycling Program operating currently, or will the Contractor be responsible for its implementation? | The QRP is operating currently; however, the contractor will be required to provide support. | |
| T-16 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.3.8 | Does Sheppard AFB have an AAFES gas station, and if so what will the Contractor's role be in oversight of the tanks associated with the AAFES station? | Yes, Sheppard AFB has an AAFES gas station and the contractor will be required to provide oversight of the tanks. Workload associated with the AAFES gas station is included in Section 10B. Oversight is spelled out in 10.1.2.3.8 as well as AFI 32-7044, paragraph 1.8.13. | |
| T-17 | PWS Paragraph | 10.1.2.5 | There is no workload data for the AMPs and Sub-Amp activity. Please provide estimated workload data to support the AMPs and Sub-AMP Activities. | AMP and Sub-AMP Activities workload data is provided in 10B (see Meeting, Councils, Boards, etc. & Optimization of Space Management). AMP is a business model and employs a sustainable asset management approach using common levels of service by implementing AMPs for built and natural assets. (see AFPD 32-10, para 2.7). | |
| T-18 | PWS Paragraph | 10.2.15.3. | Does the RPO maintain MFH inventory reports? Does inventory match housing office records and data in ACES-RP or NEXGEN IT? | ACES-RP currently only shows what was on the real property records at the time of privatization; this is a CAP on the FIAR audit but currently the ACES-RP records do not match housing office records. | |
| T-19 | PWS Paragraph | 10.2.2. | INVENTORY - Does the Real Property Office (RPO) generate real property inventory reports? Do physical folders exist for all facilities listed in the inventory report? Does each facility folder contain map and/or drawings? Has the RPO reconciled all facilities' Unit of Measure (UoM) to match GIS and/or CAD records and do they match the data in either ACES-RP or NEXGEN IT? |
AUDIT - Is Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness (FIAR) guidance being followed and implemented? What is the current Corrective Action Plan (CAP) percentage?
SPACE ALLOCATION - Has the S-File been replaced with SUDS and is it maintained by RPO or other organization/office?
FACILITY & BOUNDARY INSPECTION/INVENTORY - When conducting inventories/inspections of facilities, does RPO resource operations staff, security forces staff, etc.?
GRANTS - Are grants processed at base level or do they get outsourced to GSA or USACE?
LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE - Is there a current record of linear segmentation? Are all linear records mapped out by GIS? Do the records (UoM) match the data in either ACES-RP or NEXGEN IT?
BASE INFORMATION - Are there current base surveys i.e. metes and bounds? Are there multiple land records, if so, are deeds or any associated legal documentation available and maintained on site? INVENTORY - Yes, the RPO generates real property inventory reports. Physical folders exist for all facilities listed in the inventory report. Maps and/or drawings do exist in most facility folders; The RPO is working to reconcile all facilities; this is a FIAR requirement and the current RPO is working to ensure this is 100%.
AUDIT- The current CAP is approximately 90% SPACE ALLOCATION - The S-File has not been replaced by SUDS and currently is not maintained by the RPO FACILITY & BOUNDARY INSPECTION/INVENTORY - Yes, as required GRANTS - Grants are processed at base level LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE - There is a current record of linear segmentation based on current guidance. Linear records are mapped out by GIS and as part of the FIAR, they currently match.
BASE INFORMATION - Yes. There are multiple land records and all legal documentation is available and maintained on site.
| T-20 | PWS Paragraph | 10.3.15.1. | Is there a Real Property Accountable Officer on site with required authorities documented i.e. special orders, authority to sign DD Form 1354 (if applicable), completed RP Course WMGT-424? | Yes, there is a Real Property Accountable Officer on site with required authorities documented i.e. special orders, authority to sign DD Form 1354 (if applicable), completed RP Course WMGT-424. |
| T-21 | PWS Appendix | 11, Grounding System Testing in accordance with AFI 32-1065 | Is their data related to the location and number of LPS required to maintain on Sheppard AFB and any Annex? | Yes. Individual occurrences are captured as RWP workload, and specific locations are part of a shop maintained system of records. |
| T-22 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.1. | Does operations staff maintain RPIE in current database? Does RPO provide the base inventory (7115) report to staff responsible for maintaining RPIE in database for reconciliation purposes? Does Operations staff and RPO reconcile facility appurtenance model/serial number information? | RPIE Inventory is an Operations function under the current CE Model. The database used to maintain the information is BUILDER. The RP Inventory (7115) is available to Operations and is used for a variety of operations purposes. RPO and Operations staff interact. Yes, Operations staff and RPO reconcile facility appurtenance model/serial number information. However, who does the updating of BUILDER and how the contractor ""performs reconciliation" will be based on the Offeror's technical approach. |
| T-23 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2 | What is the existent of updating and posting afterhours IAW FPCON signs through (Base or Compound)? | This requirement is intended to be the CE Compound and CE contractor occupied facilities only. |
| T-24 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2, Line 49 | What is the workload data for abatement/LBP/mold? | Please refer to PWS Section 11, Appendix 11B, page 11B3, Table 5 for asbestos containing material disposal. The LBP and mold workload is included the workload provided in the PWS Section 11, Appendix 11B. |
| T-25 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2. | Is there workload data available for building fall arrest systems? | Fall arrest systems are all portable unless otherwise identified in RPIE Inventory as certified attachment points. Certification of portable systems is part of the personnel safety program. Certification of facility systems is accomplished as RWP and presented in that workload history. |
| T-26 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.1.1 | What is the reason for the 32 sq. ft. or less of painting? Davis Bacon is normally 200 sq. ft. or more for different pay as it applies to painting? | SAFB maintains an IDIQ Service Contract for Protective Coating Maintenance (PCM). This requirement is to curb the quantity of small repairs from accumulating as a backlog under the PCM contract. It is intended to expedite the small repair effort. |
| T-27 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.1.1 | For Roofing projects less than $150,000 what is the method of completion? Is there a cutoff value that creates a task order rather than FFP Service Order? How many projects per year is the average performed? | The Air Force manages an enterprise wide roofing contract where task orders estimated to be over $100K but less than$150K get accomplished using a method of contracting decided upon at the base level by the government. Task Orders $100K or less are accomplished in Operations. Task orders over $150K are awarded under the enterprise roofing contract. Please refer to AFI32-105_AFGM2016-01 dated 20 Jan 2016. Workload data is provided in the Tech Library under in the "Sheppard Additional workload Data" in the "Engineering Folder" in FY11-15 Workload Data associated with projects designed and inspected is listed. |
| T-28 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.1.4 | What is the reason for the 32 sq. ft. or less of painting? Davis Bacon is normally 200 sq. ft. or more for different pay as it applies to painting? | SAFB maintains an IDIQ Service Contract for Protective Coating Maintenance (PCM) . This identified requirement is to curb the quantity of small repairs from accumulating as a backlog under the PCM contract. It is intended to expedite the small repair effort. |
| T-29 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.2.1.3. Water distribution Systems | As per AFI 32-1067, other than annual water system backflow prevention-cross connections surveys, there is a requirement for 5 yr. cross connection surveys in addition to. Will this accomplished via separate contract? This must be coordinated through Base Bio-Environmental Engineer. | This work is currently performed as RWP. The method of accomplishing the requirement is up to the individual offerors, but is not to be considered as outside the scope of operations. |
| T-30 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.2.1.5. PLANT OPERATIONS | Are the Heat Generating and Water Plants operated 24/7? | Yes, the Heat Generating and Water Plants operated 24/7. |
| T-31 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.2.2. ENTOMOLOGY | When it comes to trap, net, relocate, and dispose of animals are there any local ordnances or required relocation or disposal locations to be concerned with? Please include mileage distance or limitations. | For wild animals, Entomology traps, euthanizes and disposes of carcasses at the Buffalo Creek Landfill in Iowa Park, TX which is approximately 10 miles one-way from Sheppard AFB. Domestic animals are taken to the City of Wichita Falls Animal Shelter which is approximately 8-10 miles from Sheppard AFB. |
| T-32 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.2.2. ENTOMOLOGY | When talking about protecting installation personnel from vector borne diseases and medical pests (animals and plants that do not directly transmit disease pathogens but are medically important because of biting, stinging, or other annoyances including secondary skin infections). Other than spot treatment, proper ground maintenance, removal or agitating of standing water is fogging also implied or expected. | It's a business decision as to whether or not to use fogging as a control method to reach the desired outcome. |
| T-33 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.3.3 | Will the AAS parts be provided by the government? | AAS parts will be funded through the CEMAS Cost Reimbursable CLIN. |
| T-34 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.3.3 and 11.3.2.4 | Aircraft Arrestment Systems (AAS)-Are the AAS Real property maintained on a CA/CRL government custodian account? | Yes, Aircraft Arrestment Systems (AAS)-Real property is maintained on a CA/CRL government custodian account |
| T-35 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.4.1.4 | For projects less than $100,000 how many projects per year is the average performed? | See tables 4 and 5 of Section 11 Appendix B for workload history and classification. "# of 332s" column and "# of projects/designed" column. |
| T-36 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.4.1.4. and PWS 11.1.2.2.1.1 | The PWS states, The SP shall be responsible for work/construction valued at $100K and less (includes planning, programming, designing, contracting action, and funding and executing and management). 11.1.2.2.1.1. STRUCTURES: The method of completion of projects that are valued above $150,000 will be determined by the Government IAW AFI32- 105_AFGM2016-01 dated 20 Jan 2016. |
Can the Government confirm these 2 comments are correct? What is the method of completion of projects between $100K and $150K?
| These 2 statements are independent of each other. Typically any work accomplished in Operations will not exceed $100K. Para 11.1.2.2.1.1. Structures reference is specifically related to Roof work and falls under the terms of the enterprise wide roof contract vehicle. See response to question T-27. | ||||
| T-37 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.4.1.5. | Does operations staff complete DD Form 1354 when work order require capitalization? Does RPO provide a copy of DD Form 1354 to Operations staff upon completion of project? | Yes, the operations staff complete DD Form 1354 when work orders requires capitalization. Yes, the RPO provide a copy of DD Form 1354 to Operations staff upon completion of project |
| T-38 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.4.1.5.11. | How complete is the data currently loaded in SAFB's BUILDER database? | SAFB BUILDER database is currently incomplete, BUILDER is a living database reliant on user input. The data reliability is reliant on user input. |
| T-39 | PWS Paragraph | 11.1.2.2.4.2. | The PWS states, "The service provider shall be responsible for purchasing all parts and materials, on a reimbursable basis; with the exception of the first 90 day. All parts and materials for the first 90 day of performance shall be included in the offeror’s firm-fixed price. Lack of materials shall not be considered justification for failing to meet performance requirements outlined in this PWS." |
Question: Does this apply to specific work orders supplied by the Government or all work orders?
| All parts and materials required for the first 90 days of this contract shall be included in the SP Firm-Fixed-Price; after the 90 days "The service provider shall be responsible for purchasing all parts and materials, on a reimbursable basis. This applies to all work orders. | |||||
| T-40 | PWS Paragraph | 11.3.11 | Are the AAS considered critical systems requiring "special level" supply parts? | Yes, the AAS are considered "special level". | |
| T-41 | PWS Paragraph | 11.3.2.2. | Does RPO maintain copies of MOA, MOU, and Support Agreements? Are each associated with facilities? Are they reconciled in ACES-RP or NEXGEN IT as required by FIAR? | Yes, the RPO maintain copies of CE coordinated MOA, MOU, and electronic link to Support Agreements. Yes, MOA and MOU are associated with facilities and agencies. Yes, the are they reconciled in ACES-RP or NEXGEN IT as required by FIAR. | |
| T-42 | PWS page | 11-1-4. | How does a technician get certified by higher headquarters for the AAS and EMCS requirements for certification and licensing? | Government notes the reference used should be 11-I-4. Certification for AAS is accomplished IAW AFI 32-1043 Please refer to para. 1.2.3. "The MAJCOM Directorate of Installations and Mission Support (MAJCOM/A7) ensures Base Civil Engineers (BCEs) comply with the designation and certification of personnel as tasked in paragraph 1.3, that all personnel engaged in AAS activities meet the same minimum requirements for the tasks assigned them, and that Air Force contracts for the performance of maintenance operations duties include similar standards of competency for support employees through reference to this instruction and other appropriate Air Force guidance within the support contracts. And AFI 32-1043 para. 1.3. Base Civil Engineers for further guidance on AAS certification. The EMCS certification requirement has been deleted. | |
| T-43 | PWS page | 11-1-4. | The chart outlines "at least" requirements and under the AAS section it looks to be missing some language…."…..Personnel Engaged in Aircraft Arresting System Operation and….."? | Yes, you are correct, the table has been corrected and the change is reflected in the PWS dated 15 Aug 17. | |
| T-44 | PWS Appendix | 11B-114 | Will the refurbishment stated on this page be completed by end of 2017? | Yes, the refurbishment stated on page 11B-114 will be completed by end of 2017. | |
| T-45 | PWS Page | 11B-3 Table 4 | Chart outlines number of actions by category but I could not locate specific information related to number of project under $100k per year that were accomplished by SP previous years. Also how many in the first 90 days does the government estimate that will be | See tables 4 and 5 of Section 11 Appendix B for workload history and classification. "3 of 332s" column and "# of projects/designed" column. | |
| T-46 | PWS Paragraph | 12.1.1, Line 1 | This paragraph references "Engineering Manager" while Appendix 12I lists "Chief Engineer" as a required position. Are these the same positions? | Yes, these are the same positions. | |
| T-47 | PWS Paragraph | 12.1.2.1.2.1, 12.1.2.1.2.7 | Is SAFB currently having any of it's plans (IDP, AICUZ Plan, ICEMAP, SUDS studies, GIS data capture, etc.) completed via any centralized contracting vehicles? | No, SAFB is not currently having any of it's plans (IDP, AICUZ Plan, ICEMAP, SUDS studies, GIS data capture, etc.) completed via any centralized contracting vehicles. | |
| T-48 | PWS Paragraph | 12.1.2.1.2.4, Line 2: | Who is responsible for temporary construction waivers and how many per year? | Asset Management is responsible for this requirement. There are approximately 5 to 7 temporary airfield construction waivers and 3 to 5 permanent waivers generated per year. | |
| T-49 | PWS Paragraph | 12.1.2.1.2.8 | Could you please provide historical data on how many EIAP actions are required per year on average? How many Environmental Assessments and/or EIS's, and how many projects historically have qualified for categorical exclusion? | Please refer to PWS Section 10, Appendix 10B, 10.B.1.1, page 10-B-3, NEPA/EIAP workload. | |
| T-50 | PWS Paragraph | 12.1.2.1.4. | To confirm, all SAFB utilities are provided by external, commercial utility providers? There is no on-base utility generation (i.e. power plant)? Aside from energy production, does SAFB own/operate a water treatment plant? | Correct, SAFB/Lake Texoma Recreation Annex/Frederick Field utilities are provided by external commercial utility providers. Two exceptions are the potable water supply and sewage treatment plant at Lake Texoma Recreation Annex which are government owned Real Property maintained by a separate service contract, which is listed in Section 2.3.3. SAFB does not have a central power generation plant. Critical facilities do have emergency backup generators to supply temporary power to select areas of buildings. SAFB does not own/operate a central water treatment plant to supply potable water to the installation. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .