Clarifications_of_Q&ASs.docx

1. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab A, Answer 4 and Amendment 1, Attachment 3: The updated Wage Determination document does not include the conformed positions we have submitted as the Incumbent Service Provider for consideration by all offerors. Please provide a listing of conformed positions and current wages for consideration of all prospective offerors.

Answer: The question was answered. No, conformed positions will be included. It is improper to the incumbent and as the incumbent you have the information. The Department of Labor was contacted about the conformed rates. They advised not to include the conformed rates as they are the rates of the current contractor and other offerors may not have the same conformed rates or no conformed rates.

2. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab A, Answer 12, A-TE-4, and C-TE-2a: The workload information provided by the Government does not match the level of effort provided by our firm as the Incumbent Service Provider. We would request that you verify and validate the information provided.

Answer: The data was verified in the authorized government system that is utilized by the contractor to record work performed on vehicles in Tab C/A.

3. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab B, Answer 14: The Government’s answer references the costs of repair to the JSMLT if issues are identified during calibration. Please confirm these costs are incurred by the Government.

Answer: The cost are incurred by the Government.

4. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab B, Answer 15 and PWS B-TE-2: The Government’s addition of total hours without labor category breakdown provides unclear estimation of costs associated with the after hour support and appears to violate the principle of Superior Knowledge Doctrine. This also allows for intentional underbidding with no means of validation by the Government. Please provide estimates by classification as this data should be based on the Over and Above costs paid to the Incumbent Service Provider.

Answer: This PWS has changed since the current contract. It is primarily a FFP performance based contract with an over and above CLIN which is cost plus fixed fee (no longer labor hour). We have provided the historical data for workloads to be done under the FFP portion. The FFP historical data provided is sufficient for offerors to properly bid. The over and above is a fluctuating CLIN since it is used for situations such as a crop duster spraying anthrax, blizzard in California, or other work that the government nor contractor could anticipate. This is the reason it is a cost plus fixed fee CLIN. The over and above used to be a labor hour CLIN however, it is now a performance based CPFF CLIN.

The Superior Knowledge Doctrine states that the government must provide vital information that would affect time and cost; that the government knew that the contractor didn’t have this data and had no reason to search for it; nothing alerted the contractor to a need to investigate that the government withheld the data.

The government provided extensive workload history and assumed the risk with the over and above CLIN. We have provided all relevant data and have not withheld any information necessary for a contractor to bid. Additionally, the government does an evaluation of the technical approach to determine if the proposed approach can satisfy the requirements. The government must ensure the proposed price is reasonable and balanced. Thus the verification necessary to ensure the technical proposal can be done within cost. This is in accordance with the FAR and LPTA procedures.

5. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab C, Answer 15 and PWS C-TE-2: The Government’s addition of total hours without labor category breakdown provides unclear estimation of costs associated with the after hour support and appears to violate the principle of Superior Knowledge Doctrine. This also allows for intentional underbidding with no means of validation by the Government. Please provide estimates by classification as this data should be based on the Over and Above costs paid to the Incumbent Service Provider.

Answer: This PWS has changed since the current contract. It is primarily a FFP performance based contract with an over and above CLIN which is cost plus fixed fee (no longer labor hour). We have provided the historical data for workloads to be done under the FFP portion. The FFP historical data provided is sufficient for offerors to properly bid. The over and above is a fluctuating CLIN since it is used for situations such as a crop duster spraying anthrax, blizzard in California, or other work that the government nor contractor could anticipate. This is the reason it is a cost plus fixed fee CLIN. The over and above used to be a labor hour CLIN however, it is now a performance based CPFF CLIN.

The Superior Knowledge Doctrine states that the government must provide vital information that would affect time and cost; that the government knew that the contractor didn’t have this data and had no reason to search for it; nothing alerted the contractor to a need to investigate that the government withheld the data.

The government provided extensive workload history and assumed the risk with the over and above CLIN. We have provided all relevant data and have not withheld any information necessary for a contractor to bid. Additionally, the government does an evaluation of the technical approach to determine if the proposed approach can satisfy the requirements. The government must ensure the proposed price is reasonable and balanced. Thus the verification necessary to ensure the technical proposal can be done within cost. This is in accordance with the FAR and LPTA procedures.

6. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab D, Answers 5 and 6: The Government’s answer to these Questions are not correct in our performance of services as the Incumbent Service Provider. We are tasked by the Government to provide personnel based on the IDP developed by the IDO for the Installation. We would request the Government provide a listing of billets, by function, which are to be covered by the Contractor.

Answer: All positions that are required for Tab D are included in the PWS.

7. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab D, Answers 5 and 6: The Government’s answer to these Questions are not correct in our performance of services as the Incumbent Service Provider. We are tasked by the Government to provide personnel based on the IDP developed by the IDO for the Installation. This request is critical as individuals are only allowed to fill one position regardless of activity, based on local policy.

Answer: All positions that are required for Tab D are included in the PWS.

8. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab D, Answer 7 and PWS D-TE-2: The Government’s addition of total hours without labor category breakdown provides unclear estimation of costs associated with the after hour support and appears to violate the principle of Superior Knowledge Doctrine. This also allows for intentional underbidding with no means of validation by the Government. Please provide estimates by classification as this data should be based on the Over and Above costs paid to the Incumbent Service Provider.

Answer: This PWS has changed since the current contract. It is primarily a FFP performance based contract with an over and above CLIN which is cost plus fixed fee (no longer labor hour). We have provided the historical data for workloads to be done under the FFP portion. The FFP historical data provided is sufficient for offerors to properly bid. The over and above is a fluctuating CLIN since it is used for situations such as a crop duster spraying anthrax, blizzard in California, or other work that the government nor contractor could anticipate. This is the reason it is a cost plus fixed fee CLIN. The over and above used to be a labor hour CLIN however, it is now a performance based CPFF CLIN.

The Superior Knowledge Doctrine states that the government must provide vital information that would affect time and cost; that the government knew that the contractor didn’t have this data and had no reason to search for it; nothing alerted the contractor to a need to investigate that the government withheld the data.

The government provided extensive workload history and assumed the risk with the over and above CLIN. We have provided all relevant data and have not withheld any information necessary for a contractor to bid. Additionally, the government does an evaluation of the technical approach to determine if the proposed approach can satisfy the requirements. The government must ensure the proposed price is reasonable and balanced. Thus the verification necessary to ensure the technical proposal can be done within cost. This is in accordance with the FAR and LPTA procedures.

9. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab F, Answer 2 and PWS F-TE-2h: The Government’s answer and update to F-TE-2H resulted in the change of the 10-year inspection date; however, the 2-year and 5-year were not updated. Please confirm that 2-year and 5-year tests were completed in conjunction with the 10-year inspection.

Answer: Please see previous questions. This contract requires the contractor to do a baseline of all testing up to the 10 year date(not to include 10 year and beyond) regardless of what was previously done. After completion continue with the frequencies described in the UFC.

10. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab F, Answer 21 and PWS F-TE-2: The Government’s answer states that paragraphs would be updated. Should the paragraphs in F-TE-2 be updated to reflect the areas to be mulched to reflect 22,000 SF?

Answer: 22,000 SF is in the PWS.

11. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab F, Answer 24 and PWS F6.1.4: The Government’s answer states that the Government is going to delete the requirement; however, the PWS paragraph still contains the requirement for the mulching. Please confirm that we are to include the 2,583 trees and associated requirements in the FFP.

Answer: Please see Tab F, Answer 24. It states it would be amended and it was. The trees were deleted.

12. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab G, Answer 13 and PWS G-TE-2: The Government’s addition of total hours without labor category breakdown provides unclear estimation of costs associated with the after hour support. This also allows for intentional underbidding with no means of validation by the Government and appears to violate the principle of Superior Knowledge Doctrine. Please provide estimates by classification as this data should be based on the Over and Above costs paid to the Incumbent Service Provider.

Answer: This PWS has changed since the current contract. It is primarily a FFP performance based contract with an over and above CLIN which is cost plus fixed fee (no longer labor hour). We have provided the historical data for workloads to be done under the FFP portion. The FFP historical data provided is sufficient for offerors to properly bid. The over and above is a fluctuating CLIN since it is used for situations such as a crop duster spraying anthrax, blizzard in California, or other work that the government nor contractor could anticipate. This is the reason it is a cost plus fixed fee CLIN. The over and above used to be a labor hour CLIN however, it is now a performance based CPFF CLIN.

The Superior Knowledge Doctrine states that the government must provide vital information that would affect time and cost; that the government knew that the contractor didn’t have this data and had no reason to search for it; nothing alerted the contractor to a need to investigate that the government withheld the data.

The government provided extensive workload history and assumed the risk with the over and above CLIN. We have provided all relevant data and have not withheld any information necessary for a contractor to bid. Additionally, the government does an evaluation of the technical approach to determine if the proposed approach can satisfy the requirements. The government must ensure the proposed price is reasonable and balanced. Thus the verification necessary to ensure the technical proposal can be done within cost. This is in accordance with the FAR and LPTA procedures.

13. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab H, Answer 1 and PWS H-TE-2: The Government’s addition of total hours without labor category breakdown provides unclear estimation of costs associated with the after hour support and appears to violate the principle of Superior Knowledge Doctrine. This also allows for intentional underbidding with no means of validation by the Government. Please provide estimates by classification as this data should be based on the Over and Above costs paid to the Incumbent Service Provider.

Answer: This PWS has changed since the current contract. It is primarily a FFP performance based contract with an over and above CLIN which is cost plus fixed fee (no longer labor hour). We have provided the historical data for workloads to be done under the FFP portion. The FFP historical data provided is sufficient for offerors to properly bid. The over and above is a fluctuating CLIN since it is used for situations such as a crop duster spraying anthrax, blizzard in California, or other work that the government nor contractor could anticipate. This is the reason it is a cost plus fixed fee CLIN. The over and above used to be a labor hour CLIN however, it is now a performance based CPFF CLIN.

The Superior Knowledge Doctrine states that the government must provide vital information that would affect time and cost; that the government knew that the contractor didn’t have this data and had no reason to search for it; nothing alerted the contractor to a need to investigate that the government withheld the data.

The government provided extensive workload history and assumed the risk with the over and above CLIN. We have provided all relevant data and have not withheld any information necessary for a contractor to bid. Additionally, the government does an evaluation of the technical approach to determine if the proposed approach can satisfy the requirements. The government must ensure the proposed price is reasonable and balanced. Thus the verification necessary to ensure the technical proposal can be done within cost. This is in accordance with the FAR and LPTA procedures.

14. Reference Answers to Questions, Tab I, Answer 4 and PWS I-TE-2: The Government’s addition of total hours without labor category breakdown provides unclear estimation of costs associated with the after hour support and appears to violate the principle of Superior Knowledge Doctrine. This also allows for intentional underbidding with no means of validation by the Government. Please provide estimates by classification as this data should be based on the Over and Above costs paid to the Incumbent Service Provider.

Answer: This PWS has changed since the current contract. It is primarily a FFP performance based contract with an over and above CLIN which is cost plus fixed fee (no longer labor hour). We have provided the historical data for workloads to be done under the FFP portion. The FFP historical data provided is sufficient for offerors to properly bid. The over and above is a fluctuating CLIN since it is used for situations such as a crop duster spraying anthrax, blizzard in California, or other work that the government nor contractor could anticipate. This is the reason it is a cost plus fixed fee CLIN. The over and above used to be a labor hour CLIN however, it is now a performance based CPFF CLIN.

The Superior Knowledge Doctrine states that the government must provide vital information that would affect time and cost; that the government knew that the contractor didn’t have this data and had no reason to search for it; nothing alerted the contractor to a need to investigate that the government withheld the data.

The government provided extensive workload history and assumed the risk with the over and above CLIN. We have provided all relevant data and have not withheld any information necessary for a contractor to bid. Additionally, the government does an evaluation of the technical approach to determine if the proposed approach can satisfy the requirements. The government must ensure the proposed price is reasonable and balanced. Thus the verification necessary to ensure the technical proposal can be done within cost. This is in accordance with the FAR and LPTA procedures.

15. Reference Amendment 1, Attachment 9 and PWS Paragraph A17.2.1: The updated property list includes a vehicle list provided to the Contractor for use. There is unreasonable financial risk asked on the part of the Contractor if no repair history is provided for high dollar items and no cap is placed on the exposure for repair and replacement of high cost equipment such as snow plows. The updated attachment outlines two pieces of snow equipment ($154,006 each) that are 25 years old, one of the snow blowers ($593,684 each), and three of the six rollover plows ($333,236 each) that are nearly 20 years old. These vehicles acquisition total more than $1.9M in exposure for just these items in the event they become inoperable. The PWS Paragraph states “If the KTR, at any time, considers the government furnished vehicles to be insufficient, then the KTR shall provide additional vehicles at no additional cost to the government to insure required services are performed in accordance with the requirements set forth in this PWS.” Will the Government provide this history and cap this financial exposure?

Answer: To clarify: If the GFE is determined by the government to be insufficient the government will replace the GFE. However, if the KTR determines that they need more equipment than the GFE, the KTR has to provide at no cost to the government.

16. Reference Amendment 1, Attachment 9 and PWS Paragraph A17.2.1: The updated property list includes a vehicle list provided to the Contractor for use. This is a low price, technically acceptable contract with no past performance necessary. How does the Government intend to limit the financial risk to the Contractor if one or more of the high costs items (ex. two pieces of snow equipment ($154,006 each) that are 25 years old, one of the snow blowers ($593,684 each), and three of the six rollover plows ($333,236 each) that are nearly 20 years old) become inoperable and needs to be replaced?

Answer: If the equipment has to be replaced the government replaces. If the GFE is determined by the government to be insufficient the government will replace the GFE. However, if the KTR determines that they need more equipment than the GFE, the KTR has to provide at no cost to the government.

17. Reference Grissom QAs – RFP #3: As the conformed positions are not shown in the incorporated Wage Determination, please provide the conformed positions and their current wage rate.

Answer: The question was answered. No, conformed positions will be included. It is improper to the incumbent. The Department of Labor was contacted about the conformed rates. They advised not to include the conformed rates as they are the rates of the current contractor and other offerors may not have the same conformed rates or no conformed rates.

18. Reference Q&A B15 and PWS Rev 1, TABs B, C, D, G, H and I: All of the referenced TABs have had “Estimated Workload Outside of Core Hours” added as workload (considered a part of the FFP). With the exception of TABs H and I, there are multiple job classifications utilized within the TABs during core hours. As it is currently being presented, the incumbent is the only offeror that would have any idea as to the work breakdown. Please provide the type of work performed in order to allow all offerors the ability to properly assign appropriate labor classifications and allocate the positions necessary to cover these hours without possibly doing so at a loss.

Answer: This PWS has changed since the current contract. It is primarily a FFP performance based contract with an over and above CLIN which is cost plus fixed fee (no longer labor hour). We have provided the historical data for workloads to be done under the FFP portion. The FFP historical data provided is sufficient for offerors to properly bid. The over and above is a fluctuating CLIN since it is used for situations such as a crop duster spraying anthrax, blizzard in California, or other work that the government nor contractor could anticipate. This is the reason it is a cost plus fixed fee CLIN. The over and above used to be a labor hour CLIN however, it is now a performance based CPFF CLIN.

The government provided extensive workload history and assumed the risk with the over and above CLIN. We have provided all relevant data and have not withheld any information necessary for a contractor to bid. Additionally, the government does an evaluation of the technical approach to determine if the proposed approach can satisfy the requirements. The government must ensure the proposed price is reasonable and balanced. Thus the verification necessary to ensure the technical proposal can be done within cost. This is in accordance with the FAR and LPTA procedures.

19. Reference Grissom QAs – Tab C, #5: While we fully understand the Performance Based Requirements of the contract, we submitted the original question to determine the whether we would have to staff for an exercise/deployment that required the movement of 678 personnel and 55 short tons one time or multiple times per year. There are HUGE differences based on the amount of times this occurs or has occurred historically. Moving all these people and all this cargo at one time would require enormous logistical support versus doing it over multiple events during the year.

Answer: We have provided the historical data which is a total of multiple events.

20. Reference F-TE-2,1.1 and 1.6: Paragraph 1.1 shows that there are 79.39 acres of improved grounds while paragraph 1.6 shows that there are 86.78. Which area is correct?

Answer: 79.39 acres is correct. PWS has been amended.

21. Reference Grissom QAs – Tab F, #2b: If the Government truly wants a “baseline” to be established for purposes of being sure that all systems are up to date, then it should be the Government that determines how far back on the ITM Task Tables an offeror should go rather than leaving it up to the offerors as there will not be any consistency to what is priced into the proposals. Please identify the timeline to be used by all offerors.

Answer: All baselines are to be completed in the first year and are to include all items up to (but not including) the 10 year frequency.

22. Reference Grissom QAs – Tab F, #6: The maps provided do not describe or show the topography of the drainage ditches and/or stream banks. Please provide this information.

Answer: The government has provided the only maps that are currently available in the PWS.

23. Reference Grissom QAs – Tab F, #26 and 30: The maps provided are not sized to permit accurate measurement for the determination of the area to be swept for the roads, parking lots and airfield. Please provide the square footage that will need to be swept.

Answer: The data is located in F-TE-2f and can be seen on the map.

24. Reference F5.18, Fire Systems and Mass Notification Systems: Please provide further detail, indicating the amount of existing fire alarm, suppression, sprinkler system, and mass notification system peripheral devices, that have been tested in the areas defined and required by the PWS (Performance Work Statement.) Information including (but not limited to) prior inspection dates, requirements for testing, number of peripheral devices, and detail of ancillary devices monitored or connected to the system(s) defined above. Field reporting should provide information from prior inspections that were performed on the Grissom ARB, and provide information on how existing systems were tested in accordance with UFC 3-601-02. For Sprinkler and Suppression system systems, please provide ancillary controllers, pumps, engines, and water supply tanks IAW detail that will provide information for quantity of valves, gauges, nozzles, and peripheral system devices that are required for testing.

Answer: The FFP portion is to do the inspections, if repairs are necessary they will be done under the appropriate Service Call CLIN. System inventory is included in the PWS.

25. Reference F5.18, Fire Systems and Mass Notification Systems: Understanding that the past inspections for the fire alarm, mass notification, suppression, and sprinkler systems have been performed in accordance with the requirements and testing schedule, required by UFC 3-601-02, please provide detail on when the inspections are due for each system named above, and when the Period of Performance will commence and end for the awarded contractor? Is it the expectation of the awarding agency that the building inspection deadlines are met in accordance with the existing base schedule? Please provide any testing documentation to support frequency of past inspections.

Answer: Past inspections are not relevant. This contract requires the contractor to do a baseline of all testing up to the 10 year date(not to include 10 year and beyond) regardless of what was previously done. After completion continue with the frequencies described in the UFC.

26. Reference F5.18.1, Fire Systems and Mass Notification Systems: F5.18.1 states that the KTR shall repair all fire system defects or malfunctions as a Priority 1 or 3A CM call and that KTR shall clear and correct all fire suppression system alarms, faults, and troubles. Please provide current documentation of active/current system faults, defects, malfunctions resident on the actives systems, defined in the Performance Work Statement. Specifically, we are requesting this information pertinent to the fire alarm, mass notification, suppression, and sprinkler systems associated with this RFP.

Answer: Attachment 8 in the RFP provides estimated hours that will be used for evaluation purposes. The is a Cost plus fixed fee CLIN.

26. Reference Grissom QAs – Tab G, #4: The answers to parts b, c, and d state that “the estimated workload has been provided”, however, we are unable to find that information that would answer the these questions. Please advise where this workload can be found in the PWS.

Answer: There was a site visit, maps have been provided and relevant workload has been provided.

27. Reference Grissom QAs – Tab G, #6: While we appreciate the validation of the receipt workload and the issue workload, we see that there are 143,000 more gallons a month issued than received and do not understand a discrepancy of that magnitude. Please clarify.

Answer: Workload was validated and has been corrected in the PWS.

28. Reference Grissom QAs – Tab G, #7: Only one part of the original question was answered. Are the number of issues and the average number of gallons issued for transient aircraft (#15) included in the workload found in #5 and #6?

Answer: Sorry. Yes, included.

29. Reference: 252.237-7024 <tel:(252)%20237-7024> NOTICE OF CONTINUATION OF ESSENTIAL CONTRACTOR SERVICES (OCT 2010). (b) The offeror shall provide with its offer a written plan describing how it will continue to perform the essential contractor services listed in attachment –1 PWS, Mission Essential Contractor Services, dated 1 Jun 2017, during periods of crisis. The offeror shall—

Question: Instructions to Offerors does not call for or require a Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan and Evaluation Criteria does not identify this plan as being evaluated. Please confirm this plan is required to be submitted with Proposal. Suggest it be a deliverable due during phase-in and not submitted with proposal since it is not being evaluated.

Answer: No, offerors do not submit the Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan with the proposal.. A-TE-3, A04 is the deliverable after award.

30. Question: Since there are CBA’s in place for Weather, Tab I and Airfield Management Tab H, we want to confirm that there are no CBA’s for Tab B, Tab C, Tab D, Tab F and Tab G and that offerors are to use the SCA Wage Determination provided for labor categories and pricing.

Answer: Please see RFP questions 3 and 5. Answered. (Airfield and Weather are only areas with a CBA. All other functional areas do not have CBAs and are subject to the Area Wide Wage Determination.)

31. Reference: I2. Hours of Operation. The contractor shall provide weather services as follows:

Sunday thru Saturday (including federal holidays) 0600L – 2300L

*Sunday thru Saturday (including federal holidays) 2300L – 0600L (As necessary for resource protection)

Question: How many days a year on the average are performed 2300-0600 (as necessary for resource protection)?

Answer: Workload and historical data have been provided and there was an amendment made to the PWS.

32. Question: For Tab H please confirm the AFM, AAFM and AMOM positions are mandatory staffing and stand alone positions meaning that as a minimum mandatory staffing during the day M-F Airfield Management must have on duty a AFM, AAFM, AMOM and at least 1 AMOPS person.

Answer: Any required positions are specifically stated in the PWS. It is the KTR’s responsibility to determine the workforce.

33. The following Q&As stated that the PWS would be updated and no action in this Amendment has done so. I would kindly like to request updates to TAB B Q&A 3, 6, and 8, and TAB F Q&A 18, 19 and 21 and an extension in order to review the updates accordingly.

Answer: Tab B was amended to include the answers to Q&As 3, 6 & 8. Tab F was amended. To clarify the answers to 18 and 19 the inspection portion of the paragraph was deleted. QA 21: F-TE-2 was amended.