March_ARB_-_Other_QAs.pdf

*Has a contractor performed similar work to this for the government in the past? If available, please provide the incumbent contract number. If you are unable to provide a contract number, is it safe to assume this is a new requirement for the government?

Government response: FA4664-11-C-1001, Satellite Services, Inc., $65M, 7 year contract

*Comment/Consideration:

We recommend Past Performance be included as an evaluation criterion to ensure contract award is made to the most compelling, proven, technically qualified (small) business, with documented, verifiable experience. This consideration eliminates potential contract award to a company who

1) either does not understand; 2) cannot fulfill; or 3) both does not understand and cannot fulfill all elements of performance by submitting an unrealistically low-price proposal. Reference DOD Memorandum Appropriate Use of Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable Source Selection Process and Associated Contract Type, dated 4 March 2015.

Government response: The evaluation will be conducted as stated in Section M of the RFP.

*Good Afternoon – we have been reviewing opportunities at this facility and would like market our water treatment services to potential Prime bidders. We understand a site visit was conducted and in most cases names of attendees are often posted on FBO. Will you be posting this information? If not, do you have any suggestions on how we could introduce our company’s services to these potential bidders?

Government response: The site visit sign-in sheet was included in the official solicitation release.

*Please provide list of bidders

Government response: The site visit sign-in sheet was included in the official solicitation release.

However, a “list of bidders” does not exist. Information related to the offerors ultimately submitting proposals for this effort would be considered source selection sensitive and therefore would not be released.

*Please provide $ value of last year contract and name of contractors Government response: FA4664-11-C-1001, Satellite Services, Inc., $65M, 7 year contract

*Would the Government consider sponsoring the prime contractor for the DD254 requirement?

If the subcontractor has a clearance, will that suffice?

Government response: The Government will not sponsor. A contractor cannot rely on a partner/subcontractor clearance; the prime contractor must hold the clearance.

*Who is the present Base Operations and Support Service provider? Do you happen to know the old contract # of this operations.

Government response: FA4664-11-C-1001, Satellite Services, Inc., $65M, 7 year contract

*As per item 14 in the RFP what type of pricing do you want for non-recurring services? Do you need a labor dollar per hour or do you have a list of services that you would like for me to give you pricing for?

Government response: Please refer to RFP section L for price proposal instructions, as well as the “Pricing Matrix” (RFP attachment 8). The Pricing Matrix identifies the information to be provided.

*The request would be permission for me and or my colleague, <redacted>, to do a site inspection of the locations covered by pest control.

Government response: The site visit was already held on 28 Feb 18. No additional site visits are allowed.

*Regarding the above-mentioned solicitation, we have a couple questions:

SOW, Page 126 indicates the following:

(m) Pages Counted. Each page shall be counted except the following:

Cover pages Table of Contents List of figures Glossaries Tabs Dividers Blank pages Transmittal Letter Title Pages Cross Reference Matrix Position Qualifications/Description

However, Page 124 indicates:

(e) No Cross-Referencing.

1. Please clarify whether a Cross Reference Matrix is needed for the proposal and in which volume it should reside.

Government response: There shall be no cross-referencing in the proposals. As such, a Cross Reference Matrix is not required. RFP section L (I)(E)(2)(m) “Pages Counted” will be amended to remove the inadvertent reference to “Cross Reference Matrix.”

2. In addition, the SOW does not provide any information regarding Position Qualifications/Description.

Please provide details regarding information needed for the Position Qualifications/Description portion of the proposal, as well as, which Volume contractors should submit this information.

Government response: Offerors should cover this topic when addressing Subfactor 1.2 Resource/Personnel Management in the Technical Volume; i.e. offerors must discuss their plan to staff any positions that require certain qualifications. The information to prepare this part of the proposal can be found in each Tab of the PWS, as well as Tab A, para A2.

* Reference Attachment 8, Pricing Labor Categories, DBA. The following positions found in Attachment 8, DBA are not found in the Attachment 4 DBA-WD, CBAs or Area Wide WD.

Aircraft Arresting Technician, Aircraft Fire Training Facility Controls Technician, Backflow Prevention Technicians, Corrosion Control and Cathodic Protection Technician, Fire Suppression Systems Maintenance, Hoist and Crane Technician, Lighting Controls Technician, LP Gas Installer and Vehicle Barrier Controls Technician. Please provide a cross reference sheet that identifies how these positions are priced. Absent a cross reference sheet, only the incumbent has any knowledge regarding the pay rates that apply.

Government response: If a labor category is not included in the referenced SCA/DBA/CBA WD attachments, it is up to each offeror to identify its proposed rates for employees in these categories. The incumbent’s rate information is proprietary to their company and will not be released.

* Reference Attachment 8, Pricing Labor Categories, SCA, DBA and O&A. We see that the referenced pages do not include any fields for overtime rates. How will that be dealt with when needed?

Government response: Overtime (OT) rates are not requested, as OT is not authorized under this contract. It is up to the contractor to appropriately manage the work scope cited in the PWS. As an aside: Please do not confuse “OT” with “Over and Above.” Over and Above tasks will be handled separately as explained in the RFP and PWS.

*Are the CDs due at the same time/date as the file upload to AMRDEC Safe? If so, this will require offerors to mail/ship the CDs at least one to two days prior to the file upload. Please clarify.

Government response: Yes. The CD-ROMs/DVDs and AMRDEC submittals must all be received by the proposal due date/time cited on the face page of the RFP.

*Page 77 of 120, Section H, Paragraph 252.237-7024

Please clarify which volume offerors are to include the written plan describing how it will continue to perform the essential contractor services listed in attachment PWS - 1a, Mission Essential Contractor Services.

Government response: Offerors do not need to submit a plan with the proposal. It is a post-award deliverable (ref A04, Crisis Management Plan).

*Page 107 of 120, Section L, Table 1 - Proposal Volume I - Validity Information and Clause 52.214-16 are both listed.

Please confirm the requirements for each of these items. It is our understanding that the proposal acceptance period is 120 days, therefore, we make a clear statement that our proposal is valid for 120 days

Government response: Offeror proposals must be valid for 120 days.

*Page 111 of 120, Section L, 1. (G) Section K –

Please clarify if offerors are to submit a copy of the SAM registration or complete and submit Section K included in the solicitation.

Government response: Section K must be completed and provided with the proposal. However, offerors are not required to submit a copy of their actual SAM registration, as the Government will check SAM after proposal receipt.

*Page 114 of 120, Section L, (D) Accounting System –

Please clarify what is acceptable as evidence of an adequate accounting system. If an offeror utilizes Deltek Costpoint but has never had a cost plus fixed fee and/or cost reimbursable contract as a Prime contractor, it may be difficult to have DCAA or a CPA firm review prior to proposal submission due date. Is it acceptable for an offeror to self-certify and sign that it has an accounting system such as Deltek Costpoint for accumulating and reporting incurred costs?

Government response: As noted in the referenced RFP section L, offerors must demonstrate within their proposal that they have an adequate accounting system. The Government will not restrict the parameters for this evidence. A self-certification is fine.

*Is there an incumbent on this contract? If so who is the incumbent, what is the contract number, and what is the total value of the current contract?

Government response: FA4664-11-C-1001, Satellite Services, Inc., $65M, 7 year contract

*What personal protective equipment (PPE) is required for this contract? Of the PPE required, is the government providing any of the PPE? Will a CLIN be added to the contract for ODC reimbursement for PPE?

Government response: The Government will not dictate PPE requirements. Please consult appropriate federal, state, and local safety guidelines. A reimbursement CLIN will not be added.

*Are uniforms required for employees on this contract? If so, will a CLIN be added to the contract for ODC reimbursement for uniforms?

Government response: The Government will not dictate uniform requirements. However, please note PWS par A2.1.3.3 for contractor identification requirements. A reimbursement CLIN will not be added.

*Can you provide a seniority listing so proper vacation rates can be calculated for employees?

Government response: The Government does not possess a “seniority listing.” This information, if it exists, would be proprietary to the incumbent.

*Section L instructs offerors not to cross reference between individual plans (Quality Control and Resource/Personnel Management), and that “…each plan shall stand alone, identify and address all Functional Tabs…” However, in complying with this restriction, the page numbering requirement for each functional tab seems to create a conflict in that the page numbers would be duplicated. I.e., a stand-alone plan for Quality Control would have pages numbered A-1 through A-xx, B-1 through B-xx, etc, when discussing quality control for each functional tab;

HOWEVER a stand-alone plan for discussing Resource/Personnel Management for each functional tab would ALSO have pages numbered A-1 through A-xx, B-1 through B-xx, etc.

Please clarify the page numbering requirement.

Government response: As stated in Section L (I)(E)(2)(j)(vii), the Technical Capabilities Volume shall be alpha-numerically numbered by PWS Tab, e.g., A-1, A-2, B-1, and B-2, etc. i.e. The page numbering should indicate which plan is associated with which tab. Please be sure to also note the page number limits cited in Section L of the RFP. The technical volume is limited to 100 pages total.

*Please clarify how the “stand-alone” plan requirement can be met at the same time as the requirement at L-1.III.1.B.3 that “…Each Functional Tab shall include a QCP and Resource/Personnel Management Approach Plan…” The answer to this question and resolution of this contradiction is critical to ensuring compliance with proposal preparation instructions and must be answered soonest to allow for sufficient time for thorough proposal preparation.

Government response: There is no contradiction. Each tab requires a plan as part of the technical approach. The specific instructions for the Technical Capabilities Volume are noted in Section L (III)(1)(B)(2). More specifically: At a minimum, this technical volume must address the following sub-factors:

Sub-factor 1.1 Quality Control Plan: “the Offeror shall provide a Quality Control Plan (QCP) that addresses how the offeror will establish and monitor performance metrics for each functional Tab…” Sub-factor 1.2 Resource/Personnel Management: “The Offeror shall provide a plan that includes a resource/personnel management approach for each functional Tab…” The functional tabs to be addressed are identified in part (III)(1)(B)(3).

Some examples of possible organization for the technical volume follow:

Example A:

-General Introduction -Subfactor 1.1 Quality Control -Tab A Quality Control Plan -Tab B Quality Control Plan -Tab C Quality Control Plan -Tab D Quality Control Plan -Tab F Quality Control Plan

-Tab G Quality Control Plan -Tab H Quality Control Plan -Subfactor 1.2 Resource/Personnel Management

-Tab A Resource/Personnel Management Plan -Tab B Resource/Personnel Management Plan -Tab C Resource/Personnel Management Plan

-Tab D Resource/Personnel Management Plan -Tab F Resource/Personnel Management Plan -Tab G Resource/Personnel Management Plan -Tab H Resource/Personnel Management Plan

Example B:

-General Introduction -Tab A -Subfactor 1.1 Quality Control Plan -Subfactor 1.2 Resource/Personnel Management Plan -Tab B

-Subfactor 1.1 Quality Control Plan -Subfactor 1.2 Resource/Personnel Management Plan -Tab C

-Subfactor 1.1 Quality Control Plan -Subfactor 1.2 Resource/Personnel Management Plan -Tab D

-Subfactor 1.1 Quality Control Plan -Subfactor 1.2 Resource/Personnel Management Plan -Tab F

-Subfactor 1.1 Quality Control Plan -Subfactor 1.2 Resource/Personnel Management Plan -Tab G

-Subfactor 1.1 Quality Control Plan -Subfactor 1.2 Resource/Personnel Management Plan -Tab H

-Subfactor 1.1 Quality Control Plan -Subfactor 1.2 Resource/Personnel Management Plan

*Will the USG clarify the purpose of Attachment 9 of the solicitation?

Government response: Attachment 9 identifies the “Property Incidental to Place of Performance.” This is the property that will be provided to the contractor during the life of the contract, and it must also be maintained and repaired IAW the PWS. Property Incidental to Place of Performance was addressed in detail in slide 14 of the charts presented during the pre-proposal conference/site visit, and the charts (with notes pages) were posted with the solicitation.