Q A_with_Industry_FA4800-16-R-0001.docx

Questions from Industry JBLE Dining Facility Attendant Services Solicitation FA4800-16-R-0001

Q&As resulting from the Sources Sought Notice posted to FBO on 13 Aug 2015

1. Question: Is there an incumbent contractor currently performing work for this requirement? What is their company name and contract number?

Answer: Yes, Sabrosa Foods is currently performing services at Fort Eustis through contract FA4800-15-C-0003 and at Langley AFB through contract FA4800-15-C-0001.

Q&As resulting from the official RFP posted to FBO on 11 Jan 2016

2. Question: Will there be a site visit? If so, is there a date by which we must RSVP?

Answer: No, there will not be a physical site visit. There is a slideshow of pictures in lieu of a physical site visit that is available upon request for those that send an email to jospeh.delmontagne.1@us.af.mil

3. Question: Is there a deadline for the submission of questions?

Answer: There is no deadline for the submission of questions but note that proposals are due at noon Feb 12th.

4. Question: Can you provide a copy of the current contract(s) and all its amendments that is in place with the current contractor(s) for the Cafeteria Food Service Contract(s) for the locations as specified in the PWS at Fort Eustis and Langley, AFB?

Answer: No. The current contract contains proprietary pricing information of the incumbent, which is protected information and exempted from public disclosure IAW FAR 24.203(b). Note the following regarding contract information available to the public:

General information regarding federal contracts is available at https://www.usaspending.gov Information regarding specific contracts is available by entering the contract number in ezSearch at www.fpds.gov Existing contracts:

Fort Eustis contract number FA4800-15-C-0003 Langley AFB contract number FA4800-15-C-0001

5. Question: Can you provide a copy of the current Seniority List for Fort Eustis and Langley, AFB locations as specified in the PWS.

Answer: No. IAW FAR 22.1020, the incumbent provides the seniority list in the last month of the existing contract, which is then provided by the Contracting Officer to the successor contractor.

6. Question: Can you provide the total current contract award price(s) for the current contractor(s) for the aforementioned site.

Answer: The total contract value for the current contracts are $1,592,445.31 for Fort Eustis and $2,638,771.08 for Langley AFB. Sabrosa Foods, Inc is the incumbent for both contracts.

7. Question: There are no instructions for how or where or what to submit for past performance. Please clarify.

Answer: From provision 52.212-1 of the RFP:

5.2. Proposal Volumes. Proposals shall be prepared in two (2) separate and distinct volumes. A volume is not required for past performance as the past performance information will be pulled from CPARS/PPIRS. Past performance information available through other Government sources (i.e. key Government officials) will be used as required.

Volume 1 – Price Volume 2 – Technical

8. Question: My firm is interested in taking the lead role as the Prime Contractor and forming a partnership with a highly qualified and experienced military food service contractor. Does your agency value my teaming partner’s past military dining room attendant and military food service experience, under a prime-sub teaming arrangement? If not, would your agency provide credit if it were a joint venture?

Answer: Note this is a LPTA source selection and no past performance is Acceptable performance. Also note provision 52.212-2 “The past performance information to be evaluated on each offeror will be information retrieved from CPARS and PPIRS as well as information available through other Government sources (i.e. key Government officials) regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or sub-contractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement.” This means the teaming partner would be subject to past performance evaluation. Ensure to comply with paragraph 4 of provision 52.212-1.

FAR 19.101(7) applies:

(i) Definition of a joint venture for size determination purposes. A joint venture for size determination purposes is an association of persons or concerns with interests in any degree or proportion by way of contract, express or implied, consorting to engage in and carry out a single specific business venture for joint profit, for which purpose they combine their efforts, property, money, skill, or knowledge, but not on a continuing or permanent basis for conducting business generally. A joint venture is viewed as a business entity in determining power to control its management.

(iii) Joint venture. Concerns submitting offers on a particular acquisition as joint ventures are considered as affiliated and controlling or having the power to control each other with regard to performance of the contract. Moreover, an ostensible subcontractor which is to perform primary or vital requirements of a contract may have a controlling role such to be considered a joint venturer affiliated on the contract with the prime contractor. A joint venture affiliation finding is limited to particular contracts unless the SBA size determination finds general affiliation between the parties. The rules governing 8(a) Program joint ventures are described in 13 CFR 124.513.

9. Question: I'd like to know the government expectations for contingency contract cook section 1.1.4.2? Currently, the contracts are separate with one having union labor rates and the other non-union labor rates. What is the Government's pricing instructions on this issue? Should the contractor assume the non-union contingency cook facility will become unionized under the merged contract therefore, quotations will reflect a union labor rate for the contingency contract cook position.

Answer: The current attachments to the RFP (CBA and WD) need to be used as the basis for pricing; any assumptions made by interested offerors will be at their own risk. The negotiated pricing will be Firm-Fixed Price, therefore each offeror needs to ensure they understand the terms and conditions of the RFP, to include its attachments.

10. Question: What is the distance between the 3 work sites?

Distance Table – mileage calculated via Google Maps

Answer:

11. Question: Is the current contractor price provided in questions and answers for 1 year?

Ft. Eustis – Resolute Café $1,592,445.31

Langley AFB – Crossbow and Raptor – $2,638,771.08

Answer: These are the total prices per contract IAW the information found in ezSearch in the Federal Procurement Data System – Next Generation (FPDS-NG).

Period of Performances:

Fort Eustis (FA4800-15-C-0003) 15 Mar 15 – 30 Jun 16 Langley AFB (FA4800-15-C-0001) 01 Apr 15 – 30 Jun 16

12. Question: Do these prices include the VA UTA, cooks for 1016 weeks per year and contract line servers for 144 weeks per year?

Answer: The prices include cooks and line servers respective to the requirements of those contracts.

13. Question: What is the average number of meals served per day for the UTA weekends?

Answer: From PWS pages 30 and 31 respectively, the headcount for Crossbow DFAC is 500 and Raptor Café is 300.

14. Question: Does the contractor furnish cooks at the Raptor Café on weekends for the UTA?

Answer: Yes.

15. Question: Why is lunch shown on the weekend for the Crossbow Dining Facility on page 30?

Answer: This was an error. Please disregard the lunch headcount and use the brunch headcount.

16. Question: What is the menu for the UTA at the Crossbow Dining Facility during lunch?

Answer: This question is irrelevant and not pertinent for offerors to submit technical and price proposals.

17. Question: Was the current contract negotiated or sole sourced?

Answer: The current contracts were both awarded via an 8(a) sole source contract.

18. Question: The CLIN X006 in the base and option years show 1,016 weeks under Quantity and Unit.

This is more than one year (one year=52 weeks). Please confirm if this is correct.

Answer: This is correct. The government may need multiple cooks per week at both bases, which is why the number is so high. Please note that this is a NTE CLIN so it is likely this CLIN will not be fully used.

19. Question: The CLIN X007 in the base and option years show 144 weeks under Quantity and Unit.

Please confirm if this is correct.

Answer: Similar to answer 18, this is correct. Multiple Line Servers may be needed per week. It is also a NTE CLIN.

20. Question: Can we install timeclocks? If so, do they become the property of the government or remain as the contractor’s?

Answer: The contractor is allowed to install timeclocks and they will remain contractor property.

21. Question: Do we have access to internet or Wi-Fi?

Answer: Internet access and computers are not provided by the government. The contractor may supply their own.

22. Question: In the Technical Exhibit A of the PWS, it shows that Resolute Café is open 60 weekend days. But on the Pricing Schedule, CLIN X002, it states 56 days. Please confirm which one is correct.

Answer: The Resolute Café may be open a maximum of 60 days, but due to holidays and other closures, the most likely number of days is 56.

23. Question: How many cashier stations are there in Resolute Café? Do all of them have to be manned at all times?

Answer: There is no requirement for cashier services at Resolute Café. Only the Langley facilities require cashier services.

24. Question: Please confirm that we are to serve for 192nd FW UTA on both Saturday and Sunday, as it is stated in the PWS as “weekend”.

Answer: Yes, the UTA weekend consists of both Saturday and Sunday.

25. Question: There is the average meal count for lunch on weekends in Crossbow when the meal serving periods indicate that there are only brunch and dinner service. Please clarify why there is a meal count number for lunch on weekend.

Answer: See Answer 15.

26. Question: Are the “VA Guard UPT” on the Pricing Schedule and “192nd FW UTA” in the PWS referring to the same service?

Answer: Yes

27. Question: Please provide the number of people in each dining facility to help calculate the usage level of consumable products, such as toilet paper, paper towel, hand soap and such. We are aware that you have provided the average number of meal count but we want to make sure that we capture the correct number of people who would use consumables in the building.

Answer: The meal headcount plus the employees should be the only people visiting the facilities.

28. Question: Section 3.1 on page 43 says to send the proposal and its copies to the address listed in Block 9 of Standard Form (SF) 1449. The address given in section 3.1, which offerors are instructed to mark the package with is different than the address given in box 9 of SF 1449. To which address should offerors send the proposal and its copies?

Answer: The correct address is 14 Burrell Street, Bldg 67, Langley AFB 23665-2088.

29. Question: I am unable to find information in the solicitation and PWS regarding key personnel positions. Can you please confirm which positions are considered key personnel?

Answer: Each offeror’s technical approach will determine who their key personnel are IAW the PWS. This is not directed by the government.

30. Question: When the contractor is providing food preparation service (cook support), does the contractor provide the cook(s) to prepare the meal, or instead to assist the Government's cooks already there?

Answer: The contract cooks will be working alongside military cooks in most instances. But, if a rare situation requires all military to deploy, contract cooks would need to be able to prepare the meal.