Final_RFP_Questions_and_Answers_II_18_Jul_13.pdf

Request for Proposal (RFP) FA4890-13-R-0111

Questions & Answers

Q32. Each CBA is different. Many expire in 2013; the labor pay rates are effective either in

January, August or October; the H&W benefits effective dates also range from January –

October. According to the RFP the first task order is being issued in FY14, do we use current rates (which depending upon the CBA could date back to October 2012), or are we to use rates that would be effective in August 2013 or October 2013? If the site would not transition until

2015 are we to use rates that would be in effect for 2014? The contractors must be provided direction on what rates and benefit levels (effective dates) are to be used in pricing all CLINS or you will have one contractor using 2012 rates versus others using 2014.

A32. For purposes of pricing the ID/IQ at the multiple-award contract level, use the applicable rates currently provided within the RFP based on the appropriate PoP identified. As specific

Task Orders are competed and issued in the future, the most current CBA/WD will be incorporated into the Task Order via contract modification.

Q33. If the CBA rates change in the middle of a performance period is the contractor to bid the increased rates for that period? For example: Robins CBA rates increase in August, the POP listed in the RFP is 31 Jan 2014 thru 30 Sep 2015. Is the contractor to bid the applicable rate for the period of January – July then increase the bid rates for August and September or will the contractor be reimbursed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.222-43 Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Contract Act – Price Adjustment?

A33. Similar to question 32 above, a contract modification (Task Order specific) will be issued in the event of CBA rate fluctuation. Offerors are encouraged to propose utilizing the current

CBA rates found within the RFP.

Q34. Period of Performance. First task order is for Wright-Patterson, Peterson & Malmstrom with the Transition starting 14 Feb 2014 – 31 Mar 2014 and contract start date of 01 Apr 2014.

Clin 0009 through 0036 lists a start date of 31 Jan 2014 – 30 Sep 2014. These Clins start before the Transition Date of the first task order. Also, Clin 00030AB has a start date of 01 Jan 2014 should this be 31 Jan 2014, most likely a typo?

A34. Noted – CLINs PoP read before transition of first three locations. Regardless, the ID/IQ

Pricing Matrix must be populated IAW Section L-9. The base ordering ID/IQ period encompasses all locations regardless of when a transition occurs. “All unit prices and extended amounts for these fixed price CLINS” shall be included.

Q35. The RFP does not provide for a WD or CBA for RAF Feltwell, Anderson AFB, Guam or

Thule, Greenland. Questions and answers previously provided stated to use the RFP 52.222-42

Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires. The hourly rates can be used but for Fringe

Benefits (6) Retirement, what percentages are to be used by contractors in calculating these costs as they differ between CSRS and FERS employees?

A35. Updated WD for Andersen and Hickam (currently used) are provided. The other two locations do not fall under the Service Contract Act nor are they unionized. Hence no WD or

CBA is available for these locations.

Q36. Has there been any consideration for potential changes (additions or deletions) to the originally proposed team structures in the IDIQ? Would changes be allowed with submitted justifications?

A36. Any changes to proposed teaming structures after contract award must be submitted to the

Contracting Officer in writing well in advance. Regardless of teaming changes post-award, the prime contractor is ultimately responsible for contract performance, thus held accountable for maintaining contract compliance. The Government has privity of contract with the prime contractors; prime contractors are responsible for their subs.

Q37. If the Program Manager or Quality Manager are not on a base and do not have a CAC, will they be issued one? Will they get remote access to PAMS/FEMS?

A37. Key personnel will have access to a CAC which provides remote access to PAMs.

Q38. Will the equipment and ADPE account at WPAFB be cleaned up (i.e. all the excess equipment in the lab and where the Test Cell trailer is housed?

A38. All locations are routinely working their accounts to take care of excess equipment;

however, excess equipment may also be identified during transition inventories for the incumbent to resolve.

Q39. At the ALC’s with the proposed transitions to PAMS, will there be any functions that change from civil service to contract?

A39. Current approach is that all functions remain as they are currently handled, so propose the functions as they currently are handled based on the requirements from our PWS.

Q40. Will the PWS for the Multiple-Award Contract be the same for T.O.s A (Wright-Patterson) and B (Malmstrom/Peterson)?

A40. The Multiple Award Contract PWS included in the solicitation will be the PWS for both

T.O.s with the following exceptions: No CBCs are operated for these locations and pick-up and delivery is only required for Wright Patterson.

Q41. Reference M-3.4.6 “Proposed pricing will serve as the ceiling rate for additional task orders throughout the life of this contract, with the exception of any wage determination or Collective

Bargaining Agreement labor rate changes as required.”

- During the pre-proposal conference, July 9, 2013 the government responded to a question regarding Schedule B pricing for that the proposed price for each location would not be considered a ceiling price for additional task orders. It was indicated further that the contractors could increase or decrease their proposed price with adequate justification for reasons other than the two reasons listed in RFP Section M-3.4.6 Price Evaluation. Please clarify under what circumstances a CLIN ceiling can be exceeded.

A41. A CLIN ceiling can only be exceeded based on a change in requirements from what was originally bid.

Q42. Please clarify, Beale, Grand Forks and Dover “will not” be a part of this procurement.

They are not listed in Schedule B. However, FBO and other source documents include these sites.

A42. These three locations are not currently included as part of this procurement.

Q43. Reference M-3.4.6 “The total price for each Cost Reimbursable CLIN will be determined by apply the offeror’s proposed handling fee to the NTE amount ($100,000.00) provided by the

Government in Attachment 5, Sample Pricing Matrix.”

- Will it be allowable to discount the proposed Handling Fee evaluated in Schedule B for specific

Task Orders issued during the IDIQ?

A43. All prices can be changed during specific task order RFPs.

Q44. Please clarify how the government will handle adjusting Bandwidths as workload increases or decreases during a specific Task Order.

A44. Bandwidths will primarily only be switched during execution of options years. If a need arises at other times throughout a task order, any mid-task order adjustments will be accomplished through a bi-lateral modification. Will only apply to future work and the prices will not be retroactively adjusted.

Q45. Will the government provide training at the ALC’s when the change is made from FEMS to

PAMS?

A45. Conversion to PAMS is expected to occur before the move to this contract vehicle so not for us to address.

Q46. In the event there is a conflict between the PWS and other program guidance (TO’s AFI) which one take precedence?

A46. Anytime there is a conflict between the PWS and other guidance, the PWS takes precedence because it is part of the contract. If conflict occurs, it will be government’s responsibility to de-conflict.

Q47. Will the contractor Program Manager be authorized a CAD card if the y are not located on a base and have the ability to remotely access PAMS?

A47. Yes, program personnel will be authorized a Common Access Card (CAC) and can then access PAMS.

Q48. PWS 7.1.7 states: Submit a notification to the SSO when lateral support has been obtained for TMDE. Are we no longer going to the MFM per TO 00-20-14 for lateral support request?

A48. First point of contact is with the SSO who will then comply with TO requirements.

Q49. If a company has a teaming agreement to qualify to compete, and is qualified during the initial award but the teaming arrangement changes, is the Prime still qualified or disqualified from future Task Orders?

A49. Previously answered – see Q36.

Q50. PWS 7.1.8 Can the copy of the records be electronic?

A50. How an offeror proposes to maintain their records is up to them as long as they are available for government review.

Q51. During the site visit at Wright Patterson, several equipment and ADPE items were identified for turn-in or excess. Will this equipment be processed and turned-in for the contract start? If not will this the new contractor’s responsibility?

A51. Previously answered – see Q38

Q52. PWS 2.2.1.2 How often will the contractor be required to notify the SSO of additions to the

BCL?

A52. As they occur.

Q53. PWS 3.4 At the ALC’s, the HAZMAT is done by the contractor. Is this function going to the government?

A53. As previously stated, functions are not changing as part of this acquisition.

Q54. The CDRL’s are identified in the PWS. Are they to be submitted with the proposal or after contract award an the timeframe identified in the PWS? This appears to be missing in Section L.

A54. CDRLs are part of the PWS following award and will be submitted as required by the PWS once a company is awarded a specific Task Order, not as part of the proposal.

Q55. During the site visit at WPAFB the TFCU standards were being used in the laboratory and the configuration and control was not maintained. What laboratory standards are not available to support the workload? Is there a funding problem in getting the standards repaired? Who is responsible for resolving the configuration and control?

A55. TFCU was actually on the road during the site visit to WPAFB. The old cases may have been seen within the workplace. All GFE provided is included in the appropriate appendix.

Configuration and control is the contractor’s responsibility.

Q56. Given that Feltwell has neither WD or CBA information to assist in present state bidding, would it be possible for all parties to bid Feltwell as “TBD” on the initial proposal and have more time to research actual numbers for when the Feltwell Task Order is released?

A56. The approximate values of the first three years of OCONUS (Feltwell) expenses are as follows: $3,393,861.85; $3,276,784.55; $3,364,387.71. This information will assist all offerors

– Feltwell should NOT be priced as “TBD” on the RFP.

Q57. The Anderson AB, Guam WD is posted. Also the WD for Hickam is posted. Is Hickam

AB going to be added?

A57. Previously answered – see Q35. Hickam is not part of this acquisition.

Q58. The final Solicitation dated Jun 26 still has “Draft” across the document. Will a new one be posted without the draft watermark?

A58. Yes, the first page of the RFP will be replaced via a forthcoming solicitation amendment.