Industry_Questions_(PPC)_(20150902).xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 401 KB Posted
- Attached to
- War Reserve Materiels (WRM) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA4890-15-R-0004
About this file
Pre-Proposal Conference Industry Questions
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
War Reserve Materiels (WRM) has more files on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Pre-Proposal Conference Q&A
| # | Question | Response |
| 1 | In regard to anticipated changes in scope of work prior to contract start, can the USG provide an idea of anticipated growth in workload Munitions? | AFCENT plans to reduce munitions activities at Thumrait and realign those assets elsewhere in Qatar, Kuwait, and UAE. Any overall increase or decrease of contracted munitions requirements above current levels is unknown at this time. Propose against what is in the solicitation. |
| 2 | You stated that you anticipate a change in the Munitions posture in the AOR that may or may not occur prior to proposal submission. While it may not be addressed in the proposal , can you tell us the nature of this shift in Munitions posture? i.e. increase/decrease? Change in locations? Type of Munitions? | Please see answer to question #1 |
| 3 | Section M, 3.1.1.2. Part C – what functions or mission requirements apply to the 200% staff task coverage requirement? | The intent is to avoid one-deep, single-point of failure (i.e. cross-training/cross-utilitzation) |
| 4 | The RFP workload data does not cover the full contract period of performance. How does the USG want bidders to handle estimates for the periods of performance not provided?, i.e. gov’t direct straight-line the level of effort? | 3 yrs of recent data was provided. Going back further would not provide any greater accuracy. It’s up to the offeror to extrapolate base + 7 yrs |
| 5 | Will Most Probable cost analysis be used on all submitted proposals or just the lowest six? | In accordance with the RFP M-1.3 "The Government will then evaluate those six (6) proposals as provided in the RFP, Section M-3.1 (Technical), Section M-3.2 (Past Performance), and Section M-3.3 (Price). Any proposals outside this initial evaluation pool will not be evaluated, unless necessary to obtain the desired effective competition of three Offerors rated as "acceptable" in all technical subfactors and the past performance factor |
| 6 | Section M 1.3. states “In the event that at least 3 of the 6 offerors are not rated ‘acceptable’, the evaluation pool will be increased by evaluating the next lowest-priced proposal. This process will continue until there are three ‘acceptable’ proposals or until all offerors’ proposals have been evaluated, whichever is reached first.” Question: If 3 of the 6 are acceptable why not stop? | Evaluation will be in accordance with M 1.3 |
| 7 | Plug number – how will the indirect rate be evaluated and factored in the award decision? | Please see amendment 1. |
| 8 | Other than a brief mention in Section M Pricing Evaluation of the RFP, there is no real weight assigned to the 20% Small Business participation requirement. Will a weight be assigned to this in the RFP evaluation criteria to ensure large businesses get serious about small business participation? We would also suggest basing a portion of the award fee on the prime meeting that 20% requirement. The 20% requirement could also be added to the Service Summary. | The Small business requirement will be addressed in amendment 2. |
| 9 | Why the addition of Small Business Goals (H-6 clause) on an OCONUS contract that has not historically had Small Business goal requirements? | The Small business requirement will be addressed in amendment 2. |
| 10 | In regard to Mission Support, please clarify what CLIN(s) should be used for Mission Support labor. | Generally CLIN 3, or others depending on what effort is applied |
| 11 | At the opening of this conference the USG stated that the RFP is “on the street” and that the material within it stands firm. Is the WRM RFP on FedBizzOps in its final form ready for contractor proposal preparation as of 11 August? | We pulled the RFP off FedBIzOps to revalidate some of the appendices. It should be back up NLT 14 Aug |
| 12 | Will a copy of the T.O.s be made available? A previous answer indicated yes, if we updated the required authorization (DD Form 2345). | The Government Furnished Information will only be sent by request to interested parties who successfully complete the required DD Form 2345, Military Critical Technical Data Agreement and are registered in the System for Award Management (www.sam.gov). The potential bidder must certify the data are needed to bid or perform on a contract with any agency of the U.S. Government or for other legitimate business activities in which the contractor is engaged, or plans to engage. Use this process only for data that cannot be obtained by other means. |
Further instructions follow:
1.) Bidders Library Instructions. The distribution of the data is authorized and restricted to DoD and U.S. DoD contractors with a valid Form 2345 only, for Administrative and Operational use.
a. Complete DD Form 2345 found at: http://www.dlis.dla.mil/JCP and send to the appropriate office listed at the top of the form. The process may take up to five (5) working days for approval.
b. After the form is signed by a DoD official and returned to the Offeror, send the completed form with a request for CD to the contracting point of contacts listed on FBO via e-mail.
c. Please check the form DD 2345, block 4, where it lists "the description of relevant business activity", that the offeror has certification in the areas of military equipment sustainment or any of the related component systems.
d. A CD will be made available to the Offeror after the PCO receives an e-mail and the completed DD Form 2345. Please make sure to provide a POC and address for the CD to be mailed to.
| 13 | Do the three supply positions listed in the PWS serve as a gov’t staffing plug number (FTE) since no workload data was provided (i.e. are we being told we can do the work with three people?) | No the number of personnel will be determined in the contractor's proposal. The workload data was provided in Appendix G. |
| 14 | Contractor Provided Vehicles: at the site tour the USG mentioned that they could provide a list of current contractor-provided vehicles and gov’t-provided vehicles (that are going away.) This information is not in the RFP. Will the USG consider providing this information? | The Government does not have a list of contractor-provided vehicles. The list of Government-provided vehicles is irrelevant as they are being redistributed (outside the WRM program) and ultimately each offeror must determine the required vehicles that support their technical approach. |
| 15 | CLIN 15 is silent on security of the Warehouse. Noticed guards at the locations. | We will address that, it is a requirement levied on us. |
| 16 | Does the USG still have any plans to in-source the workforce at Shaw AFB? (excluding the CLO) | No it is not anticipated. |
| 17 | Will the USG reconsider providing access to the DCA/SOFA for each country (Oman, Qatar, Kuwait and UAE)? Justification: The PWS requires the offerors to certify they are following host nation laws. The DCA/SOFA is part of HN law. Access to those documents will allow offerors ensure they are meeting the requirements associated with labor and business licensing. | The Host Nation labor laws stand on their own and are not addressed in the SOFAs. There is no SOFA with Oman, but an Access Agreement. |
| 18 | How will the Host Nations view this recompete? Will this be considered a ‘new” project or a continuation of an existing project? The answer to this question is critical as it applies to the existing labor force and application of labor laws. | Interpretations and application of HN labor laws is challenging in the AOR and often vary from year-to-year and country to country it is each contractors responsibility to check with each country labor office. |
| 19 | Slide 19 shows the Port of Salalah in Oman as being contractor-leased facility. How does the USG expect this to be priced and/or transferred to the new contractor? | The incoming contractor will be required to lease an area at Port of Salalah under CLIN 3 |
&F &A
2 Sep 2015 Page &P of &N
Emailed Questions
| # | Reference | Question | Response |
| 1 | PWS Section A, 3.1.7 | Are there any other specific equipment items on the program, other than MHU-141 and MHU-226 Trailers, that are included in the Nuclear Surety Program requirements? | Currently, there are no other program items in the AFCENT AOR. |
| 2 | Appendix B (Deliverables); PWS Section A, 3.9.3 | Munitions deliverables are not noted in the new Appendix B. | Deliverables are automated and provided via Munitions Information Systems (MIS). Hard-or electronic copies are not necessary unless MIS is off-line. |
| 3 | Appendix M: Certifications; PWS Section A, 2.2.1.1, Key Personnel | What is the difference between Munitions Personnel and the other Munitions categoried positions? Will there be certification requirements for Quality Control personnel? | Munitions Personnel refers to any/all positions not specifically named in Appendix M. AFCENT Munitions' has not levied a certification requirement for QC personnel. The referenced AFIs/TOs, etc., establish minimum quality requirements. |
| 4 | Appendix G: Level of Effort 1.1 Munitions Beginning Objective (now 1.8.1) | Why are the equipment breakdown calculations totals wrong in the table? Will a column for "Al Dhafra On-Hand" be added? | Calculation errors were an oversight (AUAB Rqmnt = 229; ADAB Available = 40). When this document was originally submitted, ADAB did not have an established MMHE requirement. The assets identified in this document were forward deployed and available for operational use by deployed forces. Numbers corrected in Appendix G. |
| 5 | Appendix G: Level of Effort 1.5. TDY Team Frequency for Periodic Inspections (now 1.8.5) | Will the two team visits per year be added to the paragraph for Al Dhafra PGM support? | Yes, ADAB will require two TDY team visits, per year. Statement added in Appendix G. |
| 6 | L-1.1 page 113 | Regarding the use of EZ-Source in the evaluation. How is EZ source used in the evaluation of the proposal? | EZ-Source will be used to capture all of the evaluations; it's a documentation tool (NOT a decision tool) which tracks and maintains historical data relative to the evaluation, assessment and selection of a source for the contract/program. It allows users to do the following: |
- document proposal evaluations
- develop evaluation notices (ENs) to communicate with offerors
- prepare working drafts of decision briefings and required decision documents such as the Proposal Analysis Report (PAR)
| 7 | RFP, Section L, paragraph L-2.2.2, pg 114 of 149 | Questions concerning the formal solicitation are required by COB 6 Aug 15. This appears to be necessary to include questions and answers at the Pre-Proposal Conference. | ||
| - Does the Government anticipate that there will be follow-on opportunities for offerors to submit questions following the Pre-Proposal Conference for those items that may arise from the conference? | The cut off dates enable the Government to have sufficient time to answer industry questions. If you have additional questions please send to the WRM re-compete box and a CO will let you know if they can be answered. | |||
| 8 | RFP Section M-1.1, M-1.3, and M-3.3.4 | M-3.3.4 states “The information collected in the cost realism assessment will be used to develop the Governments most probable cost estimate.” Section M-1.1 states that source selection will use the lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA) source selection process, while M-1.3 indicates only the lowest 6 proposals will be evaluated (assuming at least three are technically acceptable). How will the Government use “most probable cost” for source selection when only the six lowest priced proposals are evaluated? | In accordance with M-1.3 "The Government will then evaluate those six (6) proposals as provided in the RFP, Section M-3.1 (Technical), Section M-3.2 (Past Performance), and Section M-3.3 (Price). " | |
| 9 | PWS, paragraph 6.2.2, pg 70 | The Contractor is required to provide CE design, construction and construction monitoring services. | ||
| - What has been the historical annual funded amount for CE projects? | $400,000 | |||
| 10 | PWS 6.2.1.2 Corrective Maintenance (CM) | This PWS requires performing emergency, urgent, and routine corrective maintenance (CM). | ||
| Please provide the historical workload data for Corrective Maintenance | See "WRM Facility Workload.xlsx" in the Appendix G - Level of Effort and filter Type for "Schedule Work Request Other than Maintainance" | |||
| 11 | PWS 6.1.1.1.1 page 59 | The referenced PWS states the contractor shall be responsible for all Civil Engineer services and general building operations that encompass maintenance and repair of Real Property (RP), Real Property Installed Equipment (RPIE), and Real Property Similar Equipment (RPSE) as listed in Appendix J. |
However, Appendix J does not appear to provide a detailed RPIE List.
| Please provide the RP, RPIE, and RPSE Lists. | See "WRM RPIE List - 5 Jun 14.xlsx" in the Appendix G - Level of Effort | ||
| 12 | Section L-7.4.4, Subfactor D paragraph Aspect I: | Sentence 5 states, "Describe your approach to life-cycle serviceability/corrosion control for all facilities." |
Question 1: What is the Air Force currently using to offset corrosive conditions at the site?
Question 2: What predictive technologies are in use for determining (asset) failures or serviceability trends? Answer 1: Contractor performs corrective maintenance and takes whatever measures are most cost effective to offset corrosive conditions on site.
Answer 2: Hopefully with the implementation of the BUILDER program we will get better at using it to predict failures and serviceability trends.
13 Appendix J- Government Furnished Facilities Questions: Regarding Appendix J information:
Thumrait Tab – Line 144 – Is there any significance to “Block 1,2,3 (Portacabin)? Assuming that is one building which is divided into sections for housing. There is no mention of Bathroom/bedroom/living room. Can the government expand what comes with that accommodation and how exactly the building is laid out? Is the contractor to assume this housing is available to the WRM Contractor?
Thumrait Tab – Line 26 through line 55 – Junior Western Housing; Is the contractor to assume all this housing is available to the WRM Contractor?
Thumrait Tab – Line 155 and Line 156 – Are these Accommodations and Quarters for other than contractor personnel?
Masirah Tab – Asian Living Accommodation; Is the contractor to assume all Asian Living Accommodations are available to the WRM Contractor? If not, will the government explain which ones will be for the WRM contractor use?
Masirah Tab – Line 102, 103, 104 has the Acronym FAS. Please explain what that Acronym means.
Masirah Tab – Western Accommodation; Is the contractor to assume all Western Accommodations are available to the WRM Contractor for use?
Masirah (Navy-CLIN 6) – Wadi Mathrob Accommodation; It is assumed by the contractor these accommodations are not for WRM Contractor personnel. Is that correct? Please refer to the Facility reports in Appendix G-Level of effort for more information on each of the facilities.
All housing on the WRM contract is available for program/contractor use with the exception of the Navy housing. Permission must be obtained from the Navy before use.
We have not been able to determine what the acronym FAS means as it has been used as just an acronym for many years. It should be irrelevant to the solicitation.
| 14 | PWS Section A, 6.1.8.3.2, 6.1.8.3.3, and 6.1.8.3.5 PMI Program | a/The PWS States: Ensure all maintenance activities, annual tests and annual inspections are reported in BUILDER®. Does the Government require that ALL PMIs and ALL unscheduled work orders be entered into BUILDER? | |
| b/The PWS States: The contractor shall develop and maintain a PMI schedule that can be accessed within the BUILDER. How does the Government expect the PMI schedule be maintained in BUILDER: what module, or section of BUILDER is designed to handle this? BUILDER is not a work order management system it is a Facility Assessment application. | a/Corrective maintanence shall be entered into BUILDER. For equipment with more than one PMI per year, one of the PMIs shall be performed as an assessment and only that PMIs shall be entered into BUILDER. |
b/The contractor shall develop and maintain a PMI schedule in the CMMS since BUILDER cannot handle the work order management. PWS shall be corrected to replace BUILDER from CMMS.
| 15 | PWS 2.4.2. Program Element Code (PEC) | The PWS paragraph states “The contractor shall break-out and report cost data associated with storage, maintenance, QC, spare parts, and labor for WRM using the applicable PECs listed below to identify specific funding to a program. This list is not inclusive and subject to change:” | ||
| As regards CLIN 12 (CR), PEC #PE28542F, Facilities Replacement Parts/Supplies, we have the following Is the plug number for parts/supplies in support of all functional areas other than contractor owned equipment? | Yes it is. | |||
| 16 | L-7.2 Technical Factor Cross-Reference Matrix. Page 118 | The cross reference matrix does not reference Section L. 7.4.4.2 Aspect II Mission Support under the Infrastructure Support. Would the government correct the Cross reference Matrix to include this requirement? | Cross-Reference Matrix has been updated and Para L-7.4.4.2. and M-3.1.4.2. added. | |
| 17 | Appendix J, GFF | Since Appendix J, Government Furnished Facilities, does not include the Salalah Port site, will the Government confirm the site must be leased by the contractor? Or will the Government update Appendix J with addition of the Salalah Port site? If the former, where is the Offeror to include the lease cost, a new CLIN or combined with CLIN 15? And if the contractor is responsible for physical security at this site, will PWS 2.2.1.10.3 be updated accordingly? | The incoming contractor will be required to lease an area at Port of Salalah and expense to CLIN 3 or to the appropriate CLIN. |
Appendix J only lists GFF, not Contractor-leased facilities.
| 18 | Section M, Factor 2 | Would the government consider expanding the period of relevancy to greater than 5 years? | It was considered, however the period remains 5 years ia accordance with the RFP. |
| 19 | Pre-Bidders Conference. Will the government publish the attendance roster? | Yes, Pre-Proposal Conference attendance roster will be posted on FBO. | |
| 20 | Section I | Topic: Limitation of Liability |
Why are the following clauses not included in the Solicitation as prescribed by FAR 46.805:
· FAR 52.246-23,Limitation of Liability
· FAR 52.246-25, Limitation of Liability-Services?
| Recommendation: Recommend FAR 52.246-23 and 52.246-25 be included in the Solicitation as prescribed by FAR 46.805 | FAR clause 52.246-25 will be added to the solicitation. | ||
| 21 | Section I | Topic: DFAR 252.227-7000 Non-estoppel |
This clause is prescribed for use in patent release and settlement agreements, license agreements and assignments. Please clarify its applicability under the WRM solicitation/contract.
| Recommendation: Recommend DFAR 252.227-7000 Non-estoppel be removed from the WRM solicitation/contract. | DFARS clause 252.227-7000 will be deleted from the solicitiation. | ||
| 22 | Section I | Topic: FAR 52.250-1 and 52.250-1 (ALT 1) |
FAR 52.250-1 and 52.250-1 (ALT 1) state in subpara (c): “This indemnification applies only to the extent that the claim, loss, or damage (1) arises out of or results from a risk defined in this contract as unusually hazardous or nuclear and…” Request the risk be defined in the contract for which this indemnification applies.
| Recommendation: Recommend the Government amend the contract to define the risk in the contract for which this indemnification applies pursuant to FAR 52.250-1. | FAR clauses 52.250-1 and Alt 1 will be deleted. | ||
| 23 | Section H-6 | Topic: Small Business Subcontracting Requirement |
Provision H-6 states, “Note: To be determined acceptable, the company shall demonstrate a progressive small business subcontract approach that complies with a minimum of 20% of the total annual awarded contract value subcontracted to small businesses.
Our interpretation of “progressive small business subcontract approach” is that utilization of small business would increase over each annual period (show an increase of progress), resulting in an overall awarded value for the life of the contract a minimum of 20% to small business.
However section H-6 Note asks the prime contractor to demonstrate a “progressive small business approach” with a minimum of 20% of the total annual awarded contract value subcontracted to small businesses.
| Recommendation: Please explain what “progressive approach” is meant to achieve? | Small Business requirement will be addressed in amendment 2 | |||
| 24 | Clause H-6, Small Business Subcontracting Requirement, states that large business primes shall include a small business subcontracting plan that ensures a minimum of 20% of total annual awarded contract value is subcontracted to small businesses. This requirement seems unrealistic given that in order to be competitive in this LPTA acquisition; labor, equipment and materials must be procured from local (OCONUS) vendors. We suggest that the Government re-consider this requirement and recommend reverting back to the current small business subcontracting plan requirements given the OCONUS places of performance and LPTA nature of the acquisition. | Small Business requirement will be addressed in amendment 2 | ||
| 25 | Section H-6 | Topic: Small Business Subcontracting Requirement |
Since the majority of the work is performed OCONUS and with significant foreign national labor, housing and life support, and vehicles, the 20% small business goal seems excessive given the minimal opportunity for US small business subcontracting.
| Recommendation: Recommend the small business goals be removed their entirety. | Small Business requirement will be addressed in amendment 2 | |||
| 26 | Section B, CLINs x001, x011, x015, x016 | The CLIN description states “…offerors shall propose fixed fee rates for base and option years.” Please clarify what is meant by “fixed fee rates.” | Profit. | |
| 27 | Section B, CLINs x010 | The CLIN description states “(Offeror’s burdened Handling rate inclusive of Not to Exceed (NTE) amount of $2M).” We recommend the Government clarify that the NTE amount of $2M is inclusive of the Offeror’s applicable indirect burdens. | A plug number is being provided by the Government. Please see amendment 1 | |
| 28 | Section B-2(c), Awarded Contract | It is noted that Sections K, L, and M will be physically removed from the awarded contract document. Does the Government also intend to remove the instructional (supporting Section L) statements in the CLIN descriptions in Section B? | Sectiions K, L and M will be removed from the awarded contract but the CLIN descriptions in Section B shall remain. | |
| 29 | Section B-6, Fully Burdened Handling Rate | It is noted that the reimbursement of the “COST” CLINs is “subject to the cost ceiling that applies to each particular CLIN.” Please clarify that the Contractor is not required to incur any expenditures beyond the funded amount (or ceiling amount, if fully funded) of the contract. | The contractor is not required to incur cost beyond the funded amount or ceiling amount of the contract. Section B-6 has been updated. | |
| 30 | Section B, CLIN 0015 Contractor Leased Facility | It is unclear when the contractor will be reimbursed. We recommend monthly unit pricing be required and reimbursement to the contractor be made on a monthly basis. | All invoices will be processed monthly. | |
| 31 | Section B, Extension CLIN | There is no CLIN (08xx) for the 6-mos extension in Section B. We recommend that such a CLIN be included in Section B. | If an extension is required, a CLIN will be added (the extensionwill be based on 50% of the last option year). | |
| 32 | Sections L-9.1 and M-3.3.5, Pricing Table | Section L states, “Offerors are required to insert their rates for Cost Plus Fixed Fee CLINs in the CLIN description in Section B for evaluation purposes.” Section M states, “Offerors shall not input pricing in Section B.” Please clarify if the offerors are to complete and include Section B in its Volume III, Price. | Offerors are to submit both Section B and the Work Cost Summary Sheet. | |
| 33 | Section L-9.2 | Unlike all other CLINs identified in this section, there are no instructions for CLIN 0015 Contractor Leased Facility. We recommend that the Government include instructions for CLIN 0015 and its option periods. | A plug number is being provided by the Government see amendment 2. | |
| 34 | Section L-7.4.3.1, Paragraph References | The RFP states “Using a flowchart (or other illustrative tool) and narrative, provide your management processes (to include cost accounting IAW PWS Para 2.5.2) to meet outload planning requirements in the PWS (Para 3.3.3 through 3.3.8).” However, there is no paragraph 2.5.2 in the PWS, and there are only paragraphs 3.3.3 and 3.3.4 in the PWS. Please provide the correct paragraph references. | Changed L-7.4.3.1 to include: "provide your management processes (to include cost accounting IAW PWS Para. 2.4.2 & 2.4.3) to meet outload planning requirements in the PWS (Para 2.2.1.9., 2.2.1.9.1., and 5.0.). Provide your surface transportation market research to support your approach. Describe your processes to simultaneously conduct outload operations and deploy three mobile teams to set up three separate encampments per PWS Para 5.0. Contingency Logistics Support (CLS)." | |
| 35 | Section L-7.4.3.1, Paragraph References | The RFP states “Describe your processes to simultaneously conduct outload operations and deploy three mobile teams to set up three separate encampments per PWS para 4.1.” However, paragraph 4.1 discusses material management. Please provide the correct references. | Answered above in question 34. | |
| 36 | L-7.4.3 Subfactor C: Exercise/Contingency Logistics Support | The contractor is required to describe procedures and processes for delivering/outloading WRM assets/UTCs to support exercises or contingencies, and to use a flowchart or other illustrative tool and narrative to meet planning requirements IAW PWS Paragraph 2.5.2. | ||
| As we are unable to find Paragraph 2.5.2 in the PWS, will the Government please confirm this is a requirement, and if so, where we can find the specific referenced planning requirements? | Answered above in question 34. | |||
| 37 | L-7.4.3 Subfactor C: Exercise/Contingency Logistics Support | Within this same Subfactor, the Government has referenced PWS Paragraph 3.3.3 through 3.3.3.8; however, we find only Paragraph 3.3.3. As we are unable to find subparagraphs 3.3.3.1 through 3.3.3.8, will the Government please confirm outload planning requirements, and if so, where we can find this information in the PWS? | Answered above in question 34. | |
| 38 | L-7.4.3 Subfactor C: Exercise/Contingency Logistics Support | Within this same Subfactor, the Government requires the contractor to describe processes to simultaneously conduct outload operations and deploy three mobile teams to set up three separate encampments per PWS Paragraph 4.1. After a thorough review of Paragraph 4.1 through 4.1.11, we are unable to find these specific requirements. Will the Government please confirm this is a requirement, and if so, where we can find the specific referenced information in order to properly respond to the requirement? | Answered above in question 34. | |
| 39 | L-7.4.3.1 Aspect I: Exercise/Contingency Logistics Support- page 121- Reference to PWS Para 2.5.2 | PWS Paragraph 2.5.2 does not exist in the current PWS. Will the government please correct this reference and Identify the correct PWS reference? | Answered above in question 34. | |
| 40 | L-7.4.3.1 Aspect I: Exercise/Contingency Logistics Support- page 121- Reference to PWS Para3.3.3 through 3.3.3.8 | PWS Paragraph 3.3.3 describes BEAR reconstitution and has nothing to do with Outload Planning Requirements. PWS Para 3.3.3.8 does not exist in the current RFP. | ||
| Will the government please correct this PWS reference and provide the correct PWS paragraph? | Answered above in question 34. | |||
| 41 | L-7.4.3.1 Aspect I: Exercise/Contingency Logistics Support- page 121- Reference to PWS para 4.1 | PWS para 4.1 is an all encompassing section and does not mention deploying of mobile teams . | ||
| Is this the correct PWS reference? Should this reference be PWS 5.5 or some other reference? Please provide the correct PWS references for this requirement. | Answered above in question 34. | |||
| 42 | Paragraph L-7.4.3 of the Solicitation | This paragraph states “Using a flowchart (or other illustrative tool) and narrative, provide your management processes (to include cost accounting IAW PWS Para. 2.5.2) to meet outload planning requirements in the PWS (Para 3.3.3. through 3.3.3.8).” |
| Did the Government intend to reference paragraph 2.4.2 rather than 2.5.2? No paragraph 2.5.2 is contained in the PWS. | Answered above in question 34. | ||
| 43 | L-7.4.3.1 | This requirement references PWS paragraphs that do not exist (2.5.2 and 3.3.3.8). | |
| Will the Government correct the PWS references? | Answered above in question 34. | ||
| 44 | RFP Section L | The fourth bullet under L-7.4.3 Subfactor C requires “your management process (to include cost accounting IAW PWS para 2.5.2) to meet outload planning requirements in the PWS (Para 3.3.3 through 3.3.3.8). There is no 2.5.2 reference, 3.3.3 is followed immediately by 3.3.4 Virtual Afloat. There are no references “through 3.3.3.8” |
| Request: Please provide the correct references. | Answered above in question 34. | ||
| 45 | RFP L-7.4.3.1 and references therein | Requirement states: "Using a flowchart (or other illustrative tool) and narrative, provide your management processes (to include cost accounting IAW PWS Para. 2.5.2) to meet outload planning requirements in the PWS (Para 3.3.3. through 3.3.3.8)." |
| Since the PWS does not contain Para 2.5.2, and only includes Para 3.3.3 and Para 3.3.4, will the Government either provide the PWS paragraphs as referenced, identify other PWS paragraph requirements in lieu of these, or remove the references from the Section L requirement? | Answered above in question 34. | ||
| 46 | RFP L-7.4.3.1 and references therein | Requirement states: "Describe your processes to simultaneously conduct outload operations and deploy three mobile teams to set up three separate encampments per PWS Para 4.1." |
| There are no requirements stated under PWS Para 4.1 Material Management. Will the Government either provide PWS Para 4.1 requirements, identify other paragraph requirements in lieu of PWS Para 4.1, or remove the reference from the Section L requirement? | Answered above in question 34. | |||
| 47 | Section L-8.1.2.1, Past Performance Volume Sequence | RFP L-8.1.2.1 states that “Hard copies of the [PPI tool] pages generated from this tool shall be used as the hard copy of the Past Performance volume subject to the limitations outlined in this RFP and should be Tab 1 of the Past Performance volume.” However, the structure of the Past Performance Volume outlines in L-8.1b does not include the PPI tool-generated pages. Please clarify where the PPI is to be included in the sequence of the Past Performance volume. | Please include as Tab 1 in the past performance volume | |
| 48 | RFP paragraph L-8.1.2.1 PPI Tool | This paragraph requires submission of a separate PPI input using the PPI tool (posted on FedBizOpps with the solicitation information as "ppi_tool.accdb") and instructions provided (Attachment 1 - PPI Tool Instructions) for each reference. It indicates hard copies of the pages generated from this tool shall be used as the hard copy of the Past Performance volume are subject to the limitations outlined in this RFP and should be Tab 1 of the Past Performance volume. | ||
| Are there any page limitations on the PPI input using the PPI tool? | No - There is no control as to the quantity of pages that will be printed from the PPI tool; the PPI tool report dictates the format of the printouts, and offerors will be unable to comply with page format requirements of Section L if they differ from that format. There is only a limitation to the number of PPI that can be submitted. | |||
| 49 | RFP, Section L, paragraph L-9 and subparagraphs through L-9.3, ppg 123-125 |
RFP, Section M, paragraph M-3.3.5, pg 149 Section L infers that offerors should enter pricing information in Section B. Section M refers to a pricing table in Excel spreadsheet, and indicates offerors shall not input pricing in Section B.
- Does the Government intend that the WRM_Cost_Summary_Report included in the solicitation (Section J, Attachment I) be the "pricing table in Excel format"?
| - Do offerors submit a blank Section B or not at all in their price proposal? | Please complete schedule B and Cost Summary Report | ||
| 50 | RFP, Section L, paragraph L-9.2.1, pg 125 | This paragraph refers to "The proposal's pricing narrative..." | |
| - Does the Government intend that offerors provide a formal pricing narrative? Is any format determined by the offeror acceptable as long as it includes the required information? Will the price narrative be evaluated? There is no mention in Section M of evaluation criteria for the price narrative. | Please include all requirements of section L & M in your pricing narrative. No specific format is required unless detailed in the solicitation. | ||
| 51 | PWS, Section D, paragraph 3.6, pg 85 | This paragraph states "Overtime above the requirements stated in the PWS for major tasking is subject to the limits as stated in the contract, under FAR 52.222-2." This clause is not included in the RFP, and there were no overtime limits stated elsewhere in the PWS. | |
| - Will all overtime requests be submitted to the PCO for approval? How will emergencies requiring overtime be addressed? | The PCO will approve overtime. FAR clause 52.222-2 will be added. | ||
| 52 | RFP paragraph L-8.2 Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) | This paragraph indicates "The Government will use a PPQ as a tool for conducting Past Performance telephonic or email interviews only on PPI’s that do not have a CPAR. The PPQ is for Government use only. In the event a PPQ is used, it will be treated as source selection information IAW FAR Part 3.104." |
Does the Government desire that offerors include the CPARs for each of the past performance references in the Past Performance Volume or does the Government prefer to obtain the CPARs independent of the proposal submission?
| If they are included in the volume are they outside of the page count limitations for the past performance volume? | The Government does not require offerors to provide CPARS. | |||
| 53 | Attachment VI, Collective Bargaining Agreement Attachment | The CBA in the solicitation expired on 7/31/15. Please provide the current CBA. | Amendment 2 contains new CBA effective 1 Aug 15 through 31 Jul 18. | |
| 54 | RFP, Section J, Attachment VI, pg 104 | The CBA for Shaw AFB expired 31 Jul 15. | ||
| - Will the Government provide the updated CBA? | See answer to # 54 | |||
| 55 | CBA | The CBA provided with the RFP ends on 31 July 2015. | ||
| Will the Government provide current status or, if renegotiated, a current CBA? | See answer to # 54 | |||
| 56 | CBA | The CBA provided with the RFP expired 7/31/15. Will the USG provide an updated Collective Bargaining Agreement? | See answer to # 54 | |
| 57 | Collective Bargaining Agreement | The Collective Bargaining Agreement between DynCorp International LLC. War Reserve Materials at Shaw AFB and the International Association of Machinist and Aerospace workers AFL-CIO, District 110 officially expired July 31, 2015. | ||
| Question: Will AMIC send out new renegotiated Collective Bargaining Agreement for this solicitation? | See answer to # 54 | |||
| 58 | SF 33, Block 9 and L-3.1, page 114 | Date and time for submission of proposals is blank. Section L-3.1 refers to Block 9 for the submission date/time. Will the USG provide the missing information in an amendment? | The proposal due date is 19 Oct 2015/2:00 PM EST. | |
| 59 | Section I, page 80 | 52.220.50 was updated in March 2015. Will the USG be updating this clause in a subsequent amendment? | Yes | |
| 60 | Section L-9.4, page 125 | Will the USG be providing a Wage Determination for use in proposal pricing? | Not at this time only the CBA | |
| 61 | CLIN 0016, Transition, page 9 | The CLIN type is listed as Firm Fixed Price and has a quantity of 1 Lot, yet the description says "for evaluation purposes, Offerors shall propose fixed fee rates." Will the USG clarify the desired format for CLIN pricing? | For all FFP CLINs please provide profit rates, in addition to all requirements in section L&M. | |
| 62 | CLIN 0016, Transition, page 9 | The CLIN type is listed as Firm Fixed Price and has a quantity of 1 Lot, yet the description says "for evaluation purposes, Offerors shall propose fixed fee rates." There is no discussion in Section M on how the fixed fee rates are to be evaluated. Will the USG clarify the evaluation criteria? | For all FFP CLINs please provide profit rates, in addition to all requirements in section L&M. | |
| 63 | L-9.2.2, page 125 | Is a Basis of Estimate (BOE) required for the cost plus, fixed fee (CPFF) CLINs; similar to what is described in paragraph L-9.2.1? | Please provide all back up data required in section L&M | |
| 64 | L-9.2.1, 2.2, page 125 | Offerors are required to include a breakout of their fully burdened labor rates for each labor category for work as described in the PWS. Is the USG going to provide the labor categories, or must the Offeror propose the labor categories? | Each contractor will propose labor categories in accordance with their technical approach | |
| 65 | Solicitation Section H - Special Contract Clauses | Discussion: The WRM Draft RFP Solicitation Section H clauses consisted of 27 separate clauses. The WRM Final RFP removed the majority of the DRFP clauses, retaining only H-11, H-13, H-14, H-19, H-26 (renumbered as H-1 through H-5), and adding one new clause (H-6): |
H-1 DELIVERY OF SUPPLIES BEYOND CONTRACT PERIOD, H-2 TAXES, DUTIES, AND CHARGES FOR DOING BUSINESS IN COUNTRIES LISTED IN PWS, H-3 IMPORTATION OF TAX-EXEMPT MATERIAL OR SUPPLIES, H-4 INSTALLATION PASSES, H-5 MILITARY POSTAL SERVICE (APO), H-6 SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING REQUIREMENT
This change deleted a total of 22 of the special contract clauses from the final RFP, including, for example the clauses:
H-2 TECHNICAL DIRECTION, H-3 EXERCISING EXERCISE/CONTINGENCY LOGISTICS SUPPORT OPTIONS, H-4 CONTINGENCY DEPLOYMENTS, H-5 AWARD FEE AND QUALITY PERFORMANCE INDEX (QPI), H-18 INSURANCE CERTIFICATES, H-22 CHANGE IN PLACE OF PERFORMANCE, H-23 UNAUTHORIZED SERVICES, H-25 CONTRACTOR’S RESPONSIBILITY, H-27 DELIVERABLES, And other removed H-clauses.
| Is Section H in the final solicitation correct? | Section H is correct in the final solicitation | |||
| 66 | PWS Section A, 2.2.1.3 – Host Nation Labor Laws | Follow up question to USG Response to Question #70 (100_Industry_Questions_(20150727).docx) regarding Omani Labor Laws and whether the USG will provide labor rates: "The USG is researching this with DCAA & DCMA to determine what can be provided; we will likely provide labor rates for Omani labor to allow for all Offeror's proposals to be compliant with Omani laws." Question 1: Has the USG resolved this issue and will labor rates be provided? Question 2: Has the USG researched the Omani requirement to maintain current workforce regardless of a change in contractor? | Omani Labor rates will be addressed in amendment three. | |
| 67 | M-3.2.2 Relevancy (pg. 147) | Discussion: Section M-3.2.2, defines relevancy as, "...OCONUS work similar to the size, scope and complexity of the USAFCENT WRM program." Many businesses (large and small) are capable of performing WRM related work, i.e. fuel support equipment, AGE, and vehicle maintenance, however these businesses may only have experience or past performance in CONUS locations. So as to not unduly restrict competition, will the USG accept WRM related work past performance experience for CONUS projects as relevant? | M-3.2.2 defines relevancy for this solicitation | |
| 68 | H-6, page 77 | Discussion: The RFP requires Large Business Primes ensure a minimum of 20% of the total annual awarded contract value is subcontracted to small businesses in their Subcontracting Plans. FAR 52.219-9 requires goals to be expressed as a percentage of total dollars subcontracted. When evaluating performance against meeting those goals, only US companies are included in that calculation. However, if performance will be measured against total contract value, the Contractor will be severely disadvantaged for dollars subcontracted locally. Sourcing from the local provider base to compliantly procure supplies and equipment and subcontract for services ensures schedule certainty and reduces logistics costs. Can the total dollars subcontracted locally (i.e. OCONUS) be removed from the calculations for evaluating compliance with the SB contracting compliance requirement? | Please see amendment two for changes to small business goals | |
| 69 | L-8.1.2- page 122 | Re: “Submit a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of five (5) references; two (2) of the references provided should be on the Offeror (prime), if available. The remaining three (3) references may be provided for subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners considered critical to successful performance of the requirement.” | ||
| If the offeror has no critical subcontractors, may they submit 5 references as the prime? | In accordance with L-8.1.2 "Submit a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of five (5) references" | |||
| 70 | L-8.1.2- page 122 | Re: “If the PPI reference is an overarching Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) or Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA), the Government will only assess performance at the ID/IQ level and not performance on each individual underlying task/delivery order.” | ||
| An IDIQ’s experience is a sum total of its Delivery/Task Orders. How will experience at the IDIQ level be evaluated if not by referencing work performed on individual orders? | As stated in L-8.1.2, If Offerors would like assessment of an individual task/call/delivery/purchase order, the Offeror shall submit that as a separate PPI reference. | |||
| 71 | L-9.1 | Paragraph L-9.1 states "Offerors are required to insert their rates to be applied towards cost reimbursable CLINs in the description of the CLIN". and "Offerors are required to insert their rates for Cost Plus Fixed Fee CLINs in the CLIN description in Section B for evaluation purposes", however paragraph M-3.3.5 states "The Offerors proposed price for all CLINs, including Transition, base period, and all option periods listed in Section B of the solicitation (Schedule of Supplies and Services) shall be in an Excel spreadsheet. Offerors shall not input pricing in Section B". The Government asks us to input our rates into the description of the CLIN. If we are not supposed to input pricing into Section B, where exactly are we to insert our rates (i.e. Section B of the solicitation, WRM_Cost_Summary_Report.xls )? | Please complete schedule B and Cost summary reports, and provide all back up documentation as required by the solicitation . | |
| 72 | L-9.2.1 | Paragraph L-9.2.1 states “Offerors shall provide their profit rate for FFP CLINS 0001, 0011, 0014 to include the option years and CLIN 0016”. CLIN 0014 is the plug number for Award Fee and most likely should be excluded from this statement. Furthermore CLIN 0015 is excluded from your list, but is also a FFP CLIN. Will the Government correct these errors? | Rates are not requried for the award fee CLIN but are required for all others. | |
| 73 | Q&A # 70 Dated 27 July 2015 | The PWS requires compliance with local labor laws, but in at least one instance the RFP does not provide the information necessary to comply. Omani labor law (article 48 bis) requires the successor contractor to keep the same Omani labor force as employed with the predecessor contractor and at the same rates, annually escalated by 3%. Since the incumbent wages are not public information, compliance with this Omani legal requirement is impossible for anyone but the incumbent. The only practical solution seems to be the use of a plug number for the wages of Omani labor in each year of performance. Will the final RFP provide a solution to this problem? |
In order for offeror’s to adhere to this Omani Labor Law requirement we will need to know the number, by job category, and wages of Omani’s workers currently employed on the contract. If we are to “keep the same Omani labor force as employed with the predecessor contractor and at the same rates” we require this information. Only the incumbent contractor has this information.
| Will the government provide this information so offerors can correctly staff and price the Omani workforce and be in compliance with Article 48 of the Omani Labor Law? | Amendment three will address the Omani Labor Law questions. | |
| 74 | L-5.4.3, page 112 |
L-5.4.5 (table), page 113
| L-6.1, page 113 | Re: “Executive Summary is only required if the Offeror takes exception to any requirement in the solicitation”; “Executive Summary (Submit within Volume I)”; “…clearly identify each exception in the Executive Summary within the Technical volume” | ||
| Please confirm our interpretation that an Executive Summary is required ONLY if the Offeror has exceptions to the solicitation, and that no other information is required or desired in the Executive Summary. | IAW with L-5.4.3 which states "Executive Summary is only required if the Offeror takes exception to any requirement in the solicitation; this section will not be included in the proposal page limitation stated in L-5.4.5". That is correct and confirmed. | ||
| 75 | L-5.4.3, page 112 | ||
| L-7.2, page 113 | Re: “As part of Offerors’ proposals, a separate cross-reference matrix shall be completed and submitted with Volume I - Technical.” | ||
| The cross-reference matrix is not included in the paragraphing listing “Pages Not Included in Page Count.” Please clarify whether the matrix is or is not included in the page count. | The cross-reference matrix will be included in the page count. | ||
| 76 | RFP L.9.1 | Per the RFP (L.9.1) offerors are instructed to include ‘all resources (with the exception of QA)’ under the CPFF CLINs: 0002-WRM Munitions, 0003-WRM Equipment and Secondary Items, 0004-Medical WRM, and 0005-Basic Expeditionary Airfield Resources (BEAR). Then plugs are provided in the following CR CLINs: 0009-Government-Directed Travel (GDT), 0010-Port, handling & Inland Transportation (PH&IT), 0011-Facilities Maintenance Parts/Supplies. |
| Please clarify the extent to which any non-labor, material, equipment or other direct costs required to perform CLINs 0002-0005 are already included in CLINs 0009, 0010, and 0012, and the extent to which offerors are expected to include any equipment and other non-labor in their proposals for the CPFF CLINs 0002-0005, such as food-service related materials, vehicles not included under CLIN 0012, safety equipment, movement and packing equipment, medical supplies, WRM equipment and secondary items, or BEAR-related equipment. | The government has not included any costs in CLINS 0009,0010, or 0012. It is the contractors responsibility to propose all costs in the applicable CLINS | |||
| 77 | RFP Section H-6 and M-3.3.6 | The Small Business Subcontracting Plan requires at least 20% of total contract value be subcontracted to small business, with subgoals by SB category. In setting this goal, did the Government consider the following limiting factors: (1) Most purchases (labor, services, and products) are overseas for leasing facilities and housing, which by regulation do not count to SB content, (2) Few SBs are commercially registered in these four countries to conduct business, and (3) Few SBs employ the type of sophisticated cost management system required for cost-plus contracts. These factors make the stated SB goal unrealistic in our view. | Please see amendment two for changes to small business requirements | |
| 78 | RFP Section L-9.2 | Section L-9.2.1 adds the requirement for BOEs addressing each CLIN by functional area and location for the FFP CLINs, but a similar requirement is not stated for CPFF CLINs in Section L-9.2.2. Will the Government extend the BOE requirement to CPFF CLINs? | Please provide all back up data required in section L&M | |
| 79 | H-2 | H-2 TAXES, DUTIES, AND CHARGES FOR DOING BUSINESS IN COUNTRIES LISTED IN PWS, subparagraph a states: “U.S. citizen technical representatives of U.S. defense contractors enjoy the tax-exemption status of members of the civilian component in Host Nation.” | ||
| Please clarify the definition of ‘US technical representatives of UD defense contractors”. Does this include all US personnel in all countries where WRM performance will occur? | It is the contractors responsibility to know the host nation laws in each country. | |||
| 80 | The solicitation includes FAR 52.111-15 Defense Priority and Allocation Requirement (Apr 2008) however, the face page of the solicitation does not specify the rating. | Please provide the DPAS rating. | The DPAS ratings can be found in 15 CFR 700 as stated in the FAR clause. | |
| 81 | The solicitation includes FAR 52.222-41 Service Contract Labor Standards (May 2014). | Please confirm that this clause only applies to personnel working in the US and does not apply to other US personnel working OCONUS under the contract. | Applies to personnel working in the CONUS | |
| 82 | The solicitation includes FAR 52.228-10 Vehicular and General Public Liability Insurance (Apr 1984). | The contract is not primarily for transportation or transportation related services such that it does not appear to be applicable. Please clarify the need for this clause. | This contract is not primarily for transportation. However, in accordance with the PWS, the Contractor will be providing transoportation services during contract performance. Clause 52.228-10 will remain in the solicitation. | |
| 83 | The solicitation contains FAR 52.247-14 Contractor Responsibility for Receipt of Shipment (Apr 1984). | The contract is not primarily for transportation or transportation related services IAW FAR 47.207-5(d) such that it does not appear to be applicable. Please clarify the need for this clause. | This contract is not primarily for transportation. However, Contractor personnel (i.e. Traffic Management personnel) responsible for receiving cargo/shipments as part of contract perfromance in accordance with the PWS. Clause 52.247-14 will remain in the solicitation. |
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 .