Industry_Questions_-_Reference_to_Amendment_2_-_20151001.xls
XLS spreadsheet 411 KB Posted
- Attached to
- War Reserve Materiels (WRM) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA4890-15-R-0004
About this file
These are responses to Industry Questions generated as a result of Amendment 0002. The proposal is due 19 Oct 2015 2 00PM EST.
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
Post-Amendment 2 Questions
| # | Industry | Reference | Question | Response | |
| 1 | Honeywell | ||||
| 3 Sep 15 | PWS 4.6.1 | Topic: Internet Protocols for DMS | |||
| Question: WRM readiness data and contingency planning involves data that demonstrates critical capabilities for US Forces operating in the USAFCENT AOR. This data may require classification of SECRET or higher to ensure operational security. PWS para 4.6.1 directs the contractor to provide a data management system (DMS) to support WRM operations. What internet protocols will the contractor be required to support with DMS access (i.e. NIPR, SIPR, etc…)? | NIPR only. Contractor will not be required to utilize SIPR. | ||||
| 2 | Honeywell | ||||
| 3 Sep 15 | PWS 4.6.1 | Topic: System Requirements | |||
| Question: Does the data being stored in the contractor provided website have a requirement to directly populate any other government systems? | Minimizing the requirement to manually load data to/from the DMS to government systems is paramount. The offeror should propose a DMS that will maximize interfacing with government systems to the fullest extent allowed by USAF regulation. |
In some cases the only option may be exporting a file from a Government system and importing it into DMS. Where such options don't exist or are prohibited redundant data entry may be necessary.
| 3 | Honeywell | ||
| 3 Sep 15 | PWS 4.6.1 | Topic: System Requirements | |
| Question: Does the government require a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in order to pass data between systems? | No | ||
| 4 | Honeywell | ||
| 3 Sep 15 | PWS 4.6.1 | Topic: System Requirements | |
| Question: Is the contractor system required to go through DoD accreditation? | No | ||
| 5 | Honeywell | ||
| 3 Sep 15 | PWS 4.6.1 | Topic: System Requirements | |
| Question: Does the contractor system required to have CAC authentication which follows DoD protocol? | No | ||
| 6 | Honeywell | ||
| 3 Sep 15 | PWS 4.6.1 | Topic: System Requirements | |
| Question: How will the data be transferred from its current location to its new location? Is the current data in a proprietary format? What is the format of the current data? | Current DMS data is the property of the USG and will be provided to the awardee during the transition period. | ||
| 7 | Honeywell | ||
| 3 Sep 15 | PWS 4.6.1 | Topic: System Requirements | |
| Question: How are the current records being generated? | Refer to WRMMS User Guide | ||
| 8 | Honeywell | ||
| 3 Sep 15 | PWS 4.6.1 | Topic: System Requirements | |
| Question: What is the current storage load for the data? What is the current growth rate for capacity planning? | Refer to WRMMS User Guide | ||
| 9 | Honeywell | ||
| 3 Sep 15 | PWS 4.6.1 | Topic: System Requirements | |
| Question: What are the shortfalls of the current system? | None known. AFCENT’s requirements have been met. | ||
| 10 | Honeywell | ||
| 3 Sep 15 | Section L-7.2 | Topic: Cross Reference Matrix | |
| Question: The Cross-Reference Matrix included in Section L of the RFP for the Technical Proposal does not include Subfactor D, Factor II. Mission Support, although there are instructions for this section in Section L and evaluation criteria in Section M. Should we include this section in the Matrix? | This was corrected in Amendment 2. | ||
| 11 | DynCorp | ||
| 3 Sep 15 | RFP Section L-7.2, Cross Reference Matrix; and L-9.1, Pricing Table | Question: The cross reference matrix is inconsistent with the pricing table. The CLINs cited in the third column of the matrix seem to be in error. Will the Government provide a corrected version by replacing the second digit (“1”) with a zero (0). | Corrected in Amendment 0002 |
| 12 | Honeywell | ||
| 8 Sep 15 | Question: At the Pre-Proposal Conference it was shown on a chart that the contractor is to lease the Salalah Port site. However, there is no mention of this in the PWS. Can the Government please clarify this requirement? Is this an existing lease that will be novated post award? Is this a Government directed source? Please clarify. | It is the contractor's responsibility to secure the facility to meet the storage requirements stated in Sectiion 3.3.4. | |
| 13 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | L-3.3 | Please confirm that the contact information required in L-3.3 can be provided in a Cover Letter. If not, please specify in what volume/section this information should be placed. | Yes, this information should be included in the cover letter. Limit cover letter pages? |
| 14 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | L-5.4.3 | Would the Government consider adding a Cover Letter to the list of pages not included in page count for Volumes I and II? | Yes. As long as the cover letter does not exceed one page. |
| 15 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | Amendment 0001, item 2; L-5.4.3 | Would the Government consider adding the statement relating to the destruction of the previous RFP documents to the list of pages not included in page count for Volume I? | Yes, it shall not be included. |
| 16 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | L-7.2; L-5.4.3 | Would the Government consider adding the cross-reference matrix to the list of pages not included in page count for Volume I? | It will be included in the page count. |
| 17 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | L-8.1.2.1, L-8.1.b(ii) | Please confirm that the Past Performance Information (PPI) should appear before the Past Performance Summary. Paragraph L-8.1.2.1 directs that the PPI should be "Tab 1" while Paragraph L-8.1.b(ii) implies the Past Performance Summary should be the first section following the Table of Contents. | Confirmed. Any location within the Past Performance section is acceptable. |
| 18 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | L-8.1.2 | The instructions in Section L refer to a PPI tool entitled "ppi_tool.accdb." On FBO, there is a database posted with the file name Database1.mdb. Please confirm that Database1.mdb replaces ppi_tool.accdb in the Past Performance Information instructions. | The identification names are used interchangeably; ppi_tool.accdb and Database1.mdb are one and the same. |
| 19 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | L-8.1.2 | The instructions in Section L instruct offerors to use the file name extension ".accdb" in our PPI submission. Please confirm that this is correct or if it should be changed to ".mdb" to align with the Database1.mdb file issued with the 08/27/2015 RFP. | The instructions referencing the file name extension, stated in Section L , are correct. |
| 20 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | L-5.4.5 , NOTE | In Section L-5.4.5, the Note refers to "Volume III Part C." Would the Government please clarify the reference to "Part C" as we are unable to identify what page/section/paragraph this refers to. | Disregard any reference to "Part C" ; it should only be Volume III. |
| 21 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | L-9.1, B-1, J | Please clarify the required submission for pricing. Are the pricing table referenced in Section L-9.1, the pricing schedule referenced in Section B-1, and the pricing schedule (Work Cost Summary Sheet) referenced in Section J all referring to the attachment with the file name "WRM Cost Summary Report.xls"? | All offerors are required to complete Section B and the Work Cost Summary Sheet |
| 22 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | M-3.3.5 | Please clarify the requirement for submitting a completed Section B. Is the intent of Section M-3.3.5 that the offeror convert Section B as it was issued with the RFP in Microsoft Word, and submit it as an Excel file? | Complete Section B and submit per instructions in the RFP/Solicitation. |
| 23 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | M-3.1.3.1(e) and (f) | Please define "crisis" as used in the requirements for Exercise/CLS. | In this contest, a crisis is defined as a major contingency operation (e.g. Operation ENDURING FREEDOM) while sustaining baseline/peacetime WRM storage & Maintenance requirements. |
| 24 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | L-7.4.3.1 | In the context of the requirement for Exercise/CLS, would the Government provide an explanation of Unit Type Codes (UTCs)? We are unable to locate this information in the PWS. | A UTC is a potential capability focused upon accomplishment of a specific mission that the military Service provides. It can consist of manpower force element (MFE) only, equipment (LOGDET) only, or both manpower and equipment. |
UTCs are represented by a 5-character alphanumeric code. War planners use UTCs to document total Air Force manpower and logistics requirements needed to support the national military strategy during operational planning and execution activities.
| 25 | Fluor | ||
| 9 Sep 15 | L-7.4.3.1 | In the context of the requirement for Exercise/CLS, would the Government provide an explanation of baseline resources? We are unable to locate this information in the PWS. | Baseline resources are the standard staffing, equipment, technology and assets allocated and funded for day-to-day contract execution exclusive of Exercise Logistics Support (CLIN 7) and Contingency Logistics Support (CLIN 8) and associated SLINs within PH&IT (CLIN 10). |
| 26 | Vectrus | ||
| 11 Sep 15 | Amendment 1, SF 30, Block 14 | Question: Will the Government consider a clarification of the language in block 14 of the SF 30 released with Amendment 1 of the WRM RFP? The requirement as worded cannot be complied with as it presents only two possible choices for compliance: |
1. Offeror did not download “it” (referring to, we assume, the draft and final RFPs released on 09 March 2015 and 24 July 2015).
2. Offeror did download “it” but destroyed “it” and did not share with others.
As we did download both the draft RFP and the final RFP, we must elect option 2. We did destroy all copies of the draft and final RFPs; however, we freely shared those documents among our proposal team before we knew there was a compromise of proprietary information. This would seem to make us non-compliant with the block 14 instruction even though we followed the Government’s instructions regarding the compromised files.
| As this is a sensitive legal matter for all parties involved, we request the Government revise the wording of this requirement, so that it provides a clear and compliant path for offerors to follow. | You should certify that you downloaded but destroyed all copies. You are compliant as long as you didn't share them after being instructed to destroy. | |
| 27 | Fluor | |
| 14 Sep 15 | Solicitation L-9.1, Pricing Instructions, CLIN 0007, Exercise Logistics Support | Is it the Government's intent to provide a separate sample exercise as indicated in the pricing instructions: "Offerors shall propose price for the exercise listed in Appendix J; multiplied by six (6). Offerors shall propose an inclusive cost for this CLIN, to include all indirect rates and the fixed fee."? Note Appendix J is Government Provided Facilities and no exercise is listed. However, there are three (3) past exercise support provided in Appendix G, 1.17 (FTX Initial Link 14-1, FTX Desert Thunder 13-2, and CPX Eagle Resolve-FTX Eastern Falcon). |
As a follow on question, if these are the SOWs and LRC taskers intended for pricing purposes, is it the Government's intent that offerors price all three (3) exercises and multiply by six (6), or price one (1) and multiply six (6)? Appendix G, Level of Effort, para 1.17. includes example an example SOW/LRC Tasker for three (3) different exercises. Use 1.17.1 and 1.17.3 to provide an average ROM for JCS-funded exercise support (determine the average and multply by 6). These exercises are funded against CLIN 7.
Appendix G, para 1.17.2 is an example of an Acquistion & Cross-Servicing Agreement (ACSA) which are funded from CLIN 3 (WRM) and reimbursed to USAFCENT by the requesting nation through the ACSA process.
| 28 | Fluor | ||
| 14 Sep 15 | Solicitation L-9.1, Pricing Instructions, CLIN 0008, Contingency Logistics Support | Request the Government clarify the pricing instructions for CLIN 008, Contingency Logistics Support. The pricing instructions read: "Separate SLINs for each contingency (prep/outload and reconstitution). Offerors shall propose an inclusive cost for this CLIN, to include all indirect rates and the fixed fee". These instructions suggest a specific outload and reconstitution requirement will be specified. Other than the Exercises listed in Appendix G, 1.17, there is no apparent workload information or Statement of Work associated with this CLIN. Is it the Government's intent for proposer's to price the requirements established in PWS 5.1.2 (Thumrait = 50 trucks/day; Masirah = 5 trucks/day; Al Udeid: 50 trucks/day; 50 trucks/day and Al Dhafra: 40 Trucks/day)? If so, are we to price all sites or only the maximum 50 trucks/day? Since this is a rate, will the Government provide a timeframe (e.g. number of days) in order to bound the requirement? Finally, for the reconstitution aspect, will the Government provide a sample list of items to be reconstituted? | The LRC Tasker estimates are located in Appendix G under each functional area. |
| 29 | Fluor | ||
| 14 Sep 15 | Solicitation L-9.1, Pricing Instructions, CLIN 0006, US Navy Support (Munitions and Facilities) | Request the Government clarify the pricing instructions for CLIN 0006, U.S. Navy Support (Munitions and Facilities). The pricing instructions read: "Offerors shall propose an inclusive cost for this CLIN, to include all indirect rates and the fixed fee." Other than the Exercises listed in Appendix G, 1.17, there is no apparent workload information or Statement of Work associated with this CLIN. None of the exercise statements of work indicated they are in support of U.S. Navy Operations at Masirah. | The level of effort for Navy Munitions has been added to Appendix G. The contractor is required to perform daily physical security checks of the munitions facilities and Periodic Inspections (Pis) of the munitions. |
Navy contingencies and/or exercises requiring contractor support is sporadic. For purposes of the proposal a quarterly 30-day deployment can be assumed.
Navy facilities (identified in Appendix J) are maintained day-to-day by the contractor and opened up for Navy personnel/units that deploy to Masirah. The level of effort for those facilities, whether occupied or not, can be assumed to be fairly constant.
| 30 | Fluor | ||
| 21 Sep 15 | RFP L-5.4.1 | Can text in headers and footers be smaller than Times New Roman 12 point font? Recommend allowing text no smaller than Times New Roman 8 point in the header and footer of documents. | No. Standardized font throughtout. |
| 31 | Honeywell | ||
| 21 Sep 15 | Section L-5.4.3 | Section L-5.4.3 states that the organization chart, limited to one page, is not included in the page count. Does a fold-out count as a page in this instance? Would the government consider not counting the transition organization chart against the page count? | For the purposes of the organization chart a single (1) foldout (one-sided) will be acceptable and not counted as two (2) pages. |
The transition organization chart can also be a single (1) foldout (one-sided).
| 32 | Honeywell | ||
| 21 Sep 15 | Section L-5.4.3 | Section L-5.4.3 states that “Site specific organization charts will not be included in the page count but are limited to one (1) page per site.” Does a fold-out count as a page in this instance? With the information required for sites (to show baseline and outload operations), a fold-out is necessary to contain the information in a legible and understandable form. | For the purposes of the site specific organization chart a single (1) foldout (one-sided) will be acceptable and not counted as two (2) pages. |
| 33 | Fluor | ||
| 21 Sep 15 | In reference to Q&A #213 issued on 09/16/2015, Fluor requests a copy of the CD-ROMs with any available data on MOUs/MOAs, site maps and floor plans, and as-built drawings. |
My mailing address is
Diane K. Whitmoyer Fluor, Inc 100 Fluor Daniels Drive
| Greenville, SC 29607 | Most of these facilities do not have as-built and the ones that do will be provided to the awardee upon transition. | |
| 34 | Fluor | |
| 23 Sep 15 | Appendix_K_-_Government_ Furnished_Property_ (GFP).doc |
| WRM Life Cycle Listing (LCL) | We evaluated Appendix K for GFP, specifically computer systems and hardware. What is the frequency or basis for contractor-purchased replacement computer hardware? | For proposal purposes use a 5-year replacement cycle. |
| 35 | Honeywell | |
| 23 Sep 15 | Section B - Supplies/Services | Amendment 0001 states: “1. Section B - Supplies/Services: CLINS 0009, 0010, 0012 and 0013 and ALL option years changed from: "Offerors shall propose the Indirect Rate(s) that will be added to the plug # for evaluation purposes to read: " A plug # is provided by the Government". |
Please confirm the CLIN descriptions should be as follows (base year only as an example):
CLIN 0009 Government Directed Travel. A plug # is being provided by the Government.
CLIN 0010 Port, Handling & Inland Transportation (PH&IT) IAW Paragraphs 4.2. and 4.3. Not to Exceed of $650. A plug # is provided by the Government.
CLIN 0012 Facilities Replacement Parts/Supplies includes a Not to Exceed (NTE) amount of $1.67M. A plug # is being provided by the Government.
| CLIN 0013 Facilities Projects (AF Form 332s)/Engineering Studies includes a Not to Exceed (NTE) amount of $400K. A plug # is being provided by the Government. | Refer to Amendment 0002. | ||
| 36 | Honeywell | ||
| 23 Sep 15 | Section B | Will the Government consider providing offerors a new Section B to ensure the revisions to the CLIN descriptions are accurately reflected by the offerors in their proposal submission? | No. |
| 37 | Honeywell | ||
| 23 Sep 15 | Will the Government consider providing offerors a “conformed” solicitation to reflect incorporation of all of the Amendment changes? | No. | |
| 38 | Honeywell | ||
| 23 Sep 15 | Section M-3.3.6 and Section H-6 | Section M-3.3.6 and Section H-6 Small Business Subcontracting Requirement: In Amendment 0002, The Government changed the small business requirement from 20% to 5% of total annual awarded contract value. There was no corresponding change to Section H-6. | Omission of the change from 20% to 5% was an oversight and should be disregarded. Please refer to M-3.3.6 for the Small Business Subcontracting Requirement. |
| 39 | Honeywell | ||
| 23 Sep 15 | Section H-6 | Section H-6 Small Business Subcontracting Requirement: The Government’s response to Emailed Question #23 regarding a “progressive approach” was not addressed in Amendment 0002. We recommend H-6 be deleted in its entirety. Otherwise, please explain “progressive approach” since we are to meet 5% each year according to the revised Section M. | Omission of the change from 20% to 5% was an oversight and should be disregarded. Please refer to M-3.3.6 for the Small Business Subcontracting Requirement. |
| 40 | Honeywell | ||
| 23 Sep 15 | Amendment 2, SF30, Block 14 | Amendment 0002: On the SF30, block 14, item #3 states, “An extension date of the RFP will be provided in its release.” We noticed Amendment 0002 did not provide for an extension date. Was it the Government’s intention to provide an extension or will that be forthcoming in Amendment 0003. Please advise. | No. Proposals are due 19 Oct 2015, 2:00 PM, EST. |
| 41 | Honeywell | ||
| 23 Sep 15 | PWS 4.2 and 4.3 | Are the staffing positions specified in PWS 4.2 and 4.3 included in the plug number for CLIN 10? | No. CLIN 10 is for PH&IT costs exclusive of manpower. TMO and Air Transportation will fall under CLIN 3. |
| 42 | Honeywell | ||
| 23 Sep 15 | PWS 2.4.2 | PWS 2.4.2 requests that the Salalah Port lease be included in pricing of CLIN 3. Since this is a directed site lease and no specifications for the Port or contact information for the Port were provided, will the Government provide the lease cost for pricing purposes? | It is the contractor's responsibility to secure the facility to meet the storage requirements stated in Sectiion 3.3.4. |
| 43 | DynCorp | ||
| 25 Sep 15 | RFP Section L-9.1, CLIN 0007 as revised by QAs 177, 178, 179; Appendix G | Section L requires Offerors to propose a price for the exercise listed in App. G, 1.17.1, based on 6 exercises per year. Please confirm the exercises listed in App. G, 1.17.2 and 1.17.3 are to be ignored? | Yes. Use 1.17.1 for your proposal. |
1.17.2 is an example of an ACSA-funded exercise (CLIN 3) and 1.17.3 is an additional JCS-funded exercise (CLIN 7)
| 44 | DynCorp | ||
| 25 Sep 15 | RFP Section L-9.1, CLINs 0007 and 0008 | Are Offerors to include ODCs in the “inclusive cost” for these two CLINs? Or only labor hour cost plus indirect rates and fixed fee in view of the fact that ODCs must be allocated to several different CLINs? | That must be determined by each contractor's approach. |
| 45 | DynCorp | ||
| 25 Sep 15 | QAs #5 and #8, Preproposal Conf. Questions, RFP M-1.3. and M-3.3.4 | Government answers to the cited two questions still leave the apparent contradiction unresolved - perhaps the questions were poorly articulated: M-3.3.4 states “the Government will evaluate the realism of each Offeror’s proposed costs,” while M-1.3 states that only the 6 lowest priced proposals will be evaluated. Will the Government confirm that price realism will be evaluated for all proposals received, after which the 6 lowest proposals will be evaluated on technical acceptability and past performance? | No. M-1.3 stands as written. |
| 46 | DynCorp | ||
| 25 Sep 15 | Appendix G | It appears that the M32 data in Appendix G do not support sufficient labor hours for the total supply task. Is it the Governments expectation that Offerors evaluate both Appendix G and Appendix O to determine Supply staff labor hours required to support POS, MRSP and Equipment inventories? | Yes. Appendix O is used to determine the max requirement, but we rarely reach the max storage objective for WRM so offerors need to determine the mix required to support what we have and be able to cross utilize personnel effectively between Appendix G what we have and Appendix O what our max objective requires. |
The M32 starting with page 39 show what the totals are for the month which you can equate to manpower requirements. The last page shows totals for number of transactions and total number of item records for FB/FE.
| 47 | DynCorp | ||
| 25 Sep 15 | Q&A 19 (from preproposal conference) and PWS A-2.4.2 | In view of insufficient data provided in the RFP on the Salalah Port site requirement, and earlier indications it would be GFF, will the Government make the Salalah Port site lease a Government plug number in CLIN 0003 or in a new separate CLIN? | As previously stated, it is the contractor's responsibility to secure the facility to meet the storage requirements stated in Sectiion 3.3.4. |
| 48 | DynCorp | ||
| 25 Sep 15 | PWS A-3.3.1 and A-4.6.1 | Will the Government clarify whether it is necessary to interface with more than one Air Force System (i.e., ESS and AFEMS) in order to generate the BEAR Report as required by PWS A-3.3.1? Or is the DMS design required to duplicate those systems’ capabilities? | Contractors are encouraged to utilize flat files exported from AFEMS/SBSS/LIMSEV in order to import pertinent data into them contractor's DMS. Duplications of the systems capabilities are discouraged in order to maintain data integrity in the AF approved systems. |
LIMSEV is replacing Discover. LIMSEV, for example, does have the capability to establish reports and scripts which can be pulled and put into excel spreadsheets or text files which can be converted into a flat file.
| 49 | DynCorp | ||||
| 25 Sep 15 | PWS Appendix K | Since there are no demand data provided for the CFE required to support the program in lieu of the previously provided GFE listed in Appendix K, how are Offerors expected to price this requirement in their bid under a LPTA acquisition approach? Will the Government provide a plug number for this requirement to level the playing field? | Offerors should propose CFE based on their technical approach to meet PWS requirements. The Government has advised as to specific/unique military vehicles that will be provided as well as all availabe GFE. Any CFE, including vehicles, would be based on an offerors technical approach, manning, etc. | ||
| 50 | DynCorp | ||||
| 25 Sep 15 | PWS Section D-3.2 and QA#186 (Emailed questions) | In response to the Government’s answer to the cited question, does the Government require 3 FTEs for the 24/7 staffing requirement for the Customer liaison section in the proximity of AFCENT A4 Det.6? | During heightened hostilities the Ops Liaison shall be available 24/7. This can be accomplished by re-prioritizing tasks and using existing resources for this purpose during heightened hostilities. | ||
| 51 | Fluor | ||||
| 28 Sep 15 | n/a | Will the Government keep in the competition an offeror who relies on exemptions referenced in relevant international agreements between the Host Nation and the U.S. as a basis for not including Host Nation taxes, customs, or duties in the offeror's price proposal? | As long as those international agreements are cited and can be validated. Each offeror must certify that they are in compliance with all Host Nation laws. | ||
| 52 | Fluor 28 Sep 15 | L-5.4.4 | The instructions allow offerors to use jpeg images for charts or screen shots. Would the Government please consider also allowing offerors to use png images, as these are clearer and higher resolution? | Yes, png images are acceptable. | |
| 52 | DynCorp 1 Oct 15 | Amendment 0003 | The Omani Salary ranges listed in Section J, Attachment VII, promulgated with Amendment 003, includes a minimum and maximum salary range by skill category. | ||
| Does the specified salary range include the required allowances and annual escalation factor? | The salary ranges are provided in Amendment 0003 as a guideline for proposing a cost for those skill categories. It will be up to the contractor to determine what and how those ranges are established and whether they comply with the Omani Labor law. |
MBD00087350.pdf
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .