Q A's_12-23_Dec.pdf

AUAB Custodial & Grounds Maintenance Solicitation

FA5702-15-T-0001

Questions & Answers

Week of (12 – 23 Dec 2014)

Q1 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph A.1.2.5, which states: “The Government shall reserve the right to add additional handwash stations and remove handwash stations, so long as total does not exceed the current total of twelve (12) plus two (2) per year at no additional cost.”

Question: As this is an LPTA procurement and it is unclear whether or not the Government will actually increase the number of handwash stations in the contract’s option years, will the Government please consider creating a separately priced CLIN for additional handwash stations or, alternatively, consider using the post-award modification process to increase the scope of handwash station services?

A1 - An amendment to the solicitation will be performed to remove the verbiage for additional handwash stations. There will only be 12 that will require cleaning. There are 3 of the 12 handwash stations located at the Manhattan Dining Facility which require cleaning but do not require restocking.

All others require both cleaning and restocking.

Q2 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph A.1.5.1, which states: “Unscheduled Cleaning. Basic Cleaning Services and Restroom/Locker Room Services outlined in paragraphs 1 through 1.2.5 shall be provided on COR request for a facility on the facility listing within 48 hours of notification. This service will be provided for facilities up to the amounts shown (Restrooms: 10,000 ft2, Carpet: 5,000 ft2, Hard Floor: 20,000 ft2) each year.”

Question: As this is a fixed price LPTA procurement and given the uncertainty whether or not this work requirement will actually arise and the fact that the Contractor is essentially required to provide an undefined requirement at no additional cost, will the Government please consider creating a separate CLIN, with estimated or actual quantities, for Unscheduled Cleaning? Alternatively, this requirement could be accomplished via post-award modification to increase the scope of services; or addressed via a new cost reimbursement CLIN.

A2 - Unscheduled cleanings will be facilitated by shifting cleaning schedules/routes. Unscheduled cleaning will be no more than 12 times per year.

Q3 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph A.1.5.2, which states: “Special Services Cleaning. The Government shall require Contractor personnel, on an as needed basis to perform various cleaning throughout the life of the contract. The Contractor shall provide personnel for special cleaning, cleaning vacated facilities (to include dusting and trash collection), and cleaning after special events. The Contractor shall maintain the capability to respond to special cleaning requests within 24 hours after notification by the CO/CA or

COR.”

Question: As this is a fixed-price LPTA procurement and given the uncertainty whether or not this work requirement will actually arise and the fact that the Contractor is essentially required to provide an undefined requirement at no additional cost, will the Government please consider creating a separate CLIN, with estimated or actual quantities, for Special Cleaning Services? Alternatively, this requirement could be accomplished via post-award modification to increase the scope of services; or addressed via a new cost reimbursement CLIN.

A3 - Special Services cleanings will be facilitated by shifting cleaning schedules/routes. Unscheduled cleaning will be no more than 12 times per year.

Q4 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph A.4.1, states: “Base Growth Increases. It is anticipated that the number of facilities to be serviced many increase. Existing facility footprints may increase as well. The Contractor will be expected to adjust to these changes. The Government reserves the right to add and remove facilities or modify the cleaning area of existing facilities from Annex 2 without a change in contract price so long as the square footage difference of each cleaning Level does not increase or decrease by more than the percentages listed for each level of service: Level 1 cleaning - five (5) percent of 153,778 SF; Level 2 cleaning - ten (10) percent of 18,318 SF; Level 4 cleaning - five (5) percent of 114,768 SF.

Question: As this is a fixed price LPTA procurement and given the uncertainty whether or not this work requirement will actually arise and the fact that the Contractor is essentially required to provide an undefined requirement (add what type of facilities? what are the cleaning requirements of each new facility? what’s actually inside each building that needs cleaning?) at no additional cost, will the Government please consider creating a separate CLIN, with estimated or actual quantities, for Base Growth Increases? Alternatively, this requirement could be accomplished via post-award modification to increase the scope of services; or addressed via a new cost reimbursement CLIN.

A4 - The cleaning requirements for the facilities will be one of the levels specified in PWS, Annex 1 to Appendix A. These levels list what cleaning is required dependent on the level of service requested.

Q5 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph B.1.1.12, states: “CC Memorial Plaza. Contractor shall police this area weekly at a minimum, or as requested by the COR within 48 hours.” Question: The “or as requested by the COR within 48 hours” phrase makes this requirement ambiguous and impossible to price with any certainty. Will the Government please remove the “or as requested by the COR within 48 hours” phrase or take steps to define this requirement in a way for Contractors to price with certainty under this fixed price, LPTA procurement?

A5 - This requirement will be facilitated by shifting cleaning schedules/routes.

Q6 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph B.1.1.13, states: “Policing will be performed monthly at the minimum, or as requested by the COR within 72 hours.” Question: The “or as requested by the COR within 72 hours” phrase makes this requirement ambiguous and impossible to price with any certainty. Will the Government please remove the “or as requested by the COR within 72 hours” phrase or take steps to define this requirement in a way for Contractors to price with certainty under this fixed price, LPTA procurement?

A6 - This requirement would be considered another change in schedule no change in amount of work performed only a change in schedule

Q7 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph B.1.1.13, states: “The Contractor shall respond within 72 hours to any request from the CO/CA/COR to remove trash within a 10-meter buffer zone off the boundary.”

Question: This requirement is ambiguous and impossible to price with any certainty. Will the Government please remove this requirement or take steps to define this requirement in a way for Contractors to price with certainty under this fixed price, LPTA procurement?

A7 - This requirement would be considered another change in schedule no change in amount of work performed only a change in schedule

Q8 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph B.2.1, states: “Hours of Operation. The normal hours of operation for the base are 0700 - 1700 hours, Saturday through Friday. Due to the possibility of special events the Contractor may be required to perform outside of normal duty hours. The COR will notify the Contractor no later than 24 hours before required performance outside of normal duty hours.”

Question: As this is a fixed price LPTA procurement and given the uncertainty whether or not this work requirement will actually arise and the fact that the Contractor is essentially required to provide an undefined requirement at no additional cost, will the Government please consider creating a separate CLIN, with estimated or actual quantities, for Performance Outside of Normal Duty Hours? Alternatively, this requirement could be accomplished via post-award modification to increase the scope of services;

or addressed via a new cost reimbursement CLIN.

A8 - This requirement would be considered another change in schedule no change in amount of work performed only a change in schedule

Q9 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph B.5.1, states: “Changes in Service and Schedule. The COR will notify the Contractor 48 hours in advance of any scheduled events that may require special preparation or cleanup. If an unscheduled event occurs the COR will notify the Contractor as soon as possible. The Contractor shall perform preparation or cleanup at no additional cost by rescheduling lower-priority, normally-scheduled maintenance as required while completing the needs of the special event. The majority of special events are scheduled, planned, and normally involve changing the date and/or time of maintenance. The COR will work closely with the Contractor to coordinate work priorities for increase in service. The Contractor shall provide grounds maintenance for special event unique requirements with 100% compliance during the monthly performance period.”

Question: As this is a fixed price LPTA procurement and given the uncertainty whether or not this work requirement will actually arise and the fact that the Contractor is essentially required to provide an undefined requirement at no additional cost, will the Government please consider creating a separate CLIN, with estimated or actual quantities, for Special Preparation or Cleanup? Alternatively, this requirement could be accomplished via post-award modification to increase the scope of services; or addressed via a new cost reimbursement CLIN.

A9 - This requirement will be facilitated by shifting cleaning schedules/routes. Unscheduled cleaning will be no more than 12 times per year.

Q10 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph B.8, which states: “Landscaping Modification. The Government anticipates the need for landscaping and irrigation maintenance on this contract in the future. Prior to implementing any such revision, supplement, or modification that will result in an increase in contract price, the Contracting Officer will work with the Contractor on establishing a reasonable price for these services. Once a reasonable price is agreed upon, a contract modification will be performed and the Contractor shall start work at a mutually agreed upon time.” AND PWS Paragraph B.8.1 which states:

“Landscaping. Contractor shall maintain landscaped areas, to include irrigation systems. Landscaped areas should present a pleasant appearance and shall be maintained to sustain provided vegetation. Policing of and an operational inspection of irrigation systems in the landscaped green zones will be performed weekly at the minimum, or as requested by the COR within 24 hours. The Contractor shall be responsible to replace all vegetation lost due to poor upkeep. Plants or vegetation will be considered dead once 50% or more appear to be dead as determined by the COR and CA. The Contractor shall provide all tools, supplies, equipment, and labor necessary to perform all operation, maintenance, repair services for all landscaping and/or irrigations systems. Repairs and Maintenance may include, but are not limited to, the addition of soil or sand, pulling of weeds and unwanted vegetation, adjusting vegetation to promote growth, adding supports to protect vegetation from damage, adjusting the irrigation system, and repairing any broken irrigation system components. Required supplies may include, but are not limited to, shovels and gardening equipment, irrigation pipes, spray nozzles, and water control valves.”

Question: As Paragraph B.8 states this requirement may be added to the contract in the future, should offerors’ proposals demonstrate the ability to meet this requirement now? If so, should associated pricing be included in offerors’ price proposals? If the requirement is to be priced, what specifically should be priced – do we attempt to price B.8.1 or something else? Finally, how will the proposal pricing be evaluated when it includes work that may or may not be added to the contract via a future modification?

A10 - Landscaping work is included in the PWS as a potential addition of services in the future. All terms and pricing will be negotiated at the point of inclusion.

Q11 - Reference: RFP, Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation Criteria – Commercial Items, Basis for Contract Award, which states: “The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced.”

Question: Will the offerors’ base period pricing be used in the Government’s determination of unbalanced pricing? If not, why wouldn’t all pricing be factored into the Government’s determination?

A11 - Total Evaluated price includes the base price and all option pricing and unbalanced pricing will be assessed across the total evaluated price.

Q12 - References: RFP CLINs 0003, 1003, 2003, 3003 and 4003 for Consumables; and PWS Paragraph

1.4.4 which states: “Under this option a Contractor provided forklift will be required to offload consumables. Consumables delivery drivers will require base access badging for performance of this option”; and PWS Paragraph 1.4.4 which states: “Prior to the execution of the modification, the Government, shall require product samples for approval by the COR and CO”; and PWS Appendix A, Annex 4 which has the title “Consumables Estimated Quantities” and a third column title of “qty (est annual).”

Question: The PWS lists consumable quantities as estimates yet there is no place on the Scheduled consumable CLINs for unit pricing in the event the Government orders more or less than the estimated quantity (if the consumables quantities were to be a firm order with fixed quantities, the PWS would not label the quantities as estimates). If the consumable orders are to be for a fixed quantity of items, will the Government please remove PWS references to estimates? If the consumables order quantities are truly estimates right now and the actual order quantities may vary, will the Government please modify the consumable CLINs to reflect unit pricing and estimated quantities?

A12 - CLIN 0003 and associated CLINs has been removed from the pricing schedule and will be negotiated if exercised. This change will be performed via an amendment to the solicitation.

Q13 - References: RFP CLINs 0003, 1003, 2003, 3003 and 4003 for Consumables; and PWS Paragraph

1.4.4 which states: “Under this option a Contractor provided forklift will be required to offload consumables. Consumables delivery drivers will require base access badging for performance of this option”; and PWS Paragraph 1.4.4 which states: “Prior to the execution of the modification, the Government, shall require product samples for approval by the COR and CO”; and PWS Appendix A, Question: Will the Government please specify how orders will be placed against the consumables CLINs?

For example, will the quantities listed in Appendix A, Annex 4 all be delivered at once or will portions of the Appendix A, Annex 4 quantity totals be ordered throughout the performance period? If not all consumables are to be provided at one time, how is the offeror able to estimate costs associated with consumables delivery and offloading (trucks, forklifts, drivers, operators, fuel, etc.) if the frequency and quantities of consumables deliveries are uncertain?

A13 - CLIN 0003 and associated CLINs has been removed from the pricing schedule and will be

Q14 - References: RFP CLINs 0003, 1003, 2003, 3003 and 4003 for Consumables; and PWS Paragraph

1.4.4 which states: “Under this option a Contractor provided forklift will be required to offload consumables. Consumables delivery drivers will require base access badging for performance of this option”; and PWS Paragraph 1.4.4 which states: “Prior to the execution of the modification, the Government, shall require product samples for approval by the COR and CO”; and PWS Appendix A, Question: The requirement for Contracting Officer prior approval of consumables product samples suggests the Appendix A, Annex 4 product specifications are not sufficient or exhaustive – and could result in unequal evaluation of offerors’ total evaluated price because it fails to establish a set standard of quality the consumables will be measured against. Will the Government please remove the requirement for post-award approval of consumables or provide quality standards the Contracting Officer will use when determining product acceptability?

A14 - CLIN 0003 and associated CLINs has been removed from the pricing schedule and will be

Q15 - Reference: RFP CLINs 0003, 1003, 2003, 3003 and 4003 for Consumables

Question: Offerors are expected to price Consumables with certainty for a period of 5 years and 10 months from the proposal due date (through 31 Oct 2020) in the event all options are exercised, including the 6-month option that’s possible via clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. As Consumables prices cannot reasonably be foreseen that far into the future, and prices could change substantially over that period of time, the Solicitation requirement to provide FFP Consumables pricing places a large amount of risk on the Contractor. Would the Government please consider removing the provision of Consumables from this Solicitation and use alternate procurement means (i.e. local purchase order, BPA, etc.) to obtain the Consumables if and when they are needed? Or, would the Government please consider making the Consumables CLIN within this Solicitation a cost-reimbursement CLIN? Propose an adjustment for consumables if it is determined at that time one is required due to price fluxuations.

A15 - CLIN 0003 and associated CLINs has been removed from the pricing schedule and will be

Q16 - Reference: RFP, Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation Criteria – Commercial Items, Basis for Contract Award

Question: The Solicitation calls for the evaluation of offerors’ Equipment List; however, given that this is a performance based contract, there is no metric with which to standardize what/how offerors propose. Accordingly, this could lead to an unequal evaluation because no common basis is provided to standardize the Equipment List. Will the Government please provide the basis with which offerors’ Equipment List will be evaluated?

A16 - This was added to ensure the contractor understood what type of equipment is required for this effort. Preference will not be given towards one contractor over another for specific types/brands of equipment.

Q17 - Reference: RFP, Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation Criteria – Commercial Items, Basis for Contract Award, which states: “The Government will consider the performance quality of recent, relevant efforts.

The review may result in adverse findings. Adverse is defined as past performance information that supports an unacceptable rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comment received from sources without a formal rating system. For adverse information identified, the evaluation will consider the number and severity of the problem(s), mitigating circumstances, and the effectiveness of corrective actions that have resulted in sustained improvements. Process changes will only be considered when objectively measurable improvements in performance have been demonstrated.” Also, this reference states that to earn an “Acceptable” past performance rating, the Government must have “a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown.”

Question: With no stated criteria, rules or standards as to what is required of offerors for the Government to arrive at “a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort,” it appears from this Solicitation language the Government’s evaluation of past performance may very well be arbitrary, resulting in unequal treatment of proposals. Will the Government please reconsider this evaluation methodology and consider the use of objective pass/fail criteria with respect to past performance?

A17 - As long as the contractor has no documented negative past performance that meets the criteria of recency and relevancy required, the offeror would be deemed acceptable. See the definition for recency and relevancy for stated criteria/standards.

Q18 - Reference: RFP, Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation Criteria – Commercial Items, Basis for Contract Award, which states: “In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

Question: How can a proper past performance evaluation methodology equate no or unknown past performance with recent/relevant past performance that gives the Government a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort? Also, if past performance is important enough for the Government to evaluate, how can an offeror with no or unknown past performance be determined Acceptable?

A18 - The past performance must be documented. If there is no documented past performance we cannot penalize the contractor.

Q19 - What kind of registrations are required for me to bid on this opportunity other than the ones stated above?

A19 – Registrations required operating a business in the country of Qatar. Any additional questions can be referred to the Ministry of Business.

Q20 - What will be a validity of the badge once it is issued?

A20 - Badging requirement and validity are varying based on worker passport, visa, state ID, or contract expiration dates etc...

Q21 - If we are awarded the contract then do we need to register with CAAF / SPOT or any other sort of similar registration process prior to performing at the base?

A21 – No. CAAF and SPOT registration are not required for this requirement.

Q22 -Can you please provide photographs of the carpet type and vinyl floor?

A22 - Yes.

Q23 - Are the staircase walls coated with waterproof paint? as if cleaning is carried out on normal walls it will make the paint worse

A23 - Unknown.

Q24 - Will the contractor be allowed to use electricity at AUAB for accommodation purposes for the site supervisors and support staff?

A24 - No. Electricity cannot be supported at this time.

Q25 - All policing services required in Appendix B Ground maintenance shall only be performed once every three months unless otherwise stated in the PWS, correct?

A25 - Yes.

Q26 - Is there a Storage area set aside for supplies and equipment?

A26 - Yes, there is a large storage tent for contractor use. For consumables, any additional equipment are located in janitorial closets at varying facilities.

Q27 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph B.1.1.8, states: “Due to Host Nation consideration, specific removal methods may be required, and certain areas may be restricted, as directed by the COR and CO/CA.”

Question: Will the Government please define “specific removal methods” and specify the frequency and duration of such COR and CO/CA requirements?

A27 - “Specific removal methods” verbiage will be removed via amendment to the solicitation.

Q28 - Can or Do the Military escort acquire food for the workers in DFAC or can workers enter with their escorts along the route with documentation?

A28 – No, lunch is determined by the contractor. Contractor personnel shall not acquire food or eat in any of the on-base establishments. Contractor’s will not be able to eat at the Dining

Facilities. Contractor’s may acquire food at the restaurant chains on base (Subway, Burger King, Dunkin Donuts, Arby’s, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell) only if they are paying cash and escorted there.

Q29 - Will the contractor be allowed to keep 40' container x1 or 2 units for accommodation/ sanitation or storage purposes at AUAB?

A29 - No. Currently the Government cannot support this request. This may be supported in the future but not at this time. The

Q30 - Does they Military provide CAC/access cards/Escort Badges to the American workers (Site Manager, Assistant Site Manager and Or Caddy Boss?

A30 – No, the contractor is responsible for working with the host nation and U.S. Security Forces to obtain badging for all contracted employees regardless of nationality. See PWS Para. 1.2.3 &

1.2.3.1 for details.

Q31 - In Grounds Maintenance, please define CC and BPC.

A31 - CC – Coalition Compound & BPC – Blatchford Preston Complex (living Areas) Approximately 600M sq.

Q32 - In Grounds Maintenance, is passenger processing area included in parking lot total? If not, please provide square meters to be maintained.

A32 - Approximately 203M sq.

Q33 - In Grounds Maintenance, is Memorial Plaza included in parking lot total? If not, please provide square meters to be maintained.

A33 - Approximately 400M sq.

Q34 - In Grounds Maintenance, please provide square meters of runway/taxiways/ramps/flightline to be maintained.

A34 - This will be removed via an amendment to the solicitation.

Q35 - In Grounds Maintenance, please provide square meters of North Gate Area to be maintained.

A35 - Approximately 1200M sq.

Q36 - In Grounds Maintenance, please provide the number of and location of Gazebos.

A36 - Location is in CC & BPC / Approximately 25 EA at this time

Q37 - Will the Government please provide a map of the base to offers unable to attend the site visit to assist offers in route planning?

A37 – The Government is working to provide a map or information to assist in route planning. There will also be pictures of the locations posted.

Q38 - Please provide incumbent contractor name, contract number, contract period, and contract value for current grounds maintenance contract.

A38 – There is no current grounds maintenance contract in place.

Q39 - Reference: PWS, Paragraph B.1.1.9, states: “Policing shall be performed within 5 meters around all “water sheds.” Question: Will the Government please specify the frequency of these services?

A39 - Watersheds in the area specified for that month at a minimum