RFP_Questions_Round_4.pdf

RFP Questions, 4 th

Round

1. Reference RFP Questions #2; Question numbers 1, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20 and 21: Each of the answers to the referenced questions states the following, “Employee classification and compliance with the applicable WDs is an employer responsibility. The govt-provided titles and categories in the RFP are strictly for contract pricing purposes.”

a. As stated in Question #1 and Section M, 6(b), Price Evaluation Balance, the offeror is responsible for providing a price that is considered balanced following the application of

Government developed proposal analysis techniques. How is the possibility of reasonably balanced pricing supposed to occur if the government is unwilling to provide the classifications that they would expect to see in order for all offerors to approach and accomplish this task with some sense of consistency? To accomplish this in an equitable manner would require nothing more than a cross-reference list in very much the same manner as the Government furnished information found in Sec M.4.(c).(2) of the Westover BOS solicitation.

Answer: The answer given to RFP Questions #2, question 2, last sentence was in error. The offeror’s Labor-hour rates will be considered unbalanced if the fully loaded rates are not reasonably proportional to other rates proposed by the offeror. Example senior engineer vs laborers.

b. Please clarify what is meant by “The govt-provided titles and categories in the RFP are strictly for contract pricing purposes.” Is it not a correct statement that the classifications and associated wages provided by the offeror in Attachment 12 become a part of the contract that is awarded as a result of this solicitation, as has been the case over the past 12 years?

Answer: Yes, the Government provides all categories in Attachment 12 of the RFP for the offeror to provide rates to be used for evaluation for award. If awarded, the Labor-hour proposed rates become contract rates under the labor-hour CLINs.

2. Reference RFP Questions #2, Question & Answer number 2: The answer provided to this question states in part that “Labor-hour rates will be considered unbalanced if the fully loaded rates are not reasonably proportional to the salaries paid.” As this is a proposal, how is it that a salary paid would even be a part of the consideration/evaluation and where within the submitted materials is the offeror supposed to provide a listing of salaries to be paid upon award of the contract?

Answer: See answer to question 1(a).

3. Reference revised Attachment 12: While attempting to input numbers into the green shaded field of the base year, we see that upon doing this, there is no product shown in the “Total

Amount” column and therefore nothing is being transferred into the summary (as a matter of fact, this occurs for all years). The same thing occurs when we input a percentage for the

Material Handling Fee. Additionally, when we click on a cell in the base or option years against the Service Contract Act , Davis Bacon and/or O & A Labor, we see that those cells are not linked to anything, which we believe they should be. In other words, no numbers input into any of the green shaded areas transfer to any other cell – all the links appear to be missing.

Answer: Proposed pricing on attachment 12 will be evaluated in accordance with section M, paragraph 6(c) of the Request For Proposal (RFP). Because quantities are not provided for labor- hour CLINs as stated in section M, paragraph 6(c) (2), (3), and (4), a fully functional spreadsheet is not possible. Proposed pricing input in the green shaded fields will be input into a master spreadsheet that will compute a Total Evaluated Price (TEP). A copy of the offeror’s spreadsheet will be provided to them during debriefing.

4. Reference Attachment 12, Pricing Matrix and Section L, V.1.(f).2; There appears to be several issues with this attachment.

a. There is no Grand Total cell on the summary page, as a matter of fact, it appear as if an entire column is missing.

Answer: Proposed pricing on attachment 12 will be evaluated in accordance with section M, paragraph 6(c) of the Request For Proposal (RFP). Because quantities are not provided for labor- hour CLINs as stated in section M, paragraph 6(c) (2), (3), and (4), a fully functional spreadsheet is not possible. Proposed pricing input in the green shaded fields will be input into a master spreadsheet that will compute a Total Evaluated Price (TEP). A copy of the offeror’s spreadsheet will be provided to them during debriefing.

b. The SCA, DBA and O&A Labor Rate Sheets are not totaled at the bottom of each column as this is what appears should be input into the base or option year pages. When populating the green shaded cells in the labor rate sheets, those numbers go nowhere.

Answer: See answer to 2a.

5. Reference TAB A Questions 5 and 7: The answers to these 2 questions places the responsibility for determining the proper cross-reference of job titles up to the individual offeror.

Although only the incumbent is a signatory to the collective bargaining agreement, all offerors are still bound by the wages and fringes for the first year. Requiring offerors to guess at the proper job classification for use puts offerors in a position to either propose a rate that is too high

(which will be multiplied by an unknown number), or force offerors into a potential losing situation with a rate that is too low. In an effort to confirm proper pricing, shouldn’t this be the responsibility of the government? All that would be required is a cross reference list in very much the same manner as the Government furnished information found in Sec M.4.(c).(2) of the

Westover BOS solicitation.

Answer: No, the government will not provide a cross reference list. The Collective Bargaining

Agreement (CBA) is between the incumbent contractor and the union. The Government has included attachment 7 in the RFP, which is the only document provided to the Government concerning agreements between the union and incumbent contractor. Classifications not included in the document are negotiable between the two interested parties. In addition, the area wage determination or Davis Bacon wage determinations should be used depending on the type of work and whether union employees are used. It is the responsibility of each offeror to bid a rate in accordance with the law and what their company financial situation can sustain.

6. Reference TAB A Questions 6: The answers to this question places the responsibility for determining the proper cross-reference of job titles up to the individual offeror. WDOL.gov

User's Guide (Ver 6.0), Davis Bacon Act Regulations and Requirements states that “There may be rare circumstances where the general schedule wage determination does not contain the principal work classification necessary for contract performance. In those situations a project wage determination may be requested from Department of Labor by submittal of an SF-308 or other request that contains the same information. In such cases the Contracting Officer should follow the instruction in FAR 22.404-3.” We respectfully request that the Government provide a cross-reference list of those positions not currently found in the incorporated DBAs.

Answer: The Government does not know of any general schedule wage determination that does not contain the principal work classification necessary for contract performance.

7. Reference TAB A Questions 5, 6, 7 and 15: Each of the answers to these questions ends with “ The govt-provided titles and categories in the RFP are strictly for contract pricing purposes”. Can the Government please clarify what this sentence is trying to say?

Answer - The Government provides all categories in Attachment 12 of the RFP for the offeror to provided rates to be used for evaluation for award. If awarded, the Labor-hour proposed rates become a contract rate under the labor-hour CLINs.