FA6703-14-R-0001_Q A_1.doc

FA6703-14-R-0001

Dobbins ARB BOS

Questions & Answers #1

RFP GENERAL QUESTIONS

Question R1: We have investigated the item mentioned at the site visit regarding the review and approval by the SBA for all teaming arrangements that we be presenting proposals for solicitation FA6703-14-R-0001, Dobbins ARB BOS including Prime-Sub. We had discussions with our Kentucky SBA representative as well as the Washington DC SBA office. We presented the information that was indicated at the site visit regarding a new requirement for teaming arrangement approval that would even extend to the Prime-Sub relationships where the Prime will be performing 51% of the work. The representative that we talked too did not have any information on this requirement. Please provide additional information such as FAR clause or SBA directives that were the source of this discussion. This is necessary in determining the appropriate course of action for the companies that will be submitting proposals to be prepared for reward as discussed at the site visit.

Answer R1: The information presented at the Dobbins ARB Pre-Proposal Conference in regards to the SBA approving teaming arrangements was erroneous. The information presented is actually applicable to SDVOSB 8(a) set-asides. This requirement is set-aside for SDVOSB but not as an 8(a) set-aside.

Question R2:

Please provide a seniority list associated with the CBA included in this solicitation. This is necessary to calculate an accurate cost of vacation that will be required for an experienced workforce based on the years of service. If you are unable to provide this list, will there be an equitable adjustment to account for the increase cost after award based on actual years of service for the workforce?

Answer R2: IAW FAR 22.1020 the incumbent contractor is required to provide the CO a seniority list 30 days prior to the completion of the contract. The CO is required to provide the incoming contractor a copy of that list at the beginning of its contract. While the current employees have the right of first refusal for any follow-on contract there is no guarantee that any of the current employees will accept an offer of employment.

Issue/Discussion: Reference Section B-2(B): The explanation in B-2 indicates that the Government wants a composite average of the various trades that may perform work under CLINS 0014 through 0019 (and all option periods). For instance, CLIN 0014 shows a quantity of "1 lot."

Question R3: Are bidders to assume that the "Unit Price" should be the burdened cost for 1 hour for an average worker?

Answer R3: Reference Section L, Provision L-1, Proposal Instructions IV, paragraph 2(d) & (e). All offerors are required to submit fully burdened labor rates for all labor categories associated with these CLINs in the Pricing Matrix. These rates will be used to calculate the Total Evaluated Price IAW Section M. CLINs 0014 – 0019 will be funded at the discretion of the Government.

Issue/Discussion: Reference Section B-2(G)

Question R4:

Please provide additional guidance on what the Government feels is a rational basis for determining the effort that should be assumed for responding to an unknown event and develop an estimate for "1 lot"? Please Clarify

Answer R4: This CLIN will be funded at the discretion of the Government and is not to be priced.

Question R5:

Is the Government anticipating that all workers assigned to this contract will be responding and, therefore; the UNIT PRICE would be the average burdened rate for all workers assigned to the contract for 1 hour, 1 day or 1 event (that could last several days)?

Answer R5: See answer R4.

Question R6: Are bidders supposed to guess at a reasonable number of hours for an unknown event and develop an estimate for "1 lot"? Please Clarify

Answer R6: See Answer R4.

Issue/Discussion: Reference Attachment 7, CBA Question R7: We did not find a list of labor categories covered under this agreement nor the wages applicable to the labor categories. Please clarify where they can be found.

Answer R7: The Wage Determination referenced in Article 17 of the CBA has been added to Attachment 7.

Question R8: The page at the front of this attachment indicates the agreement is extended to 30 April or contract renewal. Are the current rates (whatever they are) going to change prior to contract start? If so, will the contract be modified prior to contract start to accommodate wage changes?

Answer R8: It is unknown if the rates will change. The rates in question are published by the Department of Labor and incorporated into the CBA. The government may consider an equitable adjustment.

Question R9: What is the current dollar value by service area currently under contract?

Answer R9: The current dollar value is irrelevant due to numerous changes in the PWS. The current total obligated amount for the 10-year effort is $69.99M.

Question R10: Will a copy of the previous award be made available?

Answer R10: No Question R11: Do you have a current incumbent?

Answer R11: Yes Question R12: Can the government please provide the labor categories that the CBA will cover as they are not specifically detailed in Attachment 7? Or make discernment between what would be SCA and what would be CBA?

Answer R12: All labor categories for both SCA and O&A are covered under the new CBA 2014-6619 incorporated into the solicitation via Amendment 0001.

Question R13: While filling out the hourly rates for the labor categories for the SCA Labor Rates schedule in Attachment 13 of the RFP for Dobbins ARB, , a number of categories could not be found in the WD 05-2134 (Rev -13) but the exact titles were found in the “Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires” which is not an official wage determination. Should we try to find the closest labor category on the SCA WD or use the rates and fringe calculation on the “Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires”?

Answer R13: The pricing matrix has been revised and will be posted with Amendment 0001 of the RFP.

Question R14: The CBA that was included with RFP expires April 30, 2014. Since the contract start date will be after this expiration, will there be an updated CBA issued for use in the proposal?

Answer R14: A new CBA has been incorporated into the solicitation via Amendment 0001.

Question R15: The DB schedule for “Highway” that was included with the RFP (attachment 4GD ) did not include fringe rates. Will these be provided in a subsequent amendment?

Answer R15: This is an official Department of Labor Wage Determination. DOL did not include the Fringes in the document therefore, no additional documentation will be provided.

Question R16: Can one supervisor manage more than one TAB if she/he is qualified in all TABS managed?

Answer R16: No.

Question R17: On the pricing matrix provided as a part of the RFP, it is confusing as to where the hourly rates for the SCA, Davis Bacon and Over & Above schedules should be found. The SCA & DB WD’s were provided, but in many cases, the labor categories on these schedules cannot be found in these WD’s. A Statement of Equivalent Rates was provided but this is not an official WD and, in many cases, the labor category description on the schedules match word-for-word with the labor category on this Statement. Do we use the Statement or do we try to find the nearest labor category in an official WD?

Answer R17: The proicing matrix has been revised, see Rev 1 provided via amendment 0001 of the RFP. All SCA and O&A labor categories are to be proposed IAW the new CBA provided via Amendment 0001. All of the DBA categories are to be proposed IAW the appropriate DBA general decision number.

Question R18: I am writing on our team’s behalf to request a copy of the Seniority List(s) for the Dobbins ARB, if possible.

Answer R18: See answer R2.

Issue/Discussion: Our team has identified a discrepancy concerning Schedule B located on page 102 of the referenced solicitation package. Under “B-7 OPTION PERIOD V,” the Period of Performance is listed as “01 JUN 2019 – 31 DEC 2019 (6 months).” As stated currently, this period is seven (7) months rather than six (6) months.

Question R19: So that we may provide you with an accurate price proposal, please clarify:

1) Dates of service 2) Total number of months that are intended for this service period

Answer R19: The RFP has been amended to show the correct dates of 1 Jun 2019 – 30 Nov 2019 for a total of 6 months.

Question R20: I have been searching the documents for the Dobbins ARB Contract. I cannot find the wage rates for the current CBA. Will the government please provide this for all offerors? It is imperative we receive the Wage Rates in order to price the contract accurately.

Answer R20: See answer R7.

Question R21: VOLUME I – ADMINISTRATIVE/CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION; Volume Organization requests: (e) Teaming Arrangements and/or Letters of Intent -- 1. Provide all teaming arrangements and letters of intent for the first level subcontractors to receive credit for performing as a teaming member. L-2 TEAMS/JOINT VENTURE: The Government recognizes that the offeror may subcontract or team with other contractors to meet the requirements of the solicitation. The Government will evaluate the Offeror and its first-tier subcontractors or Joint Venture as a whole when a signed Teaming Agreement, Letter of Intent or Joint Venture Agreement committing all parties to performance under this contract is submitted. Please explain why these two statements are in Volume I instructions and paragraph L-2 when there is no Section M evaluation Criteria evaluation contractor.

Answer R21: Due to the fact that this is a SDVOSB set-aside, the Government has to ensure during the evaluation process that the prime contractor is in fact proposing to accomplish at a minimum of 51% of all labor for this requirement.

Issue/Discussion: We do not see any reference to Past Performance or Experience requirements in the Section L requirements or Section M Evaluation criteria. However the Proposal Instructions include the following statements:

VOLUME I – ADMINISTRATIVE/CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION

Volume Organization requests:

(e) Teaming Arrangements and/or Letters of Intent

1. Provide all teaming arrangements and letters of intent for the first level subcontractors to receive credit for performing as a teaming member.

L-2 TEAMS/JOINT VENTURE

The Government recognizes that the offeror may subcontract or team with other contractors to meet the requirements of the solicitation. The Government will evaluate the Offeror and its first-tier subcontractors or Joint Venture as a whole when a signed Teaming Agreement, Letter of Intent or Joint Venture Agreement committing all parties to performance under this contract is submitted.

Question R22: Please explain why these two statements are in Volume I instructions and paragraph L-2 when there is no Section M evaluation Criteria evaluation contractor.

Answer R22: The statements are included because all offerors are required to submit documentation regarding proposed sub-contractors or teaming partners so that the Government can perform the required due diligence and investigate if any of the offerors, proposed sub-contractors and joint venture partners are barred from doing business with the Government IAW FAR Par 9.

Question R23: Please confirm that there are no Past Performance or Experience criteria in Section L or M and that these two criteria will not be a part of any award evaluation for this contract.

Answer R23: The CO has waived the Past Performance requirements for this acquisition.

Issue/Discussion: Reference RFP Instructions to Offerors, Volume II – Technical Capabilities, Subfactor 1.2 Quality Control: The paragraph states that we are to provide a method of measurement for each threshold established in the Service Delivery Summary. That requires us to have an insight into the number of inspections performed by the Government under their QASP.

Question R24: Please provide a copy of the QASP to be used on the resulting contract.

Answer R24: The requirement for a Quality Control Plan is for the offeror to submit a plan that demonstrates how they will ensure performance under this requirement. The QCP is not dependent upon Government inspections.

Issue/Discussion: Reference Site Visit: The briefing prior to the site visit stated that the Contractor is required to submit to the SBA as part of the submission process. We are not clear on the requirement for submission and there are no instructions in the solicitation for the SBA submission.

Question R25: Please clarify the requirements on the Contractor in regards to SBA submission.

Answer R25: See answer R1.

Issue/Discussion: Reference Site Visit: During the site visit, we noticed several ponds and wet areas around the base that appear to be maintained by the BOS contractor.

Question R26: Does the Government intend to provide a “long arm” type mower for use by the Contractor awarded this work?

Answer R26: No, the Government will only provide the equipment listed in the PWS.

Issue/Discussion: Reference Site Visit: During the site visit, we were briefed that a load bank would be required for generator testing.

Question R27: Have modifications to the transfer switch for the building been accomplished to allow introduction of the load bank to simulate the load on the generator as this is not a current requirement on the AFRC BOS contracts?

Answer R27: Still working this answer…will provided under Tab F of Q&A #2 if available.

Issue/Discussion: Reference DBA Work: The DBA rates for some categories called by the Government are lower than the corresponding CBA rates for the same work.

Question R28: Does the Government expect/require the employee rates to be the higher of the DBA/CBA rates as the employees are hired based on CBA categories?

Answer R28: The CBA takes precedence over the DBA Wage Determinations.

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS: There is a large amount of Contractor furnished property that will be necessary for contract performance after award.

Question R29: Please confirm that the Government will provide adequate secured space on base during the transition period for Contractor-furnished equipment/tools necessary for operational performance.

Answer R29: As spac becomes available it will be provided, however the security will remain the responsibility of the contractor.

Issue/Discussion: RFP page 182 of 195 5352.215-9000 FACILITY CLEARANCE (MAY 1996) The offeror must possess, or acquire prior to award of a contract, a facility clearance equal to the highest classification stated on the Contract Security Classification Specification (DD Form 254) attached to this solicitation. (End of provision)

Question R30: Would the government consider modifying this requirement to state that the contractor must be able to obtain a facility clearance within a reasonable time after award? Many smaller companies such as ours that would like to propose on this effort have the experience and ability to perform the services, however because our current contracts do not require facility clearances we cannot obtain one. We believe this change would increase the competition on this solicitation and provide the government the greatest opportunity to obtain the best value.

Answer R30: 5352.215-9000 has been modified in the RFP to add the following:

In the event the successful offeror does not have the Facility Clearance (FCL) required, contract award may be made prior to the issuance of a Facility Clearance (FCL). However, in those cases, the contractor will be processed for an FCL at the appropriate level and must meet eligibility requirements for access to classified information. The Air Force will address situations such that the contractor will not be afforded access to classified information until the FCL has been granted. All required information will be provided by the successful offeror to start the FCL process within 10 days of contract award.

If a Facility Clearance is not granted by the Government prior to the beginning of performance the contractor shall be liable for any labor provided by the Government to accomplish the classified portions of the contract.

(End of Provision)

In addition it is recommended that all offerors access the Defense Security Service (DSS) Website, http://www.dss.mil/isp/fac_clear/fac_clear.html, to familiarize themselves with the submission requirements for facility clearances in order to have all of the required documentation prepared for immediate submittal once DSS notifies the awardee that they may now submit the required paperwork.

Issue/Discussion: RFP page 189 of 195,

(d) Accounting System

1. The contract will include Labor Hour and Cost Reimbursable line items.

2. The Prime contractor must have an accounting system for accumulating and reporting incurred costs under cost type contracts in order to receive an award.

3. The Offeror shall provide evidence of an adequate accounting system.

Question R31: Would the government consider modifying this requirement to state that the contractor must be able to obtain a DCAA audit of their accounting system to determine adequacy within a reasonable time after award? For companies that currently only have fixed price contracts, there is no requirement for an audited accounting system and as such no opportunity to have DCAA audit their systems. We believe this change would increase the competition on this solicitation and provide the government the greatest opportunity to obtain the best value.

Answer R31: The offerors accounting system does not have to be certified by DCAA, however, the offeror must have an accounting system capable of tracking costs associated with specific work order numbers and/or actions. There are numerous commercial software programs available that have this capability. The offeror must simply provide documentation on the accounting system they have in use that meets this requirement.

Question R32: Ref. Table 1. Proposal Organizational Table: Table 1 does not reference paragraph 3. Functional Tabs – how does the Government want Tab-specific information organized?

Answer R32: It is assumed that the question is referencing Paragraph 3 of Volume II. Paragraph 3 is provided for reference purposes only.

Issue/Discussion: Reference: SF Form 33, Proposal Due Date Question R33: Would the Government consider a two day extension? With the current due date on a Monday, offerors would need to ship their proposal Thursday, April 24 to ensure delivery by the due date. A two day extension would provide the weekend to finalize and print their proposals for a Monday ship date.

Answer R33: The proposal submission date has been extended to 9 May 2014.

Issue/Discussion: Reference: RFP Attachment 7, Collective Bargaining Agreement:

Question R34: Appendix A of the CBA states that “Effective June 1, 2013, the wages of all employees covered by this agreement shall be a minimum of 2% above the AWD.” To ensure that all proposers are using the same and applicable wage rates, is the SCA wage determination to be used to build these rates the one that is included as Attachment 3 to the solicitation or is it a prior version?

Answer R34: See answer R7.

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Attach 0007, CBA, Article 18, para 18.01: The CBA makes reference to a CAM and DCAM, but the PWS does not reference these same positions as Functional Tab Managers. There is also a Transportation Manager listed in the CBA but none listed in the PWS. A Vehicle Operations and Maintenance Manager is required for Tab C.

Question R35: Would the Government please provide clarification on the title of all Functional Area Manager positions?

Answer R35: The titles that the Government uses in the PWS are the titles that each of the positions will be referred to as in all correspondence.

Question R36: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section K, Facility Clearance, page 174; Attachment 0002, DD254: Facility Clearance Level Does the Facility Clearance Level requirement only apply to the offeror or must all its subcontractors also possess the appropriate SECRET FCL? Is it permissible for the offeror to sponsor a subcontractor if the FCL requirement applies to subcontractors as well?

Answer R36: The FCL applies to the prime contractor as well as any sub-contractor that will be performing any portion of the requirement that is subject to the limitations under the DD254. Once the awardee of the contract has been granted an FCL it may then sponsor any of its subcontractors that require an FCL. An FCL is not required for sub-contractors that will not be performing duties requiring access to classified information.

Section F.4.3.1 indicates that the government wants the contractor to submit invoices where the contractor will be "...paid at the applicable craft hourly rates specified under the Labor for Service Call CLIN of the contract".

Question R37: Within the format provided in Section B-2, how does the Government want the unit price shown for NDH and OT rates when the format calls for 1 unit price?

Answer R37: See answer R3.

Question R38: What are the contractors supposed to assume to develop a "TOTAL ESTIMATED PRICE" and a "CEILING PRICE" for each of these CLINS? Please clarify the requirements.

Answer R38: IAW the instructions in Provision L1, Paragraph IV.1.(f)1. The required fill-ins for Section B of the Schedule require submission of the FFP CLINs only. The Government will fund the LH and reimbursable CLINs at its discretion. The TEP will be calculated by the Government IAW Provision M-1, Paragraph 4.

SECTION L

Issue/Discussion: Reference Section L.I.E(1) Table 1 and L.I.E.2 - Proposal Format.

Question L1: Table 1 instructions for Volume II -Technical Capabilities clearly shows a requirement for a table of contents, a transition plan, a quality control plan and a staffing plan. Section L.I.E.2(n)(viii) indicates there is a "Program Management/Staffing Volume". Please clarify this reference to a "Program/Management Staffing" volume and how it relates to the numbering requirement. Recommend deleting the reference to the Program Management/Staffing Volume.

Answer L1: The reference to Program Management/Staffing Volume has been changed to reflect the correct reference of Staffing Plan.

Issue/Discussion: Section L.I.E.2.(n)(ix) states that the Technical Capabilities volume shall be alpha-numerically numbered by PWS Tab. There is no guidance direction in the instructions that would lead bidders to present the Technical Proposal by PWS Tab.

Question L2: Does the referenced section mean that the Government desires the bidders to submit different transition plans, quality control plans, and staffing plans for each of the Tabs A through H? This would result in much reiteration of common information for each of the Tabs. Recommend this requirement for numbering by PWS Tab be deleted.

Answer L2: The Technical Capabilities Volume should be divided into the three subfactors: Transition Plan, Quality Control Plan and Staffing Plan. You may address the Transition and Staffing Plans in an aggregate manner. For the Transition Plan the suggested numbering should be II-1-1, II-1-2 etc. The Quality Control Plan must be specific by Functional Tab. Suggested numbering is as follows: II-A-2-1, II-A-2-2 , II-B-2-1, II-B-2-2 etc. For the Staffing Plan the suggested numbering is II-3-1, II-3-2, etc.

Issue/Discussion: Reference Section L.II.1.(b).1. This sentence refers to instructions in paragraph (a)(5)(ii)(g). We cannot locate this reference.

Question L3: Are you referring to Section I.E.2.g?

Answer L3: The paragraph reference has been changed to paragraph 1(E) 2.(g).

Issue/Discussion: Reference Section L.II.1.(b).2. This sentence refers to instructions in paragraph (a)(5)(ii)(h). We cannot locate this reference.

Question L4: Are you referring to Section I.E.2.h?

Answer L4: The paragraph reference has been changed to paragraph 1(E) 2.(h).

Issue/Discussion: Reference Section L.II.1.(b).3: This sentence refers to instructions in paragraph (a)(5)(ii)(i). We cannot locate this reference.

Question L5: Are you referring to Section I.E.2.i?

Answer L5: The paragraph reference has been changed to paragraph 1(E) 2.(i).

Issue/Discussion: Reference Section L.III.1.(a):

Question L6: The references for the 3 requirements in this section have the same reference conflicts as indicated in the questions above. Please clarify.

Answer L6: See answers L3-L5 above.

Issue/Discussion: Reference Section L.III.3:

Question L7: This section listing functional tabs is not tied to any of the previous instructions and appears to be a "cut and paste" from a previous solicitation. It is very unclear as to what the Governments intent is for including this section in the requirements for this volume.

Answer L7: The listing of the functional tabs is provided for reference only.

Issue/Discussion: Ref. L.2 Proposal Format paragraph (e) No Cross-Referencing states in subparagraph (ii): In Volume II, do not cross reference between the individual plans (Transition, Quality Control and Staffing). Each plan shall stand alone, identify and address all Functional Tabs.

Question L8: Please clarify what the government means by “no cross-referencing” for these plans.

Answer L8: The plans shall be written so that during the evaluation process each plan will stand alone and no references to any other proposed plan will be included.

Issue/Discussion: Ref. L.2 Proposal Format paragraph (n) Page Format Restrictions and Limitation, subparagraph (viii) references the “Program Management/Staffing Volume” however this volume is not included in the Proposal Organizational Table.

Question L9: Please clarify.

Answer L9: See answer L1.

Issue/Discussion: Ref. L.2 Proposal Format, Paragraph (n) Page Format Restrictions and Limitation, subparagraph (ix) states that the Technical Capabilities Volume should be page-numbered by PWS TAB.

Question L10: Please clarify how the Government wants the page numbering for the Transition Plan, Quality Control Plan and Staffing Plan – would this be labeled “A-1”, etc.?

Answer L10: See answer L2.

Issue/Discussion: Ref. Section L.III volume II – Technical Capabilities, paragraph 3. Functional Tabs.

Question L11: There are no specific instructions regarding the Functional Tabs as to what the Government is requiring offerors to provide. Please clarify.

Answer L11: See answer L7.

Issue/Discussion: Reference: Section L, Paragraph (n)(vii), Page 186.

Question L12: Paragraph (vii) says “Proprietary statements, security markings, and page numbers may fall within the defined margin area.” May company identifiers, RFP title and number, and other similar information also fall in the header area within the defined margin area?

Answer L12: Yes. Offerors are cautioned not to include any information that is intended for evaluation in the margins.

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L, para I.2.(f) (ii) and para I.(E) Table 1: Section L, para I.2.(f) (ii), Tab Indexing, states "Tab for items identified in the Title column of Table 1 Proposal Organization shall be utilized." Table 1 only identifies a tab for "Table of Contents" for Volume II instead of "Standard Proposal Information," as it does for Volumes I and III.

Question L13: Would the Government please clarify if the tab for Volume II identified as "Table of Contents" should actually be "Standard Proposal Information" as it is for Volumes I and III to allow for inclusion of the list of Tables & Figures and the Glossary for that Volume?

Answer L13: The RFP has been amended to state standard proposal information.

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L, para I.2.(m)(i): Section L, para I.2.(m), Electronic Copies (E-Copies), states, in part, "The Offeror shall submit one CD-ROM or DVD with the completed RFP Section B, completed Pricing Matrix, Attachment 7."

Question L14: Would the Government please clarify that it is referring to Pricing Matrix, Attachment 12 and not Attachment 7?

Answer L14: The RFP will be amended to reflect Attachment 12.

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L, I.(E) Table 1: Table 1, Proposal Volume III, reference Pricing Data under the Title column, states, "Pricing Data: Complete RFP, properly executed SF 33, properly executed SF 30(s) as applicable, completed Attachment 13 Pricing Matrix, Section H clause entitled Ceiling Rate for Material Handling" Question L15: Would the Government please clarify that it is referring to Attachment 12, Pricing Matrix, and not Attachment 13?

Answer L15: The RFP will be amended to reflect Attachment 12.

Issue/Discussion: : RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L, para IV.2.h.: Section L, para IV.2.h. states, "Your electronic copy shall be submitted per ITO paragraph (a)(5)(ii)(m). The saved document’s file name shall be as follows: “Your Company’s Name” FA6703-14-R-0001 Attachment 12, Pricing Matrix."

Question L16: Would the Government please provide the naming convention for the remaining electronic document files (i.e. Standard Proposal Information, Exceptions, Accounting System, and Financial Statement) to be submitted on this CD-ROM or DVD for Volume III?

Answer L16: The naming convention shall be as follows: “Your Company Name” Volume Number Title for example: ABC Company Volume I Master Table of Contents.

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L, I.(E) Table 1 and para I.2.(m): Table 1. Proposal Organization Table indicates 1 Electronic Copy is to be submitted for Volume I, Volume II, and Volume III. However, Section L, para I.2.(m) only provides instructions for electronic submission of Volume III, Price Proposal.

Question L17: Would the Government please provide CD-ROM or DVD submission instructions for electronic copies for all Volumes?

Answer L17: L-1 paragraph I(E)2.(m)(i) has been revised. Each Volume of an offerors proposal shall be submitted in electronic format, Microsoft Office compatible. Do not submit any documents in Adobe pdf format.

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L, I.2.(k)(iv): Section L, para I.2.(k)(iv), states, "Printed head-to-foot so that each page can be read when placed in a standard 2-hole file folder."

Question L18: Would the Government please clarify the 2-hole file folder requirement? Does the Government desire a manila fastener folder, a classification folder, or another type folder?

Answer L18: The “Original” proposal becomes the proposal of record and must be retained in the official contract file. A standard 2-hole file folder will hold 8.5 x 11 papers with two holes punched at the center of the 8.5 inch top edge of the pages. The holes are 2.75 inches apart measured from the center of each hole. The head to foot (dual sided, flip on short edge) printing allows for the pages to be read by simply flipping the pages up rather than spin the folder for each page. Offerors may submit their original proposals in a three ring binder but they must comply with the printing instructions in paragraph 2(k).

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L, para II.1.(b)1-3, para III.1.(a)1-3, para IV.1.(b)1-3: References state per ITO paragraph (a)(5)(ii)(g),(h), and (i), which is not a valid reference.

Question L19: Would the Government please clarify its reference?

Answer L19: See answer L3 – L5.

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L, para I.(E)(1)(b): Section L, para I.(E)(1)(b) states, "Specific format requirements are identified in paragraph (a)(5)(ii) Proposal Format," which is not a valid reference.

Question L20: Would the Government please clarify its reference?

Answer L20: The RFP will be amended to reflect the correct reference of I (E)2.

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L para I.(E) Table 1, para I.2.(n), and para III.2.: Section L, I. General Instructions, 2. Proposal Format, (n) Page Format Restrictions, item (ix), requires Volume II Technical Capabilities to be alpha-numerically numbered by PWS tab, yet Section L, III. Volume II, 2. Specific Instructions, and Table 1 Proposal Organization, require this volume to be organized by Subfactors 1.1 Transition, 1.2 Quality Control, and 1.3 Staffing.

Question L21: Would the Government please clarify the numbering instructions for Volume II?

Answer L21: See answer L2.

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L, para III.3. and Section M, para 3.c.: Section L, III. Volume II, 3. Functional Tabs, is a separate instruction from 2. Specific Instructions, and Functional Tabs is also listed separately in Section M, 3. Evaluation Factors, c. Functional Tabs.

Question L22: What is the Government asking of Offerors with regard to these functional tabs? Is it the Government's intent to have offerors' address each Functional Tab separately in each Plan?

Answer L22: See answer L2.

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L para I.2.(n)(viii-ix): Section L, para I.2.(n)(viii-ix) states, "(viii) Each volume shall be numbered consecutively with volume and page number, e.g. I-1, I-2, II-1, II-2, etc., except the Program Management/Staffing volume. (ix) The Technical Capabilities volume shall be alpha-numerically numbered by PWS Tab, e.g., A-1, A-2, B-1, and B-2, etc." Staffing is Subfactor 1.3, not a separate volume.

Question L23: Is it the Government's intent to only have the Staffing Subfactor alpha-numerically numbered by PWS or the entire Technical Capabilities Volume, Volume II? Would the Government please clarify the volume versus subfactor language in these subparagraphs?

Answer L23: See answer L2.

RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L para III.2., PWS A3.2.1-A3.2.2: Section L, para III.2., Subfactor 1.2, provides instructions to the offeror on proving a Quality Control Plan. PWS para A3.2.1-A3.2.2 outlines a requirement for a Customer Satisfaction Plan.

Question L24: Do the Section L requirements meet the Government's requirement for a Customer Satisfaction Plan as part of the QCP?

Answer L24: The Customer Satisfaction Measurement Plan is a portion of the QCP. Section L requires the submission of a complete QCP.

Issue/Discussion: RFP FA6703-14-R-0001, Section L, 252.237-7024, Page 173; PWS A-TE-3, A04, Page A-18: In accordance with PWS A-TE-3, Item A04, Page A-18, the Crisis Management Plan is required to be submitted within 10 days of contract start. Section L, 252.237-7024, Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Services states, in part, "(b) The offeror shall provide with its offer a written plan describing how it will continue to perform the essential contractor services listed in attachment-I, PWS Mission Essential Contractor Services, dated 1 March 2014, during periods of crisis." PWS para A6.3 states, "All services identified in this PWS are considered critical services during a crisis," and requires submission of the Crisis Management Plan IAW A-TE-3, A04.

Question L25: Is the Crisis Management Plan required IAW A-TE-3, A04, the same plan required IAW Section L, 252.237-7024, Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Services? If so, would the Government please confirm submission is IAW A-TE-3 or otherwise clarify its submission instructions?

Answer L25: It is anticipated that the plan required by DFARS will be part of your Quality Control Plan (QCP); it will be evaluated as referenced in Section M. The Crisis Management Plan as Referenced in A-TE-3, Item A04, requires specific employee information that would be impossible for an offeror to provide in a proposal.

Question L26: Please confirm the statement “service calls” in the last sentence of Section L, Sub-factor 1.3 should be omitted. There is no reference to service calls in section M.

Answer L26: The reference to Service Calls will be removed in the amended RFP.

SECTION M

Issue/Discussion: Reference Section M.2.b - sixth line.

Question M1: This line states "...that have been determined acceptable in both technical capabilities...". Section L is requiring submission of three technical capabilities. Please clarify. Recommending changing this sentence to say three vice two.

Answer M1: RFP has been amended to read, ”the technical capabilities.”

Issue/Discussion: Reference Section M.3.b - Sub factor 3: Staffing:

Question M2: At the end of the description and measure of merit for staffing, the Government has again included section "c. Functional Tabs" that appears to be a "cut and paste" from a previous solicitation. Recommend deletion of this Section 3 Functional Tabs list or provide a clear description of why this list is included and what is expected in the proposals received.

Answer M2: See answer L7.

Issue/Discussion: Ref. Section M.c Functional Tabs - There is no Measure of Merit listed for the Functional Tabs.

Question M3: Please clarify what the government will evaluate regarding the Tabs.

Answer M3: See answer L7.

PWS TAB A

Issue/Discussion: Reference Section A-TE-3, A01 Resumes: This AO requires submission of a resume for the Project Manager NLT 60 days prior to operational contract performance.

Question A1: Recommend that the requirement for the Project Manager resume be changed to 5 days after notice of award of contract.

Answer A1: A-TE-3, A01 changed to “The resume and any additional documentation (certifications, diplomas) for the person proposed to fill the Project Manager position shall be provided NLT 5 days after contract award.”

Issue/Discussion: There are multiple references to “paragraph H3.2” one of which is in A- TE3-A01 however we have not been able to find this paragraph in the solicitation documents.

Question A2: Please provide assistance in finding this reference paragraph.

Answer A2: The PWS has been corrected to read H1.2.1.3.1.

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS Paragraph A17.6: The paragraph states that the Government will provide all software required for the requirements of the PWS.

Question A3: Please confirm this includes license renewals for RS Means software.

Answer A3: The Government has not required RS Means software for the performance of this requirement. If an offeror wishes to use RS Means software the cost of the software as well as the annual licensing requirements shall be the responsibility of the contractor.

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS Tab A: The Contractor is required to provide equipment and vehicles beyond the items provided by the Government.

Question A4: Will the Contractor be allowed to maintain and repair Contractor furnished equipment on-site within the Transportation function?

Answer A4: No.

Issue/Discussion: Reference: A-TE-4 and C-TE-2a and 2(d)2 Question A5: Is the vehicle maintenance workload contained in A-TE-4b.1 also included in C-TE-2a?

Answer A5: No Question A6: Are the Government vehicles provided for contractor use included in A-TE-4b also included in the Government vehicle listing in C-TE-2d(2)?

Answer A6: No.

Issue/Discussion: A-TE-4b.1: Government Furnished Vehicles (Contractor Operated) Workload Estimate Question A7: Would the Government please clarify if the workload included in A-TE-4b.1 is included in C-TE-2?

Answer A7: No.

Issue/Discussion: A-TE-4b.1: Government Furnished Vehicles (Contractor Operated) Workload Estimate Question A8: Does the workload listed in the A-TE-4b.1 include the schedule maintenance for all government provided equipment?

Answer A8: Yes.

Issue/Discussion: A-TE-4b.1: Government Furnished Vehicles (Contractor Operated) Workload Estimate Question A9: Does PWS C4.1 Minor Maintenance requirements and thresholds apply to the workload listed in A-TE-4b.1?

Answer A9: Yes.

PWS TAB B

Issue/Discussion: Reference Dobbins_BOS_Tab_B_PWS_Final_1_Mar_14 Question B1: Is there a Receiving function to be included in Tab B? If so, will the government provide the Workload? If not, where is it being accomplished and where is the Workload for Receiving Function?

Answer B1: The Receiving Function is in Tab D, see Paragraph D15.

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS Appendix B-TE-2 Question B2: The appendix lists DRMS transfers at 4000 per month. Please confirm this number as accurate.

Answer B2: The 4000 per month was for the number of items. The correct number of DRMS transfers is 80 and the workload estimate has been corrected.

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS Appendix B-TE-2: The appendix lists DRMS transfers at 4000 per month.

Question B3: How many trips are made to the DRMS facility for this quantity of items?

Answer B3: An average of 3 trips per month.

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS Appendix B-TE-2: The appendix lists DRMS transfers at 4000 per month.

Question B4: Where is the servicing DRMS facility for Dobbins?

Answer B4: Robins AFB, GA.

Issue/Discussion: Reference: B-TE – 2, Workload Estimates Question B5: Please provide workload estimates for material received, i.e., receipts processing, turn-ins processed?

Answer B5: The workload estimate for Turn-Ins processed (Less IE) has been added to B-TE-2. Receipts processed has been added to the Tab D workload estimates.

Issue/Discussion: Reference: B-TE - 2 Workload Estimates Question B6: Please confirm that DRMS transfers are 4,000 per month versus annually.

Answer B6: See answer B2.

Issue/Discussion: PWS B5.1.2, AF Reservist Training: Para B5.1.2 states, "The Ktr shall provide AFSC reservists training when directed by the CO. The Ktr shall provide specific supply training to 2S0X1 reservists using AF supply procedures IAW AFI23-101 and AFMAN 23-122. The Ktr shall develop and maintain current lesson plans. The Ktr shall document all training provided to reservists in trainer block of the CFETP and the government will certify the task on the CFETP. The Ktr shall be required to provide access to GFP supply equipment, facilities, and the SBSS to 2S0X1 reservists."

Question B7: Would the Government please provide the estimated workload for training support?

Answer B7: Estimated one weekend a month, one training class for supply reservists. Additional hands on during that scheduled UTA.

Issue/Discussion: PWS B4.7: PWS para B4.7 states, in part, "The Ktr shall be armed when the weapons vault is open."

Question B8: Would the Government please clarify if all Ktr personnel operating the weapons vault shall be armed or what minimum number of armed guards is required?

Answer B8: One primary, and one alternate. During duty hours someone should have access to the vault.

PWS TAB C

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS Technical Exhibit C-TE-4c): The current contract has two Government-furnished 24,000 lb in-ground twin post lifts listed as Government-furnished equipment that are not listed in the current solicitation.

Question C1: Please confirm these lifts will be Government-furnished in the resulting contract.

Answer C1: There is no 24,000 lb. in ground lift at vehicle maintenance. There is one ground lift, which is 40,000 lb. lift in the fire truck bay.

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS Appendix C-TE-2d(2), PWS Appendix C-TE-2, and PWS Appendix A-TE-4b, and PWS Appendix A-TE-4b.1 : Our review of the Vehicle Master List (C-TE-2d(2)) reveals that the vehicles provided to the Contractor in Tab A are not included in this list.

Question C2: Please confirm the workload data in the Tab A reference is not included in the Tab C data.

Answer C2: TAB A is not included in Tab C workload data.

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS Appendix C-TE-1 and PWS Appendix C-TE-2b: The SDS summary include metrics for pickup and delivery responsibility; however, there are no workload factors provided in the vehicle operations requirements.

Question C3: Please quantify the estimate on delivery requirements.

Answer C3: Workload estimates added to C-TE-2b.

Issue/Discussion: Reference: C-TE - 2b Vehicle Management Workload Question; Where in the table is PWS C4.3, Scheduled Maintenance: Para C4.3 states, "The Ktr shall perform scheduled maintenance to include PM&I and Special Inspections based on the OLVIMS-Legacy schedule IAW TO 36-1-191 and AFI 24-302. (See C-TE-1, SDSC08)."

Question C4: Would the Government please provide the scheduled maintenance from the OLVIMS-Legacy schedule?

Answer C4: The schedule is not static but changes based on vehicle utilization that drives schedule maintenance.

Question C5: Would the Government please clarify if scheduled maintenance has the same threshold as minor maintenance?

Answer C5: All scheduled maintenance regardless of the amount of time it takes to complete must be documented on an AF Form 1823. $500 threshold applies to all maintenance.

Issue/Discussion: PWS C2.5, Fleet Wash Facilities: Para C2.5 states, "The Ktr shall provide all services and supplies necessary to maintain the fleet wash facility IAW accepted industry practices, and comply with state, local and federal environmental policies and procedures. (See C-TE-1, SDSC05)" Question C6: Is the contractor responsible for operating the Fleet Wash Facilities?

Answer C6: The contractor is responsible to provide a wash rack facility for units to maintain government vehicles.

Issue/Discussion: PWS C4.8, Tires: Para C4.8 states, "The Ktr shall provide tire shop services to include inspection, repair, replacement and assistance in changing tires not covered in the operator care program. The Ktr shall use tire control procedures IAW TO 36-1-191, AFI 24-302, and AFMAN 23-110. New tires for all government owned vehicles will be procured from the most economical source."

Question C7: Would the Government please clarify if the cost of the tires is reimbursable or if the contractor is responsible for the cost for the tires?

Answer C7: Reimbursable for non-Tab A, A-TE-4b (Government Furnished Equipment (Vehicles).

Issue/Discussion: PWS Tab C, Technical Exhibits, C-TE-2: Workload Estimates Question C8: Are all hours for scheduled minor and major repairs listed in C-TE-2a, Service Workload?

Answer C8: Yes.

Issue/Discussion: Reference: C-TE - 2b Vehicle Management Workload Question C9: Where in the table is workload for supporting C2.2.3, Due -Out Released (DOR) material deliveries?

Answer C9: The workload estimate for Deliver Material has been added to C-TE-2b. This estimate includes DOR deliveries.

PWS TAB D

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS, Tab D, Paragraph D2.2.1: UTA Shuttle services performed IAW Preventing and Resisting Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking).

Question D1: Do these security measures (screening) also include Space-A passengers allotted a seat on the aircraft?

Answer D1: Yes, it covers anyone traveling on military aircraft.

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS, Tab D, Paragraph D2.2.3: The paragraph overviews the requirements for passenger security screening requirement; however, there is no workload for passengers provided.

Question D2: Please provide an estimate on the passenger count each year.

Answer D2: New requirement per AFI, no historical data.

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS Paragraph D15.4 Off-Loading of Commercial/Government Carriers.

Question D3: Please provide workload estimates for this new contract requirement.

Answer D3: The workload estimate has been added to D-TE-2.

Issue/Discussion: Reference PWS Paragraph D1, which states that the Asset Management System (AMS) is used for processing Issue Requests, Requisitions, Receipts, Turn-Ins, Shipments, and Transfers.

Question D4: These workload requirements are not stated in Tab D workload estimates, please clarify the workload for this new requirement.

Answer D4: The workload estimates fot Receipts processed has been added to D-TE-2.

Issue/Discussion: Reference: D-TE-2 Workload Estimates, Passenger Movements.

Question D5: CBA billing transaction, 1,600 per month, please confirm that the quantity provided is correct, seems excessive for monthly workload.

Answer D5: 1600 is correct Issue/Discussion: PWS D4.2: PWS para D4.2 states, "Deployments. The Ktr shall provide sufficient qualified personnel to operate the Cargo Deployment Function, Passenger Manifesting, Quality Control Section, Load Plan Section, and provide a Transportation representative to the DCC. All deployment personnel shall be available within two hours after notification. The Ktr shall provide personnel to the Personnel Deployment Function to perform baggage in-check, baggage pallet build-up, and to prepare and process passenger manifesting. Performance during normal duty hours, including UTA weekends, is included in the firm-fixed price. The Ktr shall provide CMOS system support for base exercises and deployments IAW AFI 24-201, Chapter 15 and Base Deployment Plan. Support includes the CMOS system and operating personnel. Performance during normal duty hours, including UTA weekends, is included in the firm-fixed price. The Ktr shall perform system administration as provided for in Attachment 15. (See D-TE-3, D16)" Question D6: Would the Government please provide the historical average hours that the contractor is required to support each Deployment?

Answer D6: There is no definitive way to provide that information. It would depend on the number and size of deployments per year.

Question D7: Would the Government please confirm that there are 8 deployments and 12 UTA weekends that the contractor is required to support each year?

Answer D7: The estimate for deployments is based upon historical information available. There are 12 UTA’s a year.

PWS TAB E

Issue/Discussion: Tab E: E-TE-4b: Government Furnished Equipment lists several pieces of ground support equipment but there is nothing listed in the tab E workload estimate for this equipment maintenance.

Question E1: Who currently is responsible for maintaining ground support equipment (GSE)?

Answer E1: The Contractor Question E2: What is the workload estimate for GSE maintenance?

Answer E2: Unable to estimate the maintenance workload required on each piece of equipment. This will depend on the condition and the number of hours the equipment is actually in use.

Question E3: Who is responsible for preventive/corrective maintenance parts and supplies cost?

Answer E3: The Contractor

PWS TAB F

Issue/Discussion: Section F work is to be separated in the bid schedule, section B, into CLINs 0006-0010, however the PWS does not designate the Section F items of the PWS that fall into each CLIN.

Question F1: Please provide information to indicate which PWS section F items number by CLIN to ensure that the pricing for each CLIN is separated appropriately.

Answer F1: CLIN 0006 is Real Property Preventive Maintenance, RPM, work. CLIN 0007 is the recurring RPS for Pavement Clearance.