FA7000-13-T-0034_Pre-Award_Site_Visit_Questions.pdf

Solicitation FA7000-13-T-0034

Mitchell Hall Equipment Maintenance

Pre-Award/Site Visit Questions/Answers

PWS Section 1.1.1

1. In the event that the current contractor is not selected again will the bench stock items that are now in place be left behind for the new contractor?

Answer: NO, these items were purchased by the current contractor and will remain his property.

PWS Section 1.1.3

2. In the event an equipment item is damaged by the kitchen staff and the parts to repair it will not exceed $1,000.00 will a determination be made as to the reimbursement of cost to the contractor for the parts?

Answer: Yes, each occurrence of damage will be handled on a case-by-case basis to determine who is responsible for what.

3. Is there a reporting requirement for equipment damaged due to negligence of the kitchen staff?

Answer: Yes, any time a piece of equipment is damaged it should be reported to a supervisor immediately along with details and responsibility. There must be evidence proving negligence by the kitchen staff to establish government responsibility and equipment WILL be repaired either way.

4. In the event of a failure of the electrical or water supply systems, that are not associated with the equipment, that ultimately causes damage to the equipment will the contractor still be responsible for parts under $1,000.00?

Answer: No, if positive proof is provided that it was government responsibility/fault, the government will be responsible.

5. For parts that exceed $1,000.00 how will the government pay for the parts?

Answer: Either by GPC or Form 9 (Purchase Request) whichever is most advantageous for the government.

6. Who makes the determination concerning when to repair an equipment item or replace the equipment item if the cost of repair exceeds the cost of new equipment item and how is that determination made?

Answer: Facility Management will make the final decision, based on recommendation by the contractor, after market research and discussion.

PWS Section, Appendix 4

7. What is the historical cost data for the period October 2011 – September 2012

Answer: $11,208

8. The historical cost data indicates that the contractor was reimbursed for single parts exceeding $1,000.00. The PWS, Section 1.1.3, indicates that the government will pay for parts that exceed $1,000.00. Could you please clarify?

Answer: Current contract contained a line item (CLIN) for “reimbursable parts” – contractor would conduct market research, provide the government with three quotes for the necessary part and the government would determine the most advantageous quote.

Contractor would purchase part and submit invoice to the government for reimbursement from money allocated to that CLIN. The new contract will NOT have a reimbursable parts

CLIN, the government will simply purchase any part totaling over $1,000; however, the contractor is still required to conduct market research and provide three quotes for the government’s consideration.

SF1449

9. The SF1449 indicates across its face that it is a DRAFT document. Will a final SF1449 be issued and will there be any changes from the draft document?

Answer: The SF1449 will be re-posted with the DRAFT watermark removed, at this time we do not anticipate any changes to the document itself.

10. What is the total contract amount for the March 2008 – March 2013 period?

Answer: Contract FA7000-08-C-0019 was awarded for $561,885.00 with a period of performance of 1 Mar 2008 to 30 Sep 2012.