Attach 5 23Q0014 Q and A.pdf
PDF 208 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Bolling LRS Uniforms and Laundry Service Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA706023Q0014
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attach 1 23Q0014 LRS Uniforms PWS 27 June 2023.pdf | ||
| Attach 2 23Q0014 Bid Schedule 27 June 2023.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attach 1 23Q0014 LRS Uniforms PWS 13 June 2023.pdf | ||
| Attach 3 23Q0014 Provisions and Clauses.pdf | ||
| Attach 2 23Q0014 Bid Schedule.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attach 4 23Q0014 SCA WD 2015-4281 Rev 26 10 May 23.pdf | ||
| 23Q0014 Combo LRS Uniforms.pdf |
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
1. Are we to supply the uniforms? And What type of uniforms are you referring to?
- The contractor will need to supply the uniforms. See updated PWS dated 27 June
2023 and other Q&A ques�ons for type of uniforms needed.
2. There is a discrepancy between the specifica�ons for the garments:
In the PWS, 1.2 describes the uniforms as “…65% polyester/35% cotton uniforms (labor, pants, shirts, jackets).” – seems like typical, vehicle/maintenance shop/industry mechanics uniforms.
In the PWS, 2.1 Materials: “These uniforms will need to include the following features:
non-iron, wrinkle-resistant, static resistant, fire resistant, industrial wash friendly, double knee durability, moisture wicking fabrics, water repellent,…” The first issue here is, the “need to include” features above describe a garment we nor our industry uses or knows of – there isn’t any 65% Poly/35% coton “typical, mechanics uniform (yes, 65/35 is the normal industrial blended garment used for this ac�vity, so we feel that part of the descrip�on is correct), not with all of those features, such as:
a) fire resistant – First, there is no such garment made of 65/35 blended poly/coton.
Second, that’s a whole other line of specialty protec�ve garments, and flame-resistant is the proper term for the rental industry provided one (fire resistant is even another line of non-rentable garments), and we’d need a lot more informa�on as to what level of fire resistance (Hazard level, ARC ra�ng) would be needed etc.
Please verify and confirm whether the garments must be ‘fire resistant”, “flame resistant” and cer�fied and labeled as such, or as we expect, just 65/35 industrial blended mechanics uniforms, as described elsewhere in the RFQ.
b) sta�c resistant – again, an�-sta�c fabric (ESD, carbon-filament) is not available in a mechanics uniform, although is available for rental in lab coats and coveralls; but again, not ever have we seen this feature in a mechanics uniform (shirts, pants, jackets). Please verify whether the uniforms must be cer�fied as sta�c resistant.
c) water repellent – again, same issue as a, b above. We are unaware of any water repellent “basic mechanics” uniforms, and have never had nor seen a request for them before. There are very costly lines of water-repellent wear, but they are not rentable, or serviceable as mechanics uniforms for the intended use. Please verify whether the uniform are required to be water repellent.
In the PWS, 2.2 Color, again the seemingly intended correct descrip�on of a 65/35 uniform is reiterated, in contrast to 2.1, as: Navy Blue, Must be 65% Polyester/35% Cotton.
Please clarify the unform does not need to be made of a sta�c, fire and water resistant (non-existent) fabric.
- Two piece uniform does not need to be sta�c or flame resistant however, we would like to add two sets of coveralls that are sta�c and flame resistant because of the maintenance needed for the refuelers. Quan�ty has been updated in the PWS and Bid Schedule.
3. Quan�ty – PWS, 2.1 Materials also calls for 5 sets of shirts/pants/jackets to be installed per person (and a total of 125 total (25 x5) of each shirts/pants/jackets for the 25 individuals). A few issues with these quan��es:
a) If the requirement is for weekly laundry services, each individual would need to be issued 11 each of shirts and pants (that way the wearer has 5 clean sets (a week’s supply on hand) to wear while the soiled uniforms (from the previous week’s work) are being laundered and returned the following week - the extra one (total 11 each) for the one the wearer has on the day of service). If the individual turns in 5 shirts and 5 pants for cleaning, he won’t have any to wear while the soiled/collected uniforms (5 sets) are being processed and returned (a week’s cycle). Please clarify how many shirts and pants are required to be installed for each individual (each wearer’s inventory should = 11 shirts, 11 pants, 2 jackets/person, but please confirm.)
b) Same as above for the jackets but in reverse. Only 2 jackets are needed (not 5), allowing for one to be “in the wash” while the individual retains one on loca�on for use. Please clarify how many jackets are required for each person.
PLEASE ADJUST THE TABLE IN 2.1 to reflect any adjustments in total pieces needed for installa�on of the 25 people (at least 250 shirts, 250 pants, and 50 jackets sounds closer to what it should be).
This clarifica�on of quan��es is cri�cal, as the cost is directly related to the quan�ty of garments required,
- We adjusted to account for this. See updated PWS and Bid Schedule.
Nomenclature Quan�ty Jacket 2 each per individual Shirts 11 each per individual Pants 11 each per individual Coveralls 2 each per individual
4. In Atachment 2, the pricing spreadsheet, the pants are listed as Cargo pants – yet nowhere else does it men�on the word Cargo, which is a defini�ve pocket-style pant. Mechanic pants could have the typical 2 hip and 2 back pockets, or Cargo pants are available as well, with the extra 2 thigh pockets compared to the regular mechanics pants. Please verify the fabric and style of the pants….and confirm that they are required to be 65/35 Cargo pants in Navy, as we think they are intended to be. Again, there is a cost difference between regular and Cargo pants, so this clarifica�on is necessary to quote.
- Cargo pants will be needed for the two-piece set.
A few addi�onal ques�ons from us concerns the most recent solicita�on for similar services for this ac�vity. Back in June, 2021, RFQ # FA706021Q0008 was solicited for similar services to this ac�vity, and we were informed that a contract was awarded to Chesapeake Uniform. Two more ques�ons:
5. Who is the incumbent supplier providing these services currently?
- There is currently no incumbent contractor.
6. The previous RFQ back in 2021 was for a 1 year quote, with 4 op�on years. The resultant contract award would have had the awaredee con�nue to provide services un�l 2026 if all op�ons had been exercised. Can you tell us why the contract for those services is being rebid only 2 years later -- what happened (either terminated or op�on not exercised) to cause the current contract to end a�er only 2 years of service (and prior to the 2026 expira�on of the op�ons)?
- The op�on was not exercised for FY 2023.
7. The uniform count for each mechanic is 5, the pick up and drop off is every tuesday......My ques�on: If we pick up the 5 uniforms each week and drop off the cleaned uniforms the next week what will the mechanics do during that 5 day gap?
If 10 uniforms are provided we can pick up 5 each week and keep rota�ng. Thank you for your answer on this mater.
- See updated PWS and Bid Schedule.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .