Q A__5.pdf

Question Number Reference Question Answer

L-3.2.1, L-2.11.7

Section L-3.2.1 includes a “List of Tables & Drawings” in the Volume I organization. However, this requirement is not included in Table

2.11.3. Additionally, a “list of tables and figures” is identified as a requirement for each volume as part of the Table of Contents requirement in L-2.11.7. Will the Government please confirm whether or not a list of tables and figures (or drawings) is required in all volumes and update Section L and Table 2.11.3 accordingly?

Revised Section L- The table of contents shall include the list of tables, figures and drawings.

L-4.3.1

Attachment 1.1 does not include Past Performance Information Sheets, as referenced in the draft RFP, but instead provides Instructions to Offerors for the Past Performance Information (PPI) Tool. Does the Government intend for offerors to complete the PPI tool and submit the report generated from the tool in this section of the proposal as noted in the PPI Tool instructions? Revised Section L- Offerors shall use the PPI tool.

L-2.11.3, Volume IV "SF 33" is listed with the Title Page in Table 2.11.3. Should the SF 33 appear with Title Page in final submission or later in the volume within the "Model Contract" requirement?

The SF33 includes all of the information required for the title page. Therefore, offerors shall use the SF33 as the title page for this volume. The remainder of the model contract will be further in the volume, as detailed in Table 2.11.3.

L-6.2, L-2.11.3

Section L-6.2 includes the requirement to provide “Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements;” however, this requirement does not appear in Table 2.11.3. Can the Government please clarify if this requirement is to be included in the final proposal submission and, if so, update Table

2.11.3 accordingly?

Updated Table 2.11.3 to include "Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements".

L-6.3.2, L-2.11.3

Section L-6.3.2 includes the requirement to provide information regarding “Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations;” however, this requirement does not appear in Table 2.11.3. Can the Government please clarify if this requirement is to be included in the final proposal submission and, if so, update Table 2.11.3 accordingly?

Updated Table 2.11.3 to include “Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations".

L-6.3.4, L-2.11.3

Section L-6.3.4 includes the requirement to provide a cross reference matrix; however, this requirement does not appear in Table 2.11.3. Can the Government please clarify if this requirement is to be included in the final proposal submission and, if so, update Table 2.11.3 accordingly? Updated Table 2.11.3 to include “Cross Reference Matrix".

L-4.1, L-4.3.1

Section L-4.1 states that past performance information should be submitted, "for the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners proposed to perform work on this requirement." Section L-4.3.1 states, "Please only submit information on subcontractors and teaming partners performing key or critical portions of the proposed effort." Will the Government please clarify if offerors should submit past performance information on ALL subcontractors or just those performing key or critical portions of the proposed effort?

Revised Section L- Offerors shall only submit past performance information for subcontractors, teaming partners or joint ventures if they are proposed to perform key or critical positions.

M-4.2.2

Section M-4.2.2 states, "The Government will consider the portion of the effort accomplished on previous/current contracts compared to the portion to be performed on the proposed effort. For example, past performance of a subcontractor for program management will only be considered if that same subcontractor is to perform program management on the proposed effort." The challenge associated with determining relevancy based on the technical subfactors, particularly for subcontractors, is that the technical subfactors, as defined in Sections L and M, are comprised of requirements and actions that are traditionally the responsibility of the prime contractor. While subcontractors may participate in executing some of the requirements defined in the technical subfactors, they will not perform "key" or "critical" aspects of these requirements. Typically, subcontractors are hired to provide technical expertise or specialized services and equipment that a prime contractor may not have; therefore, evaluating the relevancy of a subcontractor's contribution via the technical subfactors is not a true assessment of what the subcontractor will likely perform on the proposed effort. Will the Government consider revising how relevancy, particularly for subcontractors, is determined to also specifically include the scope of work identified in PWS, for example PWS 1.2-1.3?

The Government has determined the technical subfactors to be the most crucial to demonstrate technical understanding.

Further, experience in these areas are essential for successful performance. Offerors shall identify what each team member will do IAW Section L, para. 4.3.1.

Section M

Based on the various aspects of the evaluation methodology presented in Section M, it is unclear how offerors can achieve a trade off, as described in M-1.1. With Volume 1 evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis and Volume 3 now including the Minimum Team Complement (MTC) requirements defined in Appendix 4.9, an offerors ability to present information that can be used in the trade off process resides solely in the Volume 2 Past Performance submission. However, the "substantial confidence" rating has been removed from the Performance Confidence Assessment ratings in this RFP, further narrowing the range of rating any offeror can receive for Volume 2 and therefore reducing the ability for an offeror to distinguish itself as having "superior past performance," as stated in M-1.1. Additionally, Section M includes a wide range of topics that will be used for "consideration" in the evaluation; however, its not clear how this information will specifically be considered. Will the Government consider clarifying/defining more specifically how relevancy will be assessed for past performance, to include the technical subfactors as well as the additional relevancy information presented as part of the Relevancy Assessment definition, and provide clear terms by which offerors can achieve "superior past performance"?

Relevancy ratings are detailed in Section M, para. 4.2.2, and the ratings look to scope, magnitude and complexities of the past performance effort compared to the solicitation requirements. Further, each past performance effort evaluated by the Government will receive relevancy and quality ratings for each of the technical subfactors and price.

For example, the Government may rate a past performance effort as "Relevant" and "Satisfactory" for Technical Subfactor 1: Transition, and so on for all other technical subfactors. The price factor will be assessed for relevacy by comparing the contract types. Then, IAW Section M, para.

4.2.4, offerors will be assigned a performance confidence rating that encompasses all of the previous quality and relevancy ratings discussed previously.

For this solicitation, tradeoffs are available between past performance and price. As "Satisfactory Confidence" is the highest rating available, it would be considered "superior past performance".

222 CLIN 7 COL 1 The Government “Total Full-Time Equivalent (FTE)” column shows 40 FTEs and the “Position Titles (FTE)” column adds up to 41. Will the Government please clarify the correct number for the MTC? Total number should be 41

223 CLIN 7 COL 2

The Government “Total Full-Time Equivalent (FTE)” column shows 35 FTEs and the “Position Titles (FTE)” column adds up to 37. Will the Government please clarify the correct number for the MTC? Total number should be 37

224 CLIN 52 The Government “Total Full-Time Equivalent (FTE)” column shows .3 FTEs and the “Position Titles (FTE)” shows .25 FTEs. Will the Government please clarify the correct number for the MTC? Total number should be 0.25

CLIN 46 and 47 – CAP CLINs Will the Government consider including an estimate for the CAP CLIN that offerors will put their indirect rates on top of? The indirect rates of each offeror will vary significantly and this can be a major cost savings to the Government depending on the overhead rates.

Workload data was provided--see PWS Appendix 4.6.7.1.

To be clear, offerors shall propose FFP monthly prices for management of CAP. Rates will not be allowed to be applied to the CAP purchases.

Since the historical workload was executed/categorized under a significantly different work requirement definition/paradigm, how accurate can current offerors assume the synthesized workload factors to be? Will there be any opportunity to readjust proposed manning if the workload factors are off significantly?

Unless otherwise stated in the contract or performance work statement, if the work differs significantly from the performance work statement and appendices, and was not reasonably forseeable, the contractor may submit a request for equitable adjustment (REA) or claim. This includes modifying the minimum team complement (MTC) up or down if there are significant increases or decreases in the work.

Are there any proprietary agreements/limitations with other service providers that the offerors should be aware of? For example; Honeywell, ABS, final denial barriers, fabric hangar doors, etc?

Yes, there some other service providers such as “Honeywell”, an ESPC contractor doing work at the base. However, this should not affect the BMC contractor. There will be a designated FAS member overseeing these contracts who will resolve any issues that impact the BMC.

228 MTC

In previous Q&A, the government indicated that shop supervisors should conduct project design reviews and provide inputs to the MMP, but in the MTC there are no shop supervisors identified. Did the government exclude these positions from the MTC?

Administrative positions are not identified in the MTC.

These positions are part of overhead. IAW revised MTC, the contractor is required to have a supervisor to employee ratio not to exceed 1 to 15.

The MTC lists HVAC/R and Electrician apprentice positions, Work Control Clerks (broken out by sub-specialties), Data Entry Clerks, and Backflow Prevention Technicians.

The CBAs do not list these position descriptions as recognized work classifications. Hiring employees into these new classifications could create issues with the existing Unions as this work falls into existing Union work classifications. The government indicated they would look for exact matches to these position descriptions in evaluating the contractor’s work force.

These positions descriptions shall be negotiated with the unions. Even though they work for work control, craft wages shall be paid for those positions.

Civil Engineer (CE) Services- Operations Management FA8101-15-R-0007 (after presolicitation conference)

Questions & Answers #5 8 Jul 15

Over time, there have been significant changes in the solicitation. Some of the questions we previously answered are now irrelevant due to changes in the contract type. Please disregard answers that are no longer applicable. Thank you.

*Note: The Government is working on all other questions submitted and not included in this document. If clarification regarding an answer is necessary, please reference the question number. Questions/answers are purposely omitted; therefore, question numbers may be missing in each document posted, as those are questions with answers pending.

The MTC specifically calls out some management positions including the PM DPM, QCM, Safety Manager and PdM folks. The MTC fails to list other work classifications that should have been called out; including Buyers, Contract Specialist, along with HR and Finance support folks. Did the government exclude these positions from the MTC?

Administrative positions are not identified in the MTC, as the Government is not as concerned with the contractor undermanning this scope of work. However, under the operations management CLIN, the positions identified under this CLIN must be filled and the individuals physically present at Tinker AFB for the transition period.

The MTC provides a “minimum” team complement (based on historical information); however, some work classifications appear to be seriously undermanned. Did the government under man certain work classifications in the MTC?

No, the government does not intend to underman any work classification. The Government encourages the offerors to provide constructive feedback in regards to MTC levels.

There are significant increased administrative requirements associated with this PWS. Does the MTC admin manning reflect historical admin workloads or does it include the new admin workload requirements?

Administrative positions are not covered in the MTC. It is the offerors responsibility to provide sufficient personnel based on PWS and work load data.

Normally wages for SCA and Union positions are adjusted annually through a wage adjustment request from the contractor to the government. Will the government identify the positions that they intend to disallow in the future from the annual wage adjustment request?

The Government will follow the SCA Adjustment Guide and DOL guidelines in determining allowable adjustments.

234 1.1.2.1.1

The contract requires the contractor to provide shop rates, historical guidance has focused on in-house CE organizations. Will the government provide guidance as to how to calculate contract shop rates under the new WPIP paradigm? If the contractor elects to organize their contract manning in a non-traditional way, traditional shop rates may not apply. Will the government provide additional guidance on how to develop “acceptable” shop rates under a non-traditional organization?

The new contractor shall submit shop rates based on industry standards (cost works) to the government for approval. When the contract is awarded, NexGen should be in place in lieu of IWIMS.

235 1.1.2.1.2, 1.1.3.5

In previous Q&A, the government indicated that an email notification was sufficient, but in later questions indicated that additional attempts by the contractor may be required to meet the various “notification” contract requirements.

The statement is correct. The contractor shall disseminate the notification base wide using multiple communication methods.

236 1.1.2.1.3, 1.1.3.3

Contractor is required to provide condition assessment information for equipment and systems. Will the government provide guidance as to what constitutes the various conditions levels?

Contractor is required to provide condition assessments.

Guidance and training can be found at the following site.

http://sms.cecer.army.mil.

237 1.1.2.1.4

Can the government provide an example of a facility history file that contains “sufficient detail to provide FAS with information required to make facility management decisions”? This requirement seems to be somewhat subjective and lacking adequate definition.

Contractor shall provide the items identified in the reference section in the PWS.

“The historical file shall track and identify equipment warranty and guaranteed parts, include a summary log of maintenance and repair type WO, dates, type of problem, and resolution. Facility history file shall also identify equipment not receiving maintenance, but determined by Contractor to need PM”

238 1.1.2.2.1 Is it the government’s intent that the contractor stage an emergency response team in order to meet the required 20 min response time for Emergency CM work?

The Government's intent is on-site response to an emergency within 20 minutes during normal duty hours.

239 1.1.2.2.1

Since the government requires Emergency CM in progress, and completion during normal duty hours is impossible, the contractor is required to work to a point of safe mitigation, regardless of the time required; will the government authorize OT for the contractor in these limited circumstances?

The government will not reimburse the contractor for any overtime work associated with this contract.

240 1.1.2.3

The PWS states the contractor is supposed to present the proposed means of accomplishment for ALL requested work requirements as well as the status of open in-progress requirements. This will result in a joint review of hundreds of DSWs, WOs and PM requirements. In addition, the contractor must present a work schedule for review/approval during the meeting. Is this the government’s intent for this meeting? Yes, that is the Government's intent.

241 1.1.3.2 Although the equipment list is extensive; it is not complete. Will newly identified equipment be formally modified into the contract? Will the contractor be allowed to recover increased costs associated with these additions? See answer to #226.

242 1.1.3.5.1 If security requirements increase (due to the Navy or other customers), will the contractor be allowed to recover increased costs? See answer to #226.

243 1.1.3.7 The PWS states the manufacturer’s recommendations will be adhered to during the warranty period for newly installed equipment. How will these recommendations/new workload be communicated to the contractor? Will a contract mod be executed for these increased requirements? See answer to #226.

244 1.1.3.9

The PWS states the hot water and chilled water systems, including cooling towers will be kept free from deposits and scale. Are the equipment/systems free from deposits and scale now? Do environmental limitations allow the use of chemicals necessary to meet these requirements?

Some systems are in poor condition due to lack of maintenance. It is the contractor’s responsibility to perform periodic maintenance per PMTLs and use proper chemical treatments to keep the towers free from scale build up and solid deposits. There is an approved list of chemicals allowed at Tinker Air Force Base. If new chemical agent is required, its use must be requested and approved.

245 1.1.7.3.1, 1.2.6 The PWS requires an AOP defining roles and responsibilities. The contractor is responsible for asbestos responses of DSW/WO scope. For the purpose of asbestos/LBP removal; what is the definition of DSW/WO scope in terms of funding?

Asbestos response shall be in support of DSW/WOs. WO funding is limited to $50K and 200 manhours.

246 1.2.1.4.3 The PWS requires the contractor (in the event of a plumbing outage causing loss of service) to provide portable sanitary facilities and fresh potable water. Can these requirements be funded through CAP?

Contractor shall provide portable sanitary facilities and fresh portable water. This shall not be part of CAP.

247 1.2.2.1 The PWS requires 100% monthly inspection of all fencing, pavements and storm drains. Will the government provide workload factor for this requirement? This work is included in the work load data provided.

248 1.2.2.1.2 The PWS requires all potholes and significant cracks be repaired by DSW/WO. Will the government provide workload factor for this requirement? This work is included in the work load data provided.

249 1.2.2.1.3 The PWS required the contractor to provide a means to prevent water from entering facilities in the event of flooding. Will the government provide workload factor for this requirement? There is no historical data for this requirement.

250 1.2.2.2.1

At the pre-solicitation meeting the government indicated that the equipment set within TAFB 32-1002 was sufficient to meet Tinker’s snow and ice removal requirements. This equipment has limited availability and long lead times. Is the government open to the contractor providing suitable substitutes that provide similar capabilities? How will that cost/capability tradeoff comparison be accomplished between offerors?

Based on historical events the listed equipment should meet the minimum requirements if the equipment is in good working order. The contractor can provide suitable substitutes with similar capabilities. Comparison will be based on cost and equipment capabilities referenced to the existing fleet as a minimum.

251 1.2.2.2.1 Will the government provide adequate facility support to facilitate execution of the Snow & Ice Control Plan, including warm storage for equipment? Refer to the revised PWS.

252 1.2.2.2.3 Will the government provide adequate facility support to facilitate execution of the DMAG snow & ice control program, including warm storage for equipment, restrooms, break area and office? Refer to the revised PWS.

253 1.2.2.2.1, 1.2.2.2.3 Will the government provided facilities include B1122 and B3778? Refer to the revised PWS and GFP.

254 1.2.2.3.5

The PWS requires a Unidirectional Water Main Flushing be accomplished once per year, requiring a significant amount of manpower and potable water. Current guidance indicates this may be necessary in instances where there are systemic water quality issues. Is that the case at Tinker? Will the government provide workload factor estimate associated with this requirement?

Unidirectional Water Main Flushing has not been performed in the past and no workload data exists. Unidirectional Water Main Flushing shall be every two years.

255 1.2.2.4.1

Is the contractor responsible for pumping sanitary and industrial wastewater, and contaminated stormwater/rainwater from lift stations, dikes, trenches, pits, enclosures, etc? Will the government provide workload factors associated with this requirement?

Yes. The contractor is responsible for pumping sanitary and industrial wastewater, and contaminated storm water/rainwater from lift stations, dikes, trenches, pits, enclosures, etc as required to perform work (DSW/WOAP/PM). No work load factor exists. Please refer to GFE for existing equipment descriptions.

256 1.2.2.4.3

The PWS requires the contractor to clean and flush all sanitary sewage gravity collection mains annually, requiring a significant amount of manpower and potable water. Current guidance indicates this may be necessary in instances where there are systemic flow reductions/blockages. Is that the case at Tinker? Will the government provide workload factors associated with this requirement? No workload data is available.

257 1.2.2.5.2

The PWS requires the contractor to remove any obstruction within the drainage system. Is the contractor responsible for large trees, extensive brush growth, etc? Will the government provide workload factors associated with this requirement?

Yes, workload is provided in appendix 4.6.1.8. Any obstruction of water flow must be removed. The contractor shall coordinate with Civil Engineering Directorate's natural resources personnel and remove the tree.

258 1.2.2.5.3 The PWS requires the contractor to flush and dispose of contaminates within the storm drainage system. Will the government provide workload factors associated with this requirement? Historical data includes one AFFF dump per year.

259 1.2.2.12.5

The PWS requires the contractor to trap or net domestic animals but does not address the disposition/disposal process after that. Local animal shelters are reluctant to enter into agreements with non-governmental agencies. Will the government define the process or provide guidance as to what to do with domestic animals (possibly pets from the housing area)?

The government is in the process of identifying a shelter for domestic animals. This will be determined prior to award.

260 1.2.3 The PWS requires the contractor to inspect all Critical Equipment every four hours. Will the government provide workload factors associated with this requirement?

Please refer to Appendix 4.7.10 for a list of equipment.

Workload data is not available.

261 1.2.3.2.11

The PWS requires the contractor to perform boiler tune-ups and calibrations. Will the government provide workload factors associated with these two separate requirements?

This is a new EPA requirement and no workload data is available. Please refer to PWS Appendix 4.6.1 for list of boilers.

262 1.2.6

The PWS states that the contractor must respond within 4 hrs to a potential release and assume the release is asbestos. Is it the government’s intent that the contractor responds to all potential releases and creates a regulated area until a determination can be accomplished? Will the government provide workload factors associated with this requirement? What if the potential release appears to be beyond WO scope?

Yes. The contractor must respond within 4 hrs to a potential release and assume the release is asbestos. The workload data provided includes this work (it is not tracked separately). If beyond WO scope, the area will be secured as a minimum.

263 1.2.9 Will the government provide workload factors associated with the appliance maintenance and furnishings management requirements? Please refer to appendix 4.6.2.

264 1.2.10.1, 1.2.10.1.5

The PWS requires written cost estimates for in-house scope repairs for hypothetical and actual damage. Does the engineering contractor have parallel requirements for project-scope repairs?

It is a joint function. The Government expects both parties to work together to provide such estimates. The engineering contractor shall take lead on this and the operations contractor shall provide supporting documents. Please refer to appendix 4.6.1.3.

265 1.2.12 Will the government provide workload factors (including locations, application, configurations) associated with this requirement? This is a new requirement and there are no workload data.

266 1.2.12.1.10

Will the government provide workload factors (including applications inventory, required upgrades, configuration, location, etc) associated with this requirement?

This is a new requirement and there are no workload data.

The list of industrial control systems on CE VLAN can be found in appendix 4.6.1.11

267 1.2.12.1.10 Does this include all ICS RP equipment applications? Yes.

268 1.2.12.1.11 Will the government provide current installed system inventory, analysis, reported security issues and proposed solutions? Refer to the appendix for system inventory.

269 1.2.12.1.12 Will the government provide workload factors (including software and hardware inventories) associated with this requirement?

This is a new requirement and there are no work load factors. However, partial list of equipment is in the PWS (60- 80 work stations).

270 1.2.12.1.12 Is the government responsible to fund these software/hardware upgrades and security requirements? This requirement is deleted from the PWS.

271 1.4.1.1

The PWS indicates there are two types of documents identified in this section; government records and all other contract documents. It goes on to relate ALL other contract documents generated in support of this contract are Government Property. Does the government intend to have the contractor establish and maintain a GFP inventory of all documents (other than government records) including sticky notes, personal notebooks, personal daytimers, contractor HR records, contractor finance records, etc? The GFP regulatory requirements don’t lend themselves to documents.

Will the government provide estimated workload factors (including types of documents, files, papers, inventory and disposition requirements, etc) associated with this undefined Government Property requirement?

Except contractor HR records, anything created in support of this contract is Government property. There are no work load factors pertaining to this requirement.

Ex. A scratch paper generated to support any work such as calculations, cost estimates, forms, spread sheets, access databases, templates, logs, completed PMTLs ect.

272 1.4.1.3

Unsure what the government’s intent is? For example, if the contractor uses Maximo to track internal requirements (such as contract vehicle or contract property tracking) as a parallel management tool, does the government intend for the contractor to provide the government with the internal database and a license for Maximo? Another example, what about financial or procurement computer management systems? Does the government intend for the contractor to provide the government with the associated internal databases and software licenses?

Anything created in support of this contract is Government property. The government will have access to such documents/ software in support of this contract at all time.

If the contractor chooses to utilize a parallel

273 1.4.2

The PWS requires reduced execution time requirements and an arguable higher requirement for a more robust store stock. Will the government consider increasing warehouse space to facilitate better DSW/WO/PM responses? Has the government considered the ramifications of having government HAZMAT stored in a contractor-provided warehouse off-base?

Yes. The Government will support the contractor with warehouse space to increase efficiency.

The Government does not have any issues with off base HAZMAT storage as long as the contractor follows all the mandated requirements in regards to storage and transportation. However, the Government prefers to store extremely hazardous material on base to preclude transportation risks.

275 1.6.1.6, 1.7.3.5.1

The PWS requires contract employees to clear background checks before being issued a CAC card. Has the government taken into consideration it is taking 5-6 months for CAC cards and security clearances to be issued to contractors?

When a contractor requires a CAC, we verify in JPAS that they have a favorable NACI completed. Due to the length of time it takes to get the favorable NACI, our process is to do a local files check on the individual, have them submit the paperwork for the NACI and once the NACI is opened in JPAS, then we allow the contractor to apply for the CAC.

This process takes as long as it takes the individual to complete and submit their paperwork in the correct format.

This process can take as little as a week.

276 2.1

In previous Q&A, the government stated the offerors are not required to propose times for MAS sheets. How does the government intend to apply the QPI 3.3 which requires the work be accomplished faster than the approved MAS sheet times?

The awardee/contractor will be required to fill-in the number of minutes for all tasks on all PMTLs (previously referred to as MAS), and obtain Government approval. See deliverables list- P04. Then, the QPI will be applied to the approved sheets for work performed during each month.

277 1.1.2.1 Work Requirements

FAS shall be notified of DSW work which will require more than 80 man-hours (mh). DSWs are not planned work, and any unplanned repair work has potential to require 80 man-hours to complete (to include Emergency CM Work). 1) Is this notification for approval to proceed or is the contractor required to proceed regardless of contact with the FAS? 2) Is this notification available 24 hours daily?

Any work requiring more than 80 hours will be communicated to the FAS. The Government’s intent is to provide approval during weekly WRRB.

278 1.1.2.1. Work Requirements Work requirements supporting reimbursable customers shall be approved prior to execution. 1) Does this include Emergency CM and Priority 3A High Risk Work as defined in 1.1.2.2.1 & 1.1.2.2.2.1 respectively? This requirement is removed from the PWS.

279 1.1.2.1.1

Maintain work requirements (WO, DSW, PM) om IWIMS, Government approved substitute program or the most current Air Force database ensuring current updates for appropriate labor and material costs records for all work requirements, respectively. Is there a workload factor for database entry for IWIMS operators and for Government substitute program or the most current Air Force database? 2) Will workload be the same for any new database compared to IWIMS?

1)There is no workload data for this task.

2)The Government anticipates similar workload for whichever new database/software system used.

280 1.1.2.1.1

The Contractor shall notify Users/Facility Manager by email for the duplicate cancelled DSWs and WO’s and keep them updated on the status of the open DSW’s & WO’s quarterly. 1) Does WO’s include Task Orders and Projects executed through Engineering? 2) With over 390 assigned facility managers at Tinker AFB, what are the specifics that are required to be updated in regard to the open DSWs and WOs to the Facility Managers on a quarterly basis? 3) Does this include alternate facility managers? 4) Is this update requirement also for individual email, spreadsheet, or personal communications?

1) Includes DSWs/WOs only

2) Updates (Kept on Sharepoint site as an example) shall include current status such as material/parts status and completion rates.

3) Yes

4) Updates shall be sent to facility managers and alternates.

1.1.2.1.2. Coordination of DSWs

and WOs with customers

Contractor will ensure appropriate notification to affected customers via facility manager or occupying facility supervisor. 1) Will a current Facility Managers’ Listing and Facility Supervisor Listing be provided with contact information?

Yes. Facility manager list with contact info will be provided.

Current facility managers can be found on the PFIP application on-line. If the facility manager cannot be identified, government will support contractor with the identification of facility supervision.

282 1.1.2.1.3.

Close completed WOs assigned by the Work Order Allocation Program (WOAP) on a first-in-first-out basis to the maximum extent practicable provided the date is not later than date scheduled. 1) Does this mean the Contractor is the sole authority in prioritizing work submitted by customers on a first in/first out basis?

Contractor to submit recommendations to the WRRB every Friday morning.

Contractor will gain WRRB chairperson’s approval prior to making changes.

283 1.1.2.1.3.

Contractor shall identify and discuss WOs that have been open for more than 90 calendar days as the PMR meeting as discussed in PWS Section

1.14.3. Assumption is that “WO” includes only “Work Orders” (submitted on AF Form 332) and not “Direct Scheduled Work” (DSW). 1) Is this a correct assumption?

No. WOs that have been open for more than 90 calendar days shall include “work orders”, AF332s, “DSW” & WOAPs.

284 1.1.2.1.4.

Maintain facility history file in electronic format, which is available to the Government at all times, to provide historical maintenance and repair records for each facility which captures PM and repair work. 1) Do these facility history files currently exist in electronic format or will the Contractor be required to develop these historic files along with the format and build historical data from any electronic/paper copies that existed before start of the new contract?

Some facility history files exist in electronic format.

Contractor is required to develop electronic files from available historical data.

285 1.1.2.1.5.

The DSW report will be in queryable format, updated weekly, and include the following information at a minimum: DSW Number, Facility Number, Equipment UID, Location, Date Generated, Categorized Priority, Description, and Status. As per question 43 fielded during 2013 RFIs, equipment UIDs are only associated with RWP equipment and IWIMS has no field for equipment UID in the DSW program. Not all real property has UIDs, only equipment identified in the PM program. 1) What field in IWIMS is the UID captured (if there is a UID), and if no UID is assigned (example…repair wall, wall has no UID), is this requirement deleted?

Requirement is still valid. Until "Nexgen" is in place this information can be placed in the comment section for each work order in IWIMS. It is Government’s intent to have “Nexgen” in place prior to the initial period of performance.

286 1.1.2.1.5

Perform report runs in IWIMS… include the following information at a minimum: Equipment UID… Equipment UID is not known to the customers that call in the work, and the majority of calls do not have UID (light fixtures, leaking sink, roof leak, etc.) Equipment UID is only used for equipment that is in the reoccurring maintenance program. If we are required to annotate the UID on a call like “too hot”, then this will increase the administrative work load. Please clarify this requirement.

The Government’s intention is when the technician investigates the issue, he or she can identified a piece of equipment and annotate the UID on the DSW. Also as a minimum, a note under comment section in IWIMS.

287 1.1.2.2.1. Emergency CM Work

Contractor shall have on-site response within 20 minutes during normal duty hours and on-site response within one-hour during non-duty hours with appropriate certified and licensed personnel capable and ready to respond and mitigate the Emergency CM as quickly as possible, not to exceed 24-hours. 1) If materials/parts are required, what is the timeframe allowed for procurement and completion or mitigation? 2) Is the Contractor required to receive prior approval for execution (as per 1.1.2.1.) for reimbursable customers?

1) Contractor shall work until mitigation and then await parts.

2) This did not apply to emergency work and this requirement is being removed from the PWS.

288 Workload Factors

Team Composition compared to DSW workloads. The DSW workload factors provided are based on prior PWS requirements and there have been workloads added to this PWS. 1) Are the DSW workload factors accurate in projecting the quantity of average DSWs per year? 2) What is the mechanism for equitable adjustment if DSW workloads exceed the workload factors provided? 3) If no mechanism is in place, will the contractor cease work when DSW workloads exceed the workload factors provided to propose on until a contract modification is awarded?

1) Work load provided based on past three (3) year average.

2) See answer #271.

3) This option is not acceptable to the Government due to mission impact.

289 1.1.3.1. PM

The actual PM to be performed will be determined by the Government as long as the work load effort does not exceed the level of effort identified in the COLS level (+/- one man-year…2080 hours). 1) Is the workload projected in the PM Level of Effort defined by the MAS table equal to the number of FTEs identified in the Minimum Team Complement for PM COLS1 (25,372 items, many with multiple frequencies, 71 FTEs, 2080 man-hours per FTE = 147,680 man-hours)? Assumption is correct.

290 DSW Workload Factors DSW workload factors represent 4 years of averages per month (2009,2010, 2011, 2012). 1) Why are the most current years not included in these workload factors (2013 & 2014)? 2) What COLS level does the DSW workload factors provided represent?

The government will provide the workload data for FY13- 14.

291 Supervision

Minimum Team Complement. The Minimum Team Complement table does not identify FTE for supervision, procurement nor laggers. 1) Is the contractor required to estimate these FTEs within each CLIN?

MTC does not apply to those positions, the Contractor shall identify the staffing required with supervisory and procurement positions.

“Lagger” is included in the MTC in the formal RFP.

292 DSW Man-Hours

Level of work that warrants classification as DSW, Work Order, Task Order, Project, etc. Appendix 4.1, “Direct Scheduled Work (DSW). Service Call received as call in or written request for maintenance or repair, including repair by replacement, of Real Property up to 200 mh; or new and alteration work that requires 80 mh (excluding planning and estimating) or less to perform the work, and does not require detailed planning, and does not require capitalization of the Real Property records. Four year average completion rate is 6.75 hours per DSW executed. Historically, new and alteration work that require 50 man-hours was classified as a Work Order executed (or placed on “hold” status and not executed) as a WOAP allocation, or programmed for a task order or project, and the DSW workload factors provided represented this standard. This new standard (conflicts with AFPAM 32-1004 V3, 4.4.2.1 Direct Scheduled Work, previously referred to as job orders, is work that generally does not require detailed planning. These work orders are small and require less than 50 man-hours. Direct scheduled work is immediate or routine and can be maintenance, repair, or minor construction not requiring capitalization.) Will add 30 additional man-hours possible to these work requests and will increase completion rate above 6.5 hours (larger number of man-hours per DSW). QPI 2.5 states there will be a deduction monthly for not completing on average DSWs in less than 6 hours measured monthly. It appears the intent is to require more work to be accomplished in less time using a Minimum Team Composition developed from DSW workload factors developed from a 50 man-hour average with a higher 6.75 hours per DSW. 1) Is the intent to implement higher standards than identified in AFPAM 32-1004 V3? 2) Are the DSW workloads provided representative of this higher standard? 1) Yes, this is a new Tinker BCE requirement.

2) No. Since this is a new requirement, no workload data is available.

1.1.2.3. Work Request Review

Board

The contractor shall conduct weekly WRRB meetings and present the proposed means for accomplishment of all requested work requirements (DSW, PM, or WO). 1) With an average of 541 DSWs per week and only 10% of those being Priority 1, is the objective to review all remaining CM (Priority 3A, 3B, 3C, 4A & 4B) requests/requirements along with all outstanding DSWs at the WRRB and determine the method of accomplishment ? This is removed from the PWS.

294 Honeywell Equipment

1) Are responses to Honeywell Equipment included in the DSW workload factors provided, or is this a new workload that requires estimate/risk by the contractor?

FY13 & FY 14 workload data includes responses to Honeywell equipment.

1.1.3.1. PMP Changes

Permanent changes to PMP, agreed or in contract modification, shall be incorporated into the program in a timely manner, but not to exceed one month with actual PM being performed within three months after input. 1) Is there a maximum number of changes per month? 2) Does execution within 3-months include annual and cyclic PM frequencies that are not due based on last PM?

1) Estimated number of changes per month will be approximately 5.

2) The government’s intention is to improve the current process and input changes/modifications to IWIMS (or "Nexgen") within a month. Execution of the PM should begin within three months if possible.

296 1.1.3.8

All high efficiency boilers and attached systems have critical water treatment requirements and water entering these systems shall have a hardness level less than 5 ppm. Water softener inspection shall be performed weekly and documentation of inspection is required. 1) Do all systems requiring water treatment (closed loop dispensers/water softeners) currently have these systems installed and are the DSW workload factors provided in the DSW workload factors?

This statement only applies to existing water softeners and such systems are included in the workload data provided.

297 Workload Data 4.6 Excel Format

0004 Scheduled Sustainment work and 0002 emergency maintenance work tabs have the same data Where is the work load date for Scheduled Enhancement work?

The work load data provided is based on the old work structure (emergency, urgent, routine). There is no data available for the new work classification structure (emergency, PM, sustainment & enhancement).

298 Q&A #3 # 100

1. Are facility managers or designated building representatives the only personnel approved to submit 332 requests? Answer: YES. What AFI is used to implement this policy and what is the current practice?

The Base Civil Engineer is the authority when it comes to making this decision.

1.2.1.Facility Maintenance and Repair

The Contractor shall maintain, repair, construct, and modify all RP, RPIE, and directed non-RP facilities and equipment assigned to TAFB to ensure cost effective, energy efficient, quality, safe, and reliable facilities. 1) Are DSW and PM workload factors for “directed non-RP facilities and equipment” included in the DSW workload factors and PM Appendices?

No, Only real property interior modular structures are included in the work load. The government intention is to include the rest (non-real property interior modular structures) under this contract.

1.2.1.Facility Maintenance and Repair

Approximately 15 percent of PM work may be required to be performed outside of normal working hours. 1) For PM work that exceeds 15% outside normal working hours, will the contract be modified?

No. 15% is simply an estimation of PM work outside the normal duty hours (Paint, stripping & fuel hangars). See answer #271.

301 1.2.1.2.1.Painting Service

DSW level paint services are limited to repainting work requiring 16 mh or less per requirement. 1) Do the DSW workload factors for the years 0f 2008 thru 2012 include 16 mh paint requirements? 2) Is a workload for painting included in the DSW workload factors? 3) Why are there no “Painter” positions identified in the Minimum Team Complement?

1) The work load factors provided for 2008- 2012 includes the DSW work load. However, the current contract requirement is 8 mh per DSW.

2) Yes, it is not broken down by shop. The workload data for FY 13-14 will have the requested data.

3) The Government will include these positions in the final

MTC.

302 1.2.1.5.4.

Contractor shall have qualified laggers on maintenance staff to perform this task. 1) The Minimum Team Complement does not include laggers…is this an oversight?

The Government will include these positions in the final

MTC.

303 1.2.1.7.1.

Ensure that an effective corrosion control program is in place, managed by National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) qualified corrosion engineer. 1) There is no FTE in the Minimum Team Complement to support this requirement. Will this workload factor be provided? This requirement is removed from the PWS.

304 1.2.1.8. Roofing Additionally, roofs in the green category shall have maintenance inspections semi-annually. 1) Is this frequency/workload captured in the PMTLs?

All roofs shall be inspected yearly as indicated in the PMTLs.

305 1.2.1.9. Fixed Ladders

The Contractor shall inspect, maintain, and repair all fixed ladders on RP facilities and Real Property Installed Equipment (RPIE) IAW AFI 91-203, Air Force Consolidated Occupational Safety Instruction. 1) Are all fixed ladders on Tinkers RP facilities identified in the PMP?

The contractor is responsible for the ladders identified in work load data. However, as the government identifies additional ladders, they will be added to PMP.

306 1.2.1.1.10.

The Contractor shall be responsible for managing, maintaining, and repairing the base’s current grand-master key code systems and any requirements for additional grand-master key systems. 1) What additional requirements may be required by the contractor to support grand-master key systems? See revised PWS.

307 1.2.1.11 Playground Equipment

The Contractor shall inspect, maintain, and repair all Government-owned playground equipment, exercise stations, and fall zones on TAFB excluding playground equipment located in MFH on a monthly basis. 1) The PMTLs only identify 1 frequency per year. Do the workload factors reflect 1 or 12 frequencies per year?

The frequency is yearly. The Government will revise the requirement to yearly.

308 1.2.1.13. White-houses

The Contractor shall inspect, maintain and repair white-houses (RP and non-RP) identified in the workload data. 1) Are the historical workload factors for all of the white-houses in Appendix 4.6.1 captured in the DSW workload factors?

No, only real property interior modular structures (white houses) are included in the workload data. The non-real property interior modular structures are also included under this contract

1.2.2.1 Pavements, Drainage and

Fences

The perimeter and security fencing, pavements (roads, parking lots and airfields) and storm drains shall be inspected 100% on a monthly basis and shall identify all repair requirements. In addition the Contractor shall: 1) Workload data for PM for perimeter and security fencing is reflected as only 1 frequency per year. Which data is correct (PM frequency in PM chart or this paragraph from the PWS)?

The pavements (roads, parking lots and airfield) and storm drains shall be inspected for hazards ( potholes) on a monthly basis.

310 1.2.2.1.3 Contractor shall provide a means to prevent water from entering facilities. In the event that facilities are flooded, Contractor shall provide means for and support of excess water removal. 1) Does the historical DSW record capture this workload or is this a new requirement?

Yes, the FY13-14 workload data includes any actions required to address flooding.

311 1.2.2.1.6 Contractor shall maintain, repair, and install all facility and installation signage including electronic marquee signs after receiving notification from the Base Comprehensive Planning and Architecture Compatibility FAS. What are the work load factors for this requirement? Workload data is not available for this requirement.

312 1.2.2.1.8

Contractor shall inspect, repair, and maintain all Security Force Base Active Vehicle Barriers, Gates and Arms IAW manufacturers’ recommendations.

These barriers have proprietary systems that belong to Smith & Wesson. Does the government realize that there will still have to be a support contract with them?

The Government is aware of this requirement. We have a contract with Smith and Wesson and it will continue.

313 1.2.2.2.3.

Establish a separate snow and ice control program for Depot Maintenance Activity Group (DMAG) ramp areas identified in workload data. Removal operations shall be initiated in conjunction with TAFB Plan 32-1002. TAFBPLAN 32-1002 identifies an equipment set for base wide snow and ice removal. 1) Is there an equipment set identified for the DMAG effort? The government will provide the equipment list.

314 1.2.2.2.5.

Contractor shall provide suitable equipment necessary to ensure operational capability of airfield and ramp pavements meeting the intent of AFI 32- 1002 and TAFB Plan 32-1002 for snow and pavement…