20200427_FA8903-20-R-0010_BECOS RFP Questions and Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 42 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA890320R0010
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to a Request for Proposals for Base Realignment and Closure Environmental Construction and Optimization Services in the Central South Region. The solicitation seeks proposals for environmental remediation and monitoring services at multiple installations including Kelly Air Force Base, Bergstrom Air Force Base, Homestead Air Force Base, and Myrtle Beach Air Force Base. Key details include services required for over 50 sites, a period of performance from July 2020 to July 2030, responses to offeror questions providing clarification on proposal requirements and site-specific documents, and an extended proposal deadline of 25 May 2020.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 72 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Q # | Document Reference | RFP QUESTIONS | DATE RCVD | Document Reference | GOV'T RESPONSE | RESPONSE DATE |
| 1 | Schedule B | Schedule B contains Lowry and Buckley (0121-0132). However, there are no sites at Lowry and Buckley in the Central South site list. A Base-Specific PWS for Task Order 2 for Lowry and Buckley was not provided. Buckley and Lowry were not included on the Task Order 2 Price Model. | 29-Feb-20 | Schedule B | Buckley and Lowry are not included in T02. Some sites are within the IDIQ site list that are not a part of the work for TO2. | |
| 2 | Task Order 1 | There is no Price Model for Task Order 1. Where/how are offerors to price travel, support, and attendance at the kick-off meetings to meet the requirements of Task Order 1? Two meetings are required - one at AFCEC in San Antonio and one in a location "central" to the installations in the Region. | 29-Feb-20 | Task Order 1 | Confirmed, offerors do not need to include pricing for TO1. The not to exceed amount for TO1 Central South is $20,000. | |
| 3 | PPQs | There are many offerors that will be bidding on more than one BECOS contract as either a prime or a sub and likely using the same projects as evidence of past performance. It is a huge burden on our DoD clients, including AFCEC personnel managing the current PBRs, to have to submit PPQ multiple times. Since all PPQs must be returned directly to the Air Force, we request the Air Force allow the person completing the PPQ or the Contractor to indicate somewhere on the PPQ form the BECOS contracts where that project/past performance information will be submitted. | 29-Feb-20 | PPQ | Past Performance Questionnaires submission must be IAW Section L, 3.4. POCs may provide the same PPQ with a revised title to update the region name and solicitation number but the PPQs must be the one in this solicitation and they must come directly from the person completing the questionnaire. | |
| 4 | Section L Proposal Submittal Instructions page 6 and page 7 | Section 2.4 states that offerors are to submit their proposal via DoD Safe. Section 2.5 states that the proposal is to be submitted via email to the email addresses identified in that section. Please clarify how proposals are to be submitted -via DoD SAFE or via email | 9-Mar-20 | Section L Proposal Submittal Instructions page 6 and page 7 | Proposals will be accepted by email. The DoD SAFE link is provided for offerors that elect to use DoD SAFE. | |
| 5 | Section L Page 9 Section 3.5 | Requires signed prime/sub authorization and consent letters. What are these letters? Does the Air Force have a format for these letters? | 9-Mar-20 | Section L Page 9 Section 3.5 | Letters may be submitted in format determined by contractor. Letters are if one company is submitting past performance information for another company and that company is requested to provide consent. Indicates the submitting company is authorized to have the information and provide it to the government. | |
| 6 | Section L Page 10, Section 4.2 | Since the work is to be performed at multiple installations and from the offeror and team partner offices, please explain what is needed for the labor surplus area designation. | 9-Mar-20 | Section L Page 10, Section 4.2 | As the solicitation is already a small business set aside, it is not necessary to provide the labor surplus area designation but offerors may provide this information to help the government identify areas of high unemployment/economic need within the region. | |
| 7 | Section L, Page 11, Section 4.5 | The OCI Mitigation Plan requires a company with previous work experience at a site at the installations in the Central South BECOS to provide the following information: site, scope of work, specific document titles and descriptions, and contract or task order number. Since no timeframe was provided, for some offerors this requirement is excessive and documents that have been produced should have been posted by the Air Force to the Administrative Record. We request that this requirement be revised to allow contractors to attest that all contract-mandated Final deliverables have been submitted to the Air Force. | 9-Mar-20 | Section L, Page 11, Section 4.5 | For clarification, please provide any applicable items that are not publicly available. Please comply as applicable within the timeline as best as possible. Documents on the administrative record are available to the public. Items required for TO2 are available in the solicitation, the administrative record and the google site. | |
| 8 | Section L, page 12, Section 4.8 | To ensure that all required clauses are submitted, please identify the specific clauses in Section H and I that are to be submitted by the offeror. | 9-Mar-20 | SF33 | Refer to the SF33 Sections H and I for required information. | |
| 9 | Section L, page 13, Section 4.8 | Please clarify the requirement for Section K on the top of page 13. Are offerors to complete the on-line provisions and print the page? | 9-Mar-20 | SF33 Amendment | 52.204-8 to be added to SF33 for contractor fill-in. Amendment forthcoming. | |
| 10 | Section L, pages 13-14, Section 4.9.1 | Please confirm the descriptions of the estimating system, purchasing system, and accounting system is only required from the prime. | 9-Mar-20 | Section L | Only information to verify an adequate accounting system from the prime will be needed. Amendment forthcoming to clarify and remove estimating and purchasing system infromation requested. | |
| 11 | Section L, page 16, Section 5.2e and 5.2f | Please clarify the requirements of paragraph e and the apparent disconnect between paragraphs e and f. Paragraph e requires the offeror to identify any assumption and exceptions to the pricing requirements. Generally, offerors are eliminated from the competition if they identify assumptions and exceptions. This requirement in paragraph e is especially confusing in light of paragraph f which states to annotate "none" if no assumptions or exceptions apply. |
1) Will offerors be eliminated from competition if they provide their assumptions for the non-severable/severable CLINs?
2) If the purpose of the assumptions (as stated in paragraph f) is to assist in price evaluation, is "none" an appropriate and acceptable response? 9-Mar-20 Section L, pages 17-18, Section 5.5 It is not stated that offerors are eliminated if they identify assumptions.
Offerors shall annotate “none,” only if no assumptions or exceptions apply.
Information provided for exceptions and assumptions will assist the price evaluation team in determining completeness, reasonableness, balance, and professional compensation plan realism.
12 Section L, pages 17-18, Section 5.5 Please confirm that if only one FBLR is being proposed for the entire team, the team members are not required to map their LCATs to the Government LCATs. 9-Mar-20 Section L, page 20 Section 5.6.2c and 5.6.2i If the team is proposing one (1) team FBLR Table the LCAT descriptions entered in the FBLR Table column B "Offeror's Labor Category" will be the descriptions entered in the "Contractor Labor Category" for the Compensation Plan Model.
As there will be only one (1) FBLR and LCAT description for the entire team, team base hourly salary support data must clearly link the team LCAT descriptions in the FBLR Table to the base hourly rates proposed in the Compensation Plan Model for the team LCAT descriptions that will be incorporated into the basic contract.
Therefore separate team members are not required or allowed to enter their unique LCAT descriptions if proposing one (1) team FBLR Table.
| 13 | Section L, page 20 Section 5.6.2c and 5.6.2i | Please confirm the mapping of proposed base hourly salaries by LCAT to offerors support documentation and a mapping of the offerors LCAT to the Governments anticipated LCAT is only required from the team members proposing FBLRs. | 9-Mar-20 | Section L, page 20 Section 5.6.2i | Correct: If proposing FBLRs from separate team members in the FBLR Table each team member shall submit a separate Compensation Plan Model. |
| 14 | Section L, page 20 Section 5.6.2i | Please confirm the mapping of offeror LCATs to the Government LCATs and to the offeror's base hourly salary support data is only for those LCATs in the Government-furnished Compensation Plan Model. | 9-Mar-20 | Professional Compensation Plan Model column D | Selected Government LCATs have been provided in the Compensation Plan Model. Only some LCATs have been selected for evaluation. |
Offeror's base hourly salary support data is only required for LCATs selected for Compensation Plan evaluation.
15 Professional Compensation Plan Model The Model has a column labeled "Offeror Fringe Rate (%)". Please confirm this rate is to be the entire labor burden the firm applies to its base rate to develop the fully burdened labor rate. 9-Mar-20 Professional Compensation Plan Model column D Proposed Base Hourly Salary and Fringe Rates are "not" the entire labor burden but only two (2) elements of fully burdened labor. Fringe rates shall be in accordance with Offerors accounting system.
Offeror Fringe Rate (%) entered in column D will be the fringe rate applied to the buildup of the proposed FBLRs that will be incorporated into the basic contract in the FBLR Table.
| 16 | Section L, page 11 | |||||
| Section 4.5 | The OCI Mitigation Plan requires a company with previous work experience at a site at the installations in the Central South BECOS to provide the following information: site, scope of work, specific document titles and descriptions, and contract or task order number. Since no timeframe was provided, for some offerors this requirement is excessive and documents that have been produced should have been posted by the Air Force to the Administrative Record. We requested that this requirement be revised to allow contractors to attest that all contract-mandated Final deliverables have been submitted to the Air Force. If this approach is not acceptable, we request that the Air Force limit the timeframe for previous work experience to the last 5 years. | 18-Mar-20 | Section L, page 11 | |||
| Section 4.5 | Comply as appropriate per the requirement and time period available. Yes, applicable information received by the AF is available on the administrative record for these sites. | |||||
| 17 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model | The non-severable CLINS have sites at Kelly and Myrtle Beach with a performance objective of Site Closeout. By what date is SC to be achieved for each site? | 18-Mar-20 | Task Order 2 | Site Closeout dates are not predetermined but performance objective is expected to occur during the POP. | |
| 18 | Task Order (2) PWS | The overall BECOS, the Task Order (2), and the installation specific PWSs do not address handling of Investigative-Derived Waste (IDW) (e.g., purge water) at sites known to be impacted by PFAS. Please confirm that there are no special handing and disposal requirements for IDW at these sites. If special handing and disposal are required, please confirm (1) the sites that are impacted; (2) whether segregation and testing for PFAS are the only requirements; (3) whether offerors should assume that all IDW at PFAS sites is to be handled in accordance with Air Force guidance. | 18-Mar-20 | PWS | The contractor must comply with Air Force Guidance Memorandum (AFGM) 2019-32-01 which establishes AFFF-Related Waste Management Implementation Guidance. | |
| 19 | Task Order (2) PWS - Brooks - LF007 and LF008 | The 2016 Five-Year Review (FYR) questioned the integrity of the cap(s) at these sites. Have the necessary repairs been made or will the cap repairs to ensure the remedy is protective be performed under the BECOS contract? | 18-Mar-20 | Task Order (2) PWS - Brooks - LF007 and LF008 | All LF cap repairs will be made by the Local Redevelopment Authority (BDA) as stated in a May 31 2017 letter. | |
| 20 | Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly | Please provide the following report: TCEQ, January 2019. Conditional Approval of Draft Final Technical Evaluation Report RCRA Sites, E-3 and S-8 Sampling Frequency, Former Kelly Air Force Base, San Antonio, Texas, Rev 0, November 2018, dated November 26, 2018 | 18-Mar-20 | Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly | Document +F21:F27uploaded to Google Drive: |
APR16_TCEQ-Conditional_Approval_31750_1_22_19_Sites_ E-3_S-8_Sampling_Freq.pdf
| 21 | Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly | Please provide the following report: USAF, November 2018. Draft Final Technical Evaluation Report, RCRA Sites E-3 and S-8 Sampling Frequency. |
| 18-Mar-20 | Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly | Document uploaded to Google Drive: |
APR16_November_2018_DRAFT_FINAL_TechEvalRpt_Sites_E_3_S_8_Sampling_Frequency.pdf 22 Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly Please provide the following report: TCEQ, November 2018. Letter to Mr. Paul Carroll, AFCEC/CIBE. Re: TCEQ Approval with Clarification of “Path Forward for Concentrations Exceeding GWPS Detected atSS003RW114R, Site SS003 (S-1)”, dated September 20, 2018 – Final Report – Risk Reduction Standard No. 2 Residential, Site S-1 Closure Report, dated May 7, 2018. Former Waste Oil Storage Facility (Site S-1), Air Force Site No. SS003, Zone 5, Former Kelly Air Force Base. 18-Mar-20 Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly Documents uploaded to Google Drive:
APR16_TCEQ letter 11.20.2018 Site S-1 cl path.pdf APR16_05_2018_REV_0_Site_S-1_Closure_Rpt.pdf
23 Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly Please provide the following report: CAPE, June 2012. Final Site S-1 (SS003) Corrective Actions Completion Report 18-Mar-20 Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly Documents uploaded to Google Drive:
APR16_Final Site S-1 (SS003) Comments.pdf APR16_Final Site S-1 (SS003) Corrective Actions Completions Report_June 2012.pdf
TCEQ has approved the demotion/removal of the Zone 5 GWTP, and the current contractor will be implementing additional substrate injections during their POP. The documents associated with this work were added to the document website.
APR16_Decommissioning-Dismantling Work Plan, Site S-1 (SS003), Former Waste Oil Storage Area, Rev 0 to TCEQ APR16_FINAL REV 0 Amend IV to Final WP Site S-1 Zone 5 24 Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly Please provide the following report: CAPE, June 2006. Completion Report, Basewide Organic Substrate Injection/Source Reduction Removal Services at Former Kelly Air Force Base. 18-Mar-20 Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly Documents uploaded to Google Drive:
APR16_Final Completion Rpt for Basewide Organic Substrate Injections_Source Reduction Removal Services Pt 1 of 4.pdf APR16_Final Completion Rpt for Basewide Organic Substrate Injections_Source Reduction Removal Services Pt 2 of 4.pdf APR16_Final Completion Rpt for Basewide Organic Substrate Injections_Source Reduction Removal Services Pt 3 of 4.pdf APR16_Final Completion Rpt for Basewide Organic Substrate Injections_Source Reduction Removal Services Pt 4 of 4.pdf
| 25 | Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly Site WP021 | Please provide work plans, construction completion reports, and performance monitoring reports for the In-Situ Enhanced Bioremediation (ISEB) injections conducted in 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2017; the five rounds of In-Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO) injection in 2015 and 2016; and the injection of PlumeStopTM in January 2017. |
| 18-Mar-20 | Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly Site WP021 | Documents uploaded to Google Drive: |
APR16_01_14_UIC_Annual_Report_AF_review_Zone_2_20140117.pdf APR16_10 2016 Field Injection Plan WP021 (E-1).pdf APR16_AF Trnsmtl ltr UIC Injection Status Report Zone 2 20160114.pdf APR16_Final Zone 2 UIC Annual Status Rpt_Jan-Dec 2014_Kelly_16Jan15.pdf APR16_Z2 UIC QSR Apr-Jun 2012 01.15.2013_FINAL.pdf APR16_Z2 UIC QSR Jul-Sep 2012 01.15.2013 FINAL.pdf APR16_Z2 UIC QSR Oct-Dec 2012 01.15.2013 FINAL.pdf APR16_01 2017 Field Injection Plan Zone 2.pdf APR16_01 2018 REV 0 Zone 2 UIC 2018 Annual Status Rpt Dec2016-Nov2017.pdf APR16_05 15 Final UIC Amendment 1 Zone 2.pdf APR16_10 13 FINAL Amendment I to Final TWP_Zone 2.pdf APR16_10 15 DF Zone 2 UIC Amendment 2.pdf APR16_Amendment II to Final Technical Work Plan Zone 2_Rev2.pdf APR16_Amendment III (FINAL REV 1) to Final Technical Work Plan (E-1).pdf APR16_CCR_Sites_E-1_and_E-3_Zone2_FINAL.pdf
| 26 | Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly - Site WP021 | The PDF scan of the report: "Zone 2 WKG COPY Updated CSM Rpt Site WP021 (E-1)_mofidied.pdf" is missing all text. It has a Table of Contents which shows 5 sections of text, but none of the text is included in the scanned PDF file. Please provide an updated copy of this document. | 18-Mar-20 | Task Order (2) PWS - Kelly - Site WP021 | Revised CSM Draft report is in Air Force review. The initial CSM is posted on the administrative record. A portion of the initial revised draft was provided. The requirement for WP021 has been identified in TO2 Price Model and TO2 PWS as RAO. Information available at this time is sufficient to generate proposals for the tasks required at this site under TO2. |
| 27 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model - Base Year | There are a number of CLINs in the Base Year that provide a performance objective of LTM (or RAO) for multiple sites. Then there is a "footnote" within the CLIN that states that all the sites are not priced in the Base Yr (i.e., CLIN 0026, CLIN 0027, CLIN 0046, and CLIN 0054). Since the footnotes say that all the sites listed for these CLINs are not priced in the Base Year, please confirm the CLIN values for these CLINs should = $0. | 18-Mar-20 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model - Base Year | Confirmed, CLINs not priced in the base year and a $0 input is sufficient. |
For example, offerors will enter $0 for "CLIN 0046 "Central South Region Performance Based Services (severable) Location: Myrtle Beach Sites: LF005, LF009, LF012, LF013, LF014, LF032, ST002, OT031, OT034, XU401, XU402, XU403 LTM in accordance with Decision Document
*Sites not priced in Base Yr: LF005, LF009, LF012, LF013, LF014, LF032, ST002, OT031, OT034, XU401, XU402, XU403"
| 28 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model - Kelly Site FT024 | Please confirm the performance objective for FT024. It is listed as LTM in CLIN 0032 and RAO in accordance with Decision Document in CLIN 0033. | 18-Mar-20 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model - Kelly Site FT024 | FT024 is removed from TO2 CLIN 0033. Refer to amendment document TO 2 Price Model. |
| 29 | General | Would the Air Force consider an extension to the requested dates for Volumes I and II and the due date for Volume III given the shutdowns and remote working situation of many businesses and potentially the Air Force in response to COVID-19? The availability/ability of the Air Force personnel to upload documents to the Administrative Record or other DoD respository and to complete and return PPQs may become an issue. In addition, as more businesses request/require workers to telework, a company's IT infrastructure and, in some cases, the internet itself may not be able to support the increased workload. | 18-Mar-20 | General | The requirement for submission of Volume III has been extended to 13 May 2020. The government will take under consideration any additional requests for extension provided after the responses to questions are posted. |
| 30 | GFI and AR | The Admin Record website has been unavailable, crashes everytime we try to download a document, does not allow document download, or the downloaded documents are blank pages. We know that there was maintenance being performed on the Admin Record website, but it also makes it difficult to review background document to develop pricing or to determine if we need to request more recent documents. We request that the Air Force either extend the due date for questions or allow potential offerors to request documents after the deadline for questions. | 18-Mar-20 | General | The requirement for submission of Volume III has been extended to 13 May 2020. The government will take under consideration any additional requests for extension provided after the responses to questions are posted. |
| 31 | GFI | In general, the reports available on the AR are dated. Please provide the 2019 versions of annual LTM and RA-O reports. | 18-Mar-20 | GFI | All information provided is sufficient to address the TO 2 tasks required. |
| 32 | Task Order (2) PWS | Please confirm the incumbent contractors be required to finish deliverables associated with their 2020 LTM/RA-O activities through regulator approval. | 18-Mar-20 | Task Order (2) PWS | Review TO 2 PWS Section 1.4 and Attachment 2 that will provide the expiration date for the current contract. It is important to keep this date in mind to ensure a seamless transition and obtain any required information. |
| 33 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model and Solicitation Section F (page 9) | The PoP in Section F is stated as 30 July 2020 to 30 July 2030. Please confirm summer sampling events in FY30 are not included in the Task Order (2) PWS or the Task Order (2) Pricing Model. | 18-Mar-20 | TO 2 | All routine sampling that can be accomplished to provide validated analytical results within the POP should be priced. |
| 34 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model - Bergstrom - SS031 | Currently performance modeling is done semi-annually and LTM is done annually. The performance objective for this site is RA-O in accordance with the Decision Document (DD). The DD only requires annual LTM. Please confirm the offerors are only to price annual LTM. | 19-Mar-20 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model - Bergstrom - SS031 | The requirement in TO2 is RAO. The decision document also states 1) Monitor chlorinated volatile organic compound (VOC) concentrations in groundwater, and 2) Monitor for potential migration of VOCs in groundwater. As annual groundwater monitoring is still required at this site, the correct site objective is RA-O. |
| 35 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model - Brooks - LF007 and LF008 | While the asphalt covers at these landfills appear to be protective (i.e., cover systems are preventing the seepage of surface water into the underlying waste material), thelast three 5-year Reviews included a statement about fixing the cracks. Please confirm offerors are not required to include the costs of sealing the cracks in their Task Order (2) pricing. | 19-Mar-20 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model - Brooks - LF007 and LF008 | See the following for information only. |
LF007 footprint includes sections of rough surfaced asphalt roads. The roads are inside the recorded deed but around the perimeter of the landfill cover. Both LFs have soil caps. AF removed mature schrubs, trees and their root systems from both LFs and cap repair was performed in 2017. Since 2017 BDA has had the sole responsibility for landfill maintenance (including mowing, erosion repair) after the AF performed the initial clearance of all trees, schrubs and root systems and cap maintenance.
| 36 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model - Bergstrom - LF002 and LF003 | Please confirm that landfill mowing is not the responsibiity of the BECOS contractor. | 19-Mar-20 | Task Order (2) Pricing Model - Bergstrom - LF002 and LF003 | See the following for information only. Historically, semi-annual mowing has been performed at the Combined Southeast Landfills 3-7 (LF003, LF004, LF005, LF006, and LF007 along with SS014 and SD017) to include the landfill caps and North Fork and South Fork Channels along with the Channel Confluence Area. Refer the Final 2018 Annual Landfill Inspection Report included as Appendix A of the Final 2018 Annual Monitoring Report for additional clarification on maintenance activities required at the sites. |
| 37 | TO 2 PWS Attach 1 Central Sourth Site List BECOS vf8.xlsx | The performance objective for FT024 is LTM for TO 2 PWS Attach 1 Central South Site List BECOS vf8. However, FT024 is included in CLIN 0033, which is RAO in accordance with Decision Document, as well as in CLIN 0032, LTM in accordance with Decision Document. Please reconcile. | 16-Mar-20 | TO 2 PWS Attach 1 Central Sourth Site List BECOS vf8.xlsx | FT024 is removed from TO2 CLIN 0033. Refer to amendment document TO 2 Price Model. |
| 38 | TO 2 PWS Central South BECOS vf3.docx, Section 1.6 GFI | In the Google drive (link provided in Section 1.6 of the document referenced), the file under the folder "Kelly" titled "Zone 2 WKG Copy Updated CSM Rpt Site WP021 (E-1)_modified.pdf" is incomplete. Most of the details including the entire Sections 1 through 4 is missing. Will the Government please provide a complete version of this report? | 13-Mar-20 | TO 2 PWS Central South BECOS vf3.docx, Section 1.6 GFI | Draft report is in Air Force review. A portion of the initial draft was provided. Complete report is not available at this time. The information available is sufficient to address tasks required under TO2. |
| 39 | TO 2 PWS Central South BECOS vf3.docx, Section 1.6 GFI | For Kelly AFB, CLIN 0044, Site WP021, the Administrative Record does not include any documents published after January 2016. Based on review of the documents provided in the Google Drive, there has been ISCO, ISEB, and PlumeStop injections since that time (late 2016, 2017 and 2018). Will the Government please provide all documents related to these injections? | |||
| 13-Mar-20 | TO 2 PWS Central South BECOS vf3.docx, Section 1.6 GFI | Documents uploaded to Google Drive: |
APR16_01_14_UIC_Annual_Report_AF_review_Zone_2_20140117.pdf APR16_10 2016 Field Injection Plan WP021 (E-1).pdf APR16_AF Trnsmtl ltr UIC Injection Status Report Zone 2 20160114.pdf APR16_Final Zone 2 UIC Annual Status Rpt_Jan-Dec 2014_Kelly_16Jan15.pdf APR16_Z2 UIC QSR Apr-Jun 2012 01.15.2013_FINAL.pdf APR16_Z2 UIC QSR Jul-Sep 2012 01.15.2013 FINAL.pdf APR16_Z2 UIC QSR Oct-Dec 2012 01.15.2013 FINAL.pdf APR16_01 2017 Field Injection Plan Zone 2.pdf APR16_01 2018 REV 0 Zone 2 UIC 2018 Annual Status Rpt Dec2016-Nov2017.pdf APR16_05 15 Final UIC Amendment 1 Zone 2.pdf APR16_10 13 FINAL Amendment I to Final TWP_Zone 2.pdf APR16_10 15 DF Zone 2 UIC Amendment 2.pdf APR16_Amendment II to Final Technical Work Plan Zone 2_Rev2.pdf APR16_Amendment III (FINAL REV 1) to Final Technical Work Plan (E-1).pdf APR16_CCR_Sites_E-1_and_E-3_Zone2_FINAL.pdf 40 TO 2 PWS Central South BECOS vf3.docx, Section 1.6 GFI For Kelly AFB, CLIN 0032, specifically the 7 new sites requiring LTM (Bldg. 324, CSA580, CSA581, CSA601, CTA598, CWR607 and B98 EST/LSTs), there is no documentation of existing site conditions at these sites and they are not included in the 2019 Draft LUC Implementation Plan provided on the Google Drive. On the Admin Record, The 2019 Annual Compliance Plan (doc # AR595035) is missing Appendix K which may include these sites. Will the Government please provide the document again with all appendices intact as well as all available documents related to these sites? 13-Mar-20 TO 2 PWS Central South BECOS vf3.docx, Section 1.6 GFI CSA580 [Yard N-01 Container Yard N]: ARs 536736 & 536741 Appendix K of the 2018 Compliance Plan Report: AR 591779.02
Documents uploaded to Google Drive:
B98 EST/LST - APR16_Bldg_98_Work_Plan_April 2020_WKG_COPY.pdf CSA581 [CSA YRD13 01 Site No. S 2 Yard 13 CSA] - APR16_Rev 0 CBA-Yard 13 with Appendices A, B, C.pdf CSA601 (CSA 03096 01 Building 3096 Permitted Storage Facility) - APR16_Rev 0 CBA-Yard 13 with Appendices A, B, C.pdf CTA598 [WST 00640 01 Waste Oil AST (031/088)] - APR16_Rev 0 ITIR-WST-00640 with App A-D.pdf CWR607 [RAD 00375 02 Former Flight Controls Shop, B375 2LM] - APR16_Rev 0 CBA RAD-00375 with App A.pdf
| 41 | Section L. Volume I. | Proposal organization instructions indicate a 3-page limit for the “Title/Introduction Page (identify region)”. Please indicate what information is required for this section and how it will be evaluated? | Section L. Volume I. | Confirmed, all information required per Section L, 3.3.3 is to be included and is covered by the 3 page limit. A separate narrative is not required. |
| 42 | Section L. Volume I. | Proposal organization instructions indicate a 5-page limit for “Teaming/Subcontracting Lists”. Please indicate what level of detail is required for teaming/subcontracting and how the lists will be evaluated? | Section L. Volume I. | The teaming/subcontractor list identifies the team members IAW submitted past performance and pricing. Please refer to Section M for past performance and price evaluation criteria. |
| 43 | Section L. Volume II. Section 4.2 Contact Information | Section L. Volume II. Section 4.2 Contact Information specifies providing a list of all locations where work is to be performed and the percentage of work to be performed at each location. Is the requirement to provide a list of project locations (i.e. AF BRAC installations) and company offices where the work will be performed, along with the percentages, or is this limited to off-site locations? Considering this is an IDQ contract, the amount of work performed on-site (at AF BRAC installations) and off-site (at company offices) will be dependent on the number, type, and magnitude of the task orders issued under this contract. Consider removing this requirement from the RFP due to the high uncertainty of where and when the work would be executed. | Section L. Volume II. Section 4.2 Contact Information | As the solicitation is already a small business set aside, it is not necessary to provide the labor surplus area designation but offerors may provide this information to help the government identify areas of high unemployment/economic need within the region. |
| 44 | Section L. Volume III. Section 5.1.c Price assumptions, exceptions, and rationale. | What level of detail is required for price assumptions and rationale, and how will this section be evaluated? It is not clear if the AF is asking for a technical approach/basis of estimate in the form of price assumptions and rationale as supporting information for the price of TO-02. Please clarify the requirements for this section and indicate how the narrative will be evaluated. | Section L. Volume III. Section 5.1.c Price assumptions, exceptions, and rationale. | Identify any assumptions and exceptions taken to the Pricing Requirements. |
Information provided for exceptions and assumptions will assist the price evaluation team in determining completeness, reasonableness, balance, and professional compensation plan realism.
45 Section L. Volume III. Section 5.2.b 5. Section L. Volume III. Section 5.2.b specifies inclusion of “all required supporting documentation” of the proposed price. Please clarify whether the requirement pertains to inclusion of backup pricing documentation with competitive bids for services such as drilling and analytical, over the micropurchase threshold and that no backup documentation is required for other direct costs such as rental equipment and travel costs Section L. Volume III. Section 5.2.b, and d The price proposal shall not include information beyond that required by this instruction unless the Offeror considers it essential to document or support Offeror’s position.
As adequate price competition is anticipated Offerors are not required to submit competitive bids unless Offeror considers it essential to document or support Offeror’s position.
If, after receipt of proposals, the Contracting Officer (CO) determines there is insufficient data to determine price reasonableness or adequate price competition is not established and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, Offerors may be required to submit additional data.
| 46 | Section L. Volume III. Section 5.4.c | Section L. Volume III. Section 5.4.c indicates that non-severable CLINs are for Performance Based Services. Does this imply that severable CLINs under TO-02 are fixed price CLINs that are not performance based? Will work performed under severable CLINs be invoiced based on percent complete rather than performance based payment plans (PBP)? | Section L. Volume III. Section 5.4.c | The BECOS requirement is performance based to the maximum extent practicable. All CLINs are performance based. |
| 47 | Section L. Volume III. Section 5.4.c. | Are there required timelines for achieving the performance objectives in the non-severable CLINs, or are the requirements limited to achieving the performance objectives within POP? | Section L. Volume III. Section 5.4.c. | Performance objectives are required to be achieved within the period of performance. |
| 48 | Section L. Volume III. Section 5.4.c | Section L. Volume III. Section 5.4.c indicates that “The FFP totals proposed for each NS CLIN will be the ceiling prices used for development and negotiation of the PBPs”. If during the execution of TO02 additional scope/requirements are identified when compared to the price assumptions in the proposal, will the ceiling be adjusted upwards accordingly to accommodate the additional requirements? | NorCal Amended Section L 2.2.9 | Refer to revised language in amendment 1 to NorCal to "The Offeror’s proposal shall include a list of contractor team arrangement companies IAW FAR 9.6. Specifically any companies that will be providing separate FFP Fully Burdened Labor Rates for inclusion in the IDIQ tables (see Price Volume); and/or will be performing on Task Order (2)" |
| 49 | Section L. Volume I, Section 2.2.9 | Section L. Volume I, Section 2.2.9, please clarify if the list is to include all subcontractors for TO 2, regardless of whether they are included in the Labor Rates for IDIQ Tables? | NorCal Amended Section L 2.2.9. |
and Volume III. Section 5.5 Refer to revised language in amendment 1 to NorCal to "The Offeror’s proposal shall include a list of contractor team arrangement companies IAW FAR 9.6. Specifically any companies that will be providing separate FFP Fully Burdened Labor Rates for inclusion in the IDIQ tables (see Price Volume); and/or will be performing on Task Order (2)"
Offerors shall determine what team members "up to four (4) team members (prime and four (4) team members)" are providing FBLRs to be incorporated into the basic contract.
5.5. (f). The team may propose one (1) FFP FBLR Table for the entire team. If the team is proposing one (1) FFP FBLR Table the FBLRs shall be entered in the prime tab of the table.
also See answers to questions 12 and 13.
| 50 | General: | General: please confirm that only team subcontractors are required to have Labor Rates for the IDIQ ? | General | Only (prime and teaming partners) are required, not all subcontractors. | ||
| 51 | General: | In light of the new working reality under COVID-19, and the number of government employees (e.g. POCs on PPQs) working remotely, we kindly request that the Government allow CPARS to be used in place of PPQs due to possible lack of response on return of PPQs, or inability to transmit due to lack of technology to do so. | Section L | The requirement for submission of Volume III has been extended to 13 May 2020. | ||
| 52 | General: | In light of current events, we kindly request that the Government consider accepting recently completed PPQs in alternative formats. | Section L | PPQs are required to comply with Section L. | ||
| 53 | Section L: Proposal Submission Deadline | Please confirm that Volumes I and II are requested earlier than Volume III (30 March 20 at 1300 San Antonio, TX local time), however offerors may opt to submit the total proposal (Volumes I, II and III) by the due date - no later than (29 April 2020 at 1300 San Antonio, TX local time). | Section L | Confirmed all items due no later than 13 May IAW Section L. | ||
| 54 | Section L.2.2.9 Teaming/ | |||||
| Subcontracting Lists | "The Offeror’s proposal shall include a list of all teaming arrangements and subcontractors (if applicable) that will make up Labor Rates for IDIQ tables (see Price Volume); and/or partners and subcontractors proposed for task order 2." Please clarify if a list of all subcontractors to be used on task order 2 must be listed (e.g., laboratories, T&D, drillers, etc.) or if only teaming partners with signed teaming agreements or letters of commitment are required to be listed. If all subcontractors on TO2 must be listed, please confirm that letters of commitment are NOT required for competitively bid subcontractors that are not considered team partners/members. Also, if subs on TO2 must be listed, please move this requirement to Volume III since we will not know potential subs for TO2 until just before submittal of pricing. | Section L | Only (prime and teaming partners) are required, not all subcontractors. | |||
| 55 | Section L.4.2 Contact Information | Please confirm that contact information is only required by the prime contractor and not team members as well. | Section L | Confirmed, only prime contact information is required. | ||
| 56 | Section L.4.7 Model Contract | Paragraph (b) states "The 'original' copy shall be clearly marked under separate cover." Please confirm that only an electronic copy is required and a separate, original, hard copy document does not need to be submitted. | Section L | Confirmed, only an electronic copy is required; requirements are provided for offerors that elect to send in hardcopy. | ||
| 57 | Section L, 4.9.1, Estimating Methodology Utilized in Pricing Proposal | Accounting System - Subsection states “Indicate whether you have Government (DCMA) determination of adequacy of your accounting or cost estimating system and if so, provide evidence of such adequacy determination. Offerors that do not currently have an adequate accounting system shall complete a ‘Pre-award Accounting System Adequacy Checklist’ found in DFARS 252.215-7009 ‘Proposal Adequacy Checklist 2014-01’.” It is unclear if this is the DCAA Pre-award Accounting System Adequacy Checklist or another version. Can the Government please provide a copy of the Pre-award Accounting System Adequacy Checklist to be sure the accurate checklist is submitted? | Section L | Requirement to be removed. Amendment to the solicitation is forthcoming. | ||
| 58 | Section L, 4.9.1, Estimating Methodology Utilized in Pricing Proposal | Accounting System - subsection states that “both small and large business shall provide a summary of their accounting system.” Can the government please clarify whether or not this is a carryover from a different solicitation, or if large business teaming partners are supposed to provide information on their accounting system? | Section L | An adequate accounting system is required when cost type CLINs are contemplated or awarded. This requirement applies to prime contractors only, regardless of business size. FAR 16.301-3(a). Amendment to the solicitation is forthcoming. | ||
| 59 | Section L.2.4 | 2.4 Electronic Copies has a reference to DoD SAFE link. Please confirm that proposals will only be accepted via email, and will not be accepted using SAFE. | Section L | Proposals will be accepted by email. The DoD SAFE link is provided for offerors that elect to use DoD SAFE. | ||
| 60 | General | If changes to Volumes I and II are identified as Volume III is being completed, may the contractor submit revised/new versions of Volumes I and II with their Volume III submission? | Section L | All items comply with final proposing marking and deadline of 13 May IAW Section L. | ||
| 61 | Section L 5.2(e) | Where shall the contractor document pricing assumptions be referenced in Section L 5.2(e)? | Section L 5.1 c. | Section L 5.1 Price Volume Organization. (c). Price Assumptions, Exceptions, and Rationale | ||
| 62 | Section L 4.4 (a) | Section 4.4 (a) states that the cover letter shall include the Offeror's confirmation that the quote is valid for 12 months. Is a separate cover letter required if this information is on the SF33 (per 4.4 (b))? If a cover letter is to be provided, please confirm that the cover letter is excluded from the page count. | Section L 4.4 (a) | Comply with both Section L, 4.4 (a) and (b). Note the page count for Volume II Contract Documentation 4.4 Validity Statement is "unlimited". | ||
| 63 | Section L 2.3 | Can text in the margins be less than 12 point font? | Section L 2.3 | No, please comply with Section L, 2.3 "no less than 12 points". | ||
| 64 | General | Please verify that the size standard for this procurement is 750 employees (NAICS 562910 - Environmental Remediation Services). | SF33, Section B. | Confirmed size standard is 750 employees and the NAICS for this acquisition is 562910. | ||
| 65 | Section I | To add to the question regarding the NAICS code, FAR 52-219-6, Deviation 2019-O0003 is incorporated by reference in Section I. Should the NAICS specify Environmental Remediation with the size differentiator of 750 employees. | SF33, Section B and Section I. | The NAICS is listed in Section B of the SF33 (562910) the size standard is 750 employees. Note the clause 52.219-28 in Section I of SF33. | ||
| 66 | Section I | Section I, FAR Clauses Incorporated by Reference contains 52.215-21 Requirements for Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost Data – Modifications and Alternate II. Section I, FAR Clauses incorporated by full text includes 52.215-21, Alternate I, Alternate III and Alternate IV of this clause. Which takes precedence? | Section I | Please refer to FAR 15.408(m). As a part of the IDIQ and task orders under the IDIQ, the aspects outlined in FAR 15.408(m) may arise that require each of the listed clauses 52.215-21 (basic) and Alternates I to IV. | ||
| 67 | Section L 4.3 | Would the Government consider moving the requirement for a Master Table of Contents and Checklist to Volume III? It is difficult to anticipate the contents of Volume III with sufficient accuracy to submit a Master Table of Contents on March 30. | Section L | All items are to be received no later than the proposal deadline 13 May. | ||
| 68 | Volume 3 Cost | Are we to assume that the 2021 fourth Five Year Review document for Reese Base is to be prepared by the current contractor? | TO 2 | No, it is being completed by the current contractor. This will not be required under TO 2. | ||
| 69 | Volume 3 Cost | Please provide the 2020 Q1 & 2019 Q4 reports for Homestead be made available. | Google Drive | The following five documents have been uploaded to the Google Drive Site: |
----- Federal Facility Agreement, Quarterly Progress Report, Fiscal Year 2019 - Quarter 4, Period of July - September 2019 for Former Homestead Air Force Base, Florida (BRAC) ----- Federal Facility Agreement, Quarterly Progress Report, Fiscal Year 2020 - Quarter 1, Period of October - December 2019 for Former Homestead Air Force Base, Florida (BRAC) 70 Volume 3 Cost Please provide the 2019 or most recent LUC/IC report for the following sites:
- Kelly
- England
- Homestead
- Myrtle Beach Google Drive Land Use Control inspections are included as part of the annual Compliance Plan report, Table K-5 and Figure K-6. In addition, LUCs inspections are conducted as part of the Five Year Review process.
Documents uploaded to Google Drive:
APR16_FINAL VOLUME 1 REV 0 CP Rpt_Jan-Dec 2019.pdf APR16_FINAL VOLUME 2 REV 0 CP Rpt_Jan-Dec 2019_FILE No 1.pdf APR16_FINAL VOLUME 2 REV 0 CP Rpt_Jan-Dec 2019_FILE No 2.pdf
Third Five Year Review - AR 540118
| 71 | Volume 3 Cost | Brooks Base Site FT002 is not part of the CLIN structure. Is this correct or should cost for this be included? | TO 2 Price Model | FT002 achieved SC in 2019. However, cost must be included to include a 5YR for FY2020. Afterwards, no future cost is anticipated for this site. |
| 72 | Volume 3 Cost | Myrtle Beach site SD024 is not in the CLIN structure. Is this correct or should cost for this be included? | TO 2 Price Model | Confirmed site SD024 is not included in the site list nor the CLIN structure. Correct as is. |
| 73 | Volume 3 Cost | Please provide the 2019 or most recent LUC/IC or Visual Site Inspection Documentation for MMRP sites at the Eaker Base. | General | No documentation exists as LUC/IC Visual Site Inspections have not been completed at Bergstrom or Eaker MMRP sites previously. |
| 74 | Volume 3 Cost | South Central Base Kelly, Zone 1 sites D-2, D-4, D-5 and CS-3 appear excluded from the CLIN structure. Where shall we place costs associated with the O&M of these sites? Also, what coordination is necessary with the ORC contractor performing LTM/RAO at these sites? Please specify the division of work at these sites between the BRAC contractor and the Lackland AFB (JBSA) ORC contractor, as well as the proper CLIN to place cost. | Google Drive | Lackland AFB's ORC contractor will conduct O&M on these Zone 1 sites and send recovered groundwater (GW) to the Zone 2 Groudwater Treatment Plant (GWTP) headworks. BECOS's contractor's responsibility will begin where the Zone 1 GW recovery piping enters the headworks (demarcation). BECOS contractor needs to work out details of how ORC contractor will be notified by BECOS contractor and vice versa of alarms, shutdowns and releases (autodialer) at the remediation systems in Zone 1. Lackland's ORC contractor will be responsible for Reuse Water Lift Station, round reuse water storage basin and associated piping located in Zone 2 near GWTP. BECOS contractor shall annually obtain soil sampling results from ORC contractor from the acreage irrigated with Zone 2 GWTP effluent (reuse water). |
| 75 | Volume 3 Cost | The Homestead Base Google Drive Reference Document lists three documents that have not been uploaded to the drive. When will these documents be made available? | General | Documents will be provided upon request post award. |
| 76 | General | Are the responses to questions provided for the NorCal solicitation, dated 12 March 2020, also applicable to the South Central solicitation; specifically, the responses to questions concerning Section L? | General | Each BECOS solicitation is treated as a separate unique solicitation. |
| 77 | Volume 3 Cost | Regarding South Central site Kelly, has the RCRA Permit and Compliance Plan #50310 renewal occurred? If so, please provide a copy of the final approved document. | Administrative Record | AR 594906 may be used to search to locate on the administrative record. |
| 78 | Performance Objectives | For Former Kelly AFB site Building 98, the Performance Objective (PO) is specified as Site Closure (SC). This site has been closed under Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s LPST program for both soil and groundwater. Groundwater contamination exists at the site. In order to achieve a performance objective of SC for this site, to which of the following levels the AF is requiring cleanup of groundwater: (a) Residential Groundwater Protection Standards under the Kelly RCRA Permit/ Compliance Plan; (b) TCEQ LPST Plan A Category I levels; or (c) TCEQ LPST Plan A Category II levels. Please specify so vendors can design an appropriate groundwater remedy. | Google Drive | Note that Building 98 is not a site in the RCRA Permit/ Compliance Plan. |
Contractor should assume (c) TCEQ LPST Plan A Category II levels as the cleanup levels required to achieve SC.
The following document has been uploaded to the Google Drive: APR16_Bldg_98_Work_Plan_April 2020_WKG_COPY.pdf
| 79 | PWS | The Kelly RCRA Permit/Compliance Plan requires 3 years of annual clean data from all wells at a site that is listed in the permit/CP to achieve groundwater closure. Kelly site Building 98 is not a part of the Kelly RCRA Permit/Compliance Plan. For Bldg. 98 site, would the AF still require 3 years of clean annual sampling data for achievement of SC or would the requirement be different? Please specify how many rounds of sample results below clean up goals, and at what frequency will be needed to demonstrate achievement of SC for Bldg. 98 site. | PWS | Refer to TCEQ Leakage Petroluem Storage Tank LPST regulatory guidance. |
| 80 | Attachment 1 and TO2 Price Model | Several PFAS sites are included in the Base Year but the scope is not defined. For example, In Attachment 1 and in the TO2 Price Model, Kelly sites FT024, SS036 and SS037 are included for RA-O. Attachment 1 and the Price Model also include FT024 (PFAS), SS036 (PFAS), and SS037 (PFAS). We are not able to locate any other information about the PFAS sites. Please provide GFI, a scope, and performance objective for these sites, as shown in Attachment 1 for other sites. | Attachment 1 and TO2 Price Model | FT024 (PFAS) was inadvertantly identified on TO2 Price model, this has been corrected. There are no PFAS elements included for FT024 under TO2. Note there is no RA-O for FT024 under TO2. |
The PFAS impacts at SS036 (Zone 2 Groundwater) and SS037 (Zone 3 Groundwater) are identified in the TO2 site list. SS036 and SS037 include geographic areas of former Kelly where PFAS were identified in the SI. Because PFAS was identified in the areas associated with SS036 and SS037, the groundwater recovery system associated with SS036 and SS037 captures and transfers PFAS to the Zone 2 GWTP. PFAS elements associated with Zone 2 GWTP treatment train for these sites need to be tracked separately due to the funding required to support them.
Groundwater monitoring for PFAS was inadvertently included under TO2. The Site List will be updated.
| 81 | Price Model | In the pricing model, RA-O for non-severable Kelly sites SS003(S-1) and WP022(E-3) is not included in Base Year or Options 1 through 9- and 6-month extension. Where should the cost of annual CP sampling for these sites be captured? | Price Model | The objective for these two sites under TO 2 is SC; the annual compliance plan sampling at the sites is part of the site activities which lead to SC and as such is included as part of the overall non-severable work required to close the site. |
| 82 | GFI | For Myrtle Beach AFB, please provide the optimization plan for the groundwater extraction system at the FT011 site to all bidders | Google Drive | The Optimization Plan has not been approved by the State. The results of the extraction well rehabilitation will determine if any optimization to the extraction well network is recommended. The Rehabilitation Technical Memorandum was issued 4/24/2020 and will be posted to the google drive. |
| 83 | GFI | For all installations, please identify LTM sites that require mowing and/or vegetation clearing by the contractor. Currently available documents do not confirm which sites require these tasks, the typical frequency of events per year, or who is responsible for completion. | Google Drive | For Kelly AFB - The following areas require periodic maintenance: |
1. Fenced area of the Zone 2 Groundwater Treatment Plant (GWTP)
2. Fenced area Building 545 - Soil Staging Facility
3. Fenced area Site S-1 (SS003)/Zone 5 GWTP
4. Site E-1 (WP021)
5. Site S-4 (ST006)
6. Site S-8 (ST038)
Four quarters of Operations and Maintenance Reports have been uploaded to Google Drive:
APR23_10 2019 REV 0 OM Rpt Y8Q4 (Dec 2018-Feb 2019) APR23_FINAL OM Rpt Y9Q1 Mar-May 2019 APR23_FINAL O&M Rpt Y9Q2 Jun-Aug 2019 APR23_04 2020 Rev 0 OM Rpt Y9Q3 Sep-Nov 2019
| 84 | GFI | Will the following documents be provided with the GFI for Homestead ARB? | ||||
| a. | Federal Facility Agreement, Quarterly Progress Report, FY 2019 – Quarter 4, July – Sept. 2019, HAFB, October 2019; | |||||
| b. | Final Land Use Controls/Institutional Controls Inspection Report – 2018, September 2019; |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .