additionalquestionsNAC.docx

The Technical Approach (Tab C) is to be comprised solely of a “written narrative describing” the Quality Control Plan. Is there to be a page limit allowed for the length of this description?

Response: No limit, The submitted QCP will be specific and relevant to this requirement at the Nebraska Avenue Complex.

On page 4 of the Instructions to Offerors, we are instructed to construct our QCP description to “meet the criteria outlined in Section 1.2.66” of the RFP. In the Evaluation discussion that follows, we are instructed that the Plan (QCP) “shall meet the criteria of Section 1.8.6” of the RFP. These two sections discuss differing criteria, but we are clearly being told to be guided by one, while we shall in fact, be evaluated by the other. Please clarify which of these RFP Sections should govern our construction of a response?

Response: Both, they are not inconsistent with one another.

The Evaluation discussion states – “A Quality Control Plan (QCP) shall be developed and submitted for approval to the CO or their designee 15 days prior to the start of the Contract.” In view of this and since the entire “Technical Approach” is devoted to the “description” of the QCP, do you merely want an outline of the QCP that we will later be “developing,” or do you want the Plan in its entirety, which will later be modified within the timeframe for submittal, described above?

Response: In Exhibit J-19 the QCP is stated as being due after award, 15 days prior to the start of the contract. This would be a re-submission to correct any issues the Government found in the first submission which is due with your proposal. The first submission is to be a fully developed QCP.

Under Tab C: Technical Approach, we are directed to “provide a written narrative describing the Quality Control Plan used for the contract submitted for consideration in Factor 1A.” The term “Factor” does not appear in the “Instructions” discussion, save for this mention. The described contents are designated only in terms of “Tabs,” while the “Evaluation” discussion is conducted in terms of “Factors” and “Tabs.” If we are guided by “Factor 1A” of the “Evaluation “ discussion, this would appear to lead us to “Factor 1: Corporate Experience – TAB A.” Are you requesting that our “Corporate Experience” (alternately listed as “TAB A” and “Factor 1 – TAB A”) discussion be focused on our “Experience” with Quality Control Plans?

Response: In the document “Instructions for Offerers and Evaluation Factors” the terms factor, tab and section are not consistently applied. The CO or CS will clarify this.

The “Instructions” are listed in terms of “Volumes” (I and II) and TABs, while the “Evaluation” discussion lists items in terms of “Factors” (4 in total) and TABS (A, B, C & D). Since “Factor 4: Pricing” is listed as TAB D in the “Evaluation” discussion, does this mean the TAB D is actually “Volume I – Price Proposal” as discussed in the “Instructions?” If so, which would you prefer we designate the Price proposal – Volume I or Tab D or both? ?

Response: In the document “Instructions for Offerers and Evaluation Factors” the terms factor, tab and section are not consistently applied. The CO or CS will clarify this.

Section E.2 defines the role of the Government personnel with whom the contractor will be interacting. Section E.2.2 defines the role of the CO and the COR. Section E.2.3 states that the Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative (COTR) will be working with the Government’s Quality Assurance Evaluators (QAE), but that position (COTR) is neither specifically identified nor defined.

A) Under what circumstances will the contractor be dealing with the COTR beyond the Quality Assurance assignment?

B) In terms of Government authority is the COR or the COTR of higher rank?

C) Will the COR or the COTR be the primary point of contact for the contractor’s on-site Management personnel?

Response: The COR is the highest ranking on-site Government official. The contractor may see more of the COTR but the higher authority is the COR.

Under the directive of the “Performance Work Statement” of the SOO, offerors are directed that “To be acceptable for award, offerors must submit a performance work statement that meets all of the objectives reflected in Exhibit J-1”(emphasis added). This is clearly and important submission, but it does not appear in the “Instructions to Offerors,” nor is it mentioned in the “Evaluation” narrative.

A) Are offerors to Response: The CO and CS will clarify this????

This Section describes the necessary qualifications for a Project Manager (H.15.2.1) and an On-Site Supervisor (H.15.2.2). Creating and filling these positions appears to be a requirement of the contract under the clauses of Section H and C, as specified.

A) Should offerors consider these two positions to be required key personnel for the construction of any management design and for pricing purposes? Yes B) Are these two positions currently in existence with the incumbent contractor? Yes C) Typically a Performance Based contract does not stipulate job titles and positions that a contractor must maintain on site. Are there any other clauses of the contract or assumptions on the part of the Government that take exception to the guiding principles of a Performance Based Contract?

Response: There are other clauses in the contract that will impact the level of skill and licensing of selected skilled employees. Also compliance with codes and local jurisdictions will impact staffing selections. See H.15.5. If adjacent non-Federal locations require licensing by the State jurisdiction so would the NAC under this contract.

It is noted that the “PBS CIO will make every effort to provide one desktop and/or one laptop to newly integrated Building Automation Systems…” For costing purposes, is there currently a computer being provided by GSA for the contractor at the site?

Response: Yes, there is a dedicated computer for the BAS on site.

We were unable to find a USDOL Wage Determination or a current Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).

A) Are the NAC facilities currently operating under a CBA? Yes B) If so, will you be releasing a copy of the current CBA? Yes C) If not, will you be releasing a copy of the current Wage Determination, appropriate for the area?

This clause states: “VI. This is a fixed-price Contract and while working with the Government in obtaining goals the Contractor is motivated to find improved methods of performance in order to increase its profits. Results of an effective partnership should reflect a “mutual win” situation.”

Does this mean that after a firm fixed-price award has been made for this Performance-Based contract, that all operational savings realized through contractor program modifications and innovations will accrue 100% to the contractor?

Response: No, for example, any operational changes that might reflect in a lower electrical bill will benefit the taxpayer. There are cost functions that are under the contractor’s direct control that would result in cost savings to the contractor; for example, determination that replacing a six dollar bearing is cheaper than buying a whole new motor.

This section refers to “a” CMMS or “other means “if available or by other means if CMMS is not available…” In Section 1.8.4, reference is made to the “Government-furnished.”

A) If the contractor is responsible for the management of the CMMS, including logging service calls and monitoring all components of the BOP, will the contractor not have continuous access to the CMMS?

B) Is the Government anticipating that the contractor will provide a back-up CMMS to augment the Government-furnished CMMS?

Response: If the contractor has a commercial CMMS that they believe is more efficient and easier to use than the Government CMMS or if the contractor wants to mitigate the risk of the Government CMMS being off line, they may use their product once they have received Government approval. Being that all maintenance records are the property of the Government, the contractor would need to provide access to the Government for inspection purposes. If a contractor elects to use their own CMMS this does not abrogate them from also populating and keeping up to date the Government CMMS if it is available to use.

A) Is the existing CMMS an active and current model of the MAXIMO system, or do dated software and modules of a previous generation of the product line support it? It is what it is.

B) Are all relevant systems and service call communications systems connected to or otherwise run through, the CMMS as it currently exists? Not all.

In between these two Section entries is the word:

“Fixtures????” This section is the Glossary. We forgot to define fixtures.

Does this indicate a Section that was overlooked or is it just a typo? This section is the Glossary. We forgot to define fixtures.

The initial reference (C.1.8.1) requires “The Contractor must be able to respond immediately, from Sunday at Midnight to Friday at midnight (24/5) to a variety of service requests involving multiple trades, including the operation of building control and energy management systems.”

Concurrent with this, Section C.1.24.3 (Tour Frequencies) specifically demands that the Contractor maintain “Tour Frequencies” to meet “DAILY: Major HVAC equipment (when in operation), including boilers, chillers, cooling towers, pneumatic control air compressors, and air handler rooms. Fire alarm system control units (e.g. fire alarm system control units shall not have any unwanted trouble conditions). Steam system reducing and regulating stations. Special HVAC for critical functions.”

We confront a problem, when the aforementioned is applied to applied to specifications enumerated in Section C. 1.24.5 – especially those requiring:

“a. Monitoring the starting, stopping, and loading of equipment.

b. Checking all operating equipment in the watch area at a minimum of once every 8 hour shift.

c. Recording operating data in appropriate logs or records at a minimum of once every 8 hour shift.

d. Making adjustments at the central control panel in response to changing operating Conditions.

For fire protection and life safety systems, tour frequencies shall be in accordance with the requirements in the applicable NFPA code and standards (C.1.42),” we see a contradiction in directions.

In the aforementioned specifications and servicing requirements, the only way to meet all of the requirements is to provides service on a 24/7/365 basis, or a variation of the same when boilers, HVAC and other equipment are primed and operating.

The requirements supporting C.1.8.1, that are subordinated but detailed (see reference Sections)) – cannot be fulfilled on a 24/5 basis unless the boilers and the HVAC systems are fully shut down on Friday night – even in the dead of winter.

Can the Government please clarify or explain the requirement in greater detail so that offerors know whether they are bidding a 24/5 requirement or something substantially greater than that?

Response: Emergency response is required 24/7. Onsite staffing is 24/5; midnight Sunday to midnight Friday. The boiler plant has operating engineers 24/7 from October 15th to April 15th. Emergency response is that someone will answer the phone at 0200 Saturday and subsequently place a call to a trades person to show up on site to address an emergent issue. GSA would pay this cost because it is beyond the 24/5 time frame.