H98210-15-R-0005-P00001.pdf

HQ014040930001001

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to provide a copy of the questions and answ ers submitted during the previous solicitation

(H98210-14-R-0038) that apply to this one (H98210-15-R-0005) for the DTMO CONUS COLA requirement.

Any additional request for clarifications must be sumitted in w irting via e-mail by 11:00 AM ET, Tuesday, December 16, 2014 to the follow ing personnel:

a. Hector E. Monge at hector.e.monge.civ@mail.mil

b. Anne Reynolds at anne.reynolds@dtmo.pentagon.mil

See Summary of Changes

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 5

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 10-Dec-2014

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X H98210-15-R-0005

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

09-Dec-2014

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE

RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

10-Dec-2014

CODE

DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY

4800 MARK CENTER DRIVE,

SUITE 07G12

ALEXANDRIA VA 22350-1300

H98210 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

H98210-15-R-0005

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been added by full text:

PREVIOUS SOLICITATION QS & AS

Defense Travel Management Office (DTMO)

CONUS COLA Data Collection and Analysis

Solicitation# H98210-14-R-0038

Questions and Answers

October 1, 2014

Q1: Section 4.6 states “derive off-the-shelf data and other cost-of-living data from primary source data/information. Primary source data/information is defined as data collected directly by the Contractor.” If relevant data is obtained from a source or subcontractor other than the prime contractor, does this fit the government’s definition of “primary source data/information?”

A1: The data can be collected from subcontractors or public sources, as well as by internal efforts.

Q2: Did the previous Contractor employ subcontractors? If so, who were these subcontractors?

A2: No.

Q3: Will any information obtained and analyzed in previous years from the previous Contractor be made available for this Contractor (if different from the incumbent)?

A3: No.

Q4: Section 4.7 states “CONUS COLA cost-of-living data will be effective 30 June each year, as mandated by the law governing CONUS COLA, Section 403B of Title 37, USC.” Please clarify if this means new COLA rates will go into effect of 30 June each year or data will be collected in a 12-month window ending on 30 June of each fiscal year.

A4: The data should reflect costs as of 30 June.

Q5: The Deliverables Table states that Standard/Off-the-Shelf Data is due 30 calendar days after COR provides the contractor with locations and vehicle selection. Please clarify if this is done at one time (i.e., the COR provides all locations to the Contractor at one time) or on a rolling basis throughout a data collection window (i.e., the COR provides groups of locations to the Contractor at different intervals). In recent years, has there been a specific time window for data collection?

A5: The locations have all generally been done at one time. Since the data was effective 30 June, in previous years the time window for data collection was February to April and then adjusted based on general inflation factors.

Q6: Section 4.11, Comparison City references costs are to be developed for a “wide range” of representative cities in the contiguous United States. Can this “wide range” descriptor be better defined in terms of the number of cities expected and other characteristics?

A6: Major cities, at least one in every of the 48 contiguous states plus the District of Columbia.

Q7: Section 4.11, Comparison City states the costs shall be calculated using the same methodology used for full-pricing locations. Does this mean “standard/off-the-shelf” data cannot be used?

A7: No, full-pricing refers to a complete market basket; standard data refers to the fact that it would be the data provided to any client.

Q8: Is the set of market basket items and their weights the same for all CONUS locations?

A8: Yes.

Q9: Are there changes to the methodology or process that are driving the change to a Small Business set-aside? Has there been an area of the SOW which is simplified or streamlined compared to years past?

A9: No, there are no changes to the government’s methodology. The SOW language was streamlined for clarity. Small business set-aside determinations are the responsibility of the contracting officer, and are based on market research.

Q10: Section 4.12.5.4 states “housing costs are defined and provided separately as rental expense, renter’s insurance, and utilities. The communities selected for pricing are to be provided with each task that collects housing data.” Will the housing cost data come from the BAH program? Please clarify the meaning of the second sentence.

A10: The contractor shall provide housing cost data to complete the cost estimate for the overall costs and unique pricings.

Q11: Can you provide the list of market basket items used last year?

A11: The market basket for CONUS COLA last year is proprietary. See section 4.5. The CONUS COLA market basket shall be the market basket used by the Contractor for off the shelf items; the market basket for OCOLA is in Appendix 3 of the PWS.

Q12: Section 4.14 of the PWS calls for unique cost-of-living data for Staten Island and Queens, NY. However, the SF1449 on page 5, for Item No. 0005, there is no quantity delineated. Should we assume for the base year this value is two?

A12: No.

Q13: Section 4.14 of the PWS calls for unique cost-of-living data for Staten Island and Queens, NY. However, under the CLIN Minimum/Maximum Quantity and CLIN Value Section, on page 33, for CLIN 005, there are no minimum or maximum values listed. For the base year should we assume the minimum is two? Is there a maximum value for this item?

A13: No. No.

Q14: Page 6 of the PWS lists a maximum quantity of three Non-Standard Public Commutation Costs, as does the CLIN Minimum/Maximum Quantity and CLIN Value Section on page 33.

However, Section 4.18 only lists Staten Island and Queens as possible locations. Should we assume another location may be required for this item? If so, what area would that be?

A14: No.

Q15: Page 6 of the PWS lists a maximum quantity of two Unique Transportation Costs, as does the CLIN Minimum/Maximum Quantity and CLIN Value Section on page 33. However, Section

4.19 only lists Bridgeport as a requested location. Should we assume another location may be required for this item? If so, what area would that be?

A15: No.

Q16: Sections 4.14, 4.15, 4.16, and 4.17 refer to provision of “unique full pricing” and “unique benchmark” pricing at established and new locations. Should we assume this means actual field work in these locations to obtain prices rather than use of “standard/off-the-shelf” data? If so, Section 4.15 further states that during the first year of contract performance “all” locations will be “new” locations. Does this mean all 300+ locations will require “unique” pricing rather than “standard/off-the-shelf” pricing in the base year?

A16: No. No.

Q17: Section 4.20 requests average U.S prices for the Overseas Comparison Market Basket for Cost-of-Living items for a period of one quarter, April through June. However, on page 46 under the deliverable schedule, data appears to be required “after the end of each quarter.” Should we assume it meant to say at the “end of the quarter”, specifically the April-June quarter?

A17: Yes, the deliverable is due at the end of the quarter. The PWS delivery schedule has been updated.

Q18: Section 4.20 references obtaining three quotes for 100 to 150 market basket items in at least 90 locations throughout the contiguous United States to support the Overseas Comparison Cost-of-Living calculations. This very much sounds like a “unique” pricing exercise as described in Sections 4.14, 4.15, 4.16, and 4.17. Can “standard/off-the-shelf” pricing be used for this work item? If not, a three-week data collection window, as per the Deliverable schedule seems ambitious.

A18: Yes.

Q19: Sections 4.14, 4.15, 4.16, and 4.17 all refer to Unique Full Pricing or Benchmark Pricing for Established or New Locations. However, only Sections 4.15, 4.16, and 4.17 have a reference to travel being potentially required. Is this an oversight or for provision of Unique Full Pricing of Established Locations (Section 4.14) there is no travel anticipated? Likewise, Section 7.0, Contractor Travel, leaves out possible travel for Section 4.14. Is this also an oversight?

A19: Yes, Section 7.0 and Section 4.14 have been updated to reflect travel may be required.

Q20: Section 4.23 calls for participation in a Post-Award Conference and submission of a written summary of the Conference to the COR. We recognize actual travel costs would be handled through CLIN 0014, however, there is no CLIN for labor hours for participation in the conference or preparation of the summary report. How should these costs be accounted for in the proposal.

A20: The post award conference can be held telephonically.

Q21: Section 2.3 references the given family size (4) and income ($68,000) for the 2013 data collection program. Will the government provide these parameters for the 2014 data collection program?

A21: Yes, the parameters for the data collection program is usually provided in the month of February.

Q22: In Appendix 2, Government Required Format, in Report B, what is the meaning of the column headings: “Gds Xref Location” and “Gds Xref Type”?

A22: The column heading have been renamed for clarity. See Revised Appendix 2.

Q23: Please clarify the Due Dates in Section 5 regarding Foundational Data for CONUS COLA.

Paragraph 4.10 implies the Government will identify the locations to be analyzed based on actual data collected but the data collection would not occur until the locations have been identified.

Further, paragraph 4.10.2 implies the contractor will provide a list of the full-pricing and benchmark pricing locations while the Deliverables section implies the Government is to provide these.

A23: There are multiple parts for the data collection; 4.10 and 4.13 are the base data of the contractor’s pricing locations, weight, and vehicles. The contractor will provide their list of full and benchmark pricing locations, (areas where the full market basket is used versus areas where a subset of the market basked is used. The remaining prices are based on the prices received. The government then requests work described in section 4.11, 4.12, 4.14 – 4.19.

Q24: Can you please provide the name of the previous contract and contract number associated with this work?

A24: The incumbent is Runzheimer International, LTC and the contract number is HC1028-10- F-2142.

Q25: Please clarify what is meant by “standard/off-the-shelf” cost data. Does this refer to readily available commercially-supplied data?

A25: Yes, or from the internally collected normal data contractors supply to their customers.

Q26: Section 4.5 references data collected for full-pricing locations shall use a market basket based on 100-150 items, which is also the market basket to be used for the “off-the-shelf” items.

However, review of commercially available cost data appear not to include such a comprehensive list of items.

A26: See A: 25.

(End of Summary of Changes)