Admin_Srvc_Amendment_0004_QA.docx

Questions and Answers November 21, 2014 HDTRA1-14-R-0018 Amendment 0004

Q30. REF L.5.3.3 Pricing Information and Supporting Documentation. In the 1st paragraph, the 3rd sentence of this requirement states: “The offeror shall provide fully burdened rates and a breakdown of their unburdened rates as detailed in Section J, Attachment 12 (Price Model).” [underline emphasis added). However, at the 4th paragraph of the preceding L.5.1 GENERAL instruction, it correctly states: In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a) and as detailed below, information other than cost or pricing data is not required.” [underline emphasis added]. It is apparent to this offeror that the statement within L.5.3.3 is in direct contradiction to the FAR citations at L.5.1. Since this acquisition is being conducted as a SDVOSB set-aside, the Government has already determined that it anticipates adequate competition. Accordingly, we request that the statement in L.5.3.3 that requires a breakdown of unburdened rates be deleted and we also request that the rate breakdown section within the Attachment 12 (Price Model) also be deleted.

A30. A breakout of unburdened rates, in the format specified in Attachment 12, are required in order to determine price is complete and reasonable. A breakout of rates is requested so that the pricing evaluators may verify that offerors have included health and welfare (as required by the Service Contract Act) in their proposed burdened rates. There is no other way to verify that offeror’s included health and welfare in their burdened rates without assessing a breakout of rates. The request for a breakout of unburdened rates in this RFP is not related to pricing competition references found in FAR Parts 15.403-1 and 15.403-3(a).

Q31. REF L.5.3.3 Pricing Information and Supporting Documentation. In the 4th paragraph, the 3rd sentence of this requirement states: “Proposed first year rates that fall outside of the table ranges found in L.5.3.5 (Parts 1 – 3) will be deemed unrealistic.” This offeror considers that statement to be unduly restrictive and an unconscionable position for the Government to impose on offerors. The statement effectively requires that all offerors must be within a $1 pricing range for every labor category and, if any offeror is outside of that range they will not be considered for award. Although the Service Contract Act and DOL Wage Determinations establish ‘minimum’ compensation requirements, the Government’s inclusion of the above cited sentence and its restrictions cannot be supported under the FAR or DFARS. Accordingly, we request that the sentence be deleted.

A31. Please see the revisions to: Sections L.3.3.7; L.5.3.3; L.5.3.5; and M.2.2.3. The Service Contract Act will require a successor contractor to pay current Advantage SCI employees at least the same wage as was previously received. The Government will not divulge propriety rate information from Advantage SCI; therefore, a range system was created to ensure that offerors are well informed with Right of First Refusal and the requirement of contractor employees are paid at least the same rate as they have currently. The rate ranges are provided for informational purposes only.

Q32. REF L.5.3.3 Pricing Information and Supporting Documentation. In the 4th paragraph, the 4th sentence of this requirement states: “Overtime will not be considered in the price analysis.” In this offeror’s opinion, if the Government requires offeror pricing for overtime; then the overtime rates should be included in the evaluation for reasonableness and LPTA consideration. If the overtime rates are not evaluated for LPTA purposes, then an offeror could easily game the evaluation by proposing an overtime rate that is 3+ times the base rate to the Government’s and other offeror’s detriment. Accordingly, we request that the sentence be corrected to read: “Overtime will be considered in the price analysis and LPTA evaluation.”

A32. We determined the labor categories and rates to be analyzed based on the current resources utilized on the existing contract and need for continued support on the new anticipated contract. At this time, we do not anticipate overtime. Overtime is not included in our pricing evaluation methodology; however, all pricing (including overtime rates) will be analyzed to determine reasonableness. Additionally, the overtime factor of time and a half (1.5) is implied for all potential offerors in Attachment 12. If a contractor proposes an overtime rate that is 3+ the base rate then his/her proposed rate would be determined to be unreasonable and of little value to the Government.

Q33. REF L.5.3.5 Current Work Year Equivalent Data and Current Rate Ranges. In the paragraph following Table L.5.3.5 …(Part 3) on page 93, the paragraph states: “Each proposed labor rate, for the first year of performance, must be within the rate range…will be deemed unrealistic.” In other words, this paragraph contains the same restrictive and unconscionable wording as presented in the preceding L.5.3.3 statement. Accordingly, we request that the sentence be deleted.

A33. Please see the revisions to: Sections L.3.3.7; L.5.3.3; L.5.3.5; and M.2.2.3.

Q34. REF M.2.2.3 Factor – Price. Within the first paragraph, starting with the 5 sentence and even including bolded type face it states: “Each proposed labor rate, for the first year of performance, must be within the rate range sets offered….will be deemed unrealistic.” In other words, this Section M evaluation paragraph contains the same restrictive and unconscionable wording as presented in the preceding Question #4 L.5.3.3 statement. Accordingly, we request that the sentence be deleted.

A34. Please see the revisions to: Sections L.3.3.7; L.5.3.3; L.5.3.5; and M.2.2.3.

Q35. REF M.2.2.3 Factor – Price. This offeror notes that the Section M price evaluation fails to include overtime rates as part of the evaluated price for LPTA purposes. The Government’s failure to include the overtime rates in the evaluation may certainly result in an unfair LPTA determination and award. We request that the evaluation include overtime rates in order to ensure a fair competition.

A35. We determined the labor categories and rates to be analyzed based on the current resources utilized on the existing contract and need for continued support on the new anticipated contract. At this time, we do not anticipate overtime. Overtime is not included in our pricing evaluation methodology; however, all pricing (including overtime rates) will be analyzed to determine reasonableness. Additionally, the overtime factor of time and a half (1.5) is implied for all potential offerors in Attachment 12. If a contractor proposes an overtime rate that is 3+ the base rate then his/her proposed rate would be determined to be unreasonable and of little value to the Government. All proposed pricing (including overtime rates) will be analyzed to determine reasonableness.

Q36. REF M.2.2.3 Factor – Price. This offeror notes that for LPTA determination, the Government is only evaluating a sampling of labor categories (primarily in NCR). In this offeror’s opinion: For an IDIQ Contract with a ceiling value of $50,000,000 over 5 years, and with today’s MS Excel spreadsheet capabilities to calculate the total price for all labor categories, at all performance site locations, for all 5 years of contract performance. If the Government persists in only evaluating a small LCAT sample for LPTA purposes, then there is the potential for an offeror to game the price evaluation to the Government’s and other offerors’ detriment. In fairness to all offerors and to the American taxpayer of whose money this contract will utilize, we request that the solicitation develop a pricing model that includes all labor categories, at all locations, for the full 5 years of performance including overtime so that an honest and fair LPTA determination can be achieved.

A36. We determined the labor categories and rates to be analyzed based on the current resources utilized on the existing contract and need for continued support on the new anticipated contract. We consider the selected sampling to be a realistic snapshot of future resource needs at this time and will determine price is complete and reasonable.