J-C23_RFI_Responses_(2nd_Round).xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 23 KB Posted
- Attached to
- BOS, Hybla Valley and USCAAF Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- HQ0034-14-R-0002
- Issued by
- DOD Washington Headquarters Service
About this file
J-C23 Attachment
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
BOS, Hybla Valley and USCAAF has more files on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| RFIs | HQ0034-14-R-0002 | Attachment ii | |
| 2nd | |||
| # | Location in RFP | Question | Answer |
| 1 | Amendment 0005, pages 15/16, Quality Control Manager | Quality Control Manager. The requirement for the required Quality Control Manager is extremely defined, limited and specific. This position was made a requirement late in the procurement process (less than 2 weeks prior to submission date) and leaves little to no time for the procurement of appropriate resumes for this Corp of Engineer certified Quality Control officer/inspector. The short period of time to seek an approved Quality Control Manager strongly suggests that the incumbent contractor has a distinct advantage in the evaluation process. Will the Government consider eliminating the specific and limiting training and certification requirements for this position? | A Quality Control Manager is required but is no longer a key personnel requirement. However, it remains a requirement under the contract. Section C-5.1.1.1.12 Quality Control Manager has been added to the PWS. |
| 2 | Amendment 0005, pages 15/16, Quality Control Manager | The requirement to be present for 100% of all requirements suggests that the bidder must provide two (2) Quality Control Managers. One would have to be stationed at each location in order to meet this 100% requirement. Is this the intent of the Government? Will two (2) Quality Control Managers be required? | The offeror should determine the number needed to meet the requirement of the contracts. However, one quality control manager is the minimum requirement. |
| 3 | Quality Control Plan | The requirements of the procurement are to provide a Corp of Engineer certified Manager/Inspector and to structure our Quality Control Plan on the Unified Facilities Guide Specifications (UFGS). The UFGS is structured towards construction and manufacturing. Because this is an Operation, Maintenance and Custodial type contract, will the Government reconsider the strict requirements of the RFP and allow industry bidders to develop and propose their own Quality Control Plan based on current industry standards? | The Contractor will have a QC plan that addresses Operations and Maintenance. The Contractor will be prepared to execute minor projects with a scope of work beyond operations & maintenance. These projects will consist of minor repairs to the facilities and will require a QC plan structured towards construction. |
| 4 | Snow and Ice Removal | The recent industry approach to pricing snow removal has been a cost reimbursement type of pricing because of the vast suggestive nature and amount of annual snow fall and ice control; this approach falls in line with the Government’s focus on cost savings. Will the Government reconsider the firm fixed price snow and ice control of this procurement and change the CLIN for this element to a reimbursable CLIN? If yes, please change the CLIN to a price per hour for each equipment type/operator. | No, this remains a fixed priced CLIN |
| 5 | We appreciate the extension that was posted today, however, we would like to request an additional extension. The current due date of Monday, January 13th would require our proposal to be mailed out on Thursday, January 9th to ensure delivery by the 11:00 AM cutoff time established for Monday morning. This does not provide adequate time to incorporate into our proposal the substantial number of changes that were made to the solicitation. Would you consider an additional two week extension of the due date? | The current RFP due date is revised to 01/17/2014 | |
| 6 | A written record of the site visit shall be made and furnished to all prospective offerors. The record will include a summary of all the areas visited.” This has not been provided yet, nor have we received a list of site visit attendees. We respectfully request that this information be provided at your earliest opportunity. | This information is provided as J-L3. | |
| 7 | Q#10(Initial RFI responses) – This answer states that a Quality Control person is required as one of the Key Personnel. This is a new requirement for which we must advertise and recruit. Even with the current extension provided, there is not sufficient time to find and recruit a qualified individual to include in our proposal. Does the Government require this to be a separate stand-alone position or can the functions of the Quality Control person be a collateral duty of one the other key positions? | No, not a key personnel, but a contract requirement. One QC inspector can cover both sites/buildings. | |
| 8 | Q#20(Initial RFI responses) – The answer provided still lists Past Performance as Volume II and Price as Volume II. In addition, it appears that the price proposal is to be included twice – once with the Past Performance and Business volume and again by itself. Was this the intent? | L.5 (c) is revised as follows: (c) Offerors must submit one original and three (3) copies of their technical (Volume I), one original and three (3) copies of their past performance proposal (Volume II), and one original and three (3) copies of their price proposal (Volume III) including all attachments, on separate CD-ROMs (one per proposal volume) using Microsoft Office 2007 compatible format. |
| 9 | Q#39(Initial RFI responses) – The answer does not fully address the question. The part of the question regarding bird control is not answered at all. Question: What kind of coverage is required for Bird Control? There are no observed bird issues on the building currently, however, if structural exclusion becomes necessary due to birds loafing on the building structure in the future, would this be considered IDIQ. | Bird control is part of pest control and is a house cleaning issue that must be maintained. Structural exclusion will not be required and is not permitted at either site. |
| 10 | Q#42(Initial RFI responses) – Will attachment J-C5 be updated to reflect this new information regarding the trash, refuse & recycling at USCAAF? The attachment states that one pull daily Monday through Friday is required. | Yes, It will be updated. Both locations will require two dumpsters, one for trash and one for recycling. The require sizes are noted in J-C5. At USCAAF, the contractor will only provide a recycling dumpster. The District of Columbia provides the trash dumpster. |
| 11 | Q#53(Initial RFI responses) – The answer provided to this question states that the water treatment plant at HVFB must be manned 24/7. This contradicts with the answer provided in questions #9 and #88. Please clarify. | The only water treatment plant is at Hybla Valley and should be manned 24/7. The water treatment plant is the cooling tower which is a closed loop system maintained biweekly. USCAAF does not have a water treatment plant. There are no other on site staffing requirements during non-core hours. |
| 12 | Q#98(Initial RFI responses) – The answer provided to this question does not address what was asked. This question does not reference repairs over $150,000. The question that was asked related to whether any additional spreadsheets or back up information is required to be submitted. Can the Government please provide an answer to this question? | No additional detail spreadsheets are required outside of those listed in the RFP. |
| 13 | Q#121(Initial RFI responses) – This answer states that the SF-33 and the Amendments are to be included in Volume III. According to the answer provided in question #20 and revised section L.5(c), there is no Volume III. Please clarify. | L.5 (c) is revised as follows: (c) Offerors must submit one original and three (3) copies of their technical (Volume I), one original and three (3) copies of their past performance proposal (Volume II), and one original and three (3) copies of their price proposal (Volume III) including all attachments, on separate CD-ROMs (one per proposal volume) using Microsoft Office 2007 compatible format. |
14 Q#196(Initial RFI responses) – Since contractors are required to furnish and provide the hand held devices required, does the Government intend for this cost to be included in the fixed price portion of the contract? Or will a separate task order be issued for this requirement since the cost will exceed $2,000? If the cost is to be included in the fixed price portion of the contract, bidders must know the following information in order to adequately price this requirement.
1) How many hand held devices must be purchased for use at HVFB and how many must be purchased for use at USCAAF?
2) What kind of devices are required. There are several different options available. Devices range from Portable Data Terminals to Tablets, with a price ranging from $500 - $5,000 for one device.
3) What version of Maximo is the Government currently using?
4) Does the Government currently have the Maximo Mobile Work Manager software? This is required for use with hand-held devices and must be purchased for the devices to be compatible with Maximo. Due to licensing issues, the contractor would not be able to purchase add-on software for a Government owned system.
5) Is Maximo deployed across one or more tiers? Is Maximo run on a single physical server or across multiple servers?
6) What is the current licensing structure of Maximo and at what level will the Contractor have access? Contractors will require access at the Authorized User level in order to setup and correctly use the contractor owned hand held devices.
| 1)Handheld devices are not required. This requirement has been deleted form the RFP. 3.) The Government is currently using Windows Maximo 2003 5.2 4) Handhelds are not required, thus software for handhelds are not required. 5)Maximo runs on multiple load balance physical servers 6)The contractor will be given sufficient access to meet the terms of the contract or the requirement will be deleted. | ||
| 15 | Q#209 – The answer states “USCAAF - Recyclables have been placed into the trash because there currently is no recycle dumpster container on site. The awardee will provide recycle dumpster container.” This directly contradicts with question #42, which states “District of Columbia picks up the Trash and Recycling Collection” at the USCAAF. Please clarify which answer is correct and specifically whether or not the contractor will be responsible for any trash, refuse or recycling costs at the USCAAF. | The District of Columbia is responsible for providing and emptying the trash dumpster. The Contractor is responsible for providing and for emptying a recycling dumpster. |
| 16 | Q#210 - The answer provided to this question does not address what was asked. This question does not reference dumpster pickups. The question that was asked related to whether maintenance staff is to be on-site at each location during core hours. Can the Government please provide an answer to this question? | Yes. The maintenance staff should be on-site during core hours at both locations. |
| 17 | Would you mind looking at the revised attachment J-B1 and J-B3 that was posted with Amendment #5? The response to question #92(Initial RFI responses) on the RFI’s states that the attachment would be revised to change the quantity from 12 months to 7 months for CLINs X007 and X008 (snow and ice removal). It does not appear that this change has been made and we do not want to assume that we should change it ourselves. We would greatly appreciate if you could provide the updated attachments with this change. Will a revised Section B also be provided for this change? | The revised attachments J-B1 and J-B3 have been added to the RFP. |
| 18 | We also noticed that section L.10 was not revised as per the answer provided in question #3(Initial RFI responses). Will an updated Section L be provided? | Section L has been revised accordingly. |
| 19 | One of the attachments, “J-C22 Boiler Operation Instruction and Attachment”, referenced the boiler plant at FOB2. Just didn’t understand the relevance?? | FOB2 does not apply. This attachment is removed from the RFP. |
| 20 | I’m confused on CLINs x007 and x008. This is for snow removal. Shouldn’t the quantity be 7 months instead of 12 months since we are only to invoice 7 months out of the year? | The quantity is 7 months. |
| 21 | We acknowledge receipt of Amendments 0005 and 0006. The revisions contained in Amendment 005 appear to be quite extensive, five (5) updated attachments and seven (7) added attachments. This information must be processed by ourselves and our subcontractors. Therefore, we are requesting the proposal due date be extended to 31 January 2014. In addition, we are requesting an additional site visit for our subcontractors. | The current RFP due date is revised to 01/17/2014 |
| 22 | #170(Initial RFI responses): Payment Bond: It is unclear if you’re requiring a payment bond with offerors based on the estimated total IDIQ activity, or will a payment bond be required each time a task order is issued? | A payment bond will be required each time a task order is issued. |
| 23 | Longevity of Service Contract Employees: WHS indicates that this information will be provided at the time of award. The answer to this question is required now in order to ensure that offeror’s are including the most current fringe benefits in their proposed firm fixed price. This information has a direct impact on pricing and the information is important to ensure equal footing by offeror’s when preparing their pricing. | This information will be provided in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 22.12 and is not currently available. |
| 24 | After careful review of the CBA agreement, I noticed that the one covering the Engineering and more skilled staff expired on Dec 31, 2013. Should we assume it is being renewed and use the 2013 figures? | The Government has provided the current contract CBA. |
| 25 | The second CBA agreement for the janitorial staff only covers Hybla Valley. Is there a CBA agreement for US Court of Appeals? I am assuming that if I use the staff interchangeably that the Hybla Valley CBA covers it? | The Government has provided the current contract CBA. |
| 26 | RFI #7(Initial RFI responses): Does the 677 work orders include PM’s? We are assuming that it would not; however, this can make a significant difference in the labor needed to accomplish the work and the maintenance budgets that we must bid. Therefore, please clarify. | The 677 work orders do not include Preventive Maintenance tasks. |
| 27 | RFI #10(Initial RFI responses): This adds an additional Key Position of Quality Control. The current closing date does not allow sufficient time for offerors to recruit a qualified candidate and submit a resume with the proposal. Additionally, this position has been added; however, the solicitation was not modified to include the qualification requirements for this new position. Request that the government provide the qualifications required for this Quality Control position. Additionally, please clarify if the government requires a dedicated full-time Quality Control individual or whether the Project Manager or Chief Engineer could perform the Quality Control duties? | The qualifications for the QC inspector are provided in section C-5.1.1.1.12 . The contract requires only one dedicated QC inspector to cover both buildings. |
| 28 | RFI #11(Initial RFI responses): The answer provided does not sufficiently answer the question asked. The question asked was “Does the government expect the contractor to provide a PM and a Chief Engineer as well as two site supervisors (one for each building)? The question was whether the government wanted a total of 4 personnel … a PM, a Chief Engineer, a Site Supervisor for HVFB, and a Site Supervisor for USCAAF. The government’s answer was “Confirmed. The Government expects the Contractor to supply both positions?” Does this mean only a PM and a Chief Engineer or does it mean two Site Supervisors or some other combination? Please clarify to specifically state if the Government requires a PM, a Chief Engineer, a separate Site Supervisor for USCAAF, and a separate Site Supervisor for the HVFB. | No- The government requires: one (1) Supervisor/Project Manager, one (1)Chief Engineer, one(1) Quality Control inspector, one (1) electrician, one (1) boiler technician (at HVFB only). The positions are the minimum contract requirement. The qualified contractor will have the labor workforce to meet all requirements. |
| 29 | RFI #23(Initial RFI responses): The answer conflicts with the requirements of Section L. Section L states graphics are exempt from the 12 pt font size as stated in Section L. Graphics are typically developed within a Table. | Graphics within a table are exempt from the 12 point font size requirement. |
| 30 | RFI #52(Initial RFI responses): We are very confused. It appears that the Government requires a PM, a Chief Engineer, a USCAAF Operating Engineer/Site Manager, a HVFB Operating Engineer/Site Manager, and a QC Manager as a minimum. Is that correct? These positions would be separate from the janitorial staff, maintenance mechanics, electricians, and other trades personnel. Is that correct? | See answer to question #28. |
| 31 | RFI #106 and RFI #196(Initial RFI responses): The answer provided indicates the contractor is to purchase and provide hand-held devices for the CMMS Maximo system. How can the contractor provide these? Specific information must be provided by the Government on the current version of the Maximo System so offerors can contact Maximo for the devices that would be available that would be compatible with the current system. Additionally, since the contractor does not own the license for the Maximo System there is no guarantee that we can even purchase them. Additionally, in order to get the devices working the contractor would have to have authorization and access to the full Maximo System to program and or modify the Maximo software so that the devices work properly. Will we have this system authorization and access to effect this? Will the government provide all the needed information in order for the offeror to determine the cost to provide, install and implement the hand-held devices. Additionally, Maximo representatives have indicated they cannot provide this information to us to properly price this element prior to the current due date for proposals. | No hand held devices are required on this contract. |
| 32 | RFI #110(Initial RFI responses): The answer provided implies that weekend snow storms would not need to be addressed over the weekend as long as the cleanup is completed prior to 0700 on a government work day. Is that correct? | Snow removal is required at all times to include weekends, holidays and when the government is closed. |
| 33 | RFI #113(Initial RFI responses): The answer provided indicates Major Repairs up to $150,000; however, C-5.3.2.1 appears to limit it to $100,000. Which is correct? | Section C-5.3.2.1 is revised to reflect a limit of $150,000 |
| 34 | RFI #121(Initial RFI responses): Please clarify that Amendment SF-30’s are to be submitted in the Price Proposal Volume III and not the Business Volume II. | Amendment SF-30s are to be submitted in the Price Proposal, Volume III |
| 35 | RFI #148 and RFI #204(Initial RFI responses): The vendor quotes for exterior window cleaning, particularly at the USCAAF, are approximately $100,000 for each time cleaning is required because of the special equipment needed and the aesthetics and age of the building. Will this be an IQ task order since it will be over $2,000? | No, this is a requirement of the fixed price portion of the contract |
| 36 | RFI #169(Initial RFI responses): Other answers to RFIs on fuel indicates the government provides/pays for the fuel. Please clarify that the language requiring the contractor to “maintain full fuel liquid levels” does not mean the contractor is to pay for the fuel costs but just to ensure the levels are kept full. | The contractor will be responsible for the cost of maintaining fuel liquid levels for fuel used during any testing. For emergency situations in excess of 24 hours, the Government will be responsible for maintaining full fuel levels. |
| 37 | RFI #191(Initial RFI responses): The answers provided do not correlate to the questions asked. Please review and provide sufficient clarification to the questions actually asked. | The answers to #191(Initial RFI responses) are as follows: a) No, b) No, c) None, d) n/a, e) n/a, f) No, g)No |
| 38 |
RFI #194(Initial RFI responses): This answer indicates offerors will be responsible for existing deficiency correction without reimbursement; however, RFI #103(Initial RFI responses) states the Government will pay 100% of cost of repair for current violations. Which answer is correct?
| The answer to RFI #103 is correct. | ||
| 39 | RFI #197(Initial RFI responses): This answer appears to conflict with the answers provided in RFI #100, RFI #140, and RFI #141 which states the Government pays all fuel consumption bills. Please specifically clarify exactly what the government pays relative to fuel and what is the contractors’ responsibility. This is a big cost element that offerors must understand to properly price the contract effort. | This question is answered in line 39 above. |
| 40 | RFI #206(Initial RFI responses): The information provided does not answer the questions asked. Since this is a significant cost element of the offerors proposal, request that you please review and provide the information specifically requested. | No separate recycling program is required. The Contractor should implement the current Government recycling program |
| 41 | RFI #208(Initial RFI responses): Why is the government unwilling to recognize licenses which the various States allow? It is simply a matter of semantics on how each state establishes the names/levels of their licenses. It seems arbitrary that the Government would not accept an equivalent license that has the same qualifications but is titled different. Respectfully request you reconsider your position. | The correct answer is: Yes we will revise the requirement. USCAAF no CE is needed. For Hybla Valley Virginia Third Class engineer license or equivalent. |
| 43 | RFI #212 and RFI #213(Initial RFI responses): The information provided changes the frequencies on numerous PMs. Request that the solicitation be modified appropriately to reflect these changed requirements since it has always been that if there is a discrepancy between the solicitation document and the Q&A’s the RFP prevails. | J-C14 has been updated accordingly. |
| 44 | RFI #218(Initial RFI responses): Is there space available at the USCAAF for the container that the offeror is to provide? | Space will be identified for the recycling dumpster after contract award. |
| 45 | Upon review of the RFI’s posted yesterday, we found a discrepancy in one of the answers provided. The answer given for question #134 of $500,000 is grossly misrepresented. Our invoicing for Hybla Valley for task orders was $1,032,992 and for USCAAF it was $453,383 for a total of $1,486,375. This amount is almost three times more than what you have indicated to bidders. We wanted to bring this to your attention as we’re certain you’ll want to make this clarification. | #134(Initial RFI responses) represents the Government's best estimate for task orders for work at both sites. The Government does not confirm the numbers provided in this answer are correct. |
| 46 | · J-C22 refers exclusively to FOB2. Since this attachment is specific to FOB2, which is no longer part of this contract, we would like to seek clarification as to whether this is applicable to Hybla. |
· J-C22 requires performance 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Does the Government require the boilers at Hybla to be a 24/7 staffed operation.
· The reference made in both section C-5.1.2.4.1 and attachment J-C22 to the DOE Energy Savings Performance Contract and Task Order is misleading. It references a task order that nobody has access to, which is likely also specific to FOB2. Will this task order be provided?
· J-C22 states that the work must be performed in accordance with Honeywell’s suggested work procedures and also states that Honeywell will maintain the Boiler Management System installed under contract #DE-AM36-99EE73683-M0006, Task Order #HQ0034-07-F-1040. The boilers listed in RFI #138 state that the manufacturer is UNILUX, not Honeywell. Is it correct that Honeywell will be performing work on UNILUX systems?
· The UNILUX Model ZF200WG Boilers located at Hybla are hot water boilers, rather than steam boilers. Attachment J-C22 references Steam Heat and states that steam shall be supplied 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. This would not be relevant to hot water boilers. Please advise.
Attachment J-C22 has been removed.
Sheet2
Sheet3
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .