Amend_01_ID04140153_Questions_and_Answers_29_Jan_2015.docx

Questions and Answers 29 January 2015

Question: C.2.1.10.2: What are the numbers of acres for each herbicide treatment zone?

Answer: Due to the nature of the invasive species on Robins AFB, the number of acres to be treated cannot be quantified but to assist with the proposal, please see the attached document that provides a brief background of the purpose of the task, the preferred control measures, the zone approach described in the PWS and a list of invasive species most likely found on Robins AFB.

See additional attachment titled “Invasive Species Control at Robins AFB” Question: L.6.B A preliminary MS Project schedule showing the level of detail of tasks and deliverables required by the government to evaluate and verify our approach would consume most of our 40-page technical volume based on format and page specifications. May we exclude the schedule from the page count?

Answer: No Question: L.6.B Would 11 x 17 pages be permissible for items such as schedules, tables, schematics, and graphics? If so, how many pages would we count for each?

Answer: Yes and one (1), respectively.

Question: L.6.B May we use smaller than 12-point type for graphics and tables?

Answer: Yes, as long as they are legible.

Question: B.1(a) What other portions of the SF1449 than Blocks 23 and 24 must completed at time of proposal submission? It is our understanding that we upload the SF 1449 along with our proposal files. Please confirm.

Answer: As long as the proposal has all of the pertinent information, the SF 1449 face page is not required.

Question: P 167: The RFP indicates that the “Proposal must include proof of SAM registration. However, Neither Sections L nor M indicate in which volume to include this proof. Please confirm that the proof of SAM registration may be included as part of Volume II: Price Proposal.

Answer: Yes, proof of SAM registration may be included as part of the Price Proposal or separately.

Question: P 168: The RFP indicates that a FAR 52.219-9 compliant subcontracting plan shall be submitted. 1- Are there specific SB goals for this BIEST contract? If yes, please provide. 2 – Are we required to submit the subcontracting plan with our proposal on due date? If yes, indicate in which volume to include the subcontracting plan.

Answer: Subcontracting plan must be submitted with the proposal. There are no small business goals specifically set for the BIEST. Goals must be in accordance with established policies. The Subcontracting plan is a separate document and will not be included in the page count.

Question: Please confirm which contract the Government anticipates to utilize for the award of this project.

Answer: This is an open market action. The Schedules will not be utilized.

Question: In order to adequately address the items within, we respectfully request a 1-2 week extension, due 2/13 or 2/20.

Answer: An extension will granted till 10 February 2015; 2:00 PM Question: Can we use fonts smaller than 12 point as long as they are legible for graphics, tables, figures, etc.?

Answer: Yes Question: Can we use 11x17 pages (schedule, org chart) and have them count as only 1 page?

Answer: Yes Question: Does the schedule count in the 40-page limit?

Answer: Yes Question: Does the organizational chart count in the 40-page limit?

Answer: Yes Small Business Plan Question: Is the plan required now, or at the time of contract? If now, what volume/Factor does it go in? Can we assume it does not count toward the page count?

Answer: Subcontracting plan must be submitted with the proposal. The Subcontracting plan is a separate document and will not be included in the page count.

PWS

Question: C.2.1.4.9 WQ – Option 3 FFP: Integrated Contingency Plan Update, mentions a facilities response plan (FRP). Where can we locate this? Can the Government send?

Answer: The FRP contains sensitive information and will be provided to Contract Award recipient AFTER Contract Award. The FRP was last updated in 2014, and consists of three volumes. Volume one is 245 pages and contains the primary FRP regulatory required elements. Volume two contains Appendices such as inventories, forms, rules, and calculations. Volume three contains facility specific Emergency Response Action Plans for approximately 21 locations.

Question: C.2.1.7.1 - Hazardous Waste Fees. The fees in Georgia are determined by the management method for the hazardous waste that is sent offsite for treatment. Depending on whether the waste is sent for incineration/disposal, treatment or storage, burning for energy recovery or recycling/reuse, a different fee per ton will apply.

The PWS states that "The Contractor shall utilize the provided fee data, forms, and payment information in order to submit the Hazardous Waste Fee payment." Does this mean that Robins will provide us with information about the management method for each waste stream that is sent offsite? Answer: Yes. Or will the contractor have to compile this information from manifests and discussions with waste vendors? Answer: No. The information may be available from the biennial reports, but those are only filed every two years and the fee is due annually.

Does the Government intend that the proposal include the actual amount of the hazardous waste fees for Robins AFB for CY2014 with the assumed amount to be same as the CY2013 hazardous waste fee payment to GA DNR?

Answer: Yes and No, respectively.

GSA Comment: The CLIN associated with PWS Para C.2.1.7.1 is CR-No Fee. The amount listed in the pricing spreadsheet is fixed and not to be changed.

Air Force Comment: Offeror must comply with GSA directive provided in response to question on proposal amount. Note the Robins AFB Hazardous Waste fees (for hazardous wastes generated and managed in CY2011 and CY2012) were $24,136.23 and $20,286.22, respectively.

Question: C.2.1.7.2 - Permit. Will an electronic copy of the last permit renewal package be made available?

Answer: Yes, an electronic copy of the “last hazardous waste permit renewal package” (submitted to GA EPD for the current Robins AFB Hazardous Waste Facility Permit) will be made available to Contract Award recipient AFTER Contract Award. Providing this previous application, approved by GA EPD, should expedite creation of Deliverables by Contract Award recipient and should streamline regulatory approval process of application due to GA EPD.

Question: What laboratory is used by Robins to analyze water quality samples?

Will the Government please provide copies of the permits referenced in the PWS to bidders?

Answer: A1: Robins currently utilizes ALS (Jacksonville, FL) and AMEC (Kennesaw, GA). Note that Contractor may utilize laboratory that complies with applicable AF, federal, state, and local standards and requirements including certification and accreditation programs, where applicable.

A2: See additional attachment posted to FBO and ITSS.

Question: Section C.2.1.4.2, Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Investigation, states: “The Contractor shall provide information on any illicit discharge detection activities performed and shall provide information on any eliminated discharges or on any enforcement actions taken to eliminate illicit discharges during the reporting period.” Is the Contractor expected to eliminate illicit discharges or just report where they were identified and make recommendations for corrective action?

Answer: Contractor is not expected to eliminate illicit discharges (i.e., make repairs). The Contractor shall identify any illicit discharges to the Robins AFB Water Quality Manager.

Question: Section C.2.1.4.8 of the PWS states: “Sampling, analysis and monitoring shall be provided as requested for production process line waste streams, wastewater treatment in-plant locations, or final discharge for permit parameters or other potential pollutants.” Does this mean SAM is the responsibility of the Contractor or will be performed by the client as requested by the Contractor? If the former:

a) What, if any, in-house analytical equipment is available for use by the Contractor?

b) Can the Government provide an assumed list of analytes and frequencies, similar to C.2.1.4.7?

Answer: SAM is the responsibility of the Contractor.

(a) None

(b) No, analytes and frequencies are to be determined within the scope of Section C.2.1.4.8.

Question: Section C.2.1.5.1.1 of the PWS states: “For quality control and assurance, blank, standard, duplicate, and a spike analyses shall be conducted 100 percent of the time on each parameter analyzed for Robins AFB.” Does this mean that duplicates are required for every sample collected?

Answer: No. Blind Duplicates are not required. Equipment Blanks are expected once per sampling event.

Question: Is the dispersion modeling in PWS C.2.1.2.14 (Option 14) intended to be the same level of effort as the air toxics modeling event described in C.2.1.2.5.1? If not, please clarify the level of effort intended for PWS C.2.1.2.14 (Option 14).

Answer: Yes Can you please provide the specific list of metals to be determined for PWS Sections:

a) C.2.1.4.1 - Routine Influent Monitoring

b) C.2.1.4.6 - Influent Wastewater Monitoring, Stormwater Outfalls 001-006 Monitoring Parameters, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall Monitoring

c) C.2.1.4.7 - Industrial Wastewater Compliance Monitoring

Answer: (a)-(c): Total Metals – Cadmium, Chromium, Hexavalent Chromium, Copper, Lead, Nickel, Zinc, Silver

Pricing Question: Attachment 7 – CLIN 0008: AQ Option 6 – labor hours are included for this option. Is it the Government’s intent that the purchase of the associated equipment be included in this option?

Answer: See revised Attachment 7, Pricing Template. GSA has revised Attachment 7 to add ODC columns.

Question: Contract Manpower Equivalents - For some scope elements, the RFP specifies the number of CMEs required; for some, it’s not mentioned, but it can be inferred from the workload estimates. Will the Government please clarify the number and types of CMEs required?

Answer: As this is a Performanced Based effort, we will not tell the offerrors how to do the work or a specific number of CMEs. Only the scope of the work is provided and it is up to each offeror to determine the number of CMEs required to perform the work.

Question: Please clarify the total requirement for Contract Manpower Equivalents (CMEs) for this contract. Some sections of the PWS specify CME requirements (C.2.1.7.7 Recycling and C.2.1.8.1 EMS). There is no requirement for an Air Quality CME specified in Section C.2.1.2; however, Section H.2.1.2 references providing office space for Air Quality contract staff. Is an Air Quality CME required, and are there any other CME requirements that should be addressed in our proposal?

Answer: CME for Air Quality not required by PWS.

See PWS Section H.2.1.2: a “temporary swing space cubical” is available “on as needed basis for visiting support contractors from off-site, in the event needed to access Government information from on-base.”

· Are we allowed to propose labor categories (primarily T&M) other than what is specified in the cost template (Attachment 7)?

Answer: No, offeror shall only enter the hourly rate for the set labor categories and hours.

· Please confirm whether or not adjustments are allowed to the hours distribution in Attachment 7.

Answer: No, offeror shall only enter the hourly rate for the set labor categories and hours.

· How are we to cost the Area leads? Can we create a category for each or fit them into one of the provided categories?

Answer: See revised Attachment 6.

· The RFP specifies a Program Manager but not a Project Manager. How should we treat the Project Manager category? Would the Project Manager category be used for Area Leads?

Answer: With respect to Contractor Program Manager and Contract Project Manager, those two (2) terms are not the same. Yes, Contract Project Manager may be an Area Lead.

· Please confirm whether or not GSA schedule rates have any applicability.

Answer: This is an Open Market acquisition, not a Schedules buy.

Key Personnel Question: There is a discrepancy for Program Manager requirements between the PWS and Attachment 6. The PWS (page 88 of 182) states … college degree in engineering or science... 5 years in Program Management for other contracts/programs with a minimum of 3 years working at sites similar to Robins AFB .. should document professional registration in Georgia in their respective field, where applicable or available. Attachment 6 – Minimum Experience & Education Requirements states .. college degree in engineering or science .. 8 years in Program Management for other contracts/programs with working experience with environmental services similar in scope at sites or facilities comparable to Robins AFB … shall document professional registration in his/her respective field that is accepted by the State of Georgia.

· Please clarify years of experience requirements.

Answer: Attachment 6 revised to be consistent with PWS Section C.5.3. See revised attachment 6 and revised PWS.

Question: PWS Section C.5.5, Program Area Lead Responsibilities, states “Individuals proposed as Program Area Leads should report professional registration in their respective field, where applicable or available.” Attachment 6, Minimum Experience & Education Requirements, states “Individuals proposed as Program Area Leads shall have a college degree in engineering or science and program leads for air quality and water quality shall document professional registration in his/her respective field that is accepted by the state of Georgia.”

· Registration requirements are conflicting in these two statements. A registration for an Environmental Scientist does not exist as it would for an Engineer or Geologist. Please confirm that an unregistered Environmental Scientist selected as the Program Area lead for Water Quality would be acceptable as no such registration exists.

· Would a Georgia Engineer in Training (EIT) registration be acceptable for an Air Program Lead?

Answer: Attachment 6 revised to be consistent with PWS Section C.5.5. See revised Attachment 6 and revised PWS.

· Would a non-engineer or non-geologist (e.g. an environmental scientist) proposed as Program Manager require registration? For some scientist categories, no professional registration exists. If we proposed such a candidate, would they be scored lower if their career field doesn’t offer professional registration?

Answer: Yes and Yes, respectively

· Can a non- registered engineer or scientist meet the Program Manager minimum qualifications perhaps considering total years of experience or other factors versus holding a professional registration?

Answer: No

· Please clarify Area Lead organizational and qualification requirements.

· PWS Section C.5.4 states that we should designate program area leads around 13 PWS media programs, while Section M directs us to organize around 6 program areas. Attachment 6 shows five areas. Please clarify.

Answer: PWS Section C.5.4 is a categorization of tasks. Section M Instructions is a listing of Evaluation criteria. Attachment 6 lists environmental program areas.

Refer to Section M for Instruction to Offerors on proposed organizational structure and staffing.

· The PWS (page 89 of 182) states ... should report professional registration in their respective field, where applicable or available. Attachment 6 – Minimum Experience & Education Requirements states .. program leads for air quality and water quality shall document professional registration in his/her respective field that is accepted by the State of Georgia.

· Is professional registration absolutely required for air quality and water quality area leads? Answer: No. If so, does the registration need to be in the State of Georgia or would another state suffice which has a reciprocity agreement with the State of Georgia?

· Would a non-engineer or non-geologist (e.g. an environmental scientist) proposed as an Area lead for Air quality or water quality require professional registration? For some scientist categories, no professional registration exists. If we proposed such a candidate, would they be scored lower if their career field doesn’t offer professional registration?

· Can a non- registered engineer or scientist meet the Area Lead minimum qualifications for air quality and water quality perhaps considering total years of experience or other factors versus holding a professional registration?

Answer: No. Attachment 6 revised to be consistent with PWS Section C.5.5. See revised Attachment 6 and revised PWS.

Past Performance Question: Is the Government wanting ONLY 3 past performance narratives AND ONLY 3 PPQs? If so, are these to be for the same project/contract/task order?

Answer: We need 3 narratives and at least 1 PPQ for each project submitted.

Question: The Government has long been using a standardized PPQ form (Form PPQ-0) that the contractor is allowed to keep on file. This allows fewer requests of our clients. If we have current, signed PPQs on file, will the Government accept those in lieu of Attachment 8?

Answer: No, Past Performance Questionnaire must be completed for this specific effort.

Question: Please clarify project request: Section L requests 3 (C. Past Performance, Page 179 of 182) and also 3 to 5 (B. Technical Factors, page 174 of 182). How are these different, or are they?

Answer: In regards to Past Performance, three efforts shall be submitted as stated on pg 179. Past Performance details how you performed that type of work and we are only requiring 3 Past Performance narratives and 3 PPQs. The 3 – 5 projects are for technical capability and relates to the offeror’s experience in the areas listed on pg. 174.

Question: Can we assume you only want 3 PPQs, even if we provide 3-5 in Past Performance?

Answer: We are only requiring 3 Past Performance narratives and 3 PPQs. The 3 – 5 projects are for technical capability and relates to the offeror’s experience in the areas listed on pg. 174.

Question: Will the contract be awarded without discussion or will interviews or interrogatories be held?

Answer: It is our intention to award without discussions.

Question: It is our understanding this is a the BIEST is a new contract vehicle for Robins to replace one or more current contracts currently being used for these services. Please confirm our understanding and outline the number, type, and incumbent contractor for each of the current contracts.

Answer: There were three incumbents and they were all IDIQs accomplished by DoD. The following are the contract numbers: FA8501-10-D-0003, FA8501-10-D-0001, and W912HN-11-D-0009. GSA has no privy to any additional information.

Question: We assume that we will have an opportunity to transition current employees to this BIEST contract to perform their current work. Can you please provide the number of incumbent employees who will be available, their expertise, years of experience, and their current duties, etc?

Answer: No. See Section C of PWS and Attachment 5, Historical Workload.

Question: Will there be a transition phase as we move the current contracts and/or employees to the BIEST contract. How will the day-to-day regulatory compliance be managed during the transition? Will there be any overlap of work with the outgoing contractor(s)? We did not see a placeholder for transition cost in the pricing spreadsheet.

Answer: See Section F.2 of PWS. No funding to Award recipient for transition period.

Question: Will you consider using a CPARS in lieu of a PPQ form? It is the policy of several of our clients to no longer complete PPQs.

Answer: CPARS will be used in conjunction with the PPQs.

Question: Will you consider granting an extension for both the submittal of the PPQs and the submittal of the Proposal?

Answer: An proposal extension will granted till 10 February 2015; 2:00 PM. A PPQ extension will be extended till 3 February 2015; 2:00 PM Question: Are we required to use our GSA Schedule rates or our current DCAA-approved rates?

Answer: This is an Open Market effort. It is up to the offeror to determine what rates to propose. The Government will evaluate proposals to evaluate price reasonableness.

Question: As the prime, we’ll be using our GSA rate schedule in development of our costs. In the case when a labor category in a CLIN will be performed by a subcontractor, can the subcontractor’s rates be used to build up costs in the Attachment 7 pricing template? For example if a Small Business is providing the Environmental Technician for a specific CLIN we would use their schedule Technician rate instead of our own.

Answer: This is an Open Market effort. It is your decision to use Schedule rates or not.

Question: We see that the pricing template for T&M tasks provides space for only labor rates. To complete these tasks, additional materials, supplies, laboratory analysis, and/or equipment (i.e., ODCs) may be required. Will the ODCs will be negotiated/funded after award using the confirmation notice procedures discussed in Part III, Section J of the PWS, or should an allotment be estimated by the contractor?

Answer: See revised Attachment 7, Pricing Template. GSA has revised Attachment 7 to add ODC columns.

Question: We see that the pricing template for FFP provides space for only labor hours and labor rates. To complete these tasks, additional materials, supplies, laboratory analysis, and/or equipment (i.e., ODCs) may be required. Will the ODCs be negotiated/funded after award using the confirmation notice procedures discussed in Part III, Section J of the PWS, or should an allotment be estimated by the contractor?

Answer: See revised Attachment 7, Pricing Template. GSA has revised Attachment 7 to add ODC columns.

Question: Is our understanding correct for G.3.2 (Invoice Information) that T&M invoices must contain all items listed in parts A through T, while FFP invoices will be invoiced in 12 equal installments, and the invoice will only include items A through i and Q through T.

Answer: Correct Question: What are the details of subcontracting, and invoicing for subcontractors? There seem to be conflicting (FFP vs. T&M) aspects.

Answer: The Government has privy with the Prime Contractor only. Invoicing should be done by the prime contractor.

Question: Please confirm that Attachment 5 - Historical Workload is on an annual basis – i.e. total labor hours for Air Quality are historically over 10,000 hours?

Answer: Total labor hours shown on Attachment 5 are correct.

Question: When is the Title V renewal permit expected to be issued?

Answer: February/March 2015 Question: Have there been significant changes to the emission unit (EU) inventory since the previous Title V was issued in May 2009? Is the EU inventory in the APIMS database current as of 2014?

Answer: No and Yes, respectively.

Question: Is the interface between APIMS and EESOH-MIS established to enable exchange of air toxics data?

Answer: An interface between APIMS and EESOH-MIS is established. Contractor will utilize interface. Transition from HMMS to EESOH-MIS has occurred relatively recently, and Contractor will utilize interface between APIMS and EESOH-MIS during performance of tasks under Contract.

Question: Has Robins AFB completed, and submitted via APIMS, a CY 2013 stationary AEI?

Answer: Yes Question: It would appear that a mobile AEI has not previously been conducted at Robins AFB and documented in APIMS. Is this correct?

Answer: A mobile AEI has been previously conducted at Robins AFB but has not been documented in APIMS.

Question: Will Robins AFB provide specific compliance inspection and no-notice audit protocols for significant air emission sources, or will the AQ support contractor be responsible for developing these?

Answer: Robins AFB will provide.

Question: Have the two required ODS management plans already been developed and only need to be updated or is the contractor responsible for developing the plans from scratch and updating them annually?

Answer: The ODS Management Plans are currently being developed and will be provided during the Option period if exercised.

Question: For C.2.1.2.16 AQ-Option 6: T&M: Design/Install/Test Exhaust Control devices, the AQ support contractor responsibility is not completely clear. Will a third part (e.g. the engine OEM) be responsible to design/install/test the DOC and CPMS systems under a separate contract with the base, with the AQ support contractor only responsible to function as the owner’s engineer, with the assumed effort level shown in the table on pages 21/22 of the PWS?

Answer: No. All work to design/install/test will be performed under this contract.

Question: The goals for APIMS at all bases stated by the AFCEC AQ SME are to:

a. Use the Compliance Management Tool in APIMS

b. Establish realistic PTE estimates through APIMS

c. Use the APIMS Refrigerant module for tracking ODC compliance

d. Establish and update mobile source AEI IAW AFI 32-7040 To what extent has the use of these APIMS features been developed by the incumbent AQ support contractor, and to what extent are the base service contractors who may be responsible paint shops, abrasive blasting, ODS containing equipment, and other air emission units, required to document activity levels (e.g. paint and abrasive usage) in APIMS? If the AQ support contractor is required to develop and implement these APIMS functions, and to collect relevant activity data from all of the base operations, this will be an effort intensive element of the contract.

Answer: Robins AFB is not familiar with the “Compliance Management Tool” feature in APIMS.

The AQ support contractor is not required to develop the APIMS functions listed. The functionality already exists in APIMS. However, the contractor will be responsible for implementing and maintaining all relevant data. At this time, only the Air Quality PM and the incumbent contractor manage and access the data in APIMS.

Question: Are you wanting a SB plan submitted with the proposal, or at the time of contract? (If similar to the QC plan, E.1 states that 3 copies shall be submitted within 30 days after contract award.) The RFP just states “shall submit” but there is no reference of where it should go (factor/volume) or what the percentages are for the SB categories.

From Section L:

In accordance with FAR 52.219-9, offeror shall submit a subcontracting plan, where applicable, that separately addresses subcontracting with small business concerns, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business, and with women-owned small business concerns.

Answer: Yes, Small Business Plan shall be submitted with proposals. This QC plan, E.1. The Small Business Plan is submitted separately and not part of the page count.