Record of Pre-proposal Conference and Site Visit.pdf

Record of Preproposal Conference and Site Visit NIEHS Campus, Research Triangle Park, NC

10:30 AM – December 4, 2008

I. Attendees:

Name Title Company/Organization Telephone No.

Paula Pier Contract Specialist NIH/NIEHS 919-541-2616 Mike Matthews Field Engineer Spectrofuge Corp of NC 919-361-2197 Paul Stroud Pres./Field Engr Spectrofuge Corp of NC 919-361-2197 John Baker Region Dir/Svc Ops NovaMed 434-978-1911 Kent Stone Project Officer NIH/NIEHS 919-541-3679

II. The Meeting Agenda is provided as Attachment I to this record.

III. Review of the solicitation was focused in the following sections:

a. Solicitation Section III – Instructions. Attendees were advised to include all required business information with their response. Also see Notices Item 4 on the solicitation cover sheet. Response must include a completed price schedule, technical response, and Completed FAR 52.212-3 - Representations and Certifications. The business and technical response shall be submitted as separate documents (reference Solicitation Section X, Provision a.3).

b. Solicitation Section VI – Supplies and Prices. Pricing is required for all existing equipment and models that may be added during the contract performance period. The consideration schedule lists all models and will be used in the price evaluation. Award will be based on providing service for the existing equipment listed under Section VI. I – Fixed Requirements.

c. Solicitation Section VII – Clauses, Terms, Conditions, and Instructions.

(1) I – Period of Performance. Performance commences on

January 1, 2009 for the base year. There are 4 option years and an additional option for up to a 6 month extension.

(2) The solicitation includes insurance requirements (Clause 13).

(3) A security and background check will be required for all contractor employees working onsite (Clause 21).

d. Solicitation Section X a.2 – Addendum to 52.212-2 Evaluation— Commercial Items (Jan 1999). As part of the technical response, the offeror must provide certification and proof of current license to dispose of radioactive sources (reference Provision X a.1)d)).

IV. Review of the Performance Work Statement (PWS): The PWS was discussed in general. The PWS is performance based and how the requirements are to be completed is part of the Contractor’s technical proposal.

a. PWS, Paragraph 6 a.(6) – (deliverables). The Contractor must submit paper work for completed PMs. Kent Stone explained although there is some required information, no specific format is required. He suggested that the proposed format be included in the offeror technical proposal.

b. Kent Stone stressed the importance of communication between the Lab

Staff and Contractor because of the nature of the on-going research.

Normal repair times need to be communicated with the lab staff and PMs will be to be arranged between experiments.

c. Normal repair and PMs may be scheduled directly with the Lab PI.

Emergency Maintenance addressed under PWS 6.b shall be scheduled only with the Project Officer or Alternate Project Officer

V. Site Visit.

Several instrument locations were visited (Models 2500TR, 2900TR, and D515). Kent Stone pointed out those doors accessing the instrument locations are generally locked; stressing again the importance of good lab PI and contractor communication.

VI. Questions and Responses.

a. The following are questions received both prior to and during the conference and site visit:

(1) Is there a previous contract for this equipment?

Answer: Yes.

(2) Who is the vendor currently servicing the equipment?

Answer: Spectrofuge Corporation of North Carolina

4915 Prospectus Drive, Suite A Durham, NC 27713

(3) What was the cost of the last year's contract and is this the

Same equipment as last year's contract?

Answer: Contract Price – Option Yr 4 (7/01/07 – 6/31/08) - $41,858.86 Extensions total Price (7/01/08 – 12/31/08) - $20,528.48 (Two 3-month extensions)

There was a minor variation in equipment in the past year (one instrument was deleted affecting the third and fourth quarter pricing)

(4) Is the contract price schedule available for viewing?

Answer: Yes. See Attachment II.

(5) Is there a service history available?

Answer: A service history for individual instruments is not available. A summary of quarterly repairs is provided by Attachment III. An estimated frequency of use is also included with this summary.

(6) Is all the equipment up and running?

Answer: Yes.

(7) Under Section X.a.2 a. (evaluation factors), are certificates required as documentation of training?

Answer: If certificates are not available, documentation of training may be submitted as dates of training, instructor, and with brief explanation of what was covered.

(8) Will knowing the technician’s/engineer’s abilities based on experience under other contracts be considered in the technical evaluation.

Answer: No. Only the information included in the technical response will be considered in the technical evaluation.

(9) When is award of the proposed contract anticipated?

Answer: Award is anticipated the week of December 22, 2008.

(10) Are there other similar instruments under different manufacturer names included in the contract?

Answer: No. This contract includes only Packard/Perkin Elmer Instruments.

VII. The meeting adjourned at approximately 11:45AM.

Attachments: Attachment I - Preproposal Conference and Site Visit Agenda Attachment II - Current Contract Price Schedule Attachment III - Repair frequency & Instrument Use Information

Combined Synopsis/Solicitation NIHES20090063 PM & Repair of Government-Owned Packard Instruments

Preproposal Conference and Site Visit

NIEHS Main Campus, Research Triangle Park, NC

12/04/08 – 10:30 AM

Agenda

I. Welcome and Introductions

Paula Pier – NIEHS Contract Specialist Telephone: 919-541-2616 Email: pierp@niehs.nih.gov Kent Stone – NIEHS Project Officer

II. Purpose of Conference and General information – Paula Pier

a. Purpose of Conference and agenda

b. Attendee registration - Provide your name, title, company, and contact information on the sign-in sheet

c. Questions – Attendees are requested to follow up verbal questions in writing

d. The pre-proposal conference is for informational purposes only. Written questions and answers will be provided by amendment to the solicitation. . Changes resulting from the conference are official only if issued through an amendment to the solicitation.

e. Questions received to date.

f. A record of conference will be posted by amendment in FEDBIZOPs.

III. Business Proposal - Paula Pier

a. Best effort forward – Discussions may or may not be conducted

b. Evaluation factors – Best value with Technical factors significantly more important

c. Review of Synopsis/Solicitation

IV. Technical - Kent Stone

a. Review of Performance Work Statement

b. Tour of some of the equipment locations

V. Meeting Handouts:

• FAR 52.212-3 Offeror Representations & Certifications—Commercial Items (Full Text)

• Selected referenced provisions/clauses from the solicitation--instructions, contract terms and conditions (FULL TEXT: FAR 52.212-1, FAR 52.212-4 & FAR 52.212-5)

• DOL Wage Determination No. 2005-2401, Rev 6, dated 5/29/2008

• Quarterly Repairs and Estimated Use Frequency mailto:pierp@niehs.nih.gov

Contract Year Quarter Repairs Relocations PMs 1 1 8 0 0 1 2 8 1 All 1 3 11 0 0 1 4 11 1 All 2 1 19 0 0 2 2 3 0 0 2 3 15 0 All 2 4 11 0 0 3 1 6 0 All 3 2 15 0 0 3 3 11 0 0 3 4 12 0 All 4 1 3 0 0 4 2 8 0 All 4 3 15 0 0 4 4 8 0 All 5 1 7 0 0 5 2 10 0 All 5 3 10 1 0 5 4 8 0 All

Extension 1 1 8 0 0

Estimated Frequency of Use:

According to the PI responses, the frequency of use for the 11 units is as follows:

7 - frequent (64%) 3 - moderate (27%) 1 - infrequent (9%)

Packard/Perkin Elmer Equipment Service History

Performance Period: 7/01/03 through 12/31/08

The following use rating is based surveying PIs with multiple instruments currently under PM and Repair Contract. The PIs were asked to rate the frequency of use for each unit using the following categories:

The PI responses received represent 11 of the 21 units under contract.

- frequent (unit is typically used on a daily basis or at least several times per week)

- moderate (unit is typically used at least several times per month)

- infrequent (unit is typically used less than 1 time per month)