Amendment_2_RA133W16RP0071_NEXRAD_Towers_Maint..pdf

Offers 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 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 your 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.

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

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION

NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

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

CHECK ONE 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)

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.

15C. DATE SIGNED

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

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

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

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

Mark E. Caban Contracting Officer

The purpose of this Amendment No. 0002 is to revise CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation and CAR 1352.215-75 Evaluation Criteria and respond to questions from interested parties.

Western Acquisition Division

SOU6

325 Broadway Boulder, CO 80305

RA-133W-16-RP-0071

1 8

See Blk 16C.

June 2, 2016

CABAN.MARK.E.1365831730 Digitally signed by CABAN.MARK.E.1365831730 DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=OTHER, cn=CABAN.MARK.E.1365831730 Date: 2016.06.24 08:03:26 -06'00'

Page 2 of 8 RA-133W-16-RP-0071/0002

1) The Section E, Solicitation Provisions, CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation and CAR 1352.215-75 Evaluation Criteria are revised as follows:

CAR 1352.215-70 PROPOSAL PREPARATION (APR 2010) (2) (B) (ii) Factor 1 – Technical Approach, (2) Scenario #2 Sample task Order, Part 2 is deleted and replaced by the following:

Part 2 - (CDRL A002) – Propose an approach for the acquisition of equipment that replaces the complete NEXRAD WSR-88D tower. This approach may include parts lists and quantities, such as consumables, expendables and repairable items. Indicate lead time required from time of order to delivery of parts at the radar tower site.

- Submit an example of an Installation/Repair Completion Report (CDRL A002) that contains the following information:

1) Number and skill level of employees required to construct an entire NEXRAD tower structure.

2) Proposed cost/price of replacement. The pricing shall be included in Volume I.

3) Tools and test equipment.

4) Technical procedures and data required.

5) Repair time.

6) Lead time for parts availability.

7) Urgency of recommended repair.

8) OSHA Certifications for workers.

9) Health and Safety Plan referenced.

10) Environmental issues addressed.

11) Quality Assurance Plan

12) Site Restoration Plan

CAR 1352.215-75 EVALUATION CRITERIA (APR 2010) (a) Factor 1 Technical Approach, Scenario 2, Part 2 is revised as follows:

Part 2 - The offeror’s proposal will be evaluated on their knowledge of the parts and materials required for the performance of this task.

NOAA Responses to Questions submitted for solicitation RA-133W-16-RP-007 Amendment 0002

NWS NEXRAD Tower Maintenance.

Question 1. On the S.F. 1449, please confirm that no pricing is to be entered into the fields for Item No.s 0001, 1001, 2001, 3001, and 4001."

NOAA Response:

The S.F. 1449 states that prices for the Base Period and Options periods (CLINs 0001, 1001, 2001, 3001, and 4001) will be negotiated in the task orders. Reference provision CAR 1352.215- 70 Proposal Preparation (2010) for pricing instructions.

Question 2. Pg. 27 (iv) PRICE PROPOSAL. (1) “direct labor categories”, is there a list of expected labor categories? If not, is it expected to include professionals (PM, SSHO, Supt., Engineer (PE or not)) and is it limited to the typical tower crew members? (Some activities may require specialty trades (crane with operator, licensed electrician, etc.)

NOAA Response:

CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation (2)(A)(iv)(1) requires a listing of all direct labor categories required for the effort with fully burdened rates for each category for the base period and for each of the four option periods. All direct labor should be included in the price proposal.

Question 3. Given the list of wage determinations (Attachment 4), are we to provide a separate rate table for each of the 3 scenarios as they have different wages?

NOAA Response:

Proposals should include pricing for each scenario as described in CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation (2)(A)(iv)(1). The labor categories proposed for each scenario should take into consideration the solicitation Attachment 4 Wage Determinations Service Contract, which are minimum wages or fringe benefits applicable to a site.

Question 4. Are the trade labor rates to include equipping with standard tools as would be required for a typical tower crew (apart from specialized tests equipment, etc.)?

NOAA Response:

CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation (2)(A)(iv)(4) requires Other Direct Costs to be included in the price proposal.

Question 5. What about vehicle costs (or is that part of travel)?

NOAA Response:

CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation (2)(A)(iv)(4) requires Other Direct Costs such as vehicle costs and equipment be included in the price proposal.

Question 6. pg. 27 (iv) PRICE PROPOSAL. (2) “Other Direct Costs”:

a. Is this markup rate (with respect to materials) intended to cover the indirect overhead (general and administrative expenses) associated with identifying, planning, and procuring these items (as a distinct item apart from the project management associated with a task order)?

b. Is this markup applicable also to equipment rentals (cranes, etc.), subcontractors (specialty contractors, outside engineers, etc.).

NOAA Response:

Proposals may include a markup rate on Other Direct Costs proposed. Other Direct Costs include equipment rental, subcontractors, materials and travel. Markup rates should be consistent with the Offeror’s accounting system.

Question 7. Pg. 27 (iv) PRICE PROPOSAL. (3) “The proposed fully burdened hourly labor and ODC markup rates …..shall be used in pricing the evaluation scenarios and will be used in pricing all task orders issued…”

a. Is the pricing methodology envisioned that all task orders must be detailed out by line items using only (1) Labor lines per the Labor Categories (hours x $) and, (2) all other items (travel, material, subcontractor, services, etc.) shown at cost plus the ODC Markup Table?

NOAA Response:

Yes.

b. Are the Task Orders fixed price with detail…..or T&M?? (Comment. It has been our experience with other Task Order-driven contracts that each Task Order is bid on a lump sum, fixed price basis, and the only time Labor Rates and Markups come into play is when an unforeseen item arises which must be priced for a change order (onsite delay at the convenience of the government, a repair item discovered while at the site which is not in the scope, etc.)).

NOAA Response:

Solicitation provision FAR 52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984) states that the task orders will be fixed price. Reference CAR 1352.216-74 Task Orders (c) (2) for task order proposal information.

Question 8. Page 28. (3) “The Technical Proposal” Are the sample reports (CDRL A001 and A002) and/or the respective Part 1 and Part 2 narratives to be included in the 50 page limitation?

NOAA Response:

Yes.

Question 9. Page 29. FACTOR 1 Is Valmont Microflect aware of this RFP and have they indicated their willingness to respond within the time allotted for our response?

NOAA Response:

Valmont Microflect (Valmont Industries, Inc.) was not contacted by the Government concerning the Request for Proposal RA-133W-16-RP-0071.

Question 10. Pg. 29 CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation (B)(iii) Factor 1, Scenario #1”

a. The Scenario calls for a CDRL A002 Installation/Repair Services Completion Report assuming that the Government has concurred with the inspection and engineering evaluation …..

and assume that we actually have completed the required maintenance /repair work. However, the list of items (1-6) seems more suited to the I*E evaluation report. Please clarify.

NOAA Response:

The CDRL A002 form is provided to record what repairs were made based on the previous inspection report. Assume that repairs were made and that you should provide a level of detail that will satisfy items 1 through 6 of this scenario.

b. Please clarify the 20% corrosion statement. Does this mean that 20% of the tower will require corrosion removal and repair? Is there a NOAA requirement on repainting the entire tower at X%?

NOAA Response:

The requirement to provide galvanic coating or paint on the tower is based upon the recommendation of the inspection report. There is no set minimum corrosion re-paint/galvanic percentage requirement. The scenario provided the "20%" example to give an idea of the amount of repairs that may be needed.

Question 11. Pg. 29 CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation (B) (iii) Factor 1, “Scenario #2”:

a. Should we assume that the foundation for the tower is intact, or not?

NOAA Response:

Request For Proposal Attachment 1, Performance Work Statement, Item 4. Scope includes tower foundation replacement and repair. For the scenario #2 assume the tower needs to be replaced with no salvageable parts including the foundation.

b. Is our scope for the tower only, excluding electrical, waveguide, grounding, other structures, etc.)? Please clarify.

NOAA Response:

It should be considered that all areas of the tower structure (cement pad perimeter and upwards to the top deck) will be subject to inspection, repairs, and/or replacement. Restoration may include, but is not limited to replacement of structural components, replacement of fasteners, repair/replacement of lightning protection system components, corrosion removal, cleaning, painting, and repair replacement of galvanic costings, and tower foundation replacement and repair. This may include any tower member structure, bolts, clamps, hangers, grounding wire, grounding connectors, repair and maintenance of the primary grounding plate, test and repair of proper ground, ladder steps, rails, lighting, perimeter fencing immediately adjacent to the underside of the tower, electrical cables, boxes, switches, electrical conduits, top deck hatch (and associated mechanisms),top deck fan structure, tower cement pad, stanchion grouting, ice dam bridge, etc.

Question 12. Pg 30 CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation (B) (iii) Factor 1, Part 1. Are we to include a freight estimate or firm freight price (yes/which, no)?

NOAA Response:

All shipping or freight included in the Other Direct Costs should be proposed in accordance with CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation (2) (A) (iv) Price Proposal.

Question 13. The I/R CR (CDLR A002) seems to be duplicative to Part 1 in much of its content. Please clarify the requirement.

NOAA Response:

The intent of Part 2 is to evaluate the proposal’s final repair report after the site is completed.

This report should outline the logistical approach and provide an example of items 1 through 13.

Question 14. CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation (B) Volume II – Technical Proposal (B)(ii) Factor 1 – Technical Approach (2) Scenario #3 Sample Task Order – Clean, Paint and Restore Tower.

NOAA Response:

This scenario assumes the site needs to be cleaned, treated for corrosion, and restored (repainted and/or have a galvanic coating applied).

a. CAR 1352.215-70 Proposal Preparation (B) Volume II – Technical Proposal (B)(ii) Factor 1 – Technical Approach (2) Scenario #3 Sample Task Order, is the Key West tower a galvanized, unpainted structure?

NOAA Response:

Please discuss the different technical approaches to a site that is either painted or galvanized.

b. Does NOAA have a painting spec, or is it up to us to propose (we’re fine with that)?

NOAA Response:

All paint and galvanic coating must meet minimum MILSPEC, ANSI, and ASTM A-780 standards.

c. The scope is to “clean, paint, and restore”. Is it correct to assume that there is no corrosion to deal with?

NOAA Response:

The assumption is a site needs to be cleaned, treated for corrosion, and restored (repainted and/or have a galvanic coating applied).

d. The Scenario calls for a CDRL A002 Installation/Repair Services Completion Report However, the list of items (1-6) do not seem to match what we would expect for a I/RCR (CDRL A002) for this scope. Please clarify.

NOAA Response:

Attachment 5 Contract Data Requirements Lists CDRL A002 form is provided to record what repairs were made based on the previous inspection report. Assume that repairs were made and that you should provide a level of detail that will satisfy items 1 through 6 of this scenario.

e. Inspections – please clarify if any dome components/appurtenances will be included in the inspections. And, if so, what will be inspected?

NOAA Response:

The radome structure or its base ring is not included in this contract.

Question 15. Attachment 1 Performance Work Statement, Pg. 6

10. CERTIFICATION OF SATISFACTORY REPAIR ACTIVITY COMPLETION

….”the Contractor shall have quality control procedures in place to ensure tower repair and restoration services are consistently and correctly performed, and that the tower is restored to a like new condition….. This report must be certified by a professionally registered structural engineer and must state that the installation/repair services completed have restored the WSR- 88D Tower to a serviceable, operational and like new condition.”

a. Unless a new tower is being installed, we are not sure that we can ever make the statement that the entire tower has been “restored to a like new condition”. What is your expectation for “like new” condition?

NOAA Response:

The definition of "like new" in terms of a tower restoration is such that the replacement will cause the tower to be fully functional as designed by the OEM and that all tower members and associated equipment have no functional degradation (i.e. no corrosion or treated for corrosion).

b. On a similar note, we regularly have reports stamped by a registered PE, but based on our experience, we are not confident that the PE will certify that the Tower has been restored to a “like new condition.” Is it your expectation that an engineer will actually certify “like new” condition? Or, would the engineer’s certification be based upon the tower’s condition compared to TIA standards?

NOAA Response:

It is not expected to have a "PE" certify metal structures to be "Like New". However, it is expected that tower members and associated equipment replacements/restorations be certified to not have functional degradation and meet Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) standards.