PRE-PROPOSALCONFERENCE.pdf

BUREAU OF PRISONS

CRIMINAL ALIEN REQUIREMENT (CAR) 6

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS PCC-0010

440 1ST STREET, N.W.

WASHINGTON, D.C.

TUESDAY, JUNE 27, 2006

PARTICIPANTS:

ISAAC GASTON, Environmental Section BEVERLY GRAHAM, Technical Section HEATHER GREINER, Contract Specialist RANDALL TAYLOR, Contract Specialist CHRISTOPHER VAN HORNE, Office of General Counsel

CONTRACTOR ATTENDEES:

CORNELL:

Mike Caltabiano, Vice President, Adult Secure Division Rachel Sanchez, Project Manager, Business

Development George Killinger, Director of Operations, Adult Secure Division Ben Erwin, Vice President, Corporate Development Stuart Smith, Manager, Development Finance

THE GEO GROUP, INC./REEVES COUNTY:

Jimmy B. Galindo, County Judge Saul Herrera, County Commissioner

GEO:

Randy Blanton, Director Contract Compliance, Central Region Office

Don Houston, Senior Vice President, Central Region Wendy Dunegan, Director Business Management, Central Region Office Jennifer Houston, Director Proposal Development, Corporate Office Whitney Mazza, Proposal/Technical Writer, Corporate Office Trey Farthing, Chief Operating Office & Vice

President, Physicians Network Associates, Possible Subcontractor

(Continued)

CONTRACTOR ATTENDEES (Continued):

LCS:

Dave Carson Richard Harbison, Vice President

Michael Harling, Municapital, Financial Advisor for Garza County

MANAGEMENT & TRAINING CORPORATION (MTC):

James C. Conner, MTC Regional Vice President for Corrections Gerry McSwain, Director Contracts Michael May, Director Development Jean Brock, Physicians Network Association (PNA)

Potential Subcontractor for MTC Vernon Trey Farthing, Physician Network

Association

CCA/CITY OF EDEN:

Damon Hininger, VP, Federal Customer Relations Linda Prescott, Senior Director, Financial

Customer Relations Mike Binion, Manager, Proposal Development John Gluch, CCA Consultant Jerry McDonald, Correctional Contracts

Administrator, City of Eden

COMMUNITY EDUCATION CENTER:

Michael Janus, Deputy Director of Operations

P R O C E E D I N G S1

(1:03 p.m.)2

MS. GREINER: Welcome, everybody.3

This is the pre-proposal conference for RFP4

PCC-0010, so you all are in the right room.5

This is for Criminal Alien Requirement Number6

6, and I'm Heather Greiner, the contract specialist.7

Sitting next to me is Beverly Graham.8

Next to her is Isaac Gaston. He's from the9 environmental section. Beverly is from the technical10 section.11

On my right is Randall Taylor, and he is a12 contract specialist, as well.13

And to his right is Christopher Van Horn, who14 is the attorney, from the Office of General Counsel.15

Okay. The purpose of this conference is to16 answer your questions that you've submitted already and17 to follow up any questions you have to those questions.18

So we'll have answers to yr questions already1 prepared and then any additional questions that you2 have.3

We have a court reporter. Hopefully, I'm4 speaking slowly and loudly enough for the court5 reporter, who is going to be transcribing the6 conference, and they will -- the transcription will be7 posted on fedbusops approximately two weeks after8 today's conference.9

Now, if you have a question at some point,10 please raise your hand, stand up, go to the podium once11 you're called, announce your name, which company you12 represent, and then you can ask your question.13

Please speak slowly and clearly and loudly.14

Okay. All right.15

So now we're going to talk about the RFP16 solicitation, and before we get directly to your17 questions, I just want to clarify a few things and make18 sure that there's no further questions on those.19

This is for 7,000 beds in the existing20 facility. You're allowed to have 20 percent additional21 construction or renovation, and that is the cap, unless22 you already have a FONZI in place.23

We expect to make multiple awards with a 900-1 bed minimum in each facility, approximately.2

I'm going to let Beverly talk a little bit3 about the technical aspects of it, and let Isaac speak4 a little bit about the environmental, and then we'll5 move on to the answers to your questions that you've6 already submitted.7

MS. GRAHAM: I'm going to try and do this8 without the microphone, so in the back if you can't9 hear me, please let me know, and if I need to use the10 mic, then, of course, I will use it.11

I'm the chairman of the technical evaluation12 board, and part of what we are going to do is do an13 actual physical plant inspection of every facility that14 is proposed.15

Then, of course, the evaluation team will be16 reviewing and rating the technical portion of the17 proposal that you give to us, but I just wanted to let18 you know what my role was.19

And Isaac here is going to explain his role.20

MR. GASTON: I work in the site selection and21 environmental review branch, and one of our missions is22 to identify and environmentally evaluate potential23 sites for new federal correctional facilities wherever1 needed.2

Environmentally, we evaluate locations by3 implementing the procedural provisions of the National4

Environmental Policy Act, also known as NEPA.5

NEPA was established in 1969 as a federal law6 to protect the environment.7

NEPA requirements apply to any federal8 project, decision, or action that might have a9 significant impact on the quality of human environment,10 primarily recognizing the environmental conditions, the11 presence or likely presence of hazardous waste and/or12 biological resources.13

In this particular situation, CAR 6, most of14 the buildings, along with the infrastructure, are15 already in place, so hopefully, you'll be able to get a16 copy of a lot of those environmental documents that17 have been done and submit them to the proper regulatory18 agencies, it being U.S. Fish & Wildlife or SHIPL, and19 asking for their concurrence in writing.20

In Section J-15 of the solicitation, you will21 find a table of contents which describes an EA,22 environmental assessment. We ask you to use that1 format when submitting your documentation.2

Also in Section J-15, in Chapter 2-C, it3 references alternatives. The Bureau of Prisons will4 take care of those alternatives. We'll address that.5

You don't have to worry about addressing that area.6

The BOP will compile the environmental7 document and publish it for a 30-day comment period. 8

During those 30 days, if there are any concerns or9 comments that come up that haven't been addressed in10 the environmental documentation that you submit,11

Heather will contact you and ask you to submit that12 information to us.13

That's all I have.14

MS. GREINER: Thank you, Isaac.15

Okay. We're going to go ahead and address the16 questions that were submitted, and again, we'll provide17 the answers to those questions, and if you have any18 additional followup questions to those questions,19 you're welcome to, after we finish addressing all of20 these, to raise your hand. I'll call on you, and then21 you can go up to the podium to ask yr question.22

MS. GRAHAM: What I'm going to do is actually1 read aloud the question, and then I will tell you what2 the Bureau's response to that is.3

Now, if at any time you -- please tell me if4 you can't hear me, and then if I am speaking too fast5 and you don't understand the question, just raise your6 hand and I'll repeat it for you as we go along. I7 don't really want to lose anybody as we go along the8 way.9

The first question that we have:10

"In order to avoid unnecessary cost to the11 government, would the government waive the requirement12 for a special housing unit, a segregation, with a13 capacity of at least 10 percent of the expected number14 of contract beds for a facility with a proven record of15 managing the inmate population identified in the RFP16 with a smaller special housing unit?"17

The answer to that is no, the Bureau will not18 waive the requirement for a special housing unit with a19 capacity less than 10 percent of the expected number of20 the contract beds.21

Question 2:22

"For clarification purposes, we propose to add1 to the end of Line 33 on Page 21 of Section D, `The2 calculation of the 120-day period shall not include the3

BOP's conditional approval process.'"4

And the answer to that is, the process used to5 calculate the 120-day period already excludes the BOP's6 conditional approval process, and that is on Lines 357 and 37 in the Statement of Work.8

Question 3:9

"The RFP references compliance with either the10

UBC, BOCA, or the SBC codes, and if none of these are11 mandated in the jurisdiction, then the contractor shall12 comply with the BOCA.13

"What if the jurisdiction is not under the14

BOCA code and will not recognize it, but rather follows15 a code that is not included in the RFP; for example,16 the 2003 international building code, IBC? Would the17

BOP accept the local jurisdiction prevailing code?"18

The answer is, the BOP will recognize the UBC,19

BOCA, SBC, and the 2003 IBC. If the local jurisdiction20 does not accept any of the first three, then IBC should21 be used.22

IBC is actually a combination of the first1 three, but some states still refer to it as UBC.2

Next question:3

"The RFP references a 1991-1992 seismic safety4 code. Is there a more current code" -- I'm sorry. "If5 there is a more current code, will the BOP accept that6 code?"7

The answer: the seismic safety code is still8 the same. It was originally mandated under Executive9

Order 12699 from 1990 and the most current building10 codes call out the seismic zones for the different11 areas.12

Next question:13

"The RFP references the Architectural Barriers14

Act of 1968, which has been replaced by the ADA. Is it15 correct to assume that the contractor should follow the16 most current state/federal accessibility code?"17

Answer: as of May 2006, the standards for the18 facility accessibility for physically handicapped19 persons are now available from what we refer to as the20

Access Board, and you can reference that at www.access-21 board.gov, and this has replaced the UFAS, which is the22

Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards.23

The Access Board issued these guidelines for1 new or altered facilities covered both by the Americans2

With Disabilities Act and by the Architectural Barriers3

Act, so this one particular code covers and4 incorporates both of those, and that is also for any5 new or altered facilities.6

Next question:7

"Please clarify whether the 400-mile radius in8 which the contractor is responsible for movement and9 transportation of inmates is driving miles or an actual10 straight-line distance of 400 miles."11

And the answer is, the term radius refers to12 an actual straight-line distance.13

Next question:14

"Is it permissible to meet the requirements15 for a negative air pressure room by making arrangements16 with a local hospital to treat any inmate who requires17 access to such equipment rather than having a negative18 air pressure room on site?"19

The answer is no, the facility must have a20 negative air pressure room, appropriately monitored.21

Next question:22

"Is it permissible for the required government1 office space and parking spaces to be provided in close2 proximity but not adjacent to the contract facility?"3

The answer: the space offered to the BOP for4

BOP staff will be evaluated as part of the technical5 evaluation. The space must afford the BOP easy access6 to the secure confines of the facility.7

Next question:8

"Please clarify how the decisional rule9 criterion would be applied to a county or other local10 government entity who seeks to satisfy the requirement11 for corporate experience operating secure corrections12 detention facilities for a continuous three-year period13 by subcontracting with a private corrections firm who14 meets the decisional rule criteria."15

The answer is, the prime contractor must be16 the contractor that meets the decisional rule17 criterion.18

Next question:19

"Does the term. `excess capacity' refer to the20 need for a facility to be able to accommodate 11521 percent of the facility's contract capacity to22 something else?23

"Please clarify that it is not the intent of1 the BOP to preclude a bidder from submitting a bid for2 the use of existing secure correctional institution3 that is currently at full occupancy pursuant to the4 terms of an existing IGA."5

Answer: excess capacity simply means6 available bed space at the time of contract award. It7 is not the intent of the BOP to preclude an offeror8 from submitting a proposal for an existing facility9 that is currently at full occupancy.10

Next question:11

"If a bidder's existing secure correctional12 institution currently houses BOP inmates at full13 occupancy pursuant to an IGA, can this bidder assume14 that if it is awarded a contract under this15 procurement, that the proposed pricing may reflect the16 continued occupancy of the institution by the incumbent17 population, or is it the intent of the BOP to18 depopulate the institution and repopulate it in19 accordance with the RFP's rampup schedule?"20

Answer: the BOP will not depopulate a21 facility and then ramp up with a new population of22 inmates if award were made to a facility with a current1 population of BOP inmates.2

This next question I need to read a little bit3 out of the solicitation, so that you have an4 understanding of where the question is coming from, so5 please bear with me.6

Line 19 through 25 states: "Expansion or7 renovation of existing facilities is permitted if8 completed within 270 calendar days after contract award9 when" -- da da da.10

And then, Line 38 through 42 states: "Within11

120 days of contract award, the contractor shall be12 ready to begin accepting and assume full responsibility13 for the operation, maintenance, and security of the14 institution."15

Now, based on that, here is the question:16

"These two sections seem to contradict each17 other. Does this mean that the BOP will allow18 continued expansion and renovation work following the19 initial intake of inmates? Please clarify."20

And the answer: the BOP will allow continued21 expansion or renovation of an existing facility22 following the notice to proceed when inmates are due to23 begin arriving, providing the work is completed within1

270 days after contract award, and of course that all2 depends on the issue of the FONZI.3

So I hope that has explained it well enough to4 you.5

Next question:6

"If a bidder's existing secure correctional7 institution currently houses BOP inmates at full8 occupancy pursuant to an IGA, will it be necessary to9 establish a position of project coordinator in the10 event the bidder is awarded a contract? Please11 clarify."12

Answer: a project coordinator is still13 required to transition to the terms and conditions of a14 new contract. The offeror has the option of presenting15 the individual approach to this requirement as it deems16 appropriate.17

Next question 18

"If a bidder's existing secure correctional19 institution currently houses BOP inmates at full20 occupancy pursuant to an IGA, is it next to provide21 detail under this section, since there will be minimal22 changes to the existing operation of the institution?"23

The section that they are referring to here is1 the requirements for the technical proposal under2 activation and staffing, whether or not it would3 require a detailed activation schedule and an4 activation plan.5

The answer to that is, this is a new6 solicitation and will be a new contract. The offeror7 shall address all technical elements as outlined in8

Section L.9

Really, you have to address everything as it10 is laid out there.11

"If a bidder submits a proposal for an12 existing facility and has a special housing unit which13 holds less than 10 percent of the facility's contract14 capacity under an existing IGA, will the BOP consider15 modifying the special housing unit requirement16 consistent with the number of SHU beds currently17 available under the existing IGA?"18

And the answer to that is no, the Bureau will19 not modify the current special housing unit20 requirements.21

This is a rather long question, so bear with1

me. If you don't understand, when I'm done, please2 raise your hand and I will read it again to you:3

"Under pricing instructions, the RFP states4 that the offeror should submit a pricing schedule5

Option A that is to be priced eliminating the6 requirement in Section C entitled Staffing Plan, See7

Page 8.8

"However, there is discrepancy in that Section9

C of the RFP is titled Fiscal Management, not Staffing10

Plan. Section D of the RFP is Personnel, which11 comprises Staffing Plan, Page 21, Line 24.12

"To that end, the staffing plan does not13 request staffing options that would require different14 pricing."15

Now, here's the gist of the question:16

"Is the pricing schedule Option A not to17 reflect proposed staffing?"18

Is everybody with me on this question? 19

Because I know that was a mouthful.20

And the answer is, I'm giving a little21 clarification to this question before I actually give22 you the answer.23

Section C of the RFP is the Statement of Work,1 which has its own chapters. The Staffing Plan referred2 to here is a sub-chapter of Chapter D, Personnel, which3 is located in Section C, the Statement of Work.4

The pricing schedule Option A should reflect a5 staffing level maintained in accordance with ACA,6 including all essential personnel and at a level that7 the offeror deems appropriate to successfully manage8 the facility.9

I hope you're all with me on that.10

Next question:11

"Under pricing schedules, the 10 percent12 segregation beds are calculated against what13 calculation, the 100 percent or the 115 percent?"14

And the answer to this is, the 10 percent15 special housing unit beds are calculated against the16

100 percent number of expected contract beds.17

Next question:18

"Under pricing schedules, is the requirement19 of 15 percent over the 100 percent contract beds20 calculated based on the 100 percent contracted beds21 plus the 10 percent segregation beds?"22

And the answer is, 15 percent over the 1001 percent population includes the 10 percent for the SHU2 beds.3

You see, both of those questions were very4 similar. They were worded differently, so we wanted to5 list each one separately, so I didn't just reiterate6 the same question twice.7

Next question:8

"Since these inmates are currently held under9 contract in other facilities, may we be provided with10 information as to where, with whom, under what type of11 contract, expiration dates, and the current per diem12 rate?"13

And the answer is, this information can be14 requested through a Freedom of Information Act request.15

Next question:16

"Is this bid necessary due to pending17 expiration of existing contracts or to provide18 additional new bed space?"19

Answer: the RFP is issued due to expiring20 agreements.21

"Will the relocation of these inmates be1 performed by BOP personnel or by contractor's personnel2 at contractor's expense?"3

And the answer to this is, we ask you to refer4 back to the statement, the section in the Statement of5

Work that discusses the 400-mile radius.6

So it's the contractor's responsibility up to7 the 400-mile radius.8

Next question:9

"What are the proposed rampup increments of10 inmates for intake, and over what period of time?"11

Answer: this is discussed in the introduction12 to the Statement of Work and is approximately 8013 inmates per week.14

Next question:15

"There is no reference to food service in the16

Statement of Work."17

And the answer: that is correct.18

The plan for food service should be in19 compliance with any applicable codes, laws, and ACA20 guidelines.21

"The composition" -- this is another one. Let1 me explain it to you, to take it a little bit out of2 the solicitation, I think, so that the question can be3 a little bit more easily understood.4

Paragraphs 1, 2, and 3, and we're in Section5

L, which is Instructions to Offerors, provide6 directions for the format and content of Volumes 2, 2-7

A, and 2-B.8

"If an offeror is only going to submit one9 site, does the composition of Volume 2 incorporate the10 information required for Volumes 2-A and 2-B?"11

The answer is, the composition of the volumes12 shall follow the instructions as provided in Section L13 of the solicitation.14

The information for physical plant may be15 included in one binder or book, as long as it is16 detailed correctly.17

Second question -- this is also leading back18 into that first question, the previous question:19

"Is the offeror then required to separate the20 information to be provided in Volume 2 into subheadings21 to be presented as Volumes 2-A and 2-B?"22

And the answer is yes, information should be1 presented with proper subheadings as detailed in2

Section L.3

Next question:4

"If Volume 2-A and 2-B is to comprise the5 content of Volume 2, do the page limitations for6

Volumes 2-A and 2-B apply?"7

And the answer is yes, page limitations will8 still apply.9

"Pages 171 through 176 in Paragraphs A and B10 describe the format and content for the proposal. 11

However, it is unclear whether the offeror is to12 respond to the specific issues identified in Volumes 2-13

A and 2-B or the entire Statement of Work. Please14 clarify."15

Section L fully describes how the offerors16 should present their proposed plan to meet all the17 requirements of the solicitation, not just the18

Statement of Work.19

The Statement of Work should not be20 paraphrased. Rather, what should be prepared and21 submitted is a succinct description of how the offeror22 intends to perform the work as described in Section L.23

So you have your Statement of Work. Section1

L addresses different items that are not necessarily2 always addressed in the Statement of Work. Make sure3 you pay attention to both of them.4

Next question:5

"These sections encourage offerors to submit6 information concerning the physical plant and past7 performance and experience prior to the due date. 8

"While the past performance and experience9 information is contained in a separate volume, Number10

3, and can be separated easily and offered as a11 separate volume, the physical plant information is a12 section within Volume 2-B.13

"In what format would you like offerors to14 present the physical plant information if it can be15 submitted early?"16

And the answer to that is, physical plant17 information should be submitted in s separate binder if18 it is to be submitted early.19

Followup to that is: "Should the information20 submitted prior to the due date be resubmitted with the21 entire proposal?"22

And regarding the physical plan information,1 no, it does not need to be resubmitted when the final2 proposal package is delivered to us.3

Next question:4

"The RFP states that the offeror shall submit5 a brief video tour of the proposed site and building. 6

What should be the format for the video tour? For7 example, CD, DVD, or VHS tape?"8

And the answer is, the format we would like to9 see for the video tour should be on a DVD.10

Next question:11

"Will attachments to offeror responses to the12 various volumes be counted against the stated page13 count limits?"14

And the answer to that is yes, the attachments15 will be counted against the page number restrictions.16

Next question -- this is still in Section L:17

"Paragraph E makes reference to Subsection A. 18

Please provide section and page number."19

This was a typographical error, and this20 should be reference Section D notification.21

Next question -- we're almost to the end,22 folks:23

"In Base Year Number 1, for 12 months, there1 is a requirement for a monthly ramp-up price. Is a2 ramp-up price required if the offered facility3 currently holds BOP inmates as those described in the4

Request for Proposal?"5

The answer is no, ramp-up price will not be6 required for a facility that does not require ramp-up.7

Next question:8

"Option A is to be priced eliminating the9 requirement for staffing levels to not fall below a10 monthly average of 95 percent of the BOP-approved11 staffing plan.12

"If this is in fact the BOP's intention, is13 there a percentage that the offeror would not be14 allowed to fall below?"15

The answer to that is, staffing levels should16 not fall below the ACA requirements and you cannot17 eliminate the essential personnel.18

Next question:19

"Paragraph 3 states that these targets are to20 be applied to the overall value of the acquisition."21

And this is referring to Attachment J-11, the22 small disadvantaged business utilization.23

"Does they mean the total contract amount for1 the base period plus all options periods, or is it2 based on available dollars, contract amount less labor3 and fixed costs to be subcontracted?"4

Answer: the targets for small and small5 disadvantaged businesses should reflect the aggregate6 total of the price offered.7

Next question:8

"Will the Bureau consider placing a cap on9 high health care costs in order to receive a lower per10 diem?11

"For example, would the Bureau be willing to12 establish a cap of $25,000 for all site treatment as in13 past Criminal Alien Requirement requests for14 proposals?"15

And the answer is, in this solicitation and16 contract, all health care costs will be the17 contractor's responsibility.18

And the last question is:19

"Will prisoner displacement be allowed if a20 contracting facility is full?"21

And the answer is, the solicitation does not22 address the issue of displacement.23

Now, if anyone has any further questions, what1 we would ask you to do again is come up to the mic,2 please state your name and your company, and if we can3 address them here, we will, and if not, we will ask yo4 to submit them to us so that we could get an answer5 back to you.6

MS. GREINER: I wanted to remind you all that7 this will all be -- you're not getting this all today. 8

This will be posted on fedbusops, the transcript will9 be there in approximately two weeks.10

Questions? Go ahead.11

MR. GLUCH: Hi. John Gluch with CCA. Good12 afternoon.13

Given your 20 percent restriction on the14 funds, would the BOP allow proposed expansion greater15 than 20 percent of the existing square footage if a16 record of decision has been completed by a sister17 federal agency for an EIS by the time of contract18 award?19

MS. GREINER: That's something we'd have to20 have our environmental group look at.21

MR. GLUCH: Okay. So that will be posted, as22 well?23

MS. GREINER: Yeah, we can get back to you on1 that question.2

MR. GLUCH: Very good. Thank you.3

MS. GREINER: Yes.4

MR. HARBISON: Dick Harbison of LCS5

Corrections out of Louisiana.6

We're asking the BOP if they would consider a7 two-week extension in the environmental impact study. 8

The environmental people are a little busy right now in9 the state.10

MS. GREINER: That's another question we'll11 get back to you on.12

MR. HARBISON: Thank you.13

MS. GREINER: Anything additional?14

(No response.)15

MS. GREINER: I just want to remind you all16 that the conference and anything that was said today17 does not change anything in the RFP. 18

In order for anything to be changed, it has to19 actually be an amendment signed by the contracting20 officer, just so that's clear for everybody.21

If there are no additional questions, then1 that will conclude the conference. Thank you all very2 much for coming.3

(Whereupon, at 1:32 p.m., the conference was4 adjourned.)5

• * * * *6