The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Questions shall be submitted by electronic mail to the Acquisition Specialist, Julie Leasure via email at julie.kemper2@dla.mil with the appropriate subject: SP3300-20-R-5001 Solicitation Question; SP3300-20-R-5001 Pre-Proposal Conference/Site Visit/Question and must be received by 1:00 P.M. Eastern Local Time on January 31, 2020. Questions received after this date and time may not receive a response. No questions may be submitted during the Pre-Proposal Conference and Site Visit. Answers to questions will be posted to the FBO website via an amendment to the solicitation.
Pre-Proposal Conference OR Site Visit
| RFP Para Reference (if question relates to the RFP) |
| Response |
Background: In the workload shown in T.E. 5.2 for “Year 1 (9 Months)” the T.E. shows a total of 57,977 receipts. This figure appears to be derived from the projected workload from the months of June 2020 through February 2021. when compared to a full 12 months of work load shown in “Year 2” this would be approximately 61% of a 12- month year or approximately 7.4 months’ worth of workload. The workload for these months, when averaged provides monthly average receipts of 6442 receipts/month for the months of June 2020 through February 2021, which, on a 12-month year of 93,778 receipts would leave 35,801 receipts for the months of March – May or an average of 11,934/month.
Question: Should the Year 1(9-month) workload be based on projections for the months of February 2021 through October 2021 instead of being based on workload projections that fall outside of the contract period? Would DLA agree that the projection for a 9-month performance period be closer to 75% of a 12-month workload vise 61%?
| Attachment J.28/T.E. 5.2 Column C rows 13-22 and Columns D & E rows 28-34 |
| Attach |
J. 28 Projected Workload A monthly average of 6,442 receipts/month would equate to 77,304 receipts a year. This would then leave 17,327 receipts for the months of March-May. Which averages to 5,776.
Yes, the 9 month projected workload of 77,304 is closer to 75% of a 12-month workload vice 61%.
| 2 |
| Background: Attachment J.38 shows Offload and Tally workload of the following number of receipts Year1=57,975; Year 2=93,778; Year 3=93,643; Year 4=93,205; Year 5=93,196 in rows 76-79; however, the same document shows total receipts processed in rows 80-91 as follows: year 1=31,235; Year 2=50,523; Year 3=50,450; Year 4=50,214; year 5=50,209. |
Question: Should the number of receipt documents offloaded and tallied (rows 76-79) be consistent with the number of receipt documents processed (rows 80-91)?
| Attachment J.38 Columns G, I, K, M, O rows 76-79 and rows 80 - 91 |
| Attach |
J. 38 Staffing Matrix Additional Receipt Requirements – Value Added has been added to TE 5.2 Projected Workload and J.38 on line 94 for Wholesale and line 246 for Retail. The addition brings the total more in-line with the offload and tally workload, however, it will not match as some receipts may fall into multiple types of value added processing.
| 3 |
| Background: In J.28/T.E. 5.1 the historical workload for FY19 MTD to be based on the months of Oct 2018 – Feb 2019. The Historical workload for New Procurement receipts and Redistributions redistribution for the 5-month FY19 MTD period are shown as 8,701 and 14,256 respectively. When normalized for a 12-month period the workload for FY19 is consistent with the workload shown for the 12-month period for FY18. However, when compared to the workload projections in J.28/T.E. 5.2 the workload for New Procurement receipts and Redistribution receipts show a reduction in workload of approximately 30% in both areas. |
Question: Does DLA expect the workload for New Procurement and Redistribution receipts to be reduced by 30% from the historical workload provided in the RFP?
| Attachment J.27/T.E. 5.1 page 5; New Procurement and redistribution workload; Attachment J.28/T.E. 5.2 Columns D-H rows 56-60 and rows 76-80 |
| Attach |
J. 28 Projected Workload The projections in TE 5.2 are based on the latest knowledge of workload expectation for San Diego.
| 4 |
| Background: In attachment J.28/T.E. 5.2 row 51 shows workload data for Supply Discrepancy Reports (SDRs) “all inclusive” and on row 175 shows workload for Retail Re-warehousing Picks, however, there are no corresponding rows in Attachment J.38 containing workload data for these two categories. |
Question: Will DLA be adding this workload to Attachment J.38 or will bidders permitted to add the workload deemed pertinent for an accurate staffing estimate?
| Attachment J.38 and Attachment J.28/T.E. 5.2 |
| Attach |
J. 38 Staffing Matrix Workload added to Attachment J.38 for SDRs (line 95) and Rewarehousing Picks (line 133).
| 5 |
| Background: Attachment J.38 row 141 show workloads for “All TPICs” to be Y1=60, Y2 thru Y5=86/yr., however Attachment J.28 Row 243 shows workload for all TPICs to be Y1=83,136, Y2 Thru Y5= 110,850/yr. |
Question: Does DLA intend to synchronized the workload data in Attachment J.38 row 141 to reflect all TPC categories reflected in Attachment J.28 Row 243?
| Attachment J.38 row 141 and Attachment J.28/T.E. 5.2 row 243 |
| Attach |
J. 38 Staffing Matrix Revised Attachment J.38 revises the workload in row 146 to match TE 5.2.
| 6 |
| Background: The data in the PPP&M section of the J.38 does not match the data in the J.28 for the container fabrication categories. |
Question: Will DLA be synchronizing the Workload Data and Categories data in in in the J.38 with the project workload for the same categories in the J.28?
| Attachment J.38 Rows 183-187; Attachment J.28/T.E.5.2 Rows 320-325 |
| Attach |
J. 38 Staffing Matrix Workload data and category data in the J.38 revised to match J.28 for rows 189 – 193.
| 7 |
| Background: The workload for “Retail Remarks” is consistent for all years with the exception of Y4 (Column M) where the workload projection drops by approximately 10,000 remarks. |
Question: Is the workload projection data for Year 4 correct or is it consistent with the rest of the performance years?
| Attachment J.38 Row 281, Column M |
| Attach |
J. 38 Staffing Matrix Workload for retail remark Y4 is corrected to 39,644 in both the J.38 and TE 5.2.
| 8 |
| Background: The Attachment J.40 Training Schedule shows all onsite Distribution Operations Training being conducted during the months July, August, and September 2020, however the solicitation shows the Contract Transition start date of November 2020 which eliminates the possibility of awardees to provide input or have access to this onsite training and impact the awardees ability to meet both transition training requirements and the follow-on training requirements of contract performance. |
Question: Will there be on site Distribution Operations Training conducted during the transition period?
| Attachment J.40 Draft Distribution Operations Training Schedule |
| Attachment J.40 Draft Distribution Operations Training; J.1 PWS, Para 4.6.1 |
| Training will be provided by DLA Training (DTD) when required. Initial training will be done during transition period. The Schedule that was provided will be changed to accommodate transition. |
| 9 |
| The Under-Run = Share (Government / Contractor) section 0-2 Letters of Concern* = 20 /100. Q: Do you mean 20/80? |
| Pg. 13 of 90, RFP |
| Under FP Incentive Firm Ratio Section |
| Amendment 001 corrects the The Under run share (Government/Contractor) to 20/80 in Section B. |
| 10 |
| RFP states “If higher direct labor rates … or escalation are proposed, offerors may not receive increases when wage determinations are modified.” |
Question: Will the government work with the contractor to maintain the pay rate differential if requested?
| Pg. 13 of 90, RFP |
| Service Contract Act section |
| We are unable to provide increases above the SCA Wage determination rates when they are modified. As noted in the PPC briefing, higher labor rates and escalation may be proposed and will be evaluated. |
| 11 |
| The government states “all deductions as a failure to meet performance requirements as established in the contract will be deducted…” However, the relevant FAR clause gives other actions as remedies, to wit: (d) If any of the services performed do not conform with contract requirements, the Government may require the Contractor to perform the services again in conformity with contract requirements, for no additional fee. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by reperformance, the Government may (1) require the Contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to contract requirements …” |
Question: Will the government take these actions mentioned in Para (d) above prior to moving to deductions?
| Pg. 19 of 90 RFP |
| F-6, Deduction |
It is the Government’s opinion that the services contained in this PWS are of a type that cannot be reperformed if failures are realized. We believe that the structure of the FPIF CLINs in regards to Letters of Concern should control the occurrence of failures. If not, the Government will move to other deductions.
| 12 |
| The government states: “(b) The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing whenever it has reason to believe that-… (2) The total cost for the performance of this contract, exclusive of any fee, will be either greater or substantially less than had been previously estimated.” |
Question: Request the government quantify “greater” and “substantially less”?
| Pg. 48 of 90, RFP |
| Limitation of Cost |
| The inclusion of the Limitation of Costs clause helps the Government identify whether additional funds will be needed prior to the incurrence of the costs. The solicitation contains reporting requirements for each of the CLINs that allow us to monitor the incurred costs. Essentially, we’re going to know if a service provider is over or under running on the FPIF and Cost type CLINs. The clause simply makes the service provider responsible to notify the Government when the Cost type CLINs will reach 75% spent. |
| 13 |
| The government states, “All Government property made available to the Contractor for use is in an “as is” condition C-48 states “The Government may bill the outgoing Contractor for costs incurred to bring GE to safe, usable operating condition, as determined by the Government.” |
Question: Will the government property be in a condition to make useable?
| C-39, Att. J.1 |
| C-3.1B |
| The government believes the GE is in usable condition. If it is determined that the GE is not usable, the Government will provide replacement equipment or authorize the Contractor to replace under the Equipment CLIN. |
| 14 |
| The government states, “For any penalties or fines resulting from activities after the Contractor assumes performance, payment, as directed by the applicable agency, may be the responsibility of the Contractor, based on fault.” Question: What is the extent of potential fines? Who determines fault? |
| C-43, Attach J.1 |
| C-3.4.2 Environmental |
| The extent is unknown as it is dependent upon the situation. Fines would be determined by the state of California and any federal agencies with jurisdiction. Fault would be determined by investigations conducted by the Government. The Contractor may elect to include in their insurance. |
| 15 |
| The government states: “Credit: The Contractor shall insure that any credits for future travel, free travel, free gifts or rebates on current travel offered by airlines or car rental agencies as part of frequent traveler or similar promotional programs that are accrued as a result of travel necessary for performance under the contract, shall be conveyed to the Government.” |
Question: Would the government please clarify if the travel statement applies to free gifts, rebates, frequent traveler or promotional programs, etc. owned by the company and not by the employee?
Our corporate policy promotes the use of the lowest airfare cost, Per Diem rates for ME&I / lodging, and price of compact car rental. Therefore, the government is receiving the lowest commercially available price to complete the travel task, and not affected by the employee frequent traveler program.
| Pg. 24 of 90, RFP |
| G-6, Credits |
| Your employees are permitted to participate in rewards programs offered by airlines and hotels. However, if such rewards are used to fund travel on the contract resulting from this solicitation, the Government would expect to receive the benefit of those rewards. As an example, if an employee on official travel for the awarded contract gets a complimentary room for participating in the reward program, the Government would NOT reimburse the company for the hotel for those nights. |
| 16 |
| Will FAR 52.222-17 apply to this solicitation or be included or incorporated into the final contract, when awarded? Executive Order 13897, issued on 1 Nov 19 by President Trump, changed the rules for the transition of contracts covered by the Service Contract Act of 1965, as amended (see 41 U.S.C. 6701 et seq.). Contractors will no longer be required to make offers of employment to those employees on incumbent contracts whose employment would otherwise be terminated due to the expiration of the incumbent contract, or the award of the successor contract to a different company. |
In Amendment 001 the Government has removed FAR Clause 52.222-17 from the solicitation and any resulting contract.
| 17 |
| The Government recommends submission of a total of five (5) contracts encompassing the prime Offeror and/or any major subcontractors. |
Question: Must the offeror (prime and major subs) submit a total of five (5) contracts or may they submit less than 5?
| Pg. 71 of 90, RFP |
| L-4, Vol II |
| The Government’s recommendation is 5. However, it is understood this may not be possible for all offerors. It is recommended but not required. |
| 18 |
| Will the Government consider revising the threshold contained in Section H-1, Competition in Supplies, to align with the micro purchase threshold amount of $10,000 as updated in the 2019 NDAA? |
| Pg. 27 of 90 RFP |
| H-1, Competition in Supplies |
| No, the Government considered options and determined the threshold in the RFP appropriate. |
| 19 |
| There appears to be a conflict in timing for transition. The Draft training schedule has training scheduled in Jul - Sep 2020 months before the start of the Contract per the Section B Schedule CLIN 0008 (1 Nov 2020 - 31 Jan 2021.) |
| RFP Page 4 of 90RFP |
Attachment J.40 Draft Distribution Operations Training Schedule – July 2020 ITEM NO. 0008 Firm-Fixed Price (Applicable to CLIN 0008) Services to Perform Transition per C.1.8 (unless specifically identified separately in another CLIN, this CLIN encompasses PWS C-1 through C-6 ) PoP 3 months (1 Nov 2020-31 Jan 2021)
Intro to DSS and Receiving Course in July 2020 Amendment 0002 incorporates an updated J.40, Draft Training Schedule.
| 20 |
| Given that the RFP was released just prior to two major holidays (Christmas and New Years Day), no announcement of the date and time of the pre-proposal conference/site visit, and the Government’s desire to have the best proposals submissions, will the Government please issue a two week extension to the proposal submission deadline to March 6, 2020 |
| RFP Page 68-90 |
| 2. The hour and date for receipt of offers is 1:00 P.M. Eastern Local Time on February 19, 2020 |
| Amendment 001 extends the proposal due date to February 26, 2020. |
Amendment 0002 extends the proposal due date to March 6, 2020.
Amendment 0003 extends the proposal due date to March 11, 2020
| 21 |
| Will the government please extend the question submission deadline from 6 January 2020 to 23 January 2020 to accommodate offeror’s ability to follow up with questions based on the site visit? |
| L-3 1.a.(page 67 of 90 ) |
| …Question and must be received by 1:00 P.M. Eastern Local Time on January 6, 2020. Questions received after this date and time may not receive a response. |
| Amendment 001 extends the question period to January 31, 2020. |
| 22 |
| The following file/link for controlled access documents appears to be unavailable in SAM (with approval already granted). The link provides the following error message: “This page isn’t working. beta.sam.gov sent an invalid response.” Would the Government please check the link or consider another way to provide to offerors? |
NAVSUPINST 4440.157B, Material Turned into Store (MTIS) Manual https://beta.sam.gov/api/prod/opps/v3/opportunities/resources/files/5c9c4d3243b74fd7b990d628d9aff4d5/download?api_key=undefined&token=b467ba29-e10d-472b-bc73-16bff35c4575
| N/A |
| N/A |
| The Government was able to download and view this document without any issues. Suggest that you try again to download the file. If you are unsuccessful a second time, please contact the contract specialist. |
| 23 |
| Ref: Section L, Tab 2 - Staffing Approach, Section (a), Subfactor (b) 2b states: "The Offeror shall provide the proposed labor categories for each specific task listed in Column A. Only one labor category shall be listed per row. The Offeror may add additional rows for specific tasks that will be performed by more than one labor category." When inserting additional rows, the workload data (Columns G, I, K, M, and O) does not flow down because of the embedded file link. Additionally, the hours (Columns H, J, L, N, and P) have a calculated formula based on the composite time standard (roll-up) and does not consider the individual time standard into the calculation. As formatted, when new rows are inserted, the J.38 requires the Composite Time Standard (Column D) to be completed for each new row. Adherent to current formulas, this results in equal hours for all labor categories identified for an individual task. |
Question: Does the Government prefer the Offeror to insert an additional row per tasks requiring multiple labor categories to serve as the composite time standard (roll-up)? If not, can the Government please provide clarification on how to complete Column D and Columns G-P when inserting additional rows to accommodate multiple labor categories performing an individual task?
| RFP Page 75 of 90 |
| Section L, Tab 2 - Staffing Approach, Section (a), Subfactor (b) 2b |
| Attachment J.38 is revised in Amendment 0002. The Composite time standard column has been removed. When inserting the line, the Offeror will need to hand type in the workload in the workload column and add the calculation in the labor hour cells to calculate the labor hours from the time standard times the workload for added labor categories. |
| 24 |
| For electronic submission of offers, would the Government consider a secure access file exchange service (such as DoD SAFE, https://safe.apps.mil/) for efficient upload, and so offerors are not limited to 6MB per attachment? |
| RFP Page 68 of 90 |
| L-3, Paragraph 2 |
| Yes, provided there is no special access required for the Contract Specialist to download the files. DoD SAFE is acceptable. However, offerors should submit as much as possible via email. |
Amendment 0003 – offerors planning to use DoD SAFE must provide the contract specialist with a point of contact and an email address not less than 48 hours prior to desired upload of files as the specialist must provide a code for use. FAR 15.208 discusses submission of proposals by electronic commerce methods.
| 25 |
| Regarding Volume II – Past Performance guidance, “Prime Offerors shall provide information for (4) and (5) below,” please confirm “prime offerors” does indeed refer only to prime offerors on this solicitation, and therefore the requirement to provide information for (4) and (5) does not apply to subcontractors on this effort that were prime contractors on the referenced contracts/efforts? |
| RFP Page 72 of 90 |
| L-4, Volume II Past Performance Proposal |
| Yes, information for (4) and (5) only applies to the Prime. |
| 26 |
| J.22 TE 4.1 Contractor Training Item 12 lists the Global Freight Management System but this is not listed on the J.39 Training Plan. Please advise if this should be added to J.39. |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.22 & J.39 |
| Attachments J.22 and J.39 have been revised. |
| 27 |
| J.22 TE 4.1 Contractor Training Item 16 lists the U.S. Bank Freight Payments but this is not listed on the J.39 Training Plan. Please advise if this should be added to J.39. |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.22 & J.39 |
| Attachments J.22 and J.39 have been revised. |
| 28 |
| J.22 TE 4.1 Contractor Training Item 17 lists Information Security Training but this is not listed on the J.39 Training Plan. Please advise if this should be added to J.39. |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.22 & J.39 |
| Attachments J.22 and J.39 have been revised. |
| 29 |
| J.39 Training Plan lists General Security Training under Contractor Training however this is not listed in J.22 TE 4.1 Contractor Training. Please provide Government requirements for this training. |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.22 & J.39 |
| Attachments J.22 and J.39 have been revised. |
| 30 |
| J.39 Training Plan lists Supervisor and Lead Safety Training Course under Contractor Training however this is not listed in J.22 TE 4.1 Contractor Training. Please provide Government requirements for this training. |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.22 & J.39 |
| Attachments J.22 and J.39 have been revised. |
| 31 |
| Radiation Protection Officer Training is listed in two locations in J.39 Training Plan - Other Government Training (Excel Row 65) and Contractor Training (Excel Row 88). Please advise if this is a duplication. |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.39 |
| Attachments J.22 and J.39 have been revised. |
| 32 |
| AMMO-62 is listed under Specialized Distribution Operations Training in J.39 Training Plan and a similar course is listed under Contractor Provided Training (listed as HAZMAT Preparer Certification). Please advise if this is a duplication. |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.39 |
| Attachments J.22 and J.39 have been revised. |
| 33 |
| J.1 DDDC PWS, Paragraph C-1.3.1 Key Personnel requirements state, “The Contractor shall identify their labor categories to fulfil the Key Personnel requirements.” May offerors propose key personnel other than the positions listed in Paragraphs B and C of C-1.3.1? |
| PWS Page C-11 |
| J.1 PWS C-1.3.1 |
| Yes, offerors may propose key or non-key personnel other than the positions listed in Paragraphs B and C as long as the Contractor includes the educational and experience criteria required by the position for the life of the Contract. Additionally, Key Personnel positions will be subject to Section H-4, Substitution of Key Personnel and Other Key Personnel Requirements. |
| 34 |
| J.2 DDDC PWS references the following Technical Exhibits which do not appear to be part of the solicitation: |
TE 5.13N (Paragraph 5.2.1.N (B)) (Page 6 of 39) TE 5.11N (Paragraph 5.3.10.2N (A)(7)) (Page 12 of 39) TE 5.12N (Paragraph 5.3.10.2N (A)(7)) (Page 12 of 39)
Would the Government please provide these Technical Exhibits?
| PWS Pages 6, 12 of 39 |
| J.2 PWS |
| TE 5.13N has been included in Amendment 001 as Attachment J.45 TE 5.13N MTIS Work Flow. |
TE 5.11N and TE 5.12N have been removed from Attachment J.2 and replaced with TE 5.6.
| 35 |
| J.2 DDDC PWS references “TE 5.6N, MPC Homeport Ships” in Paragraph 5.7.1N(B) and “TE 6.3 MPC Supported Ships Listing” in Paragraph 5.7.1N(C)). Would the Government please confirm whether these references should be Attachment J.35 “TE 6.3N MPC Home Ported Ships” or otherwise provide TE 5.6N and TE 6.3? |
| PWS Page 17 of 39 |
| J.2 PWS 5.7.1N B and C |
| All references to Homeported Ships TE in Attachment J.2 changed to TE 6.3N Homeported ships. |
TE 5.6 remains as Local Delivery and Pick Up Points.
| 36 |
| J.38 Staffing Matrix, Cell A141 references “C-5.4 Physical Inventory (all TPICs)” which implies a level of effort required to complete "all TPICs," but the workload data in Columns G, I, K, M, O only refer to the TPIC "C" Inventories identified in Attachment J.28 TE 5.2 - DDDC Projected Workload. |
1) For purposes of completing Attachment J.38 Staffing Matrix, would the Government please confirm whether the Offeror should only consider TPIC "C" Inventories when evaluating C-5.4 Physical Inventory (all TPICs)?
2) Would the Government also please confirm whether the Government Estimated FTEs for Section C-5.4 Physical Inventory Control only takes into consideration TPIC "C" Inventories when estimating FTEs required to complete PWS Paragraph C-5.4 Physical Inventory (all TPICs)?
| RFP Attachment |
| J.38 |
| Attachment J.38 is revised in Amendment 0002 to include all TPIC inventory for 1st and 2nd count workload on line 146 (changes annotated in red). |
| 37 |
| J.4 Wage Determination, under **Hazardous Pay Differential** states "These differentials are only applicable to work that has been specifically designated by the agency for ordnance explosives and incendiary material differential pay." Has the Government designated any position(s) that require a hazardous pay differential? To properly estimate this requirement, would the Government specifically identify the projected workload data for Material Potentially Possessing Explosive Hazard (MPPEH) associated with Attachment J.1 DDDC PWS Paragraphs 5.2.5.1; 5.3.4.1; 5.3.11.4.H; and 5.5.6.1? |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.4 and J.1 PWS 5.2.5.1; 5.3.4.1; 5.3.11.4.H; and 5.5.6.1 |
| The Government does not have designated positions that would fall under the Hazardous Pay Differential IAW J.4. All MPPEH materiel poses a potential safety hazard if not rendered inert prior to handling and storage. All MPPEH material will be rendered “inert” (material that no longer contains any hazardous or potentially harmful material) prior to arriving at a DLA Distribution Center. |
MPPEH is not workload that is measured separately.
| 38 |
| J.33 TE 5.6 Local Delivery and Pick Up Points has several review comments on various pages indicating the lines may need to be removed from the table. Would the Government please confirm its requirement? |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.33 |
| TE 5.6 has been finalized and has been included in Amendment 001. |
| 39 |
| J.1 DDDC PWS, Paragraph C-4.4.2 references “TE 4.4 AMHS Equipment PM Tasks.” This attachment does not appear to have been included in the solicitation. Would the Government please provide? |
| PWS Pages C-52 |
| J.1 PWS C-4.4.2 |
| AMHS Equipment PM tasks are not applicable to this solicitation. Consequently, there is no T.E. 4.4 associated with this solicitation. |
| 40 |
| J.2 DDDC PWS, Paragraph C5.5.6.5N Additional Traffic Management / Transportation Requirements: Would the Government please define the type of Installation Entry Control Points (Gates), as defined in the DLA Physical Manual 2011 (DLAM 5200.08), Chapter 2.D.2? |
| PWS Page 13 of 39 |
| J.2 PWS C-5.5.6.5N |
| The PWS requirement is referring to cargo control for trucks entering the DDDC Distribution compound. |
The contractors that work the entry points check manifests and other requirements outlined in Para C5.5.6.5N. The contractors WILL NOT perform security missions at the Installation Entry Control Point as defined in the DLA Physical Security Manual DLAM 5200.08.
| 41 |
| Per J.1 DDDC PWS, Paragraph C-1.3.2 Non-Key Personnel Requirements, Para A states, “The Government developed their estimate for performing the requirements of this contract using the following labor categories.” In reference to J.2 DDDC PWS, Paragraph C-5.5.6.5N Additional Traffic Management / Transportation Requirements, would the Government please advise which labor category was selected to complete the Manifest Checker or Access Control Duties? Does the DLA Distribution Security Office require a minimum of FTEs to be on post during the hours of 0300-1600? |
| PWS Page 13 of 39 |
| J.2 PWS C-5.5.6.5N |
| Please see response to question 40 review DOL Guidelines for appropriate labor category. |
The DLA Distribution Security Office does not require a minimum number of FTEs to be on post.
| 42 |
| J.16 TE 3.2 Government Training and J.22 TE 1.4 Contractor Training do not identify any training associated with J.2 DDDC PWS, Paragraph C5.5.6.N Additional Traffic Management / Transportation Requirements tasks other than distribution operations training (i.e. C-5.2 Receiving/C5.2.1 Inbound Truck Control). Would the Government please advise if any training will be provided or is required related to the access control tasks? |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.16, J.22 |
| The Government does not provide any formal training. The Contractor should train these positions to the proposed labor category training requirements. |
| 43 |
| J.22 TE 1.4 Contractor Training identifies Equipment Operation and Maintenance Training as provided by the Offeror. Would the Government please confirm that NAVFAC training is not required for truck or MHE operation aboard NBSD, NBC or NBPL? |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.22 |
| No, the Contractor is responsible for training their workforce for MHE licensing |
| 44 |
| J.2 DDDC PWS, Paragraph 5.7.1.7N Paragraph D states, “The MPC storage area is located on Naval Station Mayport.” Would the Government please confirm this is correct? |
| PWS Page 22 of 39 |
| J.2 PWS 5.7.1.7N(D) |
| Paragraph 5.7.1.7N Para. D. has been revised for Amendment 001. Reference to Naval Station Mayport will be replaced with NBSD/NBC, (Naval Base San Diego/Naval Base Coronodo). |
| 45 |
| J.2 DDDC PWS, Paragraph C-5.7.4.1N Material Access Technology Paragraph B states, “Due to the integral nature of MAT in DLA Distribution San Diego, CA operations, it is expected that unscheduled downtime and slow response time will cause work disruption.” Would the Government please identify the “delay” factor specific to DLA Distribution San Diego operations as it relates to Personal, Fatigue and Delay (PF&D) used in the calculation for non-productive hours? Per Section L, Tab 2 Staffing Approach, Section (a) Sub Factor (b), paragraph 3iii: “The Government calculated FTEs by dividing total estimated productive labor hours by 1,780 hours.” |
| PWS Page 34 of 39 |
| J.2 PWS C-5.7.4.1N(B) |
| The delay is due to IT system or network downtime. The Contractor determines productivity analysis used to calculate the productive hours for an FTE. See Section L, Factor 2 – Staffing Approach, Sub-factor (b) – Staffing for Full Performance and Organization Chart. |
| 46 |
| The Government provided J.33 TE 5.6 Local Delivery and Pick Up Points, and J.34 TE 6.2N Delivery Schedule Greater than 10 Miles. Would the Government please advise where the Offeror’s time standards and estimated workload data (for provided delivery points) should be inserted on the J.38 Staffing Matrix? The workload data for 5.3 Warehousing (Issue) by weight band does not allow for application of information provided in J.33 and J.34. |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.38 |
| The offer should use lines 169 through 172 to add labor categories to perform the Local Delivery requirements. |
| 47 |
| Section L, Volume III, Tab 2 Staffing, Subfactor (b), paragraph 2.f states, “The offeror shall provide workload assumptions for cells that are not pre-populated for each specific task listed.” In the Attachment J.38 Staffing Matrix, there are tasks in the workload columns that are greyed out and some that are not. Would the Government please confirm that the offeror is only required to provide workload assumptions for those cells that are not greyed out? |
| RFP Page 75 of 90 |
| L-4, Volume III Technical Proposal, Tab 2 – Staffing Approach, Subfactor (b) |
| The offeror would only include workload from their assumptions in the cells that are NOT greyed out. |
| 48 |
| Section L, Volume III, Tab 2 Staffing, Subfactor (b), paragraph 3.iv states the offeror shall provide “determination of work shift(s).” J.38 Staffing Matrix and J.28 TE5.2 DDDC Projected Workload does not provide workload data by shift. J.27 TE 5.1 DDDC Historical Workload outlines historical production data from 0000-2400 for issues. J.2 DDDC PWS, Paragraph 1.2.3N Duty Hours and Access to Host Installation states “core hours are 0700-1545.” Would the Government clarify the required hours of operation for contractor-provided services outside of any special requirements noted in the PWS? |
| RFP Page 75 of 90 |
| L-4, Volume III Technical Proposal, Tab 2 – Staffing Approach, Subfactor (b) |
Attachment J.2, Section C-1.2.3N has been revised in Amendment 0002 to provide additional clarifications.
| 49 |
| Section B, CLIN 0004 “Material Support Costs (inclusive of CLINs 0001, 0006, and 0009)” references CLIN 0009 which does not appear to be a part of Section B. Would the Government please confirm whether there should be a CLIN 0009? |
| RFP Page 2 of 90 |
| Section B |
| The reference to CLIN 0009 has been deleted as part of Amendment 001. |
| 50 |
| The Share Ratio is going to be linked to the number of Letters of Concern. Is the Letters of Concern Number by Performance Period or the Entire Contract? |
| Page 13 of 90 |
| Fixed Price Incentive Firm Share Ratio |
| The number of Letters of Concern is calculated by each task order or period of performance. |
QUESTIONS FROM PPC – Jan 15, 2020
| 51 |
| What is the percent of HAZMAT vs. Non-HAZMAT? |
| PPC |
Historical HAZMAT workload is portrayed in TE 5.1 for both receipts and issues. Historically it has been less than 1% of the total receipt/issue workload.
| 52 |
| J.38 – can you explain the “composite” cell and what the Government expects to see in that column? |
Would it be possible to see an example when proposing multiple labor categories in one task?
PPC
J.38 is being revised to remove the composite cell column. The revised J.38 to be provided in future amendment.
| 53 |
| Inventory Task: please clarify if contractor or Government personnel are responsible for causative research? |
| PPC |
The Contractor performs causative research for IAVs.
| 54 |
| PSNY: Is there a local storeroom with stock supply that is pulled from to resupply the cribmaster or is this stocked pulled from NBSD/DDDC as needed? |
| PPC |
There is no storeroom for stock supply. Replenishments predominately will come from Building 659 on North Island.
| 55 |
| What are the minimum hours of operation for service provider outside of specific hours/FTE in PWS? |
| PPC |
Attachment J.2, Section 1.2.3N, Duty Hours And Access To The Host Installation was updated in Amendment 0002. Any specific FTE staffing requirements will be included in the specific requirements.
| 56 |
| Will the Government provide MHE licensing opportunities for operators? |
| PPC |
No, the Contractor is responsible for training their workforce for MHE licensing
| 57 |
| Will the slides be available on BETA.sam? |
| PPC |
Yes. The slides were posted on January 22, 2020. Access is restricted.
| 58 |
| Will you be willing to sponsor applications for facilities clearance? |
| PPC |
The Government does not sponsor applications; however, offerors may reference the solicitation number in its request to DSS.
| 59 |
| What is 1 PM Eastern Local Time? |
| PPC |
1300 Eastern Standard Time.
| 60 |
| Who provides custodial services in spaces? Is there a difference for Government and Contractor owned spaces? |
| PPC |
Government provides a separate contract for custodial services that supports both Government and Contractor occupied administrative, restrooms and breakroom spaces. The Contractor is responsible for general warehousing best practices for housekeeping during day to day processing IAW C-5.3.2 General Warehousing/Storage Requirements.
| 61 |
| Does the contractor provide “de-miling” services prior to disposal? |
| PPC |
DEMIL requirements are addressed in Attachment J.1, PWS Section C-5.3.11.3 Demilitarization (DEMIL).
| 62 |
| HAZWASTE area? Is it for internal HAZWASTE only or is it for HAZWASTE of inventory disposal? |
| PPC |
The 90 day satellite accumulation area is for Contractor generated HAZWASTE and inventory HAZMAT Disposals.
| 63 |
| Does the lease vs. buy analysis explanation need to be detailed in the technical or cost narrative? |
| PPC |
Lease vs. buy analysis is not required as part of the cost proposal. The equipment CLIN set includes government estimated costs. Lease vs. buy analysis is required upon contract award if capital equipment or significant repairs are required.
| 64 |
| With a potential transition to SAP would the Government utilize a surge task order for extra support required during that timeframe? |
| PPC |
Potentially, there is not sufficient information to determine the path forward at this time.
| 65 |
| CLIN X005 – Travel and Training. Is corporate travel for site visits and corporate oversight an allowable cost? |
| PPC |
Yes; however, it should be monitored as to not exceed government estimates.
| 66 |
| Could you please provide more detail on the FPIF Structure? It’s difficult to discern the “incentive”. It appears there are not scenarios in the current structure where the contractor receives 100% fee. |
| PPC |
The incentive is in the share ratio based upon the letter of concern count. The better the performance, the more profit margin a firm can make.
| 67 |
| Referencing the SSDRP, the A004 states a due date of 30 days after contract award. The J.1 states a due date to submit with the technical volume. Can you please clarify when the SSDRP is to be submitted. |
| PPC |
The Mission Essential Plan is due with the proposal IAW the DFARS provision and clause. CDRL A004 is updated in Amendment 001.
| 68 |
| Will the Contractor be able to access buildings 24 hours/7 days a week to perform requirements in buildings with no specified hours in the solicitation, attachments, and/or Technical Exhibits? |
| PPC |
Contractors will be able to access buildings 24/7 as long as the base gates are accessible.
| 69 |
| Who is responsible for bending/cutting raw stock? |
| PPC |
The Contractor is responsible.
| 70 |
| Who provides/maintains rotodome covers (part of inventory)? |
| PPC |
The Government orders and provides the covers to the Contractor. The Contractor installs them.
| 71 |
| Do the vendor and Government witness commercial pick-ups for outgoing parcels (inventory adjustment)? |
| PPC |
The Contractor is responsible for outgoing parcels and pick-ups. The Government performs quality assurance on the process.
| 72 |
| Is the Share Ratio / Letter of Concern quantity per task order or for the contract period. |
| PPC |
It is calculated per year, with a year anticipated per task order. See response to question 50.
| 73 |
| Are the VLMs Under maintenance Warranty or will the contractor be responsible for repair? And is there training that will be provided for operation of the specific VLM or is it up to us to train/license operators? |
| PPC |
VLM are included in TE 3.7, the contractor will perform maintenance.
| 74 |
| The Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan (MECSP) requirement refers to CDRL A004. This CDRL is titled: Surge, Sustainment, and Disaster Recovery Plan (SSDRP). Will CDRL A004 be changed to the MECSP or will a new CDL be issued? |
| C-35 |
| C-1.8.6 |
| Refer to response to question 67. |
| 75 |
| The PWS states that the Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan (MECSP) is to be submitted with the technical proposal. This Plan will be detailed with a significant page count. Can the page count of the MECSP be excluded from the overall technical section page count? |
| PWS Page C-36; |
RFP Page 76 of 90 C-1.9 B.
RFP L.4, Tab 3 SF (b) The MECSP will be excluded from the page limitation.
| 76 |
| The RFP states that the Offeror shall complete Attachment J.39 and shall include all training requirements identified in the contract requirements. The Offeror shall add additional lines to accommodate the identification of any additional training the Offeror determines is required to successfully perform the requirement of the contract. |
This attachment will take up a significant number of pages. Question: Will the Government consider excluding the J-39 from the page count and allow it to be submitted as an attachment to Volume III?
J.39; Page 77 of 90
Attachment J.39 will be excluded from the page limitation.
| 77 |
| L-4 Proposal Preparation Requirements Table 1, references Letters of Intent. However, there is not a reference in Volume III for a Letter of Intent. Please confirm if a LOI is required and if it’s in regard to Key Personnel. |
| Page 69 of 90 |
| L-4; Table 1 Proposal Preparation Requirements |
| Amendment 001 incorporates changes to Section L to require the Letter of Intent. |
| 78 |
| Is the MECSP the same as A004 SSDRP and can references to them be considered interchangeable? |
| PWS (Page C-170) |
(Page C-36) RFP Att J.11 A004 - Surge Sustainment and Disaster Recovery Plan (SSDRP)
| PWS (Page C-170)(Page C-36) RFP Att J.11 A004 - Surge Sustainment and Disaster Recovery Plan (SSDRP) |
| Refer to response to question 67. |
| 79 |
| Are offerors required to submit a Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan with the proposal per Attachment J.1 C-1.9 B( page C-36) and include all of the elements listed in Attachment J NLT 30 days prior to full performance per Attachment J.11 A004 - Surge Sustainment and Disaster Recovery Plan (SSDRP). |
| PWS (Page C-170) |
(Page C-36) RFP Att J.11 A004 - Surge Sustainment and Disaster Recovery Plan (SSDRP) PWS C-6.6 A004 (Page C-170) PWS C-1.9 (Page C-36) Continuation of Essential Contractor Services Refer to response to question 67.
| 80 |
| Or are offerors required to submit a plan Continuation of Essential Contactor Services Plan IAW RFP Volume III, Tab 3, Section (b) NLT 30 days prior to full performance per Att J.11 A004 - Surge Sustainment and Disaster Recovery Plan (SSDRP). |
| RFP page 76 of 90 |
| RFP Volume III, Tab 3, Section (b) |
| Refer to response to question 67. |
| 81 |
| If the plan is due with the proposal should we respond to the questions in the RFP or the topics in Att J.11 A004? |
| RFP (Page 76 of 90) |
RFP Volume III, Tab 3, Section (b) Attachment J.11 A004?
Refer to response to question 67.
| 82 |
| The RFP is silent as to the use of 11X17 pages. Are offerors permitted to use 11X17 page format in Volumes II and III? |
If so, will the page be counted as one or two pages?
| RFP (Page 69 of 90) |
| L-4, Proposal Preparation Requirements 1, 2 |
| 11X17 page format may only be used for Attachments J.38 and J.39 and they are excluded from the page limitation. |
| 83 |
| Dates for CLIN 0008 are 1 Nov 2020 – 31 Jan 2021. |
Dates for Transition start end July before CLIN 0008 dates.
Transition usually starts before full performance. Please clarify.
Attachment J.40
See Question 8. Training will be provided by DLA Training (DTD) when required. Initial training will be done during transition period. The Schedule that was provided will be changed in a future amendment to accommodate transition.
Questions after the release of Amendment 0001
| 84 |
| What is current Location Identification Program (LIP) compliancy percentage? |
| J-1 |
| 5.3.5 |
In accordance with LIP SOP and Bin and Rack LIP Policy, all permanent Bin and Rack storage locations will need to be DSS Planographed within six months of receiving LIP training.
Note: All storage locations in the classified storage area will be Planographed locations.
| 85 |
| According to TE 5.1 the FY19 storage density is listed as 19.5%. Is the projected workload for Rewarehouse Actions stated in TE 5.2 support achieving 40% density goal? |
| J-1 |
5.3.7
No, the Service Provider is to project and adjust rewarehousing actions to meet and comply with density goal.
| 86 |
| Considering the number of warehouse areas throughout SD and NI, what is breakout of workload by work area (Issues and Stows)? |
| TE 5.2 |
Workload is not tracked by individual building or satellite location. When referring to TE 5.1 and 5.2 it is important to note that Retail workload only occurs on North Island (NI).
| 87 |
| Is there a Master Storage plan that can be provided (storage location sizes, unique storage designation, etc.? |
| J-1 |
| 5.3.1 B |
| Refer to the Occupancy and Density report that has recently been added to the Technical Library via Amendment 0002 |
| 88 |
| What is the core Inbound Receiving hours for DDDC? |
| J-1 |
| 5.2.1 |
| Current Core inbound receiving hours are 0600-1200 Monday-Friday. |
| 89 |
| What is the average length of service for workforce? Or sum of workforce with year time ranges (> 1 Year, 1-2 Years, 3-4 Years, >5 Years) |
| General |
The Government is unable to provide this information.
| 90 |
| What is the current Training Status of workforce? How many “Trained to Standard”? How many “Progressing”? How many “Untrained”? |
| General |
The Government is unable to provide this information. Proposals should include training/transition plans, regardless of current SPs status.
| 91 |
| On September 19, 2019, the Department of Labor published a Notice in the Federal Register to announce that, beginning January 1, 2020, the Executive Order 13658 minimum wage rate is increased to $10.80 per hour (84 FR 49345). This Executive Order minimum wage rate generally must be paid to workers performing work on or in connection with covered contracts. |
Question: For States (like California) where the state’s minimum wages are significantly higher than the wages for labor categories to be used under the current DOL AWD in the solicitation, will the government adjust the labor rates to match the rates of the respective states where the services are to be performed? This is important when competing for qualified talent in the local labor markets.
Attachment J.4 Wage Determination San Diego Ca
When the contract is awarded, the most current version of the DoL Wage Determination will be incorporated which does include the updated California minimum wage. The Service Contracting Act only requires service providers to pay at least the minimum rates listed in the appropriate wage determination. As a point of reference, the current wage determination rates all exceed the California minimum of $10.80.
| 92 |
| In Amendment 1, answer to Question 75 the Government stated that the MECSP will be excluded from the page limitation. |
Question: Will the Government update Section L to reflect the exclusion of the MECSP from the overall technical proposal page limitation?
PWS Page C-36 RFP Page 76 of 90 C-1.9B RFP L.4 Tab 3 Section (b) Yes, Section L in Amendment 0002 has been updated to reflect the exclusion of the MECSP from the overall technical proposal page limitation.
| 93 |
| In Amendment 1, answer to Question 82 the government stated that 11x17 page formats may only be used for Attachments J.38 and J.39 and they are excluded from page limitation. |
Question: Would the Government allow 11x17 for the POAM and organization chart in the technical proposal.
RFP Page 76 of 90
RFP Page 75 of 90 RFP L.4 Tab 3 Section (a)
RFP L.4 Tab 2, SF (b) 4 No. Only Attachments J.38 and J.39 may be submitted in 11x17 page format.
| 94 |
| The J.2 states the hours to stand on post to perform Manifest Checker or Access Control Duties is from 0300-1600 Monday through Friday. Can the contractor modify their start time based upon personnel start times, start of inbound truck deliveries and start of local deliveries? |
| J.2 Page 13 |
| C-5.5.6.5N Additional Traffic Management / Transportation Requirements |
| No, gate access hours are not determined by personnel start times; gate access hour coverage includes inbound/outbound truck traffic requirements. |
Questions received too late to include in Amendment 0002
| 95 |
| Reference: Affiliate companies, sister companies, teaming arrangements, joint venture agreement, etc. will be considered provided sufficient documentation is included in the Past Performance Proposal. Documentation includes a copy of the documented arrangement such as documented affiliation, a copy of the teaming agreement, a copy of the joint venture agreement, etc. |
Question:
If the offeror is to submit documentation in response to this requirement, may the documentation be excluded from the overall page count for Past Performance?
| Page 74 of 90 |
| L-4, Volume II. |
Yes. Documents pertaining to affiliates, sister companies, teaming arrangements and joint venture agreements may be excluded from the page count for the Past Performance Proposal Volume.
| 96 |
| Section L, Volume III Tab 2 Staffing, Section (c) #5 states, “Identify the turnover rate proposed for the contract.” Would the Government please confirm that personnel turnover resulting from DLA Distribution’s recruiting and hiring of contractor personnel will not negatively impact the realized turnover rate? |
| RFP Page 78 of 90 |
| Section L, Volume III Tab 2 Staffing, Section (c) |
| Turnover rate is inclusion of any change in staffing. Offerors need to conduct the analysis to determine their turnover rate in this location. |
| 97 |
| J.26, TE 5.0 APLs - The Government has listed several APLs that are measured in business hours. Would the Government please clarify the number of business hours in each 24-hour day (Monday – Sunday)? |
| RFP Attachment |
| J.26 |
| For wholesale and retail receipt induction metrics, the business hours calculation excludes weekends and holidays. For example, wholesale New Procurement receipt induction is a 24 business hour metric. If a wholesale procurement receipt was tailgated at 1400 on a Friday, the induction would need to occur by 1400 the following Monday. If Monday was a holiday, then the induction would need to occur by 1400 on Tuesday. |
| 98 |
| (A) - J.26, TE 5.0 APLs - 5.2 Receiving “Receipt Processing- Customer Returns Receipts to Tailgate to Induction” lists 120 business hours or less. Please advise how many calendar or business days equate to 120 business hours. |
(B) - J.26, TE 5.0 APLs - 5.2 Receiving “Receipt Processing - Customer Return Receipts Tailgate to Stow” lists 10 calendar days or less. Assuming the tasks associated with performing (A) must be completed before the tasks associated with performing (B), is this APL (10 calendar days or less) measured after Induction or is the time inclusive of Tailgate-to-Induction?
| RFP Attachment |
| J.26 |
| (A) See the response to question #97. |
(B) The time is inclusive of Tailgate-to-Induction.
| 99 |
| To clarify Q&A #24, a site like DoD SAFE does require a request code from the recipient (Contract Specialist) to upload documents. In this case, if we must email the submission, would it be acceptable to have multiple files for a volume to ensure it can be emailed? |
| Q&A Amend. 1 |
| #24 |
| Reference Question #24. Proposal Volume files may be emailed separately provided they are identified in such a way that the specialist can easily determine the proposal volume to which the files belong. EMAIL IS THE PREFERRED METHOD. |
Offerors wishing to utilize DoD SAFE must notify the acquisition specialist not later than 48 hours prior to proposed upload of files as the specialist must provide a code for use by offerors without a CAC card.
| 100 |
| To clarify Q&A #27, it appears U.S. Bank Freight Payments is still listed in the Amendment 0001 J.22 TE 4.1 Contractor Training, but it does not appear to have been included in Amendment 0001 J.39 Training Plan. Is the intention to keep or delete this training from the requirements? |
| Q&A Amend. 1 |
| #27 |
| The revised Attachment J.39 was erroneously omitted from Amendment 0002. It is attached for Amendment 0003. U.S Bank Freight has been added to Attachment J.39 |
Attachment J.22 provides required training. The training is dependent upon the position of the employee. Attachment J.39 is the offeror’s method of proposing which employees will need which training. Offerors are expected to complete the J.39 with the training classes indicated on Attachment J.22 as required for each employee. Add lines (training classes) as needed.
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.