TBOSS_RFI_Matrix_10312024_GOV Responses.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 33 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Tinker Air Force Base Operations Support Service (TAFB BOSS) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- Not on record
About this file
This document is an RFI (Request for Information) Matrix that provides government responses to questions from the previous source selection RFI. The key details are:
The RFI is for the Tinker Air Force Base Operations Support Service (TAFB BOSS) requirement, which seeks operations management services for facilities, infrastructure, and central plant operations at Tinker AFB and surrounding locations. The services include work requests, operations engineering, asset management, emergency response, and more. The NAICS code is 561210 - Engineering Services, with a $47M size standard.
The RFI Matrix addresses topics such as two-step sealed bidding procedures, accounting system requirements, CMMC certification, GFP, supplier risk management, quality control, and personnel requirements. The government provides responses clarifying contract requirements, timelines, and evaluation criteria. Overall, this document provides additional details and clarification on the planned RFP for the TAFB BOSS contract.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 26
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
EXAMPLE
| THIS IS AN EXAMPLE FROM THE PREVIOUS SOURCE SELECTION RFI MATRIX | ||||||
| RFI # | Document | Paragraph Reference | Page | Content | Question | Government Response |
| Ex1 | PWS | 1.1 | Operations Management shall be conducted in accordance with the principals and procedures outlined in AFI 32-1001, Civil Engineer Operations, latest version and the playbooks referenced therein. | The Playbooks (Work Management and Operations Engineering) identify the Operations Engineering portion of the Operations Flight as the critical piece where all work requirements revolve around five key processes stated (Section 2.4 of the Ops Eng. Playbook), which determine continuous improvement and success in work execution. Since Operations Engineering is not part of this contract, can the Government please provide guidance on how Operations Engineering functions and processes will support the Operations contractor? | Please refer to paragraphs 1.2.4 and 1.4 of the PWS. |
RFI Matrix
| Date: 10/31/24 | ||||||||
| CEOps_RFI_Response_Matrix | ||||||||
| RFI # | Document | Paragraph Reference | Page | Content | Question | Government Response | Note | |
| 1 | Draft RFP | Draft RFP, CLIN 0015-0018 | page 6-7 | In CLIN 0015-0018, the RFP states “The contractor shall not apply any indirect rates, fees, or profit to the purchase price of materials and/or equipment. The Government will only reimburse the actual price of materials purchased.” | ||||
| In accordance with FAR 31.203(d), “…once an appropriate base for allocating indirect costs has been accepted, the contractor shall not fragment the base by removing individual elements. All items properly includable in an indirect cost base shall bear a pro-rata share of indirect costs irrespective of their acceptance as Government contract costs.” According to FAR and DCAA requirements, contractors are required to apply our burdens in a consistent and fair manner to all contracts. By not allowing the application of our indirect rates to the purchase of CAP on this contract, those costs will be considered unallowable and will reduce the contractor's overall profit. | We request the Government change the above sentence in CLIN 0015-0018 to “The contractor shall not apply any fee or profit to the purchase price of materials and/or equipment.” | The bidder may propose indirect rates applicable to material (CAP) purchases based on the estimated material costs provided in the cost reimbursable (CR) CLINs in the RFP Pricing Matrix and the provided workload data. This method allows bidders to ensure compliance with their accounting system methods as applicable and ensure material cost bases and indirect costs are captured. The indirect rates applicable to the CR material will be captured in the Firm Fixed Price CLINs for “Material Management.” The Material Management CLINs are FFP and profit/fee are captured in this CLIN. | ||||||
| 2 | Draft RFP | ITB 2.1.1. | ITB 2.1.1. Two-Step Sealed Bidding Procedures | 2.1.1. Contract award will be made utilizing the two-step sealed bidding procedures described in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 14.5, as supplemented in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) and Department of the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DAFFARS). Step-one consists of the request for, submission, evaluation, and (if necessary) discussion of a technical proposal. No pricing is involved. Step-two involves the submission of sealed priced bids by those who submitted acceptable technical proposals in step one. | Once a bidder is deemed acceptable in Step 1, what length of time will the Government give prior to the Step 2 due date? | The government currently estimates that price bids will be due 14 days after request for price bids. | ||
| 3 | Draft RFP | ITB 4.8.8. | ITB 4.8.8. Adequate Accounting System Information | 4.8.8.1. Accounting System Requirements |
As stated in FAR 16.301-3(a)(3), a cost-reimbursement contract may only be awarded to a contractor whose accounting system is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract. Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) determines the adequacy of a contractor’s accounting system following an audit performed by Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA).
| Since CLINs X015 – X018 are Cost Reimbursable CLINs, any potential contract awardee must have their accounting system determined adequate before contract award can be made. | Due to the heightened amount of ODC and CAP, we recommend the Government require the Adequate Accounting System approval within the Step 1 gate review. We recommend the Government eliminate the Preaward survey mentioned in 4.8.8.3. | To promote competition, the government intends to provide bidders the maximum amount of time to meet the requirement and produce an acceptable bid. It is in the governments best interest to require a Pre-award Survey described in ITB 4.8.8.3. The government has posted a request offerors on SAM.gov to provide information to support the preaward survey. | |||
| 4 | Draft RFP/ PWS | PWS | PWS | In anticipation of the federal ruling regarding the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC), and to reduce the burden on the Government to perform the assessment post award, each bidder must prove it has adequate security on all covered information systems. There are high risks to the government associated with the selection of a service provider that is not Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and CMMC Third Party Assessor Organization (C3PAO) certified to be “CMMC Ready” and these risks include: |
High risk for NIST SP 800-171 R2 basic and derived security requirements that, if not implemented, could lead to significant exploitation of the network, or exfiltration of Controlled Information leading to the service provider not being able to provide material management software services.
High risk that companies “self-certifying” will not pass initial audit and obtain approval resulting in significant delays in a certification to cause the service provider to be unable to provide interconnectivity with government systems and material management software services.
High risk of jeopardizing potential IDIQ CLIN awards if the service provider only has a Conditional Level 2 CMMC Status. Conditional status places the burden on the service provider to complete reassessment within 180 days. If that term expires the service provider will be ineligible for additional awards (including IDIQ CLINS).
High Risk that a Level 2 Conditional can result in a mandatory POA&M and that POA&M must meet all the CMMC Level 2 POA&M requirements. Please note, POA&M is not always granted by the C3PAO and extensions are not authorized. Recommend that the government mitigate this high risk set of issues by including the following in the final RFP:
PWS 3.3.9: Add “The Service Provider must have been assessed by a C3PAO and DCMA members as CMMC Ready.”
Section L: Recommend that the Service Provider provide proof of a passing score from a C3PAO and DCMA at the time of proposal submission.
| Section M: Add pass/fail requirement for C3PAO and DCMA prior to submission. | This requirement, specifically the Performance Work Statement, does not require a Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification as outlined in the DFARS Subpart 204.75. DFARS Subpart 2.4.7503 (b) states it is requried for implentation after October 1, 2025; therefore, the government does not intend to include provision 252.204-7021 in this requirement. | ||||||
| 5 | Draft RFP/ ITB 6.3. Other Information Required and ITB Appendix 1 Table 2.1 | ITB 6.3. | Other Information Required and ITB Appendix 1 Table 2.1 | 6.3.4. Provide company/division's street address, county and facility code; CAGE code; DUNS code; TIN; size of business (large or small); and labor surplus area designation. | Would the Government like to replace the DUNS in Table 2.1 with the UEI number of the Bidder and each significant subcontractor and/or teaming partner? | The government concurs with change and has made the revision to Table 2.1. | |
| 6 | Draft RFP | Solicitation Section B | Solicitation Section B - Supplies or Services & Prices or Costs and APPENDIX B – Government Provided Services | Item 0013 Material Management – The Contractor shall provide all personnel, equipment, tools, supplies, passenger vehicles, fuel, and supervision necessary to perform services IAW PWS2, 2.2.3.5, 2.3.10, 2.4.9, 2.7.9, 3.3, 3.4 | To provide fair and equal competition among bidders, would the Government consider changing Passenger Vehicles (On-Base Transportation) to a Cost Reimbursable CLIN? | No. The government believes a cost reimbursable CLIN for vehicles would circumnavigate competition and not result in best value to the government. The government has added specific criteria under ITB 4.8.5(e) to evaluate the bidders technical approach to supplying vehicles, tools, and equipment. | |
| 7 | Draft RFP/ WD / CBA | Solicitation Wage Determinations (WDs) and Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) | Solicitation Wage Determinations (WDs) and Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) | Retaining knowledgeable and capable employees to provide services will be a key parameter to measure effectiveness of a successful service provider. | Will the government implement required parameters for health plan selection data for CBA personnel, to include the percentage of CBA workforce applicable to each plan type (Single, Family, Waive coverage), to ensure all Offerors are aligned in this aspect? | The government has provided all the information it possesses, in the form of the CBA. | |
| 8 | Draft RFP / PWS | PWS 4.2.2. Energy Management Control System (EMCS) Management / Operations. | PWS 4.2.2. Energy Management Control System (EMCS) Management / Operations. | 4.2.2.1.10.10. states specifically that the Service Provider is to “Provide all ISSO support as required to fulfill all EMCS requirements. The SP’s ISSO shall comply with DAFGM 2023-32-01 and maintain a minimum information assurance training (IAT) Level II certification IAW DoD 8570.01.1-M, Information Assurance Workforce Improvement Program. The ISSO shall comply with the responsibilities directed in DAFGM 2023-32-01 or AFI 17-101, Para 3.13. The ISSO shall possess a minimum of Tier 3 (SECRET) | |||
| security clearance and IAT Level II certification IAW DoD 8570.01.1-M.” | Will the government sponsor the FCL required to support this requirement? | Removed from the PWS. The government will perform the ISSO function. | |||||
| 9 | Draft RFP / PWS | PWS 1.2. | PWS 1.2. General Requirements | The PWS references at the end of PWS 1.2 “Note: Government furnished property (GFP), Appendix C.5, is provided for the purpose of reducing contract costs incurred by the Government. GFP does not relieve the SP of the requirement to provide tools, equipment, and vehicles. The SP is responsible for all costs associated with using GFP, including fuel and maintenance.” | Will the government provide specific vehicle types and quantities by Levels of Service to ensure all minimums are properly provided? | No. To provide the best service to Tinker, the government will allow industry to propose specific vehicle types and quantities and describe the rationale used to develop. See ITB 4.8.5(e) | |
| 10 | Draft RFP / PWS | PWS | PWS requirements including Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.204-21 and the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation (DFAR) 252.204-7012 and 3.3.2.1. “Utilize competitive purchase procedures and price realism (a government source shall be used in the comparison or justification provided for using only commercial sources).” | Due to the nature of Supplier Risk Management requirements being mandated as compliant with DoD processes and noting that best practices can include: |
All suppliers of services to be performed by a subcontractor are required to to have business and financial responsibility, capabilities, past performance, status of business systems, certifications and insurance and compliance.
DFARS clause 252.204-7020 complements DFARS clause 252.204-7012's flow down requirements by holding contractors responsible for confirming their subcontractors have SPRS scores on file prior to awarding them contracts.
DFARS clause 252.204-7021 also stipulates contractors will be responsible for flowing down the CMMC requirements to their subcontractors.
Service Provider must hold subs and vendors accountable - Cyber Supply Chain Risk Management; Vendor Risk Management – Risk assessments on all of subs before award, and do annual risk assessments with all of subs.
When a Service Provider has a requirement of Level 2 certification, any controlled data that is flowed down for a subcontractor to process, store, or transmit in performance of the subcontract will also carry a minimum requirement of Level 2 certification assessment.
15 controls that MUST be met at all levels of CMMC / all vendors CMMC Level 1 min.
(i) Limit information system access to authorized users, processes acting on behalf of authorized users, or devices (including other information systems).
(ii) Limit information system access to the types of transactions and functions that authorized users are permitted to execute.
(iii) Verify and control/limit connections to and use of external information systems.
(iv) Control information posted or processed on publicly accessible information systems.
(v) Identify information system users, processes acting on behalf of users, or devices.
(vi) Authenticate (or verify) the identities of those users, processes, or devices, as a prerequisite to allowing access to organizational information systems.
(vii) Sanitize or destroy information system media containing Federal Contract Information before disposal or release for reuse.
(viii) Limit physical access to organizational information systems, equipment, and the respective operating environments to authorized individuals.
(ix) Escort visitors and monitor visitor activity; maintain audit logs of physical access; and control and manage physical access devices.
(x) Monitor, control, and protect organizational communications (i.e., information transmitted or received by organizational information systems) at the external boundaries and key internal boundaries of the information systems.
(xi) Implement subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are physically or logically separated from internal networks.
(xii) Identify, report, and correct information and information system flaws in a timely manner.
(xiii) Provide protection from malicious code at appropriate locations within organizational information systems.
(xiv) Update malicious code protection mechanisms when new releases are available.
(xv) Perform periodic scans of the information system and real-time scans of files from external sources as files are downloaded, opened, or executed. Will the government include a requirement in the RFP to have the Service Provider implement a Supplier Risk Management portal?
Specifically DFARS 252.204-7024 to include:
- SPRS scores are incorporated into supplier risk systems
- Inaccurate SPRS scores could open contractors to legal risk, including False Claims Act (FCA) liability
- Requiring contracting officers to consider supplier risk assessments in DoD’s Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) when evaluating offers in response to solicitations SPRS will be a requirement for contractor responsibiltiy determination and the contracting officer will review SPRS to ensure the awardee has complied with the SPRS requirements prior to award. Offerors that have not met the requirements may not be considered for award even though they may be the lowest offeror at Step two. Be advised, the government is considering whether or not to make this a requirement for Step One. Please review the entire Request for Technical Proposals.
Regarding CMMC. The government has not stipulated a requirement for CMMC in the Performance Work Statement and does not consider this a valid requirement for this service.
11 Draft RFP PWS PWS - Draft Appendix A - Operations Management, Paragraph 5. Contractor Quality Control Management (Page 15) PWS - Draft Appendix A - Operations Management, Paragraph 5. Contractor Quality Control Management This section states that "SP’s quality control program shall ensure all requirements are being accomplished in accordance with the specifications of the contract and shall be certified to ISO 9001 or equivalent industry standard."
| Will the Government consider revising this requirement to permit contractors to provide a quality control program that is ISO 9001 compliant at contract award and certified to the ISO 9001 standard within one year of contract award? | This is acceptable to the government and the PWS has changed to reflect such. | ||||||
| 12 | Draft RFP | (ITB) | Instructions to Bidders (ITB), Paragraph 4.8.6.1 (Page 10) | Instructions to Bidders (ITB), Paragraph 4.8.6.1 | Will the Government accept experience that in the aggregate of submitted contracts demonstrates recent and relevant experience in all areas listed in Paragraph 4.8.6.1? | The government has updated ITB 4.8.6.1 to reflect technical and complexitay as factors instead of size. | |
| 13 | Draft RFP | (ITB) | Instructions to Bidders (ITB), Paragraph 4.8.6.1 (Page 10) | Instructions to Bidders (ITB), Paragraph 4.8.6.1 | Will the Government consider reducing the relevancy criteria for the number of buildings and for the number of acres? The requirement as written now is potentially too restrictive for non-incumbent offerors to demonstrate recent and relevant experience. Revising the requirement will benefit the Government by increasing competition and ensuring enough competitive offers are received. | The government has updated ITB 4.8.6.1 to reflect technical and complexitay as factors instead of size. | |
| 14 | Draft RFP | Personnel Requirements | Personnel Requirements | Personnel Requirements | Personnel Requirements: Will the government consider adding degreed engineers for Operations Engineering positions within the MTC? | The government has made additions to the MTC Apdx C.7 and PWS 3. Operations Engineering Support regarding these positions. | |
| 15 | Draft RFP | Cost Reimbursable (CR) CLINs | Cost Reimbursable (CR) CLINs | Cost Reimbursable (CR) CLINs | Cost Reimbursable (CR) CLINs: Will the CR CLINs cover costs for vehicles, tools, and equipment? Could the government clarify which specific items are expected to fall under CR versus FFP (Firm-Fixed Price)? | The cost reimbursable (CR) CLINS are NOT for vehicles, tools, or equipment. Vehicles, tools, and equipment are to be incorporated into the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLIN's. The government expects all costs associated with the performance of the FFP CLIN work to be incorporated; such as: labor, vehicles, tools, equipment, supervision, overhead, profit and ancillary costs (maintenance, fuel, training, safety, etc.). CR CLINs X015-X018 are reserved for procuring materials for workorders and repairs. | |
| 16 | Draft RFP | Evaluation and Selection Process | Evaluation and Selection Process | Evaluation and Selection Process | Evaluation and Selection Process: Is the two-step process functionally an LPTA (Lowest Price Technically Acceptable) process, or will there be additional factors considered in Step 2? Will Step 1 evaluations influence the number of participants eligible for Step 2? If so, what criteria will be used to limit participants? | If a bidder is found to not be technically acceptable through initial evaluation or through discussions, they will not be requested to provide a price bid at Step 2 and will be removed from competiton .Criteria for evaluation is in the L&M. | |
| 17 | Draft RFP | Scope of Cost CLINs | Scope of Cost CLINs | Scope of Cost CLINs | Scope of Cost CLINs: What specific items or services are included in the Cost CLIN this time? Will this be in line with past expectations, or should we anticipate changes? | The cost reimbursable CLINs are for repair materials to perform workorders and repairs such as filters, chemicals, ceiling tiles, carpet squares, paint, and U-Fix it inventory. | |
| 18 | Draft RFP | Solicitation Timeline | Solicitation Timeline | Solicitation Timeline | Solicitation Timeline: Can the government provide further insight into why the solicitation is being issued earlier than expected? | The government will not provide an explanation. | |
| 19 | Draft RFP | Technical and Workload Data | Technical and Workload Data | Technical and Workload Data | Technical and Workload Data: When can offerors expect complete technical and workload data to be released for accurate proposal preparation? | Technical and Workload Data is provided in Appendix C. | |
| 20 | Draft RFP | Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) | Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) | Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) | Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA): What is the anticipated release date for the Collective Bargaining Agreement? Will this release be available before Step 1 evaluations are completed?Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA): What is the anticipated release date for the Collective Bargaining Agreement? Will this release be available before Step 1 evaluations are completed? | CBA's were released. | |
| 21 | Draft RFP | Proposal Instructions and Section L | Proposal Instructions and Section L | Proposal Instructions and Section L | Proposal Instructions and Section L: Section L currently appears to only contain clauses. Will additional instructions for proposal preparation, particularly regarding formatting and required content, be added? | Yes, updated section L, Instructions to Bidders, will be published. | |
| 22 | Draft RFP | Timeline for Step 1 Evaluations | Timeline for Step 1 Evaluations | Timeline for Step 1 Evaluations | Timeline for Step 1 Evaluations: What is the anticipated timeline for completing Step 1 evaluations? Will feedback be provided before moving into Step 2? | The government estimates 30 days to complete technical evaluations. This may change depending on quality of technical proposals and length of discussions with bidders. | |
| 23 | Draft RFP | Vehicle Maintenance | Vehicle Maintenance | Vehicle Maintenance | Vehicle Maintenance: Can routine maintenance for vehicles be conducted on-base, or will contractors need to arrange off-site facilities? | On base maintenance is acceptable to the government. SP must account for hazmat approval and disposal process. | |
| 24 | Draft RFP | CLIN Structure and Levels of Service | CLIN Structure and Levels of Service | CLIN Structure and Levels of Service | CLIN Structure and Levels of Service: The CLINs are structured in pairs of FFP and QPI. Can the government confirm if both components will be priced as one item? How will the Levels of Service be weighted, and how should contractors interpret this weighting in developing their approach? | The government will provide a pricing matrix. Bidders will not need to provide an amount for QPI. QPI will be calcuated at 8% of the FFP for the Level of Service amount. This will be a calcualted function within the pricing matrix. | |
| 25 | Draft RFP | Proposal as Part of the Contract | Proposal as Part of the Contract | Proposal as Part of the Contract | Proposal as Part of the Contract: Since the proposal will become part of the contract, can the government specify any additional content requirements that would ensure compliance? | The government will incorporate the technical proposal into the contract. The awardee must perform to all the contract requirements in addition to their technical proposal. | |
| 26 | Draft RFP | Technical Proposal Preparation Time | Technical Proposal Preparation Time | Technical Proposal Preparation Time | Technical Proposal Preparation Time: With 60 days allocated for preparing the technical proposal, will there be any interim opportunities to ask further clarifying questions, or is the October 31 deadline final for all inquiries? | Offerors may ask questions for clarification or if they believe there has been an error made in the solicitation. The contracting officer reserves the right to consider an extension to the RFP response due date. Note, the government may post questions and responses to the SAM.gov announcement. | |
| 27 | Draft RFP | Change in Requirements | Change in Requirements | Change in Requirements | Change in Requirements: Can the government clarify what requirements have been added or subtracted from the current program? | The adoption of a standardized PWS has resulted in significant language, formatting, and layout changes to the PWS. The overall requirement to perform Base Operations remains; however, the minutia of changes are not quantifiable. Please read the PWS and appendices in their entirety to develop a proposal. | |
| 28 | Draft RFP | Safety | Safety | Safety | Safety: Can the government clarify to what extent safety will be evaluated in this solicitation? | See Instructions to Bidders. | |
| 29 | Draft RFP | Incumbent Inventory | Incumbent Inventory | Incumbent Inventory | Incumbent Inventory: Will the Government provide the current incumbent inventory to include condition status? | The government will not provide information on incumbent owned inventory. | |
| 30 | Draft RFP | Government Inventory | Government Inventory | Government Inventory | Government Inventory: Will the Government provide the current Government Owned inventory available for contractor use, to include condition status? | The Government Furnished Equipment is listed in Appendix C.5 and in operational status. Additional information, if known, such as year, model, hours or millage is provided in Appendix C.5.1.7. Thes bidders are cautioned not to dupicate the inventory as these photos are of items listed in Appendix C.5.1.2 and C.5.1.4. No aditional information will be provided. | |
| 31 | Draft RFP | Equipment List | Equipment List | Equipment List | Equipment List: Will the Government require offerors to list all equipment they intend to provide exclusively for this contract as part of a month Firm Fix Price versus equipment offerors plan to include as costs in unpriced project work orders or Cost Reimbursable CLINs? | Yes. bidders need to list all equipment in the technical proposal. Additionally, All vehicles, tools, and equipment shall be under the appropriate Firm Fixed Price CLIN; None shall be considered in the cost reimbursable CLINs. | |
| 32 | Draft RFP | Recommended Inventory | Recommended Inventory | Recommended Inventory | Recommended Inventory: Will the Government provide a recommended equipment inventory that should be included in the monthly FFP, allowing offerors to propose deviations in the technical proposal versus explaining the need and purpose for each line item? Without a benchmark (the recommended equipment inventory) provided by the Government, evaluating long lists of equipment from each offeror will be tedious, time consuming, and hard to objectively distinguish the differences between dissimilar lists in organization, format, level of detail, etc. | The government will not provide a recommended inventory. It is the bidders onerous to understand the requirements necessary to perform base operations at Tinker AFB and provide the necessary vehicles, tools, and equipment. | |
| 33 | Draft RFP | Most Probable Cost | Most Probable Cost | Most Probable Cost | Most Probable Cost: Will the Government conduct a most probable cost analysis based upon the proposed equipment offerors will have available versus equipment offerors intend to rent for unpriced/unevaluated project work orders? For example, will the Government decrease or increase the Cost Reimbursement CLINs if an offeror proposes more or less equipment than the Government recommends? | No. Additionally, the cost reimbursable CLINs are not for the SP to utilize for rentals. The SP shall provide all vehicles, tools, and equipments as part of their firm fixed price to accomplish the PWS. | |
| 34 | Draft RFP | Trade Analysis | Trade Analysis | Trade Analysis | Trade Analysis: Will the Government conduct a trade off analysis that includes the proposed equipment inventory versus the Total Evaluated Price? | There are no trade offs. The SP shall provide all vehicles, tools, and equipment to accomplish the PWS. | |
| 35 | Draft RFP | Proposed Equipment CLIN | Proposed Equipment CLIN | Proposed Equipment CLIN | Proposed Equipment CLIN: Would the Government entertain a separate CLIN for contractor proposed equipment so the Government can verify the offerors proposed equipment costs are realistic based upon the offerors proposed equipment? | No. The bidder shall provide all vehicles, tools, and equipment to accomplish the PWS as part of their Firm Fixed Price. | |
| 36 | |||||||
| 37 | |||||||
| 38 | |||||||
| 39 | |||||||
| 40 | |||||||
| 41 | |||||||
| 42 | |||||||
| 43 | |||||||
| 44 | |||||||
| 45 | |||||||
| 46 | |||||||
| 47 | |||||||
| 48 | |||||||
| 49 | |||||||
| 50 | |||||||
| 51 | |||||||
| 52 | |||||||
| 53 | |||||||
| 54 | |||||||
| 55 | |||||||
| 56 | |||||||
| 57 | |||||||
| 58 | |||||||
| 59 | |||||||
| 60 | |||||||
| 61 | |||||||
| 62 | |||||||
| 63 | |||||||
| 64 | |||||||
| 65 | |||||||
| 66 | |||||||
| 67 | |||||||
| 68 | |||||||
| 69 | |||||||
| 70 | |||||||
| 71 | |||||||
| 72 | |||||||
| 73 | |||||||
| 74 | |||||||
| 75 | |||||||
| 76 | |||||||
| 77 | |||||||
| 78 | |||||||
| 79 | |||||||
| 80 | |||||||
| 81 | |||||||
| 82 | |||||||
| 83 | |||||||
| 84 | |||||||
| 85 | |||||||
| 86 | |||||||
| 87 | |||||||
| 88 | |||||||
| 89 | |||||||
| 90 | |||||||
| 91 | |||||||
| 92 | |||||||
| 93 | |||||||
| 94 | |||||||
| 95 | |||||||
| 96 | |||||||
| 97 | |||||||
| 98 | |||||||
| 99 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .