Soliciation_Question_Set_4_1_Oct.pdf

1.) In accordance with the Business Rules 5.a.(2), minimum staffing requirements at any ACP are (2) guards, minimum one guard and overwatch. 5.b.(1) calls for ‘one guard per access lane, if volume is 300 checks or less per hour’. Is the guard identified 5.b.(1) in addition to the guard and overwatch in 5.a.(2) or included in that number?

A. If traffic flow is under 300 checks per hour, that takes only one ID checking guard, so it is not in addition to the guard and overwatch, i.e. total of two guards.

2.) The Business Rules refer to the overwatch position being the second position at each ACP.

Paragraph 4.3.b of the RFP PWS allows overwatch positions to be armed with a shotgun. Is it the intent of the government that every overwatch (person) as identified by the Business Rules is armed with a shotgun, or shall only the overwatches occupying a hardened overwatch structure at an ACP be armed with a shotgun?

A: The intent is for the overwatch to be armed with shotgun.

3.) Business Rules 5.(3) states that additional manpower is required if an overwatch position cannot view all access lanes at an ACP including vehicle search lanes. In the government data in the Workload Data, the government identifies that the overwatch can view all ACP lanes, including the search lanes at several ACP’s where this is not the case. Based on the current configuration of Gate 9 in Tower Barracks in Grafenwöhr, and Gate 21 in Grafenwöhr, the overwatch cannot view all lanes. Will the government correct the Workload Data to accommodate this, or should the offeror adjust its proposed manpower to reflect the actual configuration of the ACP?

A: The workload data has been corrected and includes the two examples, Gate 9 and Gate 21 at Grafenwöhr as well as other ACPs at other installations.

4.) The Workload Data does not identify a Visitor Control Center at gate six in Grafenwöhr / Tower Barracks. A VCC is present at this ACP. For calculation purposes, should the offeror consider a VCC at this ACP?

A: The employees at that location issue paper passes and that location is authorized a position IAW business rules.

5.) The current volume of the Workload Data provided by the government does not identify the number of vehicle access lanes at the ACP’s as the previous volume did. At Gate 6 in Tower Barracks in Grafenwöhr, two lanes of traffic were present, but one of the lanes is only used in high traffic situations.

Will the government provide the number of traffic lanes present at each ACP to facilitate adding personnel to each lane as determined necessary based on the Workload Data?

A: Workload Data has been updated to include lanes at each ACP.

6.) Technical Exhibit #5: Penalty and Remediation Table:

a.) For failed performance at an ACP, EDD, Patrol, or IDS, we understand that the penalty would be applied to that ACP only. Is this correct?

Answer: If a situation(s) occur that necessitates a penalty listed in the Penalty and Remediation Table, the deduction applies to the entire invoice for that month. If multiple PWS referenced sections result in multiple penalties, those penalties are cumulative.

b.) Referencing 3.b of exhibit #4 in the RFP PWS, since outer marker lines are generally not present at ACP’s, to which ACP’s will the (900) unit standard be applied and to which ACP’s will the (300) unit standard be applied?

A: Currently there are no ACPs with an outer marker to begin a timing survey. Therefore the contractor shall provide security officers to process from 300 to 900 ID cards per hour per lane. However, using the hourly maximum at each ACP from the workload data coupled with the number of vehicle ID lanes per ACP (and often one of the commercial vehicle lanes will be used for personal vehicles), the maximum per lane rarely exceeds 400 vehicles in an hour.

c.) According to technical exhibit #5, the government will deduct 5% of the monthly payment if 5% of the workforce is not current on training within 60 days.

1.) We understand the government will evaluate the training criteria per site, and in the case of a deduction, only deduct the payment from the payment due for that site. Is this correct?

Answer: The training requirement will be evaluated for the entire guard force and not per site.

7.) The government identifies several locations that require roving patrols. Can the government identify locations where the terrain will require specialty vehicles other than a standard street capable vehicle, as noted in par. 4.3.e of the RFP PWS, Contractor Furnished Items and Services?

A. There are terrain issues at certain locations that require four wheel drive vehicles, that level of detail has been provided in the updated workload data.

8.) The Workload Date does not identify special access circumstances, such as access rosters, including those for large scale multinational exercises, and trusted traveler regulations that significantly affect the traffic and workload at many ACP’s. Will the government provide information to allow the offeror to calculate needed manpower for these circumstances?

A: In those locations where access rosters for multinational personnel are often required, an additional pedestrian guard has been added. See Tower Barracks AC 9 (Grafenwöhr) as an example.

9.) The RFP requests that proposals be submitted per email. Are there limits on the size of data files or emails that can be sent for this requirement? Are there any alternate transmission methods of proposal data allowed?

Answer: The standard size limit for incoming emails is 8MB.

10.) In the submission of proposals, Volume 1, may the offeror leave company identifying information in the licenses and certifications submitted as part of the proposal?

Answer: The Addendum to 52.212‐1 Section 4. a. has been updated to only require removing companying identifying information from Volume II.