Amendment_16-R-0014-0004.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

a. The purpose of this amendment is to:

-Post industry questions and answ ers on the Continuation Page, -Extend the proposal due date by four days, from 12:00pm Central Daylight Time (CDT) 18 August 2016 to 12:00pm CDT 22 August 2016.

-Provide additional proposal submission instructions to Section L.1.A.1.

-All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 28

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 05-Aug-2016

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W91151-16-R-0014

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

21-Jul-2016

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

05-Aug-2016

CODE

MISSION AND INSTALLATION CONTRACTING

MISSION CONTRACTING OFFICE (MCO)

BUILDING 1001, ROOM W103

1001 761ST TANK BATTALION AVE

FORT HOOD TX 76544-5025

W91151 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91151-16-R-0014

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0004

Reference: Section L 1.A.1 & L.1.A.2, page 96, states that proposals are due by 1200 Central time on 18 August 2016, but final questions pertaining to this RFP are not due until 4 August 2016. This is a complex support contract, and naturally, there will be many technical questions specific to the PWS and staffing. The window of time between final questions submission and the due date set forth in the RFP will not afford the Government much time to respond to industry’s questions, and leave even less time for interested bidders to consider the Government’s answers to these questions and the potential impacts to their developing proposals.

Question #1: We respectfully request that the Government extend the proposal submission date to 1 September, thereby extending the due date by two (2) weeks. Will the Government consider our request?

Government Response #1: The Government has considered a request to extend the proposal submission to 1 September, thereby extending the due date by two weeks. However, the Government’s proposal is extended for four additional days. As a result the proposal due date has changed from 12:00pm Central Daylight Time (CDT) on 18 August 2016 to 12:00pm CDT on 22 August 2016.

Reference: Section L 1.A.3, page 96, set forth the time and date for a Pre-Proposal Conference at Ft Hood on 26 July 2016. During that event, the COR delivered a brief to the attendees.

Following the brief, attendees requested a copy of it, to which the COR informed the KO and CS that the customer did not have an issue with releasing the brief to interested bidders.

Question #2: We respectfully request that the Government post the Pre-Proposal Conference Briefing and attendee list from the 26 Jul 16 event on FBO ASAP. Will the Government consider our request?

Government Response #2: The Government has considered the request to post the Pre- Proposal Conference Briefing and attendee list from the 26 July event. All documentation concerning this solicitation require Contracting Officer approval not the COR (Requiring Activity). Due to the need for teaming agreement, joint ventures, and subcontracts, the Government has posted the Pre-Proposal Conference Briefing and attendee list as Attachment 5 and 6, respectively.

Reference: PWS 1.7.2 page 25 and TE-U Baseline Staffing. PWS 1.7.2 states “vehicle repairs not performed at this location” yet TE-U has several automotive positions [Rows 33 Automobile

Body Repairer, Fiberglass (05005), 34 Motor Vehicle Mechanic (05190), 35 Automotive Worker (05070)].

Question #3: Please clarify why these automotive positions are needed, as PWS 1.7.2 vehicle repairs do not appear to take place on post.

Government Response #3: You have to consider the phrase “vehicle repairs not performed at this location” in the context of the sentence it applies to. The sentence reads “The Contractor is authorized to use GFP off-post to perform administrative, supply and maintenance functions:

(such as mail and supply pick-up, warranty returns, vehicle repairs not performed at this location).” The meaning of the sentence is to address the use of GFP off-post. For example, if a vehicle needs a transmission rebuilt and the Contractor wants to use a sub-contractor off post to perform that task, then, for that reason, they are allowed to take the vehicle off post to perform that task. The phrase “vehicle repairs not performed at this location” should not be taken out of context and used to imply that no vehicles will be repaired at this location. The automotive positions established in TE-U are intended to demonstrate the Contractor should have an automotive repair capability on post. PWS 1.7.2 recognizes that there may be repair requirements that exceed the baseline staff’s capability, in which case, transporting the GFP off post to facilitate that repair is authorized.

Reference: PWS 1.7.2 page 25. PWS 1.7.2 states “vehicle repairs not performed at this location” This seems to imply that all levels of vehicle maintenance is performed at some other unspecified location or off post by contractor personnel or subcontracted.

Question #4: If all levels of vehicle maintenance are conducted at an unspecified location or off post, does the contractor need to acquire off-post facilities for the automotive personnel listed in TE-U to perform vehicle repairs?

Government Response #4: No. The question is taking the phrase “vehicle repairs not performed at this location” out of context. Facilities for repairs are provided. Please see Government response #3 above.

Reference: PWS 1.17.1.8 page 28. PWS 1.17.1.8 states “The contractor shall develop a Mobilization/Contingency Plan …” However, this PWS paragraph does not say it must be submitted to the Government, whether or not the Government shall to approve it, nor when this is to be done.

Questions #5: Please clarify if the Mobilization/Contingency Plan must:

(a) Be submitted to the Government,

(b) Require approval and

(c) When this is to be accomplished.

Government Response #5: Please see PWS 1.17.1.6. The full range of potential Mobilization/Contingency Plans cannot be planned for with any reasonable accuracy until they occur. PWS 1.17.1.6 ensures that upon occurrence they will be in the scope of this contract.

Specific answers are:

(a) Yes, submit to the Contracting Officer (KO).

(b) Yes requires approval by the KO and requiring agency.

(c) Within 72 hours of notification from the KO of the specific requirements that need to be met due to the Mobilization/Contingency’s impact.

Reference: PWS Section 5.1, Range Operations, discusses the types of ranges the contractor will support on this contract TE-G provides a detailed range listing and workload data, and also identifies various characteristics of these ranges, such as whether or not they are automated, contractor supported, etc. Per US Army PEO STRI, the software application, TRACR (Targetry Range Automated Control & Recording) is employed on numerous Army live-fire training ranges, to include Fort Hood. The TRACR system is a software application that supports the planning, execution and review of scenario-based training at non-instrumented Army training ranges. TRACR allows users to develop and prepare automated target control scenarios that support time and event-based target control, as well as triggering via manual control. There is no mention in the RFP and TEs which of the ranges at Ft Hood are TRACR ranges, and if they are fully configured for TRACR or partially configured for TRACR.

Question #6a: Which of the ranges listed in TE-G supported by this contract are TRACR ranges, and to what extent has each range been configured for TRACR (fully or partially configured)?

Government Response #6a: The following ranges are full TRACR configuration.

BGPQ Black Gap Pistol Qualification

BGRB Black Gap Rifle Bravo

BGRC Black Gap Rifle Charlie

BKSR Brookhaven Scout Reconnaissance Range

BRSR Brave Rifles Scaled Range

BWMU Blackwell Multi Use

CCRA Clear Creek Rifle Alpha

CCRB Clear Creek Rifle Bravo

CHMG Cow House Machine Gun

EKMG Elm Knob Machine Gun

EUAC Elam Urban Assault Course

PKRA Pilot Knob Rifle Alpha

PSR Pegasus Scaled Range

QTR Qualification Training Range

RUAC Ruth Urban Assault Course

The following Ranges are partially configured with TRACR:

CMPRC Crittenberger Multi Purpose Range Complex

PKMU Pilot Knob Multi Use

SLMU Sugarloaf Multi Use

All other ranges are not currently configured for TRACR.

Question #6b: Which ranges, if any, will evolve into TRACR ranges, or transition from partial TRACR to full TRACR? This is particularly relevant with respect to Force Modernizations, Range Digitization, Instrumented range initiatives.

Government Response #6b: It is the Government’s goal to configure all automated ranges associated with this contract to TRACR. However, this is driven by the budget and therefore the extent that we’ll be able to accomplish that over the life of the contract is unknown.

Reference: PWS 5.1.4 page 48. PWS 5.1.4 states “range types and configurations are expected to develop over the next five years to allow Force Modernizations, Range Digitization, Instrumented ranges…” Since the POP is base plus 4 option years, and the impact of range digitation, instrumented ranges and other change directly affect out-year staffing, a plan with schedule is needed to properly evaluate such change impacts on contractor staffing given the LPTA award criteria.

Question #7: Can the Government please provide a list of ranges scheduled for changes/upgrades, being pulled out of service for modernizations with timeline?

Government Response #7: There is not a list at this time, again, this is driven by the budget.

As upgrades are done a modification of the contract is done to adjust for the additional Government Furnished Property (GFP) and staffing specific to each range. The Offeror should, in his proposal, address his proposal to support the ranges as currently defined in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Technical Exhibits (TEs). Any changes that occur in the future will be addressed through modifications of the contract.

Reference: PWS 5.8.1 page 54. PWS 5.8.1 states “The contractor shall maintain two separate systems to log purchases.” PWS 5.8.1 does not explain what the two (2) separate systems are or should be, whether or not they are duplicate nor if one type of item to be logged goes in one system, while another type of item should be managed in the other system.

Question #8: Please clarify the two separate systems the contract must operate as stated in PWS 5.8.1.

Government Response #8: The two separate systems are one for Government Furnished Property (TE L) and one for Government Property (TE V). The two will not be intermixed in processing or storage. For example, a purchase of a case of paper will be either GFP or Government Property (GP), it will not be some for GFP and some for GP. Likewise a storage location of paper will not be both GFP and GP. GFP will be stored separate and away from GP.

Reference: PWS 5.11 page 56 and TE –L. Given a review of TE-L it is unclear how the contractor is to move tracked vehicles from the LRC to down range position since no VTR (M- 88 or M-578) are provided as GFE. The 5-ton wrecker in TE-L seem insufficient for the task.

Question #9: Please clarify how the contractor is to transport tracked vehicles down range to be hard targets given the lack of GFE transportation assets.

Government Response #9: The 5-ton wrecker can tow with a pintle weight of up to 20,000 lbs (IAW TM 9-2320-272-10, table 1-4) and the rear winch can handle up to 28,000 lbs. (same reference table 1-2). The contractor can use it for loads that do not exceed those limits. So far we have not had to tow anything heavier than that. For loads that are greater than that there are a number of alternatives. It is up to the Contractor to determine how they’ll accomplish that task should the need arise.

Reference: Section L.1.C.3.b.ii page 99. Section L.1.C.3.b.ii states “The Offeror shall address as specific as possible the actual methodology that would be used for accomplishing the PWS tasks.” This appears to be required to be put in the Subfactor (1) Technical Capability Section L.1.C.3.b.ii.(5) and Section L.1.C.3.b.iii

Question #10: Are ONLY the PWS elements enumerated in Section L.1.C.3.b.iii. (1) to (4) to be addressed or are ALL the PWS elements to have their methodology discussed as L.1.C.3.b.ii requires? If all, (1) at what level of indenture do we need to go down to and, (2) we respectfully request an increase in page count to accommodate.

Government Response #10: Section L.1.C.3.b.ii makes it clear that the offeror shall address the methodology for accomplishing the PWS tasks. Sections L.1.C.3.b.ii.(5) and Section L.1.C.3.b.iii denote specific areas to address specific aspects of the PWS. Those two sections are not all inclusive of the PWS tasks, it is simply where we want some of the tasks addressed.

More specifically, all the PWS tasks should be addressed. The level of indenture should be that necessary to fully address each major functional area as identified in the PWS at para 1.1.1 and

5.1. An increase in the page number is not allowed.

Reference: Section L.1.C.3.b.iv. (1) page 100. Section L.1.C.3.b.iv. (1) states “Separate set of Matrices are required for the base period of performance and each of the option years.” In order to estimate any change in staffing for the option years from the base year, the Government needs to provide a list of planned/projected range modifications, upgrades, new ranges/training facilities, permanent or temporary closing and other changes that affect the contractor level-of-effort plus a time line so projections can be made for staffing in option years. Obviously the incumbent has access to these so they should be made public to ensure level bidding.

Question #11: Please provide a list of planned/projected range modifications, upgrades, permanent or temporary closing and other changes to range the contract will support in option years.

Government Response #11: As mentioned above in the Government Response #7, there is not a list at this time. More specifically the offeror should focus on his planned changes over the life of the contract. It is conceivable that the offeror may have more personnel in the base year to get started than is needed in option years. It is also conceivable that offeror may have more or less manpower flexibility in the out years than the base year. It is also conceivable that the offerors’ internal costs for medical or other insurance maybe under agreements whose terms change over the life of this contract. Providing the information for the base and option years is so that the Government can understand the total costs associated with the contract as written. Any future upgrades or modernization of ranges shall be addressed through modifications of the contract as they occur and if they occur.

Reference: PWS 1.5.3 page 22 and PWS 5.1.10 page 49. Both PWS references are silent on the contractor responsibilities as to sampling/testing air quality in the UTF, use of breathing apparatus or other mine safety actions.

Question #12: Please confirm the contract has no responsibilities to sample air quality in the UTF, do any test/collection for testing of air or air particulates or operate any type of air breathing apparatus in the performance of this contract.

Government Response #12: These requirements are clearly regulated by Occupational Safety and Health Agency (OSHA) and the Mine Safety and Health Agency (MSHA) regulations. Both are referenced in PWS 1.5.3. More directly to the question, there are such responsibilities and more in those regulations. It is not a normal practice for a Government contract to repeat specific OSHA and/or MSHA requirements in a PWS. Standard practice in a contract is to require the Contractor to comply with OSHA and/or MSHA. Further, in 5.1.10, the Contractor is required to have personnel certified IAW MSHA standards. Personnel certified are trained in the areas raised by the question. Additionally, TE L Government Furnished Property contains the equipment necessary for these and many other tasks.

Reference: Section L. Discussion: Given all that must be addressed for technical approach, management approach and Quality Control to include the numerous plans (Tower Operation Training Plan [L.1.C.3.b.iii. (1)], Training Plan [L.1.C.3.b.iv. (4)], Safety Plan [L.1.C.3.b.iv. (5)], Property Management System Plan [L.1.C.3.b.iv. (6)], plus breakout of the staffing by Base and each option years; the current page count is insufficient to address these requirement in the requested detail.

Question #13: Will the Government please increase the page count to 125 page or permit these plans to be attachment to the proposal with no page limitations.

Government Response #13: A page count increase and attachment will not be permitted.

Reference: PWS 5.12.1 page 57. It is unclear if all the services listed in PWS 5.12.1 and subparagraphs are provided by the contractor to only the IT systems the contractor is hand receipted for or does this include all Government IT systems that are part of Range Control.

Question #14: Please clarify if the all the tasks stated in PWS 5.12.1-PWS 5.12.8.2 are for contractor controlled IT assets only.

Government Response #14: No, it is not just for the IT systems the Contractor is hand receipted for. It is for all IT systems on the Government Furnished Property (TE L) list and the Government Property list (TE V).

Reference: PWS 5.12.2 page 57. PWS 5.12.2.1 discusses KPI and COMSEC support yet there is no DD 254 included in the solicitation.

Question #15: Will the Government please provide the appropriate DD254?

Government Response #15: No, there is no classified material associated with this contract and so no DD254 required. Communications Security (COMSEC) is not just classified material. It covers the full range of unclassified, sensitive, Personal Identifiable Information, For Official Use Only and classified. The Systems Administrator (SA) will not be supporting classified systems.

Reference: PWS 5.12.3.1 page 58. This PWS paragraph implies that the contractor will function as the Systems Administrator (SA) for Range Control.

Question #16: Please confirm or elaborate if the contractor is to function as the Systems Administrator (SA) for Range Control.

Government Response #16: Confirmed. In accordance with PWS 5.12.3.1 the Contractor will function as the SA for Range Operations.

Reference: TE-G Detail Range Listing and Workload.

Question #17: Please clarify the differences in the contractor provided support for Boaz MOUT Facility, Elam Shoot House and House Creek Shoothouse and the other MOUTS shown in TE-G.

Government Response #17: In the area of Boaz MOUT, Elam Shoot House and House Creek Shoot House the contractor will not operate or maintain them. The contract will, as necessary, perform dirt work as needed. Examples include Course and Service Road repair. On the other MOUT sites the contractor has full responsibility for the operation, maintenance, repair and service of the entire facilities.

Reference: TE-G Detail Range Listing and Workload. This information is needed in order to properly comply with Section L.1.C.3.b.iv.(1) “Separate sets of matrices are required for the base period of performance and each of the option years.” To accurately project staffing levels in option years.

Questions #18: Are any of the Automated Ranges listed in TE –G planned to be:

(a) Taken off-line for conversion to digitized range or for major range/range infrastructure upgrades, renovation or modifications and

(b) When are they planned to be pulled out of service (i.e. which contract period) and

(c) When are they planned to be returned to service (i.e. which contract period).

Government Response #18: As mentioned in Government Response #7 above. There is no specific plan at this time on which ranges will be taken off line, when they will be pulled out of service or when they are planned to be returned to service. The offeror should address in his matrices the base period of performance and each option year as the solicitation is currently written. Any such modifications or upgrades will be addressed through a contract modification if and/or when they occur.

Reference: TE-G Detail Range Listing and Workload. The note in cell A14 states “That contractor is not responsible for course or service road maintenance. The contactor under this PWS is responsible for course or service road maintenance for all ranges and training facilities/areas.” Need clarification on additional typical range activities as to who does it on the “Yes*” ranges.

Questions #19: Are we or is the “Yes*” automated range contractor responsible for the following; (A) berm maintenance, (B) target fabrication and painting, (C) installation of wooden fabricated targets and change out during shut down periods, (D) battery charging and replacement in the field, (E) dragging of up range gravel area to include staging and lager areas,

(F) up range facility, building and infrastructure preventive maintenance, repair and inspections, and (G) down range TRP and thermalization if required.

Government Response #19:

(A) Yes, the successful offeror of solicitation W91151-16-R-0014 is responsible for berm maintenance for ranges labeled in TE G with a “Yes*” in column C.

(B) Yes, the successful offeror of solicitation W91151-16-R-0014 is responsible for target fabrication and painting for ranges labeled in TE G with a “Yes*” in column C.

(C) No, the successful offeror of solicitation W91151-16-R-0014 is not responsible for installation of wooden fabricated targets and change out during shut down periods for ranges labeled in TE G with a “Yes*” in column C.

(D) Not in the field, those batteries are brought to the battery shop where yes, the successful offeror of solicitation W91151-16-R-0014 will be required to swap out good batteries for batteries that need service, repair, charge or replacements for ranges labeled in TE G with a “Yes*” in column C.

(E) Not sure what the term “dragging” refers to but no requirement on these ranges for staging and lager areas, just the berms, course and service roads for ranges labeled in TE G with a “Yes*” in column C.

(F) No, the successful offeror of solicitation W91151-16-R-0014 is not responsible for up range facility, building and infrastructure preventive maintenance, repair and inspections for ranges labeled in TE G with a “Yes*” in column C.

(G) No, the successful offeror of solicitation W91151-16-R-0014 is not responsible for down range TRP and thermalization for ranges labeled in TE G with a “Yes*” in column C.

Reference: PWS 5.1.1 and TE-G Detail Range Listing and Workload. PWS 5.1.1 states “Future Instrumentation of MURs and other technological enhancements of ranges will require the Contractor to install, operate, repair, and maintain new and/or more advanced equipment” and in order to properly comply with Section L.1.C.3.b.iv.(1) “Separate sets of matrices are required for the base period of performance and each of the option years.” Dates when the tasks stated in

PWS 5.1.1 are to be assumed by the contractor (us) are needed to accurately project staffing levels in option years.

Question #20: Please provide dates of new/future Instrumentation MURs full O&M support are to be assumed by the contractor under the contract as referenced in PWS 5.1.1.

Government Response #20: As answered in Government Response #7 above, there is not a list at this time, again, this is driven by the budget. As upgrades are done a modification of the contract is done to adjust for the additional GFP and staffing specific to each range. The offeror should, in his proposal, address his proposal to support the ranges as currently defined in the PWS and TEs. Any changes that occur in the future will be addressed through modifications of the contract.

Reference: PWS 5.1.1 and TE-G Detail Range Listing and Workload. PWS 5.1.1 states “Currently the existing Instrumented Ranges only require materials, supplies, and ground repair support only.” And the note in TE-G cell A14 states “That contractor is responsible for the range equipment and operation of those ranges.” This leaves some logistics (materials and supply) actions vague as to who does them.

Questions #21: Please clarify if the following activities are range contractor requirements: (A) ordering, (B) stocking, (C) shipping [in or out] and packing, (D) warehousing with inventory control, (E) and issuing items to the “Yes*” automated range contractor. If so, please define level of requirements for each A thru E task.

Government Response #21: Contractor personnel operating and maintaining ranges listed with “Yes*” do not require the support listed in your question’s A-E.

Reference: PWS 1.0 page 20, PWS 2.1.41 page 36, and PWS 5.1 page 47 TE-G. The RFP and PWS are silent on how this contractor is to interface with the “Yes*” automated range contractor shown in TE –G and referenced in the PWS. It is unclear if there is direct interface and coordination between the two contractors or all interfaces, coordination and taskings are done through a 3rd party (i.e. Range Control Operations).

Question #22: Please provide detail how the coordination and interface is conducted between this contractor and the “Yes*” automated range contractor shown in TE –G.

Government Response #22: As any other customer those responsible for the ranges identified by “Yes*” will submit requests for targets or berm, course or service road repairs through the Government. The Government will then pass that request, as appropriate, to the Contractor.

Reference: TE-A Wage Determination. TE-A Wage Determination has at the end of the document a description for two levels of Hazardous Pay Differential; 8% and 4%. It is unclear if there is the need pay either of these two Hazardous Pay Differential on this contract.

Question #23a: Please clarify the Hazardous Pay Differential being paid to any employee for any work regardless of the amount on this contract in the last two years as it relates to this contract?

Government Response #23a: All offerors should include the 8% hazardous duty rate for all employees whose duties will require them to go in front of the firing lines.

Question #23b: What areas (by grid coordinates) does work within this contract require Hazardous Pay Differential to be paid as per the WD?

Government Response #23b: It is not as easily defined by grid coordinates. Rather it should be defined as #23a above, anyone whose duties will require them to go forward of the firing line of any range.

Reference: TE-F Ground Work Repairs and Maintenance Workload. The information provided in TE-F is extremely vague to the point it cannot be used to estimate labor hours or categories to be used. It also does not identify which tasks were done by in-house labor or what may have been subcontracted out to local small business subcontractors.

Question #24a: Please identify in TE-F which of the tasks were done by in-house labor and which were done by local subcontracting.

Government Response #24a: That information was specifically left out due to proprietary concerns. How that work was done, how long it took and how much it cost is proprietary to the Contractor who performed it. The list was provided to demonstrate the type and quantity of work.

Question #24b: Please provide historical labor hours and categories expending on these tasks to include inspection and QC efforts.

Government Response #24b: Again, that information was specifically left out due to proprietary concerns. How that work was done, how long it took and how much it cost is proprietary to the Contractor who performed it. The list was provided to demonstrate the type and quantity of work.

Reference: TE-H Vehicle Maintenance Welding Target Devices. The information provided in TE-F is extremely vague and the information in the first table on top cannot be correlated to the table on the bottom. (Example first two items are Truck Utility M998 (they are HMMWVs).

There are no M998s listed in the second table of vehicles. Also there is no labor workload on the actions taken in the first table of faults identified.

Question #25: Please provide historical labor hours by labor category for all maintenance on vehicles, targets and any welding performed.

Government Response #25: That information was specifically left out due to proprietary concerns. How that work was done, how long it took and how much it cost is proprietary to the

Contractor who performed it. The list was provided to demonstrate the type and quantity of work. The two lists don’t collate because they’re two lists, not one that collates with another.

Reference: Reference TE L- GFP and TE-V- Government Property. It is unclear if what is in TE-V is also in TE-L or is it totally separate list of property.

Question #26a: Please confirm that the property listed in TE-V is not listed in TE-L and is a totally different list of property.

Government Response #26a: The property that is given to the Contractor to perform his tasks is provided in TE L. The property that the Contractor maintains for the Government is in TE V as Government Property. Notice that almost everything in TE V is also in TE L with very few exceptions. In essence, for example, there are vehicles that need to be repaired. Some of the items are GFP and some are GP. The Contractor’s responsibilities are the same (except the Contractors don’t operate the GP), but administratively the items must be tracked separately.

Questions #26b: Both TE’s L and V have vehicles (pick-ups, HMMWV and construction) listed, are these different or duplicated listing of vehicles, it cannot be determined from the data presented.

Government Response #26b: It is exactly determined the way it is presented. The equipment in TE L is Government Furnished Property for the Contractor’s use to perform the requirements of the PWS. The equipment in TE V are operated by Government personnel and maintained, serviced and repaired by Contractor personnel.

Reference: PWS 5.1.10 page 49 and TE-G Detail Range Listing and Workload. The PWS only mentions underground training facilities in conjunction with the two specific UTFs listed on Line #245 and #246 in TE-G. There are several MOUT facilities listed in TE-G and states the contractor maintains all of these. Many MOUTs have an underground parts to them.

Question #27a: Do any of these MOUT Training Areas contain underground tunnels, culverts or other subterranean rooms or passageways the contractor must maintain?

Government Response #27a: The underground areas at the MOUT sites are considered confined spaces, not Underground Training Facilities requiring MSHA compliance. There are definitely OSHA requirements for confined spaces that must be adhered to.

Question #27b: If they are present, are they subject to the same OSHA and MHSA regulations and certifications associated with the UTFs?

Government Response #27b: See #27a above.

Reference: TE-H Vehicle Maintenance, Welding, Target Devices

Question #28: It is unclear if the maintenance shown in TE-H for targets is maintenance that is only performed in the shop (after target has been evacuated up range and back to the DS/GS shop) or does it also include target repairs conducted downrange?

Government Response #28: The specific answer is unknown and would be proprietary to the Contractor who did the work. Generally, performing maintenance as far forward as possible in a timely manner is preferable, however, the Contractor is free to accomplish the tasks in which ever manner the Contractor deems the most cost effective.

Reference: TE-G Detailed Range Listing and Workload. It is unclear exactly what the labor hours for “Range Worker” actually represent in TE-G. It is unclear if it includes: tower operations, target set-up and change-out, preventive maintenance on the range infrastructure, corrective maintenance on the range infrastructure, preventive maintenance on targetry and Battle Effects Simulators (BESs), corrective maintenance down range on targetry and BESs, corrective maintenance performed up-range on targetry and BESs, other communications maintenance on the range (hard wire or fiber optics). This data is needed to justify the staffing as per L.1.C.3.b.iv.(4).

Question #29a: Please define exactly what work is covered by the labors hours shown in TE-G.

Government Response #29a: The PWS and baseline staffing are designed in such a way as to identify first the 24/7 requirement to provide all the services and second what the additional requirement is when specific ranges are going to be used. TE G identifies what the Government’s estimate is for additional manpower when any one or any combination of ranges is going to be used on any specific day. Those additional resources, by shift, are identified to perform all of the tasks listed in TE G. TE G should be seen as cumulative. That is to say that if 2 or more ranges are scheduled to be used, then the resources identified, by shift, will be needed for each range to be used. Likewise, on a day where none of the ranges scheduled need any additional manpower, then none would be used.

Question #29b: For those actions listed outside of the “Range Worker” hours in TE-G, please provide what the actions with corresponding labor hours and labor category.

Government Response #29b: That is provided in TE U Baseline Staffing. The item on line 55 of TE U reflects the number associated with TE G. All other items on TE U are not associated to

TE G.

Question #29c: Please correlate the TE-G labor title of “Range Worker” in labor categories shown in TE-U.

Government Response #29c: The item on line 55 (Laborer [23470]) of TE U reflects the number associated with TE G.

Reference: PWS 5.7.11 page 54 and TE-G Detailed Range Listing and Workload. It is unclear which ranges have fiber optic cables installed, how much, and if it is fully fiber or a mixture of copper and fiber optic cable on these ranges. This data is needed to justify the staffing as per L.1.C.3.b.iv.(4) in the Option years.

Question #30a: Please identify which ranges/training facilities in TE-G have fiber optic cables currently installed and list by percentage of that range (i.e. 15% fiber, 65% fiber, 100% fiber), how much is installed relative to existing copper on these ranges that include both fiber and copper?

Government Response #30a: This list has been provided as Technical Exhibit X.

Question #30b: Which ranges in each option year will be converted from copper to fiber optic cable, replacing current copper wiring targetry communications?

Government Response #30b: As answered in Government Response #7 above. There is not a list at this time and is driven by the budget. As upgrades are done a modification of the contract is done to adjust for the additional GFP and staffing specific to each range. The offeror should, in his proposal, address his proposal to support the ranges as currently defined in the PWS and TEs. Any changes that occur in the future will be addressed through modifications of the contract.

Reference: Attachment 2 Specific Relevant Contracts. Attachment 2 of this RFP essentially represents what bidders will regard as the format for specific, relevant contract citations we will provide as part of our past performance volume (Vol III). Since each contract citation must use the Att. 2 format and is limited to 3 pages, the instructions consume about 30 additional lines that could otherwise be used to respond with pertinent data. There is already a Section Number and 2-4 word bolded title in Att. 2.

Question #31: While inputting the pertinent data required by Att.2, may bidders omit the instructions portion of Att. 2 in their responses in order to provide more usable space within the 3-page limit?

Government Response #31: Offerors may omit the instructions portion of Att.2 in their responses to provide more useable space with the 3-page limit.

Reference: Section L.1.C.3.b.iii. (1) and Section M.1.B.3.a.i. Section L.1.C.3.b.iii. states “(1) Tower Operations training plan to include how the plan addresses the safe operations, standards, and regulatory requirements of a Tower Operator. The Offeror shall provide relevant experience within the last three years on specific target systems from DOS operating systems to the most current version of Windows based systems.” Yet Section M.1.B.3.a.i states “i. The ability of the Offeror to conduct Tower Operations in a manner that shows a variety of target systems from

DOS operating systems to the most current version of Windows based systems and the ability to upgrade technical skills when new equipment is fielded, a knowledge of the safe operations, and standards and regulatory requirements of a Tower Operator.

Question #32: Section L.1.C.3.b.iii. (1) asks for a Tower Certification Plan but Section M.1.B.3.a.i states it will evaluate the contractor ability not the plan. Please clarify what is required or will be evaluated so they are the same.

Government Response #32: Reference Section L.1.C.3.b.iii. (1) and Section M.1.B.3.a.i. the Tower Operations training plan is required and will be evaluated.

Reference: TE-O Detailed Range Maps and TE-G Detailed Range Listing and Workload. TE-O includes several training areas/ facilities, such as the MOUTS, but it does not provide any diagrams of UTF 92026 or 92050, which would enable bidders to better understand the size and complexity of these underground facilities.

Question #33: Please provide layout of UTFs # 92026 and 92050.

Government Response #33: The Government does not have a specific layout for 92026. It is a mirror image of 92050 except that 92026 does not have the same ventilation system and only has 3 buildings associated with it. Floor plan for 92050 is provided as Technical Exhibit Y.

Reference: PWS 1.5.3 page 22 & 23 and PWS 5.1.10. PWS 1.5.3 states “At least one Competent Person as defined by MSHA requirements shall be onsite whenever work is being done underground.” However, PWS 5.1.10 states “Personnel supporting the UTF shall require MSHA certification prior to entering the facility …” This seems to imply any and all personnel working on the UTF must have the certification and not just one competent person present.

Question #34: Please clarify which requirement is correct between PWS 1.5.3 requiring 1 person or PWS 5.1.10 requiring all personnel.

Government Response #34: Both 1.5.3 and 5.1.10 are correct. All personnel working underground must have MSHA training. Additionally a Competent Person is required per shift.

A Competent Person is defined in MSHA regulations and goes beyond simply attending training.

Reference: TE-G Detailed Range Listing and Workload. It is unclear if the hours shown in cells AL247, AM247, AN247 and AO247 [Range Worker Hours assessment, highest/mean/low/average respectively] and are inclusive or exclusive of the hours shown in cells C248 [part time contract time estimated] in TE-G.

Question #35: Are the hours shown in C248 part of or, in addition to, the hours shown the Range Worker Hours assessment totals [cells AL247, AM247, AN247].

Government Response #35: The cells do not relate. The information in AL247, AM247, AN247 and AO247 are exactly what the column title represents Highest usage in any year, Mean usage in any year, Lowest usage in any year and Average usage in any year. The quantity in

C248 is the number the Government is estimating going forward based on the analysis of what the Government knew at the time the estimated usage was developed. In accordance with the PWS section 5.1.3 the Contractor shall use unit scheduling on RFMSS or other Government approved forms and systems such as the Range Control Server for scenarios. Schedules are subject to change. Based on this analysis the number in C248 is the Government’s best estimate of usage.

Reference: Section B.

Question #36: Were “FIXED FEE” and “TOTAL EST COST + FEE” inadvertently left off Section B under ITEM NO’s 1003, 2003, 3003, and 4003?

Government Response #36: Due to a system glitch, the “FIXED FEE” and “TOTAL EST COST + FEE were inadvertently removed from Section B under CLINs 1003, 2003, 3003, and 4003. These descriptors have been added and are now located on CLINs 1003, 2003, 3003, and 4003.

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time 22-Aug-2016 12:00 PM has been added.

The following have been modified:

IMPORTANT INFORMATION

Offerors are cautioned that failure to follow instructions, omit or not submit proper documentation, and failure to address every requirement outlined in the instructions or that will be evaluated are material failures that are often the cause for a proposal to be deemed unresponsive and rejected. It is in the offeror’s best interest to thoroughly read the entire solicitation, Performance Work Statement (PWS), and follow the instructions in Sections L & M.

Offeror's proposals are due by 12:00pm CDT, 22 August 2016.

Reference SF33 Block 12, the minimum proposal acceptance period is 180 days from the closing date specified in the solicitation.

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The Table of Contents has changed from:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Exhibit A TE A - Wage Determination

10 29-DEC-2015

Exhibit B TE B - Annual Supply Action Tasks and Workload

1 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit C TE C - Battery Shop Tasks and Workload

1 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit D TE D - Central Issue Point Tasks and Workload

4 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit E TE E - Computer Equipment Maintenance Workload

1 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit F TE F - Ground Work Repairs and Maintenance Workload

3 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit G TE G - Detailed Range Listing and Workload

2 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit H TE H - Vehicle Maintenance, Welding, Target Devices

14 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit J TE J - Electrical and Mechanical Maintenance and Workload

2 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit K TE K - Generator, Small Engine Maintenance Workload

14 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit L TE L - Government Furnished Property

78 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit M TE M - Telephone Network

1 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit N TE N - Target Fabrication and Workload

2 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit O TE O - Detailed Range Maps

43 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit P TE P - Reports 1 11-JUL-2016 Exhibit Q TE Q - Supplemental, Reports, Monthly CIP Usage Report

5 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit R TE R - Minimum Safety Briefing

1 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit S TE S - Range Utilization Data

4 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit T TE T - Request for Training Resources

9 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit U TE U - Baseline Staffing 2 11-JUL-2016 Exhibit V TE V - Government

Property

80 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit W TE W - Performance Requirement Summary

(PRS)

4 11-JUL-2016

Attachment 1 Consent Letter Attachment 2 Specific Relevant

Contracts

Attachment 3 Past Performance

Questionnaire Attachment 4 Cost Price Proposal to:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Exhibit A TE A - Wage

Determination

10 29-DEC-2015

Exhibit B TE B - Annual Supply Action Tasks and Workload

1 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit C TE C - Battery Shop Tasks and Workload

1 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit D TE D - Central Issue Point Tasks and Workload

4 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit E TE E - Computer Equipment Maintenance Workload

1 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit F TE F - Ground Work Repairs and Maintenance Workload

3 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit G TE G - Detailed Range Listing and Workload

2 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit H TE H - Vehicle Maintenance, Welding, Target Devices

14 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit J TE J - Electrical and Mechanical Maintenance and Workload

2 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit K TE K - Generator, Small Engine Maintenance Workload

14 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit L TE L - Government Furnished Property

78 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit M TE M - Telephone Network

1 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit N TE N - Target Fabrication and Workload

2 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit O TE O - Detailed Range Maps

43 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit P TE P - Reports 1 11-JUL-2016 Exhibit Q TE Q - Supplemental, Reports, Monthly CIP Usage Report

5 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit R TE R - Minimum Safety Briefing

1 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit S TE S - Range Utilization Data

4 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit T TE T - Request for Training Resources

9 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit U TE U - Baseline Staffing 2 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit V TE V - Government Property

80 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit W TE W - Performance Requirement Summary

(PRS)

4 11-JUL-2016

Exhibit X TE X - Fiber, Copper, Combination and RF breakdown

1 02-AUG-2016

Exhibit Y TE Y - UTF 92050 Room Map

3 02-AUG-2016

Attachment 1 Consent Letter Attachment 2 Specific Relevant

Contracts

Attachment 3 Past Performance Questionnaire

Attachment 4 Cost Price Proposal Attachment 5 Attachment 5 - Site Visit

Briefing

10 02-AUG-2016

Attachment 6 Attachment 6 - Site Visit Attendees

1 02-AUG-2016

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

18L.1 - Proposal Preparation Instructions

A. Proposal Submittal and Inquiries

1. Proposals shall be submitted electronically at the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research Development and Engineering Center Safe Access File Exchange (AMRDEC SAFE) secure website:

https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/SAFE/ to the Contract Specialist (CS) and Contracting Officer (KO) email addresses.

Offeror’s proposals are due by 12:00pm CDT, 22 August 2016. No hard copies or CDs will be accepted. All Offeror’s shall click on “Non-CAC Users” once the site is entered. Enter the Offeror’s name and email address.

The Offeror can upload up to a maximum of 25 files, (total size cannot exceed 2GB). The Offeror shall place a Description of each file uploaded located in the “Description of File(s)” box located on the right. The Offeror shall give access to Ms. Mary Chamberlin at mary.a.chamberlin4.civ@mail.mil and Ms. Pamilla Lazare at pamilla.a.lazare.civ@mail.mil. The Offeror shall manually enter each email address one at a time and click add after each entry. The Offeror shall ensure that the box next to “Require CAC for Pick-up (all recipients will need to log in with a CAC to download file(s))” is checked. The Offeror shall click the “Upload” button once all instructions have been followed. Once this is done, the Offeror will be notified to verify their email address. The Offeror will receive an email with a website and password to verify their email address. If you do not verify your email address your proposal will not be downloaded for evaluation. Please use the link provided in the email address and enter the password given in the email address. Once the Offeror hits the submit button please click on verify and your proposal will be sent to the Government.

2. The point of contact responsible for supplying additional information and answering all inquiries is the KO via the CS. Address all questions or concerns the Offeror may have to the Contract Specialist, Ms. Mary Chamberlin, mary.a.chamberlin4.civ@mail.mil, and Contracting Officer, Ms. Pamilla Lazare, pamilla.a.lazare.civ@mail.mil. All questions regarding this solicitation shall be submitted in writing via email no later than 10:00am CDT on 4 August 2016. The subject line of the email shall read: RFI - W91151-16-R-0014 -

Range Operations. Questions, comments, or inquires made by telephone will not receive a response. The Government will issue an amendment to provide responses to industry questions via posting to the Federal Business Opportunities website at https://www.fbo.gov. Explanations or instructions given in a form other than an amendment to the solicitation shall not be binding.

3. Pre-proposal conference/Site Visit: The…