questions with clarifications 1-31-2020.pdf

PDF 110 KB Posted

Attached to
FACILITIES MAINT-CDTF Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
W911S720R0001
Issued by
Department of the Army Materiel Command Mission and Installation Contracting Command Fort Eustis

About this file

This document provides details for a Request for Proposal for facilities operation and maintenance services at the United States Army Chemical Defense Training Facility at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. The requirement includes comprehensive facilities maintenance and operation and maintenance of chemical testing sites, including decontamination of equipment and facilities, disposal of chemical waste, and maintenance of personal protective equipment for handling and disposing of toxic chemical substances. Offerors must submit proposals by 3:00 PM Central Time on February 5, 2020. The contract will be a single-award, firm-fixed-price contract for a one-year base period and four one-year options, awarded under full and open competition. The Mission and Installation Contracting Command at Fort Leonard Wood will evaluate proposals without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. The North American Industry Classification System code is 561210 for facilities support services, and the Product Service Code is S216.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Show all 20

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

1. Q&A No. 11: Would the government please confirm that they are not looking for us to provide an equipment list but rather that they are looking for us to address the government’s list in Technical Exhibit 1 pg J‐5 through J‐19 within TAB B?

Answer: T.E. 1.0 are listings of Facility Systems and Equipment. The Govt never requires a bidder to provide any equipment list. Technical exhibits are provided for [proposal] information only.

Section M, Factor 1 –Technical, (2) Facility Systems Operations and Maintenance: “…In evaluating this element, the assessment will concentrate on the Offeror’s plans for accomplishing the PWS requirements, to include proposed processes, equipment, schedule, and approaches. Each proposal shall be evaluated on its ability to demonstrate a clear understanding of the contractual requirements and a corresponding plan to fulfill those performance requirements in the most effective and efficient manner possible for each task…”

2. Q&A 32: The question asked the government to confirm which positions are key personnel on this contract and the government sent us to follow section 4.2 of the PWS. Section 4.2 states: “The following personnel are considered key personnel by the government: Contractor Project Manager;

Contractor Deputy Project Manager; Enterprise Building Integrator (EBI) Direct Digital Control (DDC) System Technician, and the Quality Assurance Coordinator.” This is four positions. However, the conformed RFP lists five positions as “Contractor Project Manager; Contractor Deputy Project Manager;

Enterprise Building Integrator (EBI), Direct Digital Control (DDC) System Technician, and the Quality Assurance Coordinator.” Please clarify if there are four or five required key personnel positions.

Answer: 4 staff are considered key personnel.

Section M Factor 1 –(1) Management/Organization/Staffing, “…The following personnel are considered key personnel by the government: Contractor Project Manager; Contractor Deputy Project Manager;

Enterprise Building Integrator (EBI) Direct Digital Control (DDC) System Technician, and the Quality Assurance Coordinator. Qualifications will be evaluated to ensure the ability of the contractor to produce candidates who meet the position requirements outlined in the PWS.”

3. Q&A 49: The government’s response introduces ambiguity into what is being required of the key personnel for this proposal. The government has amended the RFP requirements to ask bidders to “also see” 5152.204‐4001 Key Personnel requirements (MAR 2009) (LOCAL CLAUSE). This clause states “These "Key Personnel" were identified by name within the contractor’s proposal and their resumes were submitted for evaluation during the source selection process.” Please confirm that the government is neither requiring nor evaluating names or resumes for the key personnel positions. Otherwise, please clarify resume requirements and how this will be evaluated and whether or not this will be included in page count.

Answer: 4 staff are considered key personnel.

Section M Factor 1 –(1) Management/Organization/Staffing, (1) “…The following personnel are considered key personnel by the government: Contractor Project Manager; Contractor Deputy Project Manager; Enterprise Building Integrator (EBI) Direct Digital Control (DDC) System Technician, and the Quality Assurance Coordinator. Qualifications will be evaluated to ensure the ability of the contractor to produce candidates who meet the position requirements outlined in the PWS.”

5152.204‐4001 Key Personnel requirements (MAR 2009) (LOCAL CLAUSE) has been removed from the solicitation.

4. Amendment 0005 and 0006: Because this is a Low Price Technical Acceptable contract it is important that we clearly understand the associated cost. Amendment 5, provided some update consumable and service contract prices. However, there seems to be some disconnects between Technical Exhibit 4.0 and Technical Exhibit 5.0. Therefore we request clarification on the following:

a) In Technical Exhibit 5.0, Advantor Tech Support is listed as an annual cost of $3,200.00. There is also a line item Advantor IDS Technical Support listed as an annual cost of $3,200.00. Are the Advantor Technical Support two separate subcontracts for a total annual cost of $6,400.00? Or is this a duplicate entry?

Answer: Duplicate entry

b) In Technical Exhibit 5.0 there is a subcontract listed with AirGas Compressed Gas for Bi‐Monthly support at $1,666,66 ($39,999.84 annually).

In Technical Exhibit 4.0 there are three‐line items for Gas, Helium ($8,400.00), Gas Hydrogen ($36,000.00), and Gas Nitrogen ($800.00) ($45,200.00 annually). Is there duplication in these numbers or is the compressed air support $85,199.84 annually and/or $425,999.20 over the life of the contract.

Answer: estimated annual cost of $40k due to the flexibility of gas prices.

c) In Technical Exhibit 5.0 there is a subcontract for Bleach 5% nominal for $10,000 annually. In Technical Exhibit 4.0 there is a line item for Bleach, Household 1 Gal for $9,923.75. Is this a duplication?

Answer: T.E. 5 estimated cost were rounded up, yes this is duplicated.

d) In Technical Exhibit 5.0 there is a subcontract for Silver Fluoride Pads for $2,500.00 ($30,000,00 annually) In Technical Exhibit 4.0 there is a line item for Pads, Silver Fluoride for $11,600.00 annually. Is there duplication in these numbers or is the Pad, Silver Fluoride support $41,600.00 annually and/or $208,000 over the life of the contract.

Answer: $30,000 annually estimated

e) In Technical Exhibit 4.0 there is a $5,598‐line item for AstroClean Consumables. There is a 2nd line item that list ASTROClean system consumables at $6,500.00. Are these line items a duplicate or is the ASTROClean Consumables $12,098.00 annually?

Answer: Estimated annual cost is $5,598 + the TBD cost of DISPOSORB & the TBD cost of Disposal of the DISPOSORB.

f) In Technical Exhibit 4.0 Advantor / IDS parts are listed at 3 units at $1,200.00 each for an annual total of $2,000.00 Is the annual total $2,000.00 or should it be $3,200.00?

Answer: $3,600.00 estimated ($1,200.00 x 3)

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .