Solicitation W9124C21R0010 RFI_Solid Waste Removal Ft. Jackson_20210224.pdf

W9124C21R0010 Solid Waste Management (Refuse) RFI Log 24 Feb 21

1. Ref: In accordance with the instructions for Volume III: Price Proposal “Offerors shall fill in the proposed prices (base year plus four option years) for the unit prices on the pricing schedule provided in Section B of the solicitation

Comment: The total cost in the – Pricing Schedule at Section B shall be filled in at each of their respective CLINS in the bid schedule in Section B…” The quantities in the bid schedule at Section B do not correspond to the quantities provided in Attachment 3 – Price Schedule.

Question: Will the Government please reconcile?

Answer: Pricing schedule at Section B updated. See amendment 0001.

2. Ref: Proposal Instructions (page 96 of 111) Comment: states “Proposals shall consist of four separate files; one file for each volume.” however it then goes on to list five separate volumes.

Question: Will the Government please deconflict?

Answer: Section L, page 96 has been updated to reflect five separate volumes.

3. Ref: Proposal Content (page 96 of 111)

Comment: provides naming protocols for each of the proposal volumes but does not provide a desired file type.

a. Question: Will the Government please provide the desired file type for the proposal files?

b. Question: Will the Government please provide the maximum file size for each file?

c. Question: Will the Government please provide the maximum total for the whole email submission?

Answer: The offeror can submit Volumes 1, 2, 4, 5 as word and or pdf.

Refer to section Instruction to offerors for submission requirements for Volume 3, pricing.

4. Ref: Proposal Content (page 96 of 111) Comment: Provides naming protocols for each of the proposal volumes.

Question: Does the Government want Offerors to add a company identifier to the file names? (Example “COMPANY A-VOLUMEI-RFP DOCUMENTS, W9124C-21-R-0010”)

Answer: The offeror should properly identify each volume IAW the

Instructions to offeror.

5. Ref: Proposal Content (page 96 of 111) Comment: states “Offerors shall attach a cover sheet in each file identifying: 1) volume number(s);

2) request for proposal number; 3) title; 4) offeror’s name.” However, 5. Tab E – Technical (page 98 of 111) states “The technical volume shall not contain the Offerors name or any markings that would readily reveal the offeror’s name, subcontractor’s name…This part shall be marked with the Offeror’s DUNS Number.”

a. Question: Does the Government want Offerors to NOT put a cover sheet on the Technical Volume? This will be a determination made by the offeror.

b. Question: Does the Government want Offerors to use their DUNS number of the cover sheet in lieu of the company name?

Refer to Q4 response.

c. Question: Does the Government want Offerors to use their DUNS number within the text of the Technical Volume while referring to themselves (Example…”The ##### Team’s Phase- in plan….”

Refer to Q4 response.

d. Question: If the Offeror has pictures of proposed containers what are already in the Offeror’s possession, does the Government want the Offeror to redact the company name from the side of the equipment?

Answer: Refer to Q4 response.

6. Ref: Volume III – Price Proposal CLIN 0011 – Contractor Manpower Reporting (CMR) Comment: States “Offeror will determine, in Section B, CLIN 0011 to price or not-separately-price the CMRA requirement.” However Attachment 3 – Price Schedule indicates that CLIN 0011 is NSP for the base and all option years.

Question: Will the Government please deconflict?

Answer: See updated Price schedule to remove NSP.

7. Ref: “Complete breakdown of costs by major subcontractor”

Comment: Does the government want the narrative in the subcontractors break down to include the below questions

a. Question: Included in the cost narrative?

b. Question: Identified in Attachment 3?

c. Question: Both

Answer: Reference Section L price volume submission, highlighted, for subcontractor break down inclusion, in addition Volume V small business participation requirements document. The offeror should also reference

FAR 52.219-9.

8. Ref: Items 2, 3, and 4 on page 103 of 111

Comment: seem to be out of place.

Question: Will the Government please delete these items or provide context for them?

Answer: The information is required as a part of the Addendum FAR Clause 52.212-1.

9. Ref: Section M 52.212-2 (page 104 of 111)

Comment: states “…with appropriate considerations given to the four (4) evaluation factors” however only lists the following three: Technical, Cost/Price, and Past Performance.

Question: Will the Government please verify that there are 4 evaluation factors?

Answer: Refer to solicitation amendment 0001.

10. Ref: Section M, 4. Past Performance Factor paragraph

Comment: states “Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix D.”

a. Question: There is no Appendix D. Can the Government please clarify?

b. Question: Attachment 6 provides a past performance information form to complete but there is no associated questionnaire. Does the Government want Offerors to provide questionnaires to contract POCs?

• If so, can the Government please provide the questionnaire?

Answer: Reference Attachment 0008.

11. Ref: PWS 2.0 Comment: lists scrap metal and toner cartridges, however 2.3.1.4 Scrap Metal Items and 2.3.1.5 Toner Cartridge Items are both “Reserved”.

a. Question: Are these items to be collected as part of this contract?

b. Question: Will the Government please provide information regarding the collection of these 2 items?

Answer: The contractor is not required to pick up scrap metal or toner cartridges.

12. Ref: Tab E Technical Subfactor 1 (d)

Comment: requires a phase-in approach to be provided with the proposal, however PWS 2.2.1 states that the phase-in plan must be submitted “within ten

(10) business days after contract award.” Question: Will the Government please confirm that the phase-in should be provided with the proposal.

Answer: Offerors should prepare the technical volume IAW Instructions to offerors section.

13. Ref: Technical Capability Question: Will the Project Manager also take on the role of Quality Control

Manager?

Answer: No

14. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 4.0 AQLs #5 references PWS para 4.2.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

Question: Will the Government please confirm that this reference should be 3.2?

Answer: That is correct

15. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 4.0 AQLs #6 references PWS para 2.1.11.1.6.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

Question: Will the Government please confirm that this reference should be 2.4.4.5?

16. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 4.0 AQLs #7 references PWS para 3.1.1.1.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

Question: Will the Government please confirm that this reference should be 7.4.3?

17. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 4.0 AQLs #8 references PWS para 2.3.4.1.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

Question: Will the Government please provide the correct reference?

Answer: It should be 2.17

18. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 6.0 Deliverables A001 references PWS para 4.2.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

Question: Will the Government please confirm that this reference should be 3.2?

19. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 6.0 Deliverables A002 references PWS para 2.1.11.1.1.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

Question: Will the Government please confirm that this reference should be 2.4.3.1?

20. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 6.0 Deliverables A003 references PWS para 2.5.2.1.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

Answer: It should be 2.15

21. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 6.0 Deliverables A004 references PWS para 2.5.3.1.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

Question: Will the Government please confirm this reference should be 2.16.1

Answer: It should be 2.16.1

22. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 6.0 Deliverables A005 references PWS para 2.3.5.3.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

Question: Will the Government please confirm this reference should be 2.18.3.1?

Answer: It should be 2.18.3.1

23. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 6.0 Deliverables A006 references PWS para 3.1.1.1.2.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

Answer: It should be 7.4.3

24. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 6.0 Deliverables A007 references PWS para

2.5.5.4 Spill Plan.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

a. Question: Spill Plan is referenced in PWS 2.18.7. Please confirm that this is the correct reference.

b. Question: 2.18.7 Spill Plan states “N/A”. Will the Government please clarify if a Spill Plan is a deliverable under this contract?

Answer: PWS updated to 2.18.7 “The Contractor shall notify the COR/ACOR within one (1) hour, if the Contractor spills or releases any hazardous substances, i.e., substances listed in 40 CFR 302, Designation, Reportable Quantities, and Notification. The Contractor shall submit a Spill Plan to the KO for approval within thirty (30) days of contract award IAW Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan.”

25. Ref: Overarching PWS Base Operations Contract 6.0 Deliverables A006 references PWS para 3.3.1.

Comment: This PWS paragraph does not exist.

Question: Will the Government please confirm this reference should be 7.8?

Answer: I think you meant A0008 references PWS para 3.3.1 and yes it should be 7.8. I answered A0006 above on question 23

26. Ref: PWS, 3.3

Comment:

Question: Can the Government please provide historical information regarding the number of 8 cubic yard, roll offs and compactors requiring repairs in 2019?

Answer: Reference FAR clause 52.216-21 Requirements. Information pertaining to quantiles are estimates and may increase or decrease during contract performance.

27. Ref: PWS, 2.3 Recycling Support

Comment: The Contractor shall pick up cardboard generated on post on a contingency basis.” Question: Will the Government confirm that regularly scheduled recycling routes are not a part of this contract and that pricing is requested only in the case of temporary coverage?

28. Question: Will you please provide a map of container locations on Ft. Jackson?

Answer: We can provide a cantonment map but we don’t have a map off all the locations.

29. Question: How long before contract start date do all employees need to complete the vetting policy, on average what is the wait time for the vetting procedure?

Answer: Awardee will follow the Fort Jackson Vetting policy, timeline varies.

30. Question: How many contractor leased containers and compactors will need to be provided on average?

Answer: Reference Q26 response.

31. Question: Is a Site Visit anticipated?

Answer: No Site visit will be conducted.

32. Ref: TE-1 Schedule of Attachment 1-PWS

Question: Does TE 1 Schedule of Attachment 1-PWS include the recycling containers? If not, will the Government provide the number of recycling containers?

Answer: Reference Q26 response.

33. Question: How long is phase in period?

Answer: 30 day phase in

34. Question: Under GFE does the government provide an office space/modular building in the lay down area assigned to the contractor?

Answer: No.

35. Question: Under Technical submission is Key Personnel (Project Manager) resume required to be submitted with the proposal?

36. Question: Does the government require compactors to have the ability to electronically monitor waste levels and send email to the service provider/customer/contractor when approaching capacity?

Answer: Yes

37. Question: Will the government please confirm that only front load MSW trucks are required to have scales onboard?

38. Question: Are roll off trucks required to have scales?

39. Question: Are offerors required to submit pricing basis of estimates as part of their pricing breakdowns

Answer: Reference Pricing Volume, Instructions to Offerors and price schedule

40. Ref: Attachment 3

a) Question: Is the extended pricing for each Base and Option CLIN for a 12 month period?

b) Question: After computing do we list the annual total in the CLIN 0001, 0002, 003 et seq for Base and OPT years as “1 JOB”?

Answer: a. Offerors should reference delivery information in the solicitation.

b. Unit price should be indicated and not cumulative total price.

41. Ref: Technical Exhibit 1 Estimated Workload identifies the location of 2 additional compactors as “TBD” [To Be Determined].

Comment: Currently, there are only 8 compactors in use at Fort Jackson.

a) Question: Why is the contractor bidding on 10 when only 8 are needed?

b) Question: Can these 2 “TBD Compactors” be listed on a separate CLIN?

c) Question: Will the contractor be allowed to invoice for 10 Compactors for each month of the Contract?

d) Question: Will the locations of the 2 additional Compactors be determined prior to the due date for submission of proposals?

e) Question: CLIN003 Compactor Haul Fee: Does the 40 hauls a month include hauls for the compactors that aren’t even in place yet? IF so, can these hauls be placed on a newly created “extra/unscheduled compactor collection” CLIN?

Answer: a. Refer to Q26 response.

b. Reference FAR clause 52.216-21

c. No.

d. TBD at a later date

e. Reference Q41a response.

42. Ref: Section 2.3 Cardboard of the Performance Work Statement Comment: “Recycle Support. The Contractor shall pick up cardboard generated on post on a contingency basis.

a) Question: It appears Solicitation does not contain the location for the cardboard containers. Will the Government provide the location of the cardboard containers?

b) Question: Are the cardboard containers referenced in Section 2.3. of PWS provided by the Government?

Answer: We do not have a map at this time but will give you the location when needed. Yes they are provide by the government.

43. Ref: Section 2.3.1.1 of the PWS Question: How much time will be provided for collection of the Cardboard Containers referenced in Section 2.3.1.1 of the PWS once a Task Order has been issued to the Contractor by the COR?

Answer: One week

44. Question: Will the Government provide a laydown yard on Base for use by the

Contractor for office facilities, vehicle and equipment storage?

Answer: Yes

45. Ref: Section 2.1 of the PWS Question: The Solicitation lists 8 Roll Off containers with “Estimated haul 20 per month.” Is the Contractor required to haul each Roll Off container each week as stated in Section 2.1 of the PWS?

Answer: No only when they are full.

46. Question: If the Contractor is required to haul Roll Off containers more than 20 times per month, will the additional Roll Off container hauls beyond 20 be invoiced pursuant to CLINs 0010, 1009, 2009, 3009, and 4009?

47. Question: Carboard: Is the contractor required to provide weights on the cardboard cans?

48. Question: Can the proposal due date be extended to account for the time needed to answer these questions?

Answer: No.

49. Ref: PWS TE 1.

Comment: The last line item in the 8 YD section reads TBA, REFUSE, 49

a) Question: Does the 49 refer to an additional 49 lifts of 8YD refuse containers per week?

b) Question: Would it include 49 new 8YD locations or would it be 49 additional lifts per week of the containers listed on the schedule?

c) Question: Will the Government please provide more detail/clarification of this TBA requirement?

Answer: It refers to additional lifts any new locations are added to the TE or if frequency are increased at any present location.

Reference Q41a response.

50. Comment: Historically, Ft Jackson does not have 2,752 8 CY FEL collections per month. The Government even reserves in the PWS TE1“49 collections TBD, per week”. If offerors are to use this quantity of 2,752, they will experience a significant shortfall in required monies that they bid to receive, and their fixed costs will not be covered in full.

a. Question: Will the Government please remove the 49 TBA per month AND reduce the monthly quantity to actual, more realistic monthly collection number?

Example: IF offeror feels it needs $40,000.00 for this line item, mathematically its $14.50 per collection/month ($40k/2752). Monthly, say you only collect 2,200 containers. When you only collect 2,200 times x $14.50 per collection = $31,950. This is an $8,050.00 shortfall to pay your salaries, manager, notes, interest, insurance, taxes, rents, permits, profit, etc. Annually this is a $96,600.00 shortfall. This is an amount that no business, much less an 8(a) can afford to come up short with, and would place the awarded contractor in immediate financial difficulties.

Question: IF the Government’s answer to Q26 is “we need these collections in case of future growth, surge requirements, Acts of God etc.”, AND the Government does not wish to remove these extra collections in their entirety, we strongly suggest the Government list these extra collections in Unscheduled Refuse Collections CLIN 0010, 1010, et seq so that the Government has the ability to order the extra pickups. Placing unknown quantities in “unscheduled refuse collections” is the best place to reserve the extra pickups that the Government may see necessary for the future.

Answer: Reference Q26 response and Q41a.

51. Question: Please advise as to why the last contract was only a 2 year term?

Answer: The previous contract was terminated for default.

52. Solicitation, Page 72 of 111, Section J – List of Documents….

Question: . Will the Government please identify the response Volume/Tab to place the completed Attachment 7?

Answer: Offerors should add Attachment 7 to Volume 1.

53. Question. Will the Government please confirm that the latest Wage

Determination, 2015-4430, Revision 15, dated 6/03/20 is correct for this solicitation?

Answer: Yes, this is most recent Wage Determination.

54. For clarification, as noted in the PWS, TE 1 Estimated Workload the government mentions the Compactor Size to be 42 YD self-contained units. All of the compactors located on Fort Jackson property currently are 35 YD self-contained units, as were the ones prior too. In addition, by industry standards, 42 YD containers are not customary. This is due in part by many reasons; one being the weight of the containers once filled and the excessive weight would exceed the legal South Carolina Highway limits. Manufacturers do not produce the 42 YD Self Contained Compactors as well. It too, is not customary due to the larger size thus putting restrictions on container placement especially where loading docks are used and other government building locations currently in place at Fort Jackson. Multiple locations will not allow room for the 42 YD size container, as currently they are set up for35 YD Self Contained Compactors where utilities are connected for such units. Please acknowledge if the government can take concession and allow the contractor to propose the same size 35 YD Self Contained that are currently in service, have previously been in service and perform satisfactory.

Answer: That is correct they are rated as 35 YD.