Attachment_M_-_Irwin_Food_Services_Tech_QA_update_21Dec2018.pdf

Q1. Is this the first time the requirements have been separated between FFS & DFA?

A1. These services have been combined since at least Fiscal Year 2005.

Q2. Was the combined total $22.6M?

A2. The current contract was awarded under Contract Number W911S8-18-P-0080 in the amount of $1,934,250.00.

Q3. When you have a chance, would you please release the seniority list for each building?

A3. The solicitations contain FAR Clause 52.222-41, Service Contract Labor Standards.

Paragraph (n) addresses the seniority list. Paragraph (n) states the following, “Not less than 10 days prior to completion of any contract being performed at a Federal facility where service employees may be retained in the performance of the succeeding contract and subject to a wage determination which contains vacation or other benefit provisions based upon length of service with a Contractor (predecessor) or successor (29 CFR 4.173), the incumbent Prime Contractor shall furnish the Contracting Officer a certified list of the names of all service employees on the Contractor’s or subcontractor’s payroll during the last month of contract performance. Such list shall also contain anniversary dates of employment on the contract either with the current or predecessor Contractors of each such service employee. The Contracting Officer shall turn over such list to the successor Contractor at the commencement of the succeeding contract.”

No. Section No. Subsection, Paragraph, or Bullet No.

Page No. Question

1 SF1449 pg. 3-5 Please confirm that the following are the CLIN requirements for the above-mentioned solicitation:

0001 - Phase-in; 0002 - Program Management; 0003 - Bldg 254; 0004 - Bldg 271; 0005 - Reporting?

2 Amendment

Section 14 1 If we previously sent our past performance references for W9124J18R0027, do we need to send them again?

3 Addendum 52.212-1 and 52.212-2

Discussion: In Instruction to Offerors (ADDENDUM TO 52.2121-1) , paragraph I.C.4.b.(4) describes technical volume submission requirements, identifying two subfactors (Sub-Factor 1 Key Personnel and Qualifications; Sub-Factor 2 Staffing Plan). This is consistent with the Evaluation Factors (ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2), which states that “The Technical Capability Factor evaluation provides an assessment of the offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. This factor has two sub-factors that will be used to determine the overall technical capability: Key Personnel and Qualification; and Staffing Plan.” However, there are inconsistencies between the Instructions to Offerors and the Evaluation Factors that cause confusion about both the submission requirements and the way submissions will be evaluated. Paragraph I.C.4.b.(2) of the Instructions to Offerors states that proposals will be evaluated against the Technical Capability Factor and Subfactors defined in the Evaluation Factors (these are consistent), but goes on to say that: “The section shall be prepared in an orderly format and in sufficient detail to enable the Government to make a thorough evaluation of the contractor’s technical competence and ability to comply with the contract task requirements specified in the PWS. “ (Emphasis added). Despite the statement that an evaluation of technical competence and PWS compliance is planned, there is no specific requirement in Instructions to Offerors which would demonstrate technical capability. Nor is there a specific Evaluation Factor that shows how the Government will assess offerors’ technical capability, aside from resumes, job descriptions and staffing plans. The Government’s intent is further confused by the page count allocated for the technical submission. This substantially exceeds the requirements of Key Personnel and Qualifications and of the Staffing Plan, lending support to the belief that the Government wishes offerors to address contract tasks in detail. In summary: 1) It is clear that the Government wishes to assess the offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s requirements; 2) It appears that additional, detailed information might be desired by the Government to establish offeror capability to perform contract requirements; 3) If actually desired, the requirement for information to support offerors technical competence and ability to comply with contract requirements has not been defined in the solicitation or identified in the evaluation criteria.

Question: Does the Government desire to have offerors provide a technical discussion of contract task requirements? If so, please include submission requirements in ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1 paragraph I.C.4.b.(4) and corresponding evaluation criteria to ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2 paragraph I.c.(2).

ADDITIONAL Q&A 21 DECEMBER 2018

The CLIN structure is correct.

Offerors that originally submitted proposals for W9124J-18-R-0027 Fort Irwin FFS will be allowed to submit updated documents electronically i.e.

Attachment G Pricing Matrix and Attachment H Staffing Matrix. All other offerors submitting a new proposal will have to adhere to Addendums 52.212-1 and 52.212-2.

Technical discussions of contract task requirements are not required, the technical page limit is to ensure that it is not too restrictive and allows for adequate space for a quality proposal. Follow the instructions for the two sub-factors for Factor 1, Technical capability.