Response_to_Vendor_Questions_-_Final.pdf

Response to Vendor Questions – W9124R-15-R-0001 Document Name(s) i.e. PWS, RFP, Attachment 2.

Page# Question Disposition

Amendment 0002 Technical Exhibit 2, Workload History, first table, Number of Services, it indicates the Total Number of Service Orders 4,420. However, in the same Technical Exhibit under Additional Workload Information, it provides for Average Workload History for Priority 1 – 773 Service Orders, Priority 2 – 1,669 Service Orders, and Priority 3 – 955 Service Orders, for a Total of 3,397. This is a difference of 1,023 Service Orders, or a difference of 23%. Which is correct? The Actual Workload History indicates 4,420 is correct.

TE 2 has been updated to provide the accurate average for FY12 -

FY15.

2 Amendment 0002

Section L, Paragraph 3.0, Table 3.1.1 – Proposal Organization. Volume II Mission Capability lists the Number of pages to be 75. However, the Response to Vendor Questions #6, answer to Question #15, states that the limit has been increased to 125 pages for Volume II, and includes the information required in 3.3.7. Please clarify the Number of Pages for Volume II Mission Capability is 125 pages.

The number of pages has been increased to 125 as stated in Table 3.1.1 in the forthcoming Amendment.

3 Amendment 0002 in response to Questions 51 and 52; Government response “These service orders will be individually negotiated Task Orders”

Question: Is it the intent of the government for all priority 2 and 3 service orders to be accomplished following a negotiated Task Order?

Question: Is the contractor to perform priority 2 and 3 service orders in accordance with C.5.5.2.2 and C.5.5.2.3 listed below?

Question: If priority 2 and 3 service orders are to be performed in accordance with C.5.5.2.2 and C.5.5.2.3 listed below which CLIN on the schedule B will the contractor provide the labor hours to the government?

C.5.5.2.2 Priority 2 - Urgent: Priority 2 work should be accomplished by the first available personnel. Personnel shall not be diverted from scheduled jobs for this work. This includes work required to correct a condition, which could become an emergency, or could seriously affect

1 – Yes

2 – Yes

3 – CLIN X006

morale. The Contractor shall respond to, and initiate corrective action on, Priority 2 SOs within three (3) calendar days of receipt of call and all work shall be completed within seven (7) calendar days of receipt of call or notify the COR of the reason for the delay in completion. Once the urgent condition is remediated, the Contractor will complete the SO and create a Priority 3 SO to complete any additional work.

C.5.5.2.3 Priority 3 - Routine: Priority 3 work does not meet the criteria for Priorities 1 or 2. These jobs require work, which, if not accomplished, would only continue to be an inconvenience or an unsightly condition.

The Contractor shall respond to, and initiate corrective action on Priority 3 SOs within five (5) calendar days of receipt of call and all work shall be completed within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of call.

4 Amendment 0002: in response to Questions 72; Government response “PWS requirements are potential work that can be performed under this contract and set the scope for IJOs for construction or services”.

PWS Sections 1.6.3 Safety; C.5.2: Work Control; C.5.3 C: Planning & Estimating; C.5.4 Work Documentation; C.5.5: Service Orders; C.5.6 Preventive Maintenance and Operations Requirements; C.5.13:

Unaccompanied Personnel Housing Operations; C.5.14 Operation, Maintenance & Repair of Electrical Systems and Equipment; C.5.15:

Operation Maintenance & Repair of Heating Plants and Equipment;

C.5.16: Operation, Maintenance & Repair of Water Supply Distribution Systems; C.5.17: Operation, Maintenance & Repair of Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems; C.5.18: Operation, Maintenance & Repair of Air Conditioning/Refrigeration Plants & Evaporative Cooling Systems; C.5.19:

Operation, Maintenance & Repair of Structures and Facilities; C.5.21:

Heavy Equipment Operations; C.5.22: Sanitary Landfill Operations;

C.5.24: POL.

Question: Is it the Government’s intent for the contractor to charge all labor hours for the PWS sections listed above to CLIN 5 Negotiated IJO construction and CLIN 6 Negotiated IJO services?

1 – Yes, for that work not defined in the Fixed Price CLINs (X002, X007, X008).

2 – N/A

Question: If not the Government’s intent to charge the labor hours to CLIN 5 and CLIN 6, what CLIN in the schedule B would the contractor charge the labor hours for the PWS sections listed above?

5 CBA On May 2, 2017, the Government posted a copy of the CBA as an Attachment 6 to FBO. Section J was not updated to reflect the new attachment. Will the Government amend the solicitation and update Section J – List of Documents, Exhibits, and Other Attachments to include Attachment 6 and formally incorporate it to the solicitation?

Section J will reflect the update in the forthcoming Amendment.

6 Q&A #4, #4, #5, 9, and 29, Attachment 5, Amend 1

CLIN X005, since per Q&A4 it appears Offerors are to supply DBA rates after award would the Government please clarify the request for a Co- Efficient on Attachment 5? Section L. 4.3.1.12 explains the request as “Co-Efficient: Identify the current Co-Efficient that will be applied to CLIN X005 Negotiated IJOs – Construction. The Co-Efficient will be proposed in the Cost Proposal Narrative and will be reflected in Attachment 5 where appropriate for each year.”

Would the Government please provide the current Co-Efficient referenced in Section L? The Offeror is not the incumbent and currently does not have an established co-efficient. If it is the Governments intent that the Offeror supply a co-efficient would the Government please provide the basis upon which to apply the Co-Efficient?

No. It is the vendor’s responsibility to propose their co-efficient.

7 Q&A #6 L.3.3.7 and L.3.3.4

Based upon the answers provided by the Government with respect with Past Performance submission requirements, and the contents of amendment 0002, this contractor has interpreted the requirements as follows:

1. Within Volume II the offeror has the option to provide no more than two completed L-1 attachments for similar programs that provide experience to support their proposed approach to meeting the requirements of the three subfactors in Mission Capability. It is our understanding that this information will not be formally evaluated.

2. If the offeror choses to provide this information, they will be required to provide this information in compliance with the table found in L.3.3.7.1. Since the Government has clearly stated that this information is optional, this information is therefore outside of the 125 page limitation for Volume II – Mission Capability, but

Section L clearly states the purpose of the L-1 document and the proposal submission requirements. The Page Limitations have been increased from 75 to 125 pages in the forthcoming Amendment.

must strictly comply with the limitations specified within the table.

Our rationale behind this assumption is that if this information were to be included within the page count limitations, an offeror chose not to provide this information, which the Government has recommended we provide, would have additional pages to address the technical response.

3. If the offeror choses not to provide L-1 attachments, the other items in the table found in L.3.3.7.1 are still required for submission (e.g., summary page, organizational structure change history, consent/authorization letters, and questionnaire receipients).

Question: Will the Government please validate the accuracy of these assumptions, in order to enable offerors to adjust to these new requirements and continue moving forward with the proposal development.

8 L.3.4.1 In paragraph L.3.4.1 the Government has stated that “burden of providing thorough, complete, and current past performance information as requested in this paragraph remains with the Offerors. Proposals that do not contain the information requested by this paragraph risk rejection or an unacceptable performance rating by the Government.” Our question is, since the offeror has no requirements under Factor 2 beyond submitting a blank PPQ and a request to the contract point of contract, what are offerors expected to provide that is thorough, complete and competitive information if not given the opportunity to provide data that will be evaluated? Given that all information to be evaluated in support of Factor 2 is required to be provided by independent third parties, will the Government take any action to further substantiate the strength of the submitted PPQ in the even that the third party does not properly respond to the request? It seems ill-advised to potentially reject or deem an offerors proposal unacceptable based on factors that are completely out of their control.

See revised Para 3.4.2.1 under Section L.

9 Q&As 7 #25 and L.3.1.1

For compliance purposes, will the Government please update the page limitation in Table 3.1.1 from 75 to 125?

Updated in forthcoming Amendment

10 Q&As 7 #25 and L.3.1.1

In answering questions, the Government is now including in page count the Table of Contents (TOC), List of Table and Drawings, Cross Reference Matrix (CRM), acronyms and the physical hard copy tabs that separate the major sections of the proposal. It is highly unusual to include these items in the page limitation as these are administrative tools to assist the

No. the Government has increased the page limitation from 75 to 125 to accommodate additional work.

Government navigate the proposals. None of these items give offerors any competitive advantage. A useful TOC with List of Table and Drawings is roughly 5 pages, a CRM is at least another 2, acronyms (if done accurately) another 5 and the tabs could be 10 (so as to assist the Government locate pertinent sections of the document). That is 22 pages lost to technical writing for administrative items. In order to allow offerors to take full advantage of the allotted 125 pages to write to the technical requirements on an equal level playing field, we strongly recommend that these administrative items are removed from page count.

11 Q&As 7 #72 Many of the PWS references are for general requirements, service order and SJO work, which CLINS are offerors to use for pricing these requirements, the PWS references and work requirements are not IJO work?

Question: If the Government does not identify a CLIN, can offerors price this work to CLIN X001?

No. Service Orders and SJO work are included in CLIN X006.

12 Q&As 7 #85 The response indicates that Section L.3.3.3 has been revised to correct the functional areas being requested. Amend 0002 L.3.3.3 still reads as originally written, is that the Governments intent or does L.3.3.3 need to be updated?

Updated in forthcoming Amendment.

13 Q&As 7 #88 Please provide workload for Priority 1, 2, 3, and 4 estimating requirements. #88 does not refer to Priority 1, 2, 3, and 4 estimating requirements. Estimating requirements are listed in TE2.

14 Q&As 7 #90 Please confirm that RS Means labor rates are used to prepare estimates for IJO work, and the DOL Wage Decission is not the basis for the estimate development.

RS Means, local to Yuma, AZ is the pricing method.

15 Response to Vendor Questions #4

Page 1, Question No. 3

In reference to CLIN x004 Emergency Repair, the answer states, “Historical data indicates an average of 71 Emergency Service Orders, 780 man-hours, and approximately $5000.00 annually." Please clarify whether this historical information reflects the NTE 10,000 limit for Emergency Repairs.

The historical data for Emergency Service Orders is for CLIN X003 which is not relevant to CLIN X004..CLIN X004 is a Not To Exceed value provided by the Government.

The two do not relate.

16 Amendment 2 Page 15, Para 3.1.1

For Volume II, number of pages is listed as 75, which differs from answers provided on page limits within Response to Vendor Questions #6. Please confirm the page limit for Volume II.

Updated in forthcoming Amendment.

17 Response to Vendor Questions #6

Page 4, Question

The referenced response regarding page limits for Volume II applying to Vendor Provided Projects states the limit has been increased to 125 pages and that pages for Vendor Provided Projects are counted within the limit.

Please clarify whether this has changed as a result of Amendment 2 and if so, how.

Updated in forthcoming Amendment.

18 Response to Vendor Questions #7

Page 16, Question

The Government’s response says RFP Section L.3.3.3 has been revised regarding the functional area in question (Industrial Waste Water Treatment Plant). The most recent version of this section in Amendment 2 does not contain any changes to the paragraph regarding notional Preventive Maintenance Plans. Please advise.

Updated in forthcoming Amendment.

19 Amendment 2, Tech Exhibit 21

Page 2 Within the Electrical Section, the Electrician Lead is listed twice. Our assumption is the second listing should be an Electrician.

As stated in response #5, question 5, one lead is for high voltage and the other lead is for low voltage work.

20 PWS C.3.8.3 Regarding forms, the paragraph states, “At the end of this contract, the Contractor shall turn over to the Government or the successor contractor all electronic forms developed.” Will the Government provide a listing of the names of the electronic forms that we would expect to be provided?

The Government will not provide a listing of electronic forms at this time.

21 General Information It is our understanding that there is more than one COR. Is there a COR specifically assigned to the Yuma ISS PWS?

IAW MICC policy, a COR(s) will be appointed to any service contract over $150,000.

22 Question #3, The Government answered, “Offerors are responsible for their own workload. TE 23 was provided as a sample of the personnel that may be required under CLIN X003”. Technical Exhibit 2 provided in Amendment 0002 instructs the Bidder to anticipate and staff for 773 Priority 1 Service Orders. Paragraph C.5.5.2.1 last sentence states “Priority 1 emergencies shall be captured under CLIN XX03 and XX04….CLIN XX04 can only be used in conjunction with CLIN 0003, Emergency Service Orders to provide for additional labor to control the initial emergency.” It does not say in this paragraph or anywhere else in the PWS that this only relates to after-hours emergencies. As the PWS is now stated, CLIN XX03 has an estimated quantity of 100 each Priority 1 Service Orders. If this CLIN is not intended to reimburse the Bidder for emergency overtime performed after normal duty hours, then the estimated quantity in CLIN XX03 should be increased from 100 to the 773 estimated

a. No. The Solicitation describes the usage for CLINs X003 and X004.

b. CLIN X002 does not address Emergency Service Orders, only Preventive Maintenance.

c. See TE 23 for Pricing per Task for CLIN X003.

Priority 1 Service Orders in Technical Exhibit 2 as per Amendment 0002.

Please clarify.

a. Is this CLIN intended to reimburse Bidders for overtime after duty hour emergencies?

b. Should the Bidders include all labor and materials to arrest emergency service orders less than 32 hours during normal duty hours (as per the definition of Work Level II service orders on Pages C.1-47 and C.1-48, Section C.2, Definitions, Work Levels) in the FFP in CLIN XX02?

c. Is CLIN X003 to be priced as an average labor rate and used as the Unit Cost and multiplied by a Quantity of 100, found in Schedule B?

23 Question #25, asks “Please confirm that the Table of Contents, List of Table and Drawings, Cross Reference Matrix, Glossary and the actual Tab A Tab B and Tab C are excluded from the 75 page limitation for the volume.” The response was “These are not excluded, however, the page limit has been increased to 125 for that volume.” However, Amendment 0002, Section L, paragraph 2.1.2 Page Limitations states “Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate what is in the respective volume, which will not be counted in the page limits. In addition, the following will also not be counted in the maximum page limits: cover pages, tabs, cross-reference matrix, and glossaries.” Please clarify that Table of Contents, Glossaries, Cover Pages, Tabs, and Cross- Reference Matrixes are not included in the 125 page count.

See related response in question 10 above.

24 Question #50, response states “Attachment 5 has been revised. Please utilize the version posted with Amendment 0002.” Please provide a revised Section B to reflect all changes.

Section B is not changed by the revision of Attachment #5.

25 Question #51, the question asks “In reference to paragraph C.5.5.2.2, in which CLIN should the offerors capture costs for Priority 2 – Urgent SO?”

The response is “These service orders will be individually negotiated Task Orders.” CLIN XX02 states “The Contractor shall provide non-personal Installation Support Services at the U.S. Army, Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona as described in the Performance Work Statement sections C.5.11.2, C.5.14.2.1, C.5.15.2, C.5.16.8, C.5.19.2 – included as Preventive

PMs are Fixed Price pre-scheduled work. They are not subject to negotiations. CLINs X003 and X004 are not to accommodate Preventive Maintenance. See also previous

Maintenance. Base Period of Performance 1 August 2017 – 31 July 2018.”

This CLIN only includes some and not all of the Level I Work (paragraphs included in this CLIN do not cover all of the systems requiring Level I Work). The definition of Level I and Level II Work is provided on Pages C.1-47 and C.1-48, Section C.2, Definitions, Work Levels. Paragraph C.5.1.3 states “this contract is only for maintenance and repair, not construction.” Paragraph C.5.1.7 defines the Work Levels of SJOs, SOOs, PMs, Service Orders and IJOs, and Paragraph C.5.5.2.1 and C.5.5.2.2, and C.5.5.2.3 once again defines the way the different types of work will be performed. C.5.5.3 indicates that all Service Orders will be documented on L&E Cards and data input into GFEBS. Paragraph C.5.6 states that PMs will be done on SJOs and SOOs. None of those paragraphs indicate that Level I and Level II Work will be performed via separate Task Orders.

When a Service Order exceeds the definition provided on Pages C.1-47 and C.1-48, Section C.2, Definitions, Work Levels, and Paragraph C.5.4.3.1, it will be converted to an IJO and billed in CLIN XX04, XX05 or XX06.

a) Recommend CLIN XX02 be changed to include Level I and Level II Work to match the PWS. If this is not the intent of CLIN XX02, please add another pricing CLIN for Service Orders that do not exceed the limitations found in the above paragraphs.

responses regarding Service Orders.

26 Question #52, the question asks “In reference to paragraph C.5.5.2.3, in which CLIN should the offerors capture costs for Priority 3 – Routine SO?” The response is “These service orders will be individually negotiated Task Orders.” CLIN XX02 states “The Contractor shall provide non-personal Installation Support Services at the U.S. Army, Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona as described in the Performance Work Statement sections C.5.11.2, C.5.14.2.1, C.5.15.2, C.5.16.8, C.5.19.2 – included as Preventive Maintenance. Base Period of Performance 1 August 2017 – 31 July 2018.” This CLIN only includes some and not all of the Level I Work (paragraphs included in this CLIN do not cover all of the systems requiring Level I Work). The definition of Level I and Level II Work is provided on Page C.1-47 and C.1-48 Section C.2, Definitions, Work Levels. Paragraph C.5.1.3 states “this contract is only for

PMs are Fixed Price pre-scheduled work. They are not subject to negotiations. CLINs X003 and X004 are not to accommodate Preventive Maintenance. See also previous responses regarding Service Orders.

maintenance and repair, not construction.” Paragraph C.5.1.7 defines the Work Levels of SJOs, SOOs, PMs, Service Orders and IJOs, and Paragraph C.5.5.2.1 and C.5.5.2.2, and C.5.5.2.3 once again defines the way the different types of work will be performed. C.5.5.3 indicates that all Service Orders will be documented on L&E Cards and data input into GFEBS. Paragraph C.5.6 states that PMs will be done on SJOs and SOOs.

None of those paragraphs indicate that Level I and Level II Work will be performed via separate Task Orders. When a Service Order exceeds the definition provided on Pages C.1-47 and C.1-48, Section C.2, Definitions, Work Levels, and Paragraph C.5.4.3.1, it will be converted to an IJO and billed in CLIN XX04, XX05 or XX06.

a) Recommend CLIN XX02 be changed to include Level I and Level II Work to match the PWS. If this is not the intent of CLIN XX02, please add another pricing CLIN for Service Orders that do not exceed the limitations found in the above paragraphs.

27 Response_to_Vendo r_Questions__7_5- 4-17_

Response 15, regarding Att. L-1, states the narrative/instructions may not be removed from the Past Performance Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet.

Is it not clear if the response pertains to only the narrative/instructions above the table, as asked in the original question, or whether the repsonse intends to preclude removal of the narrative/instructions contained within the table in the Narrative Explanation, Negative Performance Documentation, and Completion Date/Delivery Schedule as well.

Including all narrative/instructions contained in Att. L-1 will take up approximately 1 page of the 5 alloted pages.

Will the government permit offerors to remove all narrative/instructions contained in the Narrative Explanation, Negative Performance Documentation, and Completion Date/Delivery Schedule sections of the table but leave in the Instructions prior to the Table?

No.

28 Response to Vendor Questions 7 5/4/17

Response 25, regarding Table of Contents, List of Table and Drawings, Cross Reference Matrix, Glossary and the actual TAB A, TAB B and TAB C are NOT excluded from the 125 page limitation for the volume.

Section L 2.1.2 Page Limitations, 2.1.3 Page Size, 2.1.6 Glossary of Terms (all in Amendment 2 of the RFP) state that these things ARE

The current Amendment takes precedence over any previous documents.

excluded from the page limit. Will the government please confirm that the instructions in Section L of Amendment 2 are correct.

29 Reference Response to Vendor Questions #7, Answer to Question #79 states “Amendment 2 has re-opened the question period until 12:00 p.m.

PDT, Monday, 8 May 2017.” Please verify this overrides Amendment 2 Section 1.12.4, which states “Offerors were given five (5) business days to submit questions. The question period is now closed.”

The Section L Para 1.12 addresses the post Site Visit question period. The Response to Question #79 allowed additional days for questions.

30 On what date do you anticipate releasing the conformed solicitation? 1730 PDT, 12 May 2017

31 In reference to RFP Section L–3.3.7.1, please provide instructions for the included table. Is an additional Table of Contents and Glossary required? If so, please clarify if this is included in the page count for Volume II.

Refer to the Solicitation and subsequent Amendments. The Table clearly states the instructions.

32 In reference to RFP Section L–3.3.7.1, please provide instructions for the included table. Are a 5-page Summary Page and a 3-page Organizational Structure Change History required to precede the L1s provided in this section of the proposal?

Refer to the Solicitation and subsequent Amendments. The Table clearly states the instructions.

33 In reference to RFP Section L–3.3.7.1, please provide instructions for the included table. Are copies of the Consent / Client Authorization Letters to be provided in this section as well? If so, please clarify if this is included in the page count for Volume II.

Refer to the Solicitation and subsequent Amendments. The Table clearly states the instructions.

34 Reference Sections L & M: Please confirm or clarify if the Sections L and M found in the Amendment 2 package are complete replacements of prior versions and that they contain the complete instructions for proposal preparation / submission and evaluation?

The current Amendment takes precedence over any previous documents.

35 Offerors require a conformed Section B to complete this requirement for Volume I; will the government provide a conformed Section B in the next amendment?

No. A conformed copy of the Solicitation will be provided.

36 Reference RFP Section L—3.2.8 and Section I Clause 52.223-3, is the Offeror required to complete this clause for incorporation into the submitted proposal, or is this to be completed after contract award? The information required for completion could be in excess of 80 pages; if the

This is required, per the FAR reference, only by the apparent awardee and prior to contract award.

Offeror is to include this in the submitted proposal, will the government allow this to be an addendum to the proposal?

37 Reference RFP Section L—3.2.6, page 85, the DD Form 254 typically is completed after contact award by the government. Please verify whether the Offeror is to complete only the Contractor information on the form, or the entire form.

The offeror shall complete the contractor information.

38 Per PWS Section C.5.13:

a. Is there a Government provided software solution currently in place for UPH operations management? If yes, would the Government please name the solution?

b. Is the contractor required to provide a software solution for UPH Operations management?

c. Is the Government’s General Fund Enterprise Business System (GFEBS) used for meeting the UPH operations requirements?

d. Does the Government’s General Fund Enterprise Business System (GFEBS) have the capability to meet the UPH Operations requirements?

See Response #8 question 11.

39 In reference to the Answer to Question #2 dated April 26, 2017, since the government cannot provide workload history / estimate data, therefore making it impossible to provide an accurate firm fixed price, will the Lead, Asbestos, Mold Abatement work be issued through an IJO?

See Response #8 question 34.

40 Section L, Item 3.2.5 states “The government has agreed to provide materials as needed. Materials that the government cannot provide will be captured at the Task Order Level, or through the Reimbursable CLINs when authorized.” However, PWS Section 4.2 states “The Contractor shall furnish all additional supplies and materials necessary to meet the requirements of the contract.”

QUESTION: Are materials and supplies provided by the government and / or reimbursed to the contractor for all Work Levels (Preventive Maintenance, Service Orders, IJOs) and Priority

See Response #8 question 68.

Levels or are materials and supplies only provided for Emergency Service Orders and Negotiated IJOs?

41 Section B, CLIN Structure, CLIN X0001. Final RFP for CLIN X0001 now states that personnel charged to this CLIN is limited to PWSs C.1.4.1 and C.1.5.1.1, which is the 2 key personnel required for the contract and the Quality Control Manager. What CLIN(s) are to be used for all the other overhead personnel, such as, Business Office, Work Control, Property Control, Material Control, etc. Please provide how we are to charge these personnel requirements.

See Response #8 question 65.

42 Reference PWS C.5.1.7, Work Levels, 5th paragraph, indicates IJO’s to be charged to CLIN X0004, and the final RFP Section B CLINs indicated IJOs to be charged to CLINs X0005 and X0006. Please clarify which is correct.

See Response #8 question 66.

43 Reference Standard Job Orders (SJO). Are we to assume that SJOs are charged to CLIN X0002, PM CLIN?

See Response #8 question 67.

44 Reference PWS C.5.5.2.2 and C.5.5.2.3, and reference Section B. Please clarify which CLIN the offeror is to price for Priority 2 – Urgent, and Priority 3 – Routine Service Orders.

See question 3 above.

45 RFP Section L–3.3.3, states “The Offeror shall demonstrate its understanding of each functional area below…” and provides a list of 16 PWS areas. Attachment L-2 PPQ lists a total of 19 areas with the statement “The Government seeks to determine the ability of the submitting contractor to perform in areas that are critical to the potential services that are required in support of the award.” The list of tasks in the PPQ differs from the RFP and implies “Planning and Estimating” is not a critical element but “Qualified Recycling Program”, “Installation and Repair of Equipment in Place (EIP)”, “Animal Control Management”, and “Emergency Repair” are. The elimination of “Planning and Estimating” on the PPQ could potentially lead to a flawed evaluation by the government evaluator for this solicitation. Please clarify the disconnect in the RFP and

PPQ.

The PPQs may seek different information that the Government has determined to be pertinent for its evaluation of Past Performance.

46 Amendment 2 RFP Section L–3.4.1.1 states “Early Proposal Information.

In order to expedite evaluations, Offerors are encouraged, but not required, to submit their Past Performance Questionnaires any time prior to the closing of the RFP, to the Contracting Officer at the address specified in paragraph 3.1.4.” This paragraph conflicts with the instructions in 3.4.2.1.

Please clarify the instructions for submitting PPQs in a conformed solicitation.

This is not conflicting information. See Solicitation and subsequent Amendments.

47 RFP Section L–3.3.7.1 states “The vendor is encouraged, but not required to provide specific relevant contract data that will provide additional clarity to the sub-factors for mission capability. The vendor is highly encouraged to provide no less than one, and no more than two references in accordance with the table below and the attachment at L1, to support each sub-factor in Mission Capability. This information will not be evaluated, however, it is an opportunity to provide supplemental information to a reviewer that may further clarify the information or practical application of the sub-factors listed above.”

RFP Section L–3.4.2.1 states “Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment L-2) - For the contracts identified on each Specific Relevant Contract Reference, the Offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts.”

RFP Section L-3.4.3.1 states “The Offeror shall provide no more than five completed examples of recent Past Performance within the last five (5) years.”

These 3 paragraphs create significant discrepancies that must be addressed within a reasonable timeframe of the solicitation’s due date.

a. Para 3.4.2.1 indicates PPQs are only required for any L1 included in the proposal, compelling each Offeror to include an L1 for each past performance reference we want evaluated. Please clarify whether an L1 is required for each past performance reference to be evaluated.

a. Para 3.4.2.1 is revised in the forthcoming Amendment.

b. It is true that L-1s are not required, however, the offeror is “highly encouraged” to submit an L-1 to support each sub-factor of Mission Capability.

c. Para 3.3.7.1 does allow for up to 6 L-1s in the current Amendment. However it does not state a PPQ is required for each L-1. Para 3.4.3.1 allows for 5 PPQs. These are not related documents and have a specific purpose.

b. Para 3.3.7.1 indicates L1s are not required in the proposal submission, further indicating that if an Offeror does not have the necessary page allotment in its proposal that PPQs will not be evaluated. Please clarify whether this is the intent.

c. Para 3.3.7.1 allows 6 L1s, and states a PPQ is required for each L1 in the proposal. Para 3.4.3.1. allows only 5 PPQs to be submitted. Please clarify these requirements to conform with each other.

48 The guidance provided in Sections L and M regarding the Past Performance ratings do not consider the significantly lower risk of an Offeror who provides more than 1 PPQs with ratings of Substantial Confidence compared with the higher risk of an Offeror who provides only 1 PPQ with the same rating. Please annotate how these risk factors will be considered.

Please review Sections L & M of the Solicitation.

49 RFP Section L–2.2.2 states “File Preparation. All text, including table and figure identifiers, shall be indexed and 100% searchable text using Microsoft Word. All text shall be displayed as a font and not displayed as a bitmap in any proposal volume or appendix to facilitate the ability to copy and paste to another document.” Since some required proposal content is provided in image format, please clarify whether this includes:

a. Graphics (meaning graphics can only be included if created in Microsoft Word);

b. Company logos

c. Volume I, Tab A – copy of the signed letter

d. Volume I, Tab C – SF33 and all SF30s (if these must be searchable, please provide all these in Microsoft Word format)

e. Volume I, Tab D – Section B

f. Volume I, Tab E – DD Form 254 (if this must be searchable, please provide a file that is not a sample in Microsoft Word)

Refer to the Solicitation and subsequent Amendments.

g. Volume IV, Section 4.0 – DCAA Audit Report and DCMA signed letter (these are only provided by DCAA and DCMA as PDF files) plus the potential Pre-Award Survey

50 Reference Responses to Vendor Questions #7, Q&A #85:

Offeror Question: “RFP Section L—3.3.3, last paragraph states: “The Offeror shall provide notional (for evaluation purposes only) Preventive Maintenance Plans IAW C.1.5.2 of the PWS for the Electrical Systems Maintenance and Repair, Industrial Waste Water Treatment Plant, and Facilities Maintenance and Repair functional areas.” Please provide clarification if we are responsible for an Industrial Waste Water Treatment Plant or is the Offeror required to provide a PMP for the Sanitary Sewage Collection System instead.”

Government Answer: “Section L, 3.3.3 has been revised to correct the functional areas being requested.”

Additional Question: Amendment 0002 does not provide a revision to the text in L–3.3.3. Please provide the corrected L–3.3.3.

Updated in forthcoming Amendment.

51 Amendment 2 RFP Section L–4.0 states “If DCMA has not approved the accounting system or DCAA has not determined adequacy, the offer shall submit a completed Pre-award Survey of Prospective Contractor Accounting System Checklist. Completion of the Pre-award Survey of Prospective Contractor Accounting System Checklist is required in order for the MICC to proceed with a request for a DCAA pre-award accounting system review.” Section M—5.0 states “The Government will not conduct a Pre-Award Survey.” Please clarify the intent of the statement in Section M is to verify the Government itself will conduct the survey, and that DCAA will, or if this is not the intent, please conform these two statements.

Section M Para 5.0 has been revised in the forthcoming Amendment.

52 Amendment 2 RFP Section L–4.1.4 refers to requirements in paragraph 1.A.12. This paragraph is not included in this solicitation; please clarify as to what requirements the instructions are specifically referring.

4.1.4 is revised in the forthcoming Amendment.

53 In reference to RFP Amendment 2, Section L—4.0, the Pre-award Survey of Prospective Contractor Accounting System Checklist is not available through the DCAA web site; will the government please provide the Checklist we are to use?

No. It is the responsibility of the vendor to provide the correct information. See the DCMA Customer Service website.

RFP Section L—4.1.5 (2) states the offeror should use the NTE figures provided by the government for Cost Reimbursable CLINS in Attachment #5. However, the Instructions at the top of the CLIN Pricing worksheet in the Attachment #5 says that “Cells for CR CLINS should be Government provided amount Plus any indirect Fees.” Should the Offeror populate Attachment #5 Cost Reimbursable CLINs with the government provided NTE amounts or with the NTE amounts plus the Indirect Fees?

55 For Amendment 2 to the RFP has the Technical Exhibit #23 – Pricing for CLIN X003 been removed as a requirement?

a. The Attachment #5 now has a tab for IJO Burdened Rates.

Does that replace the TE#23?

b. If question 2(a) is true, the TE#23 requested a price for a unit of 4 hours. The worksheet tab in Attachment #5 appears to be requesting a fully burdened rate for 1 hour per labor category. Please confirm that the IJO rates requested on the new Attachment #5 are for only 1 hour and not a 4-hour unit.

a. No. TE #23 provides pricing for the disciplines that may be used for CLIN X003.

Attachment #5, Tab “IJO Burdened Rates” provides an opportunity for the offeror to state a fully burdened rate for the disciplines used for IJOs for Services.

56 Reference Responses to Vendor Questions #7, Q&A #88:

Offeror Question: “Per PWS Section C.5.3, what is the historical workload of the number of projects planned/estimated and number of projects inspected? Will the government please provide the project breakout IAW FAR guidelines for both in accordance with the following table?”

Project Size # projects planned/estimated

#p

Less than $25k

$25k to $100k

This is a hybrid contract. FAR

36.204 is waived due to construction being ancillary not primary.

$100k to $250k

$250k to $500k

Government Answer: “Please provide FAR reference. A search of farsitehill.gov did not provide this guideline.”

Vendor Clarification: FAR 36.204 - Disclosure of the Magnitude of Construction Projects, which states: “Advance notices and solicitations shall state the magnitude of the requirement in terms of physical characteristics and estimated price range. In no event shall the statement of magnitude disclose the Government’s estimate. Therefore, the estimated price should be described in terms of one of the following price ranges:

(a) Less than $25,000.

(b) Between $25,000 and $100,000.

(c) Between $100,000 and $250,000.

(d) Between $250,000 and $500,000.

(e) Between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

(f) Between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000.

(g) Between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000.

(h) More than $10,000,000.”

57 Reference Responses to Vendor Questions #7, Q&A #87: Government’s answer states “TE 3 has been corrected and revised.” What date does the Government anticipate releasing the corrected and revised TE 3; this was not included in Amendment 2.

This will be posted with the forthcoming Amendment.