MODIFICATION
R -- Manpower Support Services - Amendment 2
- Notice Date
- 10/8/2010
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- NAICS
- 541690
— Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services
- Contracting Office
- Department of the Air Force, Air Force Materiel Command, WR-ALC, WR-ALC/PK Acquisition Opportunities, 235 Byron St,, Warner Robins, Georgia, 31098-1611, United States
- ZIP Code
- 31098-1611
- Solicitation Number
- FA8505-10-R-21787
- Archive Date
- 12/31/2010
- Point of Contact
- Alexander H Comportie, Phone: 478-926-5860
- E-Mail Address
-
alexander.comportie@robins.af.mil
(alexander.comportie@robins.af.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Competitive 8(a)
- Description
- Wage Determination WD 05-2139 (Rev.-9) Amendment 0002 The purpose of this amendment is to post amendment FA8505-10-R-21787-0002 and provide additional responses to questions asked by potential offerors. Q (15) On page 30 of the solicitation the following Clause was included: "I-283 52.222-41 SERVICE CONTRACT ACT OF 1965 (NOV 2007) (IAW FAR 22.1006(a)) (Applicable to services over $2,500)" Will this clause be deleted or will the Government be issuing a DOL WD against the Solicitation? A (15) Clause 52.222-41 will not be deleted. The Wage Determination will be posted with Amendment 0002. Q (16) Section I-283 references FAR clause 52.222-41, Service Contract Act of 1965. Will the Government provide the applicable SCA Wage Determination for the solicitation? A (16) The Wage Determination has been posted with Amendment 0002. Q (17) The Answers to Questions posted to FBO on September 16 included the following: Q (6): Will you use the Service Contract Act for any labor categories? If so, how many? A (6): Yes, SCA applies to service contracts over $2,500 and flows down to subcontractors. The labor categories will be listed under the RFP. As no Wage Determination was issued with the solicitation, please clarify if SCA rates do, indeed, apply, and if so will the Government be issuing a current Wage Determination? A (17) The Wage Determination will be posted with Amendment 0002. The SCA will apply in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 22 & supplements. Q (18) On page 30 in paragraph B, it states: "Volume III is due in WR-ALC/830 ACSG/235 Byron Street Suite 19A Robins AFB, GA 31098-1607, Attention: Alexander Comportie, seven (7) calendar days prior to the required due date for proposals". This date calculates to be Columbus Day Oct. 11. Would the Government consider moving this date to Oct. 12? A (18) Please see amendment 0001, receipt of Offers has been extended. The extension did not change any other terms and conditions of the Request for Proposal. Reference the last sentence in paragraph B. It states: "However, failure to submit VOLUME III by the earlier date will not result in offeror disqualification." Q (19) This question is regarding paragraph B. Volume I, of L-900. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS, for Solicitation Number FA8505-10-R-21787. The paragraph states: "(Volume III is due in WR-ALC/830 ACSG/235 Byron Street Suite 19A Robins AFB, GA 31098-1607, Attention: Alexander Comportie, seven (7) calendar days prior to the required due date for proposals." Later in the paragraph it states, "However, failure to submit VOLUME III by the earlier date will not result in offeror disqualification." We request for ease of mailing and accountability for both the government and offerors, that you clarify the due date for all volumes of the proposal as 18-OCT-2010 3:30PM, per Block 9 of the 1447? A (19) Please see amendment 0001, receipt of Offers has been extended. Q (20) I saw Amendment 0001 to Solicitation Number: FA8505-10-R-21787 that you posted yesterday changing the due date to 29 October. Would you please confirm that the due date for Volume III - Present and Past Performance Information remains seven days before the due date of Volumes I, II, & IV? Or are all four volumes now due on the same date? A (20) The extension to receipt of Offers to 29 October 2010 did not change any other terms and conditions of the Request for Proposal. Q (21) On page 49 of the Solicitation paragraph D Volume III - Present and Past Performance it states that "The offeror may expand the answering space on the FACTS Sheet so that the filled-in FACTS Sheet for each relevant contract covers no more than both sides of two 8 ½ x 11 inch pages." Does our response need to be printed on both sides of the paper? Is there a page limit for each individual Past Performance Fact Sheet? A (21) Yes, the response needs to be printed on both sides of the paper and yes, there's a page limit (both sides of two pages). Q (22) Is the page limit for each Fact Sheet 4 pages or 4 additional pages to the template in the RFP? We want to make sure we respond timely and correctly and as of now the Past Performance volume is to be submitted on Oct 11 (Columbus Day). We are preparing our proposal at our corporate office and would need to ship on Oct 7 to reach your office by Friday Oct 8. This answer is critical to our response. A (22) See amendment 0001 extending receipt of Offers date. Q (23) Our firm is preparing a bid for subject project and would like to know if there's any historical data that can be provided, i.e., number or personnel currently performing work, how many aircraft associated, T.O. changes, aircraft modifications, frequency of meetings, and is this strictly manpower support with emphasis on logistics, supply, and administrative support? A (23) How many aircraft associated, T.O. changes, aircraft modifications, frequency of meetings, will not be provided unless described in a separate order. Yes, this is manpower support. The PWS at the order level will provide specifics. Q (24) Page 53 of the RFP speaks to the relevancy criteria for the Past Performance. Specifically, "The effort must have included providing logistic support for Foreign Military Sales. The effort must have included at least 4 of the following support items: Supply and Deployment Support, Program and Logistic Support, Information Technology Support, Administrative and Timekeeping Support, Logistics Support of Multi-National Events."Information Technology Support and Administrative & Timekeeping Support don't match the PWS paragraphs 4.9.1 Administrative Support and 4.9.1 Technical Support. Shouldn't these match? A (24) Amendment 0002 restated Information Technology Support, Administrative and Timekeeping Support to Technology Support and Administrative Support in section M of the RFP to match the PWS paragraphs 4.9.1 and 4.9.1. Q (25) Can the government provide estimated man-hours per labor category expected to be expended for the life of the new contract or any part thereof? A (25) The government will not be providing this information. Q (26) There is no requirement found in the PWS for IT support nor is there a provision for IT labor categories. a) Can the government provide clarification of the relevancy in the Section M evaluation criteria regarding Information Technology (IT) (pg 53)? b) Does the government wish the contractor to provide labor category(ies) for IT? c) What level/experience/qualifications should the IT professional have? A (26) There is a requirement for Technical Support rather than Information Technology Support. Amendment 0002 restated Information Technology Support to Technology Support to match the PWS paragraphs 4.9.1. Q (27) Will the government allow additional labor categories such as Program/Project Managers? PWS paragraph 4.9.4.2 specifically identifies PM function but no provision is made for a labor category to execute the requirement. A (27) Only those labor categories identified in RFP Attachment G, Proposed Loaded Labor Rates will be considered. PWS paragraph 4.9.4.2 only addresses management of data/files not perform program management functions. Q (28) Regarding the submission of proposals, Section L states "*All volumes shall be submitted in written form (1 copy) and CD-R or DVD-R (write once/read only) (1copy) that is "closed" so that no further writes can be made to the media." Does the government wish four separate CDs for each volume OR one CD containing all volumes? A (28) The Government has no preference submitting one CD with all volumes on it or multiple CDs with one volume on each. Q (29) Is the cost of contact required contractor training such as outlined in PWS paragraph 4.5.1, billable to the contract? A (29) Training is not separately billed Q (30) If so, will the government provide estimated man-hours to complete required per contractor personnel under each delivery order? Q (31) If not, will the government provide a CLIN to capture training costs? A (30 & 31 ) No, training is not separately billed Q (32) In Attachment B - Past Performance Questionnaire, the instructions say to call prior to faxing, however no point of contact or phone number is provided. Will the government please provide this POC information? A (32) Reference Block 7 on cover page of the solicitation. Q (33) Page 45 of the solicitation references FAR clause 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees, which states that, "As part of their proposals, offerors will submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract." In which volume would the Government like offerors to include a copy of their Total Professional Employee Compensation Plan; Volume I or Volume IV? A (33) Volume I Completed RFP Q (34) RFP Section L reference PWS Paragraph 4.12 with respect to security requirements. Should this reference actually be to PWS Paragraph 4.13? A (34) The correct reference is PWS paragraph 4.13. Correction has been addressed in amendment 0002. Q (35) After looking at the RFP, I see that the NAICS code used is a $7M size standard. We had recommended the NAICS code 541330, "Military and Aerospace Equipment and Military Weapons" $27M size standard be used. If the current NAICS code is used, ___ cannot bid as a 8(a) small business. Is there a chance the 541330 NAICS code "Military and Aerospace Equipment and Military Weapons" $27M size standard can be used to broaden the competition. ____could bid with this code. A (35) The NAICS code referenced in the RFP will be maintained. Q (36) On page 50 of the Solicitation, paragraph (5) it states that the Offeror shall send out the Questionnaires and not delegate. Are the critical subcontractors allowed to send their own questionnaires to their Customers and track? A (36) RFP page 50 states "The responsibility to send out and track the completion of the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires rests solely with the offeror - i.e., it shall not be delegated to any other entity." Q (37) The PWS is non-specific with regard to levels of support - that is, it is absent any quantitative or schedule references to the number of aircraft and/or modifications to be supported, the number and types of material purchases to be performed, or the number an duration of the meetings to be supported - all of which are necessary to project the appropriate level of support for the scope of the effort. Please provide the government's estimate for these activities or, alternatively, provide historical data from previous years that could be used as one input in projecting the required support. A (37) This will be provided on the task order basis Q (38) Section L D 5 of the solicitation states, "The Offeror shall send out - and track the completion of - the present/Past Performance Questionnaires to each of the offeror's, critical subcontractors', teaming contractors' and/or joint venture partners; Points of Contact identified in each FACTS Sheet. The responsibility to send out and track the completion of the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires rests solely with the offeror - i.e., it shall not be delegated to any other entity." Given that the subcontractors have established relationships with their POCs, would it be acceptable to have the Subcontractor submit their Past Performance Questionnaires to their POCs, or would that be considered a violation of the delegation prohibition contained in the above clause? A (38) Violation - Offerors need to send in accordance with the following statement: "The responsibility to send out and track the completion of the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires rests solely with the offeror - i.e., it shall not be delegated to any other entity."
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/USAF/AFMC/WRALC/FA8505-10-R-21787/listing.html)
- Record
- SN02308775-W 20101010/101008233936-2435015745be85fea8e3071326d26b33 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |