Responses to Questions Received at the

**TSSC-III Bidders\' Conference 27-28 February 2001 in Atlanta, GA**

**Web Site Notice:** At the TSSC III Bidders\' Conference, several
attendees made a comment to the effect that the TSSC III contract should
provide a fee structure for Davis Bacon subcontracted efforts. We would
like the persons/companies who made these comments to provide their
rationale, keeping in mind that many, if not most, of the costs
associated with Davis Bacon subcontracting are labor hours which ARE
considered in establishing the maximum award fee amount for a
performance evaluation period. In addition, many other costs, such as
legal costs, may be included in indirect and/or G&A fee pools.

1.  [Security]{.underline}: Please describe what assistance the TSSSC
    III Program Management Office (PMO) will provide to the TSSC III
    contractor in speeding the approval for FAA Security clearances and
    badging of TSSC III contractor employees for both FAA facilities and
    for on-airport access.

**Answer:** The PMO has no ability to change or influence security
procedures. Airport access is controlled by each airport in compliance
with FAA regulations. Employees in need of airport badges fill out
airport forms to obtain badges that are controlled by the airport
authority. The few delays experienced by FAA contractors in obtaining
badges have been due to incomplete or inaccurate data provided by the
contractor employee(s).

2.  [Environmental Liability]{.underline}: Are we correct in our
    assumption that any liability for environmental damage that has
    occurred at sites is the FAA\'s liability, not the contractor\'s
    liability?

**Answer:** Liability for pre-existing conditions will not be
transferred to the TSSC III contractor. However, the TSSC III contractor
will be responsible for conditions caused during the execution of a TSSC
III work release.

3.  [Award Fee]{.underline}: If actual hours performed in a period
    exceed the estimated total award fee hours for the period, will the
    total award fee pool for the period be adjusted higher as well?

**Answer:** Yes. See provision B.4.0(e). For example, if the actual
hours worked exceeds the estimated number of hours by 5 percent, the
maximum award fee pool will also be increased by 5 percent.

4.  [Combining Tasks]{.underline}: Have you entertained rolling up
    individual work releases into one composite task for a period, e.g.,
    one year might be easier for you?

**Answer:** The contract is structured to accommodate this. As the ANI
organization matures and the annual work plan concept is fully
implemented, consolidation of tasks is anticipated. However, for the
immediate future we continue to anticipate individual work releases.

5.  [TSSC II List]{.underline}: Will FAA make names and addresses of
    present primes, subs, and consultants to the (TSSC III) awardee?

**Answer:** No, the FAA does not intend to release the current list of
prime contractor, subcontractors, or consultants.

6.  [Cost of Money]{.underline}: How does the contractor team recover
    their \"cost of money\" for funds advanced for material procurements
    and/or subcontractor \"down payments\"?

**Answer:** The TSSC III contractor may submit monthly invoices for
actual material procurements and all other incurred reasonable,
allowable, and allocable costs. Monthly invoicing minimizes the time
factor for cost of money to the contractor\'s invoicing cycle.

7.  [Discussions]{.underline}: Are any further discussion opportunities
    scheduled other than technical clarifications/questions submitted
    through the FAA web page?

**Answer:** No other conferences are scheduled. Please submit any
questions or comments via the TSSC III web site. Individual meetings may
be arranged with the FAA at any offeror's request; however, official
questions and answers to the solicitation are preferred via the web
site.

8.  [National vs. regional WRs]{.underline}: What is the relative
    relationship (in terms of percentages of contract dollars or staff
    hours) between National work releases and regional work releases?

**Answer:** The amount of dollars and hours represented by National Work
Releases (NWRs) vary over time, depending on agency requirements. On
previous TSSC contracts, we have had national technical work releases
that exceeded \$60 million each. The technical NWRs currently represent
approximately 10 percent of the total technical dollars of the contract.
Although technical NWRs are at a rather low level at present, there is a
distinct possibility of greater National or Engineering Center Platform
type work releases with the new ANI organization. However, the numbers
of National versus Regional work releases should have no bearing on your
proposal. Be sure to follow the directions in the RFO/SIR in submitting
your proposal.

9.  [National vs. regional PM]{.underline}: How does the amount of
    contract management efforts compare (or is anticipated) between
    national program management and regional program management?

**Answer:** All contract management effort is included in the national
program management (NPM) WR. Management and management support costs
associated with regional/local work releases, their facility and related
costs, and work planning of preliminary work releases is included within
the NPM WR. There are no program management costs associated with
regional or local work releases.

10. [Non-Wage Determination Positions]{.underline}: Due to the large
    amount of wage determination positions (low salaries) the existing
    contractor has reportedly shown extremely low profit. Will there be
    increased number of non-wage (higher salaried) positions in the
    follow-on contract?

**Answer:** Potential offerors should review Attachment L1, which gives
the anticipated yearly number of hours for each labor category. Fee is
not directly related to labor rates.

11. [Subcontracting Goals]{.underline}: What are the subcontracting
    goals for the TSSC III contract and what subcontracts are counted
    toward meeting those goals?

**Answer:** Clause H.6.1 establishes the goals for subcontracting
expressed as a percentage of subcontracting subject to the Davis Bacon
Act as:

> Goal for subcontracting to small business is 45% of the total dollar
> subcontracted
>
> Goal for small disadvantaged business is 10% of the 45%
>
> Goal for women owned business is 5% of the 45%.
>
> However, ***all*** first tier subcontracts awarded under the TSSC III
> contract will be counted toward meeting the goals.

12. [Subcontracting]{.underline}: What guidance, if any, will the
    successful offeror follow in its subcontracting activities?

**Answer:** Offerors will detail their subcontracting program in the
subcontract management plan and will be required to follow that program.

13. [TSSC II Property]{.underline}: Is any FAA owned property procured
    under the TSSC II contract available to the prospective TSSC prime
    contractor?

**Answer:** No. Initially, the prime would still be using the equipment.
In all probability, only a few personal computers and some old furniture
are owned by the Government and would probably be retired after the TSSC
II contract expires.

14. [Training]{.underline}: What type of training is envisioned for FAA
    personnel?

**Answer:** The FAA anticipates possible course development and/or
classroom training sessions for personnel safety, hazardous materials,
equipment installation techniques, equipment maintenance, CAEG, software
systems, etc.

15. [Award Fee]{.underline}: Will the performance evaluation plan (PEP)
    provide factors that will allow the prime contractor to
    appropriately apportion award fee for management, work release
    performance, socioeconomic subcontracting, Davis-Bacon
    subcontracting, etc.?

**Answer:** There will be factors in the PEP to determine the overall
award fee for the prime contractor, based on overall performance on the
contract. Within that award fee determination, the prime is free to
apportion the fee among its teammates/labor subcontractors in whatever
manner the prime chooses or in accordance with whatever the teammates
have agreed to.

The Davis-Bacon subcontracting will be based upon a competitively
awarded, fixed price format. Each of these subcontractor's bid price
will include a profit for his/her company and any flow-down construction
subcontracts. Flown down of the TSSC III award fee to these Davis-Bacon
subcontractors is not envisioned.

16. [Fee on Davis Bacon]{.underline}: Is Davis Bacon work included in
    the fee pool? (See related question and Web Site Notice)

**Answer:** See answer to Q&A #17, below.

17. [Fee on Davis Bacon]{.underline}: Can you or will you provide
    rationale supporting no fee recovery on Davis Bacon? (See related
    question and web site notice).

**Answer:** The available award fee pool is determined based on labor
hours expended. Therefore, prime and subcontract labor effort expended
in the management of Davis Bacon work WILL contribute to the award fee
pool. Conversely, the profit associated with Davis Bacon work is
included in the fixed price construction bids and subcontracts.

Our initial rationale for allowing no fee recovery on Davis-Bacon
subcontracts is that all TSSC III labor hours to define the design and
specification, solicitation and award, management, and resident engineer
functions associated with these subcontract(s) generate labor hours,
which increase the TSSC III contractor's award feel pool. Any subsequent
costs, such as liability, litigation, etc., are covered by corporate
indirect or G&A rates (or by subsequent DCAA rate adjustments). The
program risk to the TSSC III contractor is considered to be minimal.

However, due to the questions received on this subject, the FAA may
reconsider its position on this subject. Please see the Web Site Notice
on this, below. Our final position will be posted in the final RFO/SIR,
due to be released by approximately March 30, 2001.

18. [Number of PWRs]{.underline}: The NPM Work Release for the first 12
    months requires identification of technical work planning
    (developing work plans from preliminary work releases) in cost
    exhibit 2. The question is, will the FAA provide the number of
    preliminary work releases anticipated during the first 12 months in
    order to level the playing field?

**Answer:** Yes, the FAA will provide these numbers in the final
RFO/SIR.

19. [National vs. regional WRs]{.underline}: How is coordination between
    national work release efforts and regional work release efforts
    accomplished?

**Answer:** For any national WR, the FAA national program manager for a
Capital Investment Plan (CIP) program coordinates, via his/her
Integrated Program Team (IPT), with the ANI Engineering Center and the
Implementation Center (IC) Platform Manager for planned F&E work. Beyond
this brief description, we would wish for the TSSC III offeror to
describe its proposed coordination in more detail in the appropriate
Management Plan in the Management/technical plan proposal.

20. [Incumbent]{.underline}: The incumbent contractor logically will
    have start up costs far below the costs facing other offerors.
    Including these costs as part of the cost evaluation would seem to
    penalize companies who need to incur transition and start up costs.

**Answer:** The incumbent may have some inherent advantage for certain
aspects of the TSSC III start up. The FAA has tried to level the playing
field as much as possible for all offerors by inserting the same bid
costs for travel, labor category and hour estimates, etc.

21. [Subcontracting Goals]{.underline}: How are subcontracting
    socioeconomic goals calculated with regard to recognizing a
    subcontractor\'s activity? Does the prime contractor receive credit
    for its subcontractor\'s utilization of small, small disadvantaged
    or women owned business?

**Answer:** Please see our answer to a previous question (#11) on this
subject.

22. [Award Fee]{.underline}: We are proposing an award fee against an
    unknown PEP that may include a higher proposed award fee than
    otherwise. In view of this, might you consider an option by offerors
    to propose a base fee up to 3 percent as an element of overall fee?

**Answer:** No base fee structure will be considered. Award fee shall be
determined in accordance with RFO/SIR Sections B and H.

23. [Socioeconomic Goals]{.underline}: Are SDB Goals for Davis-Bacon
    contracts only?

**Answer:** Please see our answer to a previous question (#11) on this
subject.

24. [Award Fee]{.underline}: The contractor has several concerns
    regarding the lack of a proposed Performance Evaluation Plan and the
    limited base for award fee opportunity. This combination presents an
    extremely difficult business case to present to justify bidding the
    TSSC3 program. The following questions are provided for the FAA\'s
    consideration on these topics:

25. Request that a proposed or draft PEP be provided for use during the
    proposal preparation process. This is especially important when
    preparing the Subcontractor Management Plan that requires a method
    for allocating award fee to the subcontractors. Preparation of this
    plan without the guidance of the PEP presents a
    challenge/unidentifiable risk for both the contractor and its
    subcontractor. With regard to the basis for award fee, limiting
    application of award fee to the actual hours worked yields a
    possible profit calculation that is less than adequate to justify
    pursuing this opportunity. Will the FAA consider authorizing profit
    for the prime contractor to reward the management of its main
    subcontractors, the Davis-Bacon subcontractors, the non-Davis Bacon
    subcontractors, the travel allocation, or the other direct costs
    activity defined in L.20.3.5?

**Answer:** The FAA may reconsider its position on fee for Davis-Bacon
subcontracting; our final position will be reflected in the final
RFO/SIR. However, we do not anticipate making any changes in the award
fee structure, based on the actual number of labor hours worked. Award
fee earned will be based on performance and apportioned to
subcontractors/teammates in whatever manner the prime chooses or in
accordance with whatever the teammates have agreed to.

26. [Costs]{.underline}: Schedule B does not reflect an input for the
    Other Direct Costs identified in Section L. Is this an oversight? In
    addition, there is no evaluation associated with the costs proposed
    for L.20.3.5 - Other Direct Costs. Are these correct assessments?
    The RFO/SIR refers to the Model Contract document in several
    locations. When is this document scheduled for release?

**Answer:** Section B should read "Total Estimated Costs", not "Total
Estimated Cost for Direct Labor". The correct language will appear in
the final RFO/SIR. All costs associated with an offeror's proposal will
be considered in the cost evaluation.

27. [Fee]{.underline}: The contractor is concerned that there is no base
    fee available in the TSSC3 SIR. This contractor recommends you add a
    base fee. Will the FAA consider a base fee in the award fee
    structure?

**Answer:** No. See answer to this in previous questions.

28. [Proposals]{.underline}: What is the rationale for having both
    written submissions and oral presentations on the technical
    scenarios and management plans? Is the expectation that the oral
    presentations will contain material over and above what is contained
    in the written submission?

**Answer:** We have revised our thinking on this matter and will require
only written submissions for the three technical scenarios and either a
written submission or an oral presentation, but not both, on each of the
six management plans. Which of the six plans will be presented orally
will be specified in the final RFO/SIR.