Inactive Total Small Business Set-Aside (FAR 19.5)

Combined Synopsis Solicitation – Maintenance and Repair of Overhead Cranes and Hoists Response Date: 24 Feb 2022 at 12:00 PM MST Solicitation No: W9124R-22-R-0003 Amendment 0002 PLEASE NOTE THE NOTICE... Combined Synopsis Solicitation – Maintenance and Repair of Overhead Cranes and Hoists Response Date: 24 Feb 2022 at 12:00 PM MST Solicitation No: W9124R-22-R-0003 Amendment 0002 PLEASE NOTE THE NOTICE ID NUMBER IS NOT THE SOLICITATION NUMBER. Amendment 0003 is issued on February 22, 2022. Questions and Answers for Solicitation W9124R-22-R-0003. We are hoping to find out if there is (was) an incumbent contractor performing these services, or if this is a brand new contract. If there is an incumbent, could you please provide the current/ previous contract number? Answer: This is a follow-on contract for Yuma Proving Ground. The current contract number W9124R-16-P-0052 . 2. In some cases, an issue with a crane or hoist is not always clear. When is the damage or failure the fault of the customer or the contractor? Example: the pendant has a crack it and the inspection are marked FAIL. Now the contractor says it is a damage caused by the customer. The customer disagrees and says the pendant is old and time has caused the crack. Another example: a hoist motor has stopped working. The contractor says the customer continuously overloaded the hoist and the damage is not under contract. The customer says no that is not true, the to be hoisted material/weight is never more than that of the capacity of the hoist. Contractor must repair under contract. Who at the end decides the outcome? Answer: To answer the overarching question as to "Who at the end decides the outcome?" Competent/Qualified personnel (Quality Assurance Evaluators (QAEs)) shall be involved in discussions prior to final decision(s). After discussion(s), the ultimate decision shall lie with the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) and the Contracting Officer (KO) based upon the evidence that is presented by the contractor and confirmed or refuted by the QAE. Again, if there is no or insufficient evidence presented, the contractor shall be responsible for repairs. 3. The inspection is scheduled to take place, but an event prohibits the entering for the contractor to visit a crane or hoist. Now the scheduled time is much greater than anticipated. Who carries the cost for this delay? Careful and preplanned scheduling should prevent unexpected events and the question asked is a very rare. The inspections are a firm fixed CLIN on the contract and without any leeway. If this is anticipated, the contractor should bid accordingly. 4. One of the mission critical cranes needs a repair. The contractor's business workload does not allow for a quick solution. YPG finds out that the contractor is stalling. What can or will happen? Answer: If delayed response for the crane repairs does not pose an issue for YPG, a concession may be made by the COR. If a concession is not realized, regardless of the reason the contractor is not on site within the contractually obligated timeframe for response in addressing the issue(s), the COR shall report to the KO that the contractor has failed to meet the requirement of the contract. 5. After the start date of the new contract, what happens to items that are still the previous contractor issues/repairs/failures? The previous contractor repaired an expensive Frequency Drive just a week before the end of the contract. The drive fails a month later and the new contractor has determined that the drive failed because of improper installation. This failure is also verified by the drive manufacturer and refused to repair the drive under warranty. The previous contractor claims not responsible. What is the response from YPG? Answer: If the contractor who is awarded the follow on contract is the incumbent contractor, the incumbent contractor shall be responsible for all their previous work with the warranties as issued by the incumbent contractor and/or manufacturer. On the follow on contract, if any failures are suspected to be the fault of the previous/incumbent contractor, clear evidence supporting/proving the reason for failure shall be provided to the QAE/COR/KO and if accepted, the current contractor will not be responsible for the cost of repairs. The new contractor will likely be asked to make such repairs under the CLIN that handles repairs outside of normal wear and tear.