12445123R0005_6_7 ARKANSAS Questions Asked As Of 03232023.doc

COMMENTS MATRIX FOR USDA-FS ISSUANCES: 12445123R0005/67 ARKANSAS Road Construction MATOC (Please read instructions on back before completing form.)

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: Is there an attendees list?

Resolution: Companies phoning in today are: Jonett 479-8588478 and Syte Corp 224-714-9712. Other call ins included: Ben Gentry, Ozark Engineer / Sammie McDowell, Oauchita Engineer, Cynthia Granderson, CO, Steve Alves, CO 859-334-0524

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: What was the prior contract’s rough award values?

Resolution: The rough estimate from memory:

Ouachita was roughly $5M-6M over five years

Ozark/St Francis was roughly $3M-$4M over five years In the past Ozark/St Francis were combined so I do not have a breakdown

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: What was the majority of the previous work?

Resolution: majority was culvert replacements. There were a few small bridge projects but those were not the “norm”.

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: What is the “normal” price range on the task orders?

Resolution: Generally speaking, most of CSA awards are below the $250K SAP level. We do, on occasion, have orders that exceed that limit. Example: LA had several years of road work backlogged and that task order exceeded SAP.

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: CPAR/PPQ: Can the CPAR duplicate the PPQ?

Resolution: Generally speaking, it’s a strategy question. When they duplicate each other, it may not be wise if you are maximizing showing your experience if they relay the same message. If you do not have a CPAR your rated as neutral. The PPQ and relevancy questionnaire become more central.

USDA-FS for 005/6/7 will allow the same CPAR/PPQ submittal for each solicitation versus creating unique packages for each solicitation. This should save the contractor time and money!

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: Does it matter the “type of money” being used?

Resolution: barring restriction on use, the MATOCs will not differentiate. The standard spec may change, example DOT/ERFO money versus forest funds.

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: Why was this not a pre-priced IDIQ? Are these “mandatory”?

Resolution: Because of the large variance swings in the (1) economy and more important (2) the individual construction requirements, the Forest/CO decided that a competitive MATOC was more representative to the community in terms of current pricing and competition. While not mandatory, current internal FS policy is to use exiting contract in place first. This does not preclude the use of socio-eco set asides as needed.

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: Market Research using FPDS-NG? What is it?

Resolution: any contract written by the federal government over key dollar values is reported to Congress. The information is open public knowledge at https://www.fpds.gov/fpdsng_cms/index.php/en/ By using the ezSearch in the center of the screen, you can see awards, modification across the entire federal gov.

Example: Search using naics “237310” you can see the entire roads budget obligated.

In the left hand corner, you can sort by Agency

In the right hand corner, you can download the data in a spreadsheet.

There are other sort functions that can further help for your specific needs.

Why is this important? See Changes Next Question!

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: What has changed on these MATOCs versus 2018?

Resolution: Good question!!!

Following USDA policy, these MATOC are open to ALL USDA contracting officers

- Since COs for Rural Development/FPAC/APHIS/ARS do not contract on National Forests, the state of Arkansas is divided into three zones: North- Ozark / South – Ouachita / East -St Francis.

- If RD needs a road/culvert project in Ft Smith, they could solicit the project to that vendor pool!

- If FPAC has a road restoration in Fayetteville, they could solicit the project to that vendor pool!

The overall MATOC ceiling value has been increased accordingly to account for other USDA service use

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: For new task orders Davis Bacon Act Resolution: Be careful when bidding new task orders in 2023. The DOL has updated the DBA/SCA WDOL and some changes were significant.

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: Deadline for sample project and SF1442 for base Resolution:

12445123R0005 Arkansas North OZARK 14 April 2023 12445123R0006 Arkansas South Ouachita 17 Apr 2023

12445123R0007 ARKANSAS EAST ST FRANCIS 19 Apr 2023

PRESOLICITATION CALL IN 03/22/23

Bidder Comment: Sample project submittal Resolution: There were no actual projects available to bid so we are using a sample project that was awarded in the past. This allows two things: 1. We can see what the impact of inflation is and 2. We get realistic ROM pricing for comparison purpose on the MATOC **DO NOT OVERTHINK the sample. There is no site visit or technical calls. You will not be held to that price since it’s a sample. Be realistic but do not expend huge amounts of time on it.

Bidder Comment:

Bidder Comment:

Bidder Comment:

INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING SD FORM 818

Coordinating OSD Component: Use this form to provide consolidated critical and substantive comments to the OSD Component that originated the issuance. Complete the classification header and footer, columns 1 through 5, and the first two entries in column 6. REVIEW THE COMMENTS, resolve any conflicting views, AND CONFIRM THAT THE COMPLETED MATRIX ACCURATELY REPRESENTS YOUR COMPONENT’S POSITIOn. Upload the form to the DoD Directives Program Portal in microsoft word format, with a scanned copy of the sign SD Form 106, “DoD Directives Program Coordination Record,” or coordination memorandum.

Originating OSD Component: Use this form to consolidate comments from all coordinators and to record adjudication of the comments. (To add comments from an SD 818 submitted by a coordinator, use the “Copy” and “Paste” tools on the Microsoft Word Standard Toolbar.) When consolidating comments, place them in the order of the pages/paragraphs they apply to (e.g., all comments from all coordinators that apply to page 1, paragraph 1.a., should be grouped together as the initial entries; all comments that apply to page 1, paragraph 1.b., should be grouped together next, and so on). Complete column 7 and the third entry in column 6. Adjust the classification header and footer and columns 1 and 2 as appropriate.

Classification – Enter the highest classification of the comments. If all are unclassified, mark the header and footer accordingly and ignore the column.

Column 1 – Enter the number of the comment. Enter comments in the order of the pages/paragraphs they apply to.

Column 2 – Enter the classification of the comment. If all comments are unclassified, mark the header and footer accordingly and ignore the column.

Column 3 – Enter the appropriate information.

Column 4 – Enter the appropriate information.

Column 5 – Enter the appropriate information.

Column 6 – Enter the comment type. Place only one comment per row. Do not include administrative comments concerning non-substantive aspects of an issuance, such as dates of references, organizational symbols, and/or grammatical errors.

(C) Critical: When a Component has one or more critical comments, that Component’s coordination shall reflect a nonconcur. THE JUSTIFICATION FOR CRITICAL COMMENTS MUST IDENTIFY:

– Violations of the law or contradictions of Executive Branch policy or of policy established in DoD issuances. The GC, DoD, or his or her representative shall identify legal objections as critical comments.

– Unnecessary risks to safety, life, limb, or DoD materiel; waste or abuse of DoD appropriations; or imposition of an unreasonable burden on a Component’s resources.

(S) Substantive: Substantive comments are made when a section in the issuance appears to be or is potentially unnecessary, incorrect, misleading, confusing, or inconsistent with other sections, or when a Component disagrees with the proposed responsibilities, requirements, and/or procedures. A substantive comment is usually not sufficient justification for a Component to nonconcur on an issuance. Several substantive comments when taken together may be grounds for a nonconcurrence.

Column 7 – Coordinating Component: Enter the comment in the area provided. Enter your justification for the comment and your requested or recommended changes in the area provided. YOU MUST PROVIDE CONVINCING SUPPORT FOR CRITICAL COMMENTS IN THE JUSTIFICATION.

– Originating Component: Enter your justification for disposition of the comment in the area provided. Include any related communications with the coordinating Component. You must provide convincing support for rejecting critical comments.

Column 8 – Enter whether you accepted (A), rejected (R), or partially accepted (P) the comment. Your justification for disposition of the comment in column 6 must be consistent with this entry.

PAGE

SD FORM 818, JAN 09

PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE