EP2AE - Q R 12- 44 - 28 Jan 10.doc

Environmental planning, Programming, and architect-engineer services

Ref No.: FA0021-10-R-0001 Post: Qs & Rs - # 12 – 44. Date: 28 Jan 10 RFI Questions and Responses ***Below responses supersede previously posted responses to similar questions.***

12. Question: According to the SS/RFI on the FedBizOpps, Prime contracts will contain Firm-Fixed Price, Time-and-Material, Labor-Hour, and Cost-Reimbursable Contract Line Items (CLINs); however in Section II. ADVERTISEMENT, subsection b. Scope of Services, paragraph d. Cost Range, Limitations, and General Information, subparagraph (5) (d) Maximum Fully Burdened Labor Rates – Requirement for payment of “maximum” FBLRs, the government outlines a maximum and a reduced FBLR which will “vary commensurate with “base rates” paid to employees.” This scenario is indicative of a cost plus percentage of cost scenario which is an unallowable contract type in accordance with the FAR Part 16, i.e. as costs go up, the amount billed goes up. There is no incentive to contain costs. Does the government intend to award a prime contract which will contain Firm Fixed Price, Time and Material, Labor-Hour, and Cost-Reimbursable Contract Line Items (CLINs) regardless of the “base rate” paid to employees which places the risk on the contractor to contain costs; or does the government intend to award a Prime contract as a Cost Plus contract which will allow for the fluctuation of costs as indicated?

Response: Your interpretation is inaccurate. The terms of this contract are clear and reasonable. Compliance with the Government’s obligation to pay what a “prudent” [shrewd/frugal] person would pay is required. Below is an example of a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) labor proposal. “Hours” are estimated and FBLR labor rates are one “maximum” and one “reduced,” FBLRs are based on “hourly rate” paid the employees. The example shows “amount awarded/paid” vs. “actual expense” to the contractor. The FFP aspect is the Government pays what is determined fair and reasonable and awarded. If the project is complete using less hours, the Government still pays the awarded amount. And, if the project takes more hours than awarded, the Government pays the awarded amount. This is the FFP aspect of the contract. Vacancy credits are explained in response #21 below.

Period of Performance:

1 Apr – 30 Oct 10 (7-months)

Maximum FBLR Architect Mid level:

$40.73

Proposed & Awarded FFP Labor

1 Apr 10 – 30 Oct 10

Total Paid (FFP)

$45,750.40

Actual Labor Expended

Actual Expended

$33,384.20

Difference (Profit)

$12,366.202

1 FBLR is reduced based on “actual” base rate/hourly rate paid the employee.

2 The difference could be “negative” if more hours are expended than proposed/awarded.

13. Question: Section II. ADVERTISEMENT, subsection d. Cost Range, Limitations, and General Information, paragraph f referencing “escalated base rate” requiring the Contractor to increase the employee base rate does not allow for increases in costs in other areas such as overhead, G&A, benefits, etc. and this requirement crosses the personal services threshold between government and contractor when the government prescribes pay. This section also addresses protecting the Government from overpayment of profit; the use of profit/fee is a measure of risk during the negotiations. Once a price is fixed, the burdened is on the contractor to reduce costs to increase profit except for Cost plus, yet the RFI states most task orders are anticipated to be firm fixed price so this appears to be in conflict of the contactor bearing the risk and receiving the reward if managed properly. We request that this language be removed in order to remove any conflict of personal services on behalf of contractor employees and unallowable contract types.

Response: Your interpretation is inaccurate. The terms of this contract are clear and reasonable. Profit will be negotiated to a fair and reasonable percentage prior to award of IDIQ contracts. Profit will also be fixed for the 5-year period. Profit is based on risk, and there is low to no risk anticipated on projects required for this acquisition. In the event a projects is determined unsuitable for use of FFP labor, awards will be made using labor hour or T&M as applicable with not to exceed cost identified. Keep in mind, the Government is required to pay what a “prudent” [shrewd/frugal] person would pay; and response to the SS/RFI is voluntary.

14. Question: Section II. ADVERTISEMENT, subsection d. Cost Range, Limitations, and General Information, paragraph h references requires G&A to be in the FBLR calculation, this conflicts with our DCAA approved accounting system rules. This requires a contractor to use the value added method to determine G&A which results in a higher cost on all labor. We request that this language be removed and that each contractor’s system be evaluated on a case by case basis as determined by the DCAA.

Response: Your interpretation is inaccurate. Please have your DCAA rep contact this office directly if further discussion is requested to clarity your question/request. Also, cost/price is not a factor at this time and will only be a factor for the most highly qualified firms receiving an RFP.

15. Question: Section III. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, paragraph d., SECTION I – Market Research Questionnaire, Subsection 1.1 Professional Qualifications, this section requires that only the prime contractor complete, yet large businesses are required to submit a small business subcontracting plan. By requiring only the prime contractor’s qualifications to be considered in this section the government is restricting competition and impeding large businesses from securing superior small business subcontractors and presenting their qualifications in the proposal for consideration. This is what the small subcontracting goals are intended to do: which is to allow small business to gain experience and thus increase competition. We request to have subcontractor’s qualifications demonstrated and the requirement for “not-subcontracted” be removed from this section.

Response: MRQ 1.1 will be used to determine the “depth” of the professional qualifications of the Prime Contractor. The intent of this requirement is to ensure that the Prime Contractor employs "qualified" Project Managers (PMs) to administer task orders or perform the work in-house. It is not intended to limit the use of qualified small business firms as subcontractors. Rather, by requiring the prime to employ qualified PMs, the Government can be assured that the Prime is qualified to hire "qualified" SB firms to use as subcontractors.

16. Question: Section III. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, paragraph d., SECTION I – Market Research Questionnaire, Subsection 1.1 Professional Qualifications, the date for the qualifications is 14 Oct 2009, and this date does not coincide with the submission of the proposal. We request that the date for the qualifications be the submission date of the proposal?

Response: The date is changed to 21 Dec 09.

17. Question: On the market research questionnaire in solicitation FA0021-10-R-0001, section 4.1 indicates that “firms receiving marginal or unsatisfactory scores in PPIRS within the last 3 years will be considered non-competitive.” By the word “scores” in that sentence do you mean firms that have a poor track record and regularly receive marginal and unsatisfactory ratings would be disqualified, or do you mean that a firm no matter how large, with just one marginal rating out of hundreds of ratings in the last three years, would be disqualified? Please clarify or delete the text after the asterisk in question 4.1 “firms receiving marginal or unsatisfactory scores in PPIRS within the last 3 years will be considered non-competitive.”

Response: See revised MRQ, Past Performance, Section 3.1.

18. Question: Section I b. Comply with page limitations identified in the MRQ for attachments. Information provided in excess of the page limitations shall not be reviewed. With the exception of the page limitations identified in the MRQ for attachments, please confirm there are no other page limitations for the offerors response.

Response: See revised Announcement, Section III SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, item c. Organization / Page Limitations

19. Question: Section II c. Type of Contract. The Government anticipates award of up to four (4) IDIQ prime contracts to the most highly qualified firms to perform required services. Is it the Government’s intent to compete task orders with the four awardees or will RFPs be sent directly?

Response: Reference revised announcement Section II ADVERTISEMENT, item g. Selection Procedures, (2) Task Orders.

20. Question: Section II d (5) (a) Up to six (6) of the most highly qualified firms will receive a Request for Proposal (RFP). The RFP will require firms to complete a cost proposal workbook prepared by the Government in Microsoft EXCEL. The cost workbook identifies required labor categories and requires input of "base rates" for each labor category and "indirect rates" used to calculate maximum FBLRs. Are the fixed labor rates to be included only for those personnel included in Section E of the proposal or are these rates inclusive of any potential personnel that may work on this IDIQ?

Response: The categories will not only be for personnel listed in Section E of the SF 330.

Reference revised announcement Section II ADVERTISEMENT, item g. Selection Procedures.

21a. Question: Section II (d) (5) (g) discusses Vacancy Credits. Please provide further clarification regarding the “vacancy credit” requirement.

Response: If the Government requires a full-time contractor employee; or if the contractor proposes a full-time contractor employee to perform a task the contractor will propose the “Total Productive Work Year (TPWY)” times “Fully Burdened Labor Rate (FBLR)” of the Labor Category/Employee proposed to calculate labor cost for the year. If the employee leaves the position/firm for whatever reason and the position becomes vacant prior to the end of the task, the Government will reduce labor payments for the workdays the position is vacant. Once the position is filled with an equally or higher qualified individual (approved by the CO prior to filling the position) full labor payments will resume. Example*:

Performance Period:

1 Apr 10 – 31 Mar 11 (1-year) Total Workdays (weekends & holidays not included):

TPWY:

1,880 (2080 hrs – holiday, vacation, other hrs) Work hours per day:

7.372 (1,880 TPWY / 255 workdays) *Formula used to calculate vacancy credits will be submitted by the firm and approved by the CO prior to use.

Proposed & Awarded FFP Labor

1 Apr 10 – 31 Mar 10

Total (FFP)

$72,373.20

Vacancy Credits

Vacancy Credit

Vacancy Credit

1 Fill-time employee firm uses TPWY times FBLR to calculate FFP labor cost for the year.

2 FBLR is “reduced” based on “actual” base rate/hourly rate paid the employee.

3 Employee’s last workday.

4 New employee’s start date.

Example:

Monthly Credit Calculation: Days x Hrs Per Day x FBLR = Vacancy Credit Amount 22 x 7.372 x $35.03 = $5,681.73 8 x 7.372 x $35.03 = $2,066.08

Example of Monthly Payments with Vacancy Credits

1-31 Jul 10

1-31 Aug 10

1-30 Sep 10

1-31 Oct 10

1-31 Nov 10 etc.

21b. Question: Does the Government intend to use this contract to augment on-site staff?

Response: No, not at this time.

22. Question: Section II g. Significant Evaluation Factors. Are the Significant Evaluation Factors listed in order of importance (i.e., is Professional Qualifications weighted more than Specialized Experience and Technical Competence)?

Response: Reference revised announcement Section II Advertisement, item f. Evaluation Factors.

23. Question: Section III a: Submit original, five (5) copies, and a CD (containing the entire package) of the following documents. Please confirm if PDF is the desired format for the CD copy of the proposal submittal

Response: PDF is the desired format for all docs except EXCEL docs. Save EXCEL worksheets as EXCEL docs, not in PDF format.

24. Question: In reference to Section 2.2. of the questionnaire. “Does the prime contractor have successful, recent (within 3-years) past performance for the Air Force in the primary task areas? Only provide two examples for each of the task areas listed.” Please clarify whether a project submitted for SF330 Part 1(f) can be an IDIQ contract and/or an individual task order on a contract.

Response: If you intend to submit an IDIQ contract reference as relevant past performance you must identify the relevant task order(s) for each of the primary task areas. You may not submit more than eight (8) total task order references.

25. Question: Solicitation 2 (g) (4) Past Performance - The prime contractor and/or team members/subcontractors (as applicable) shall have recent (within 3-yrs), relevant, successful past performance on similar projects in all three (3) task areas performed for the Air Force, other Government agencies, and/or private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules. The evaluation criteria for the eight (8) prime project examples states that work performed in all three areas can be for the Air Force, other Governmental agencies and/or private industry. The questionnaire section 2.2 only states “for the Air Force.” Will other Services or BRAC (with AF involvement) projects be equally acceptable and scored as demonstrated experience for the purposes of this submittal?

Response: The MRQ’s intent is that Air Force work will receive a higher evaluation score than other DoD and private sector work. You may provide examples of DoD or private sector work if you do not have relevant Air Force past performance to submit.

26. Question: Our firm download the “Sources Sought (SS) / Request for Information (RFI) advertisement” in October 2009. We certainly considered submittal on this with a large business teaming partner, but collectively agreed that since it was not a “solicitation” that we would not expend the resources at this time. As you know it is very costly and time consuming submitting the requested information and we felt it better to wait for the official solicitation.

Response: A-E Service acquisitions are awarded differently than other acquisitions. The SS/RFI is posted to advertise HQ AFSOC requirements and request interested firms qualified to perform the services to submit their qualifications for evaluation. The four (4) firms determined most highly qualified to perform the requirements will receive an RFP. If your firm intend to be considered for possible receipt of an RFP, response to this announcement is required.

27. Question: Can you please clarify the submission requirements for this sources sought? The MRQ references Section III of the SS/RFI. Section III states in parenthesis (SB only this posting).

Response: The reference to “SB only this posting” is removed.

28. Question: Paragraph d under Section III lists several Sections for documents that includes a typical full SF 330 submission (ie: D-Organization Chart; E-Resumes, G, and H). Is a full SF330 proposal required for this submission, or just the relevant items related to the MRQ?

Response: Yes, a full SF 330 is required. See revised announcement Section III Submission Requirements, item c. Organization / Page Limitations.

29. Question: If a full SF 330 is required as part of this submission, are there page limits for the total SF 330, and/or individual SF 330 Sections (resumes and Sec H in particular)?

Response: See revised announcement Section III Submission Requirements, item c. Organization / Page Limitations.

30. Question: We would like to include a write-up on the work we completed last year, but the text and graphics for the final document are marked “For Official Use Only.” Do you or the or information security personnel for the unit the services were provided have concerns if we reproduce the report cover as a small graphic to include on our submittal cover?

Response: Contact the procuring CO and designated COR for the requirement to request permission to use the information you identified in your question.

31. Question: Section 2.2 of the Questionnaire asks "Does the prime contractor have successful, recent (within 3-years) past performance for the Air Force in the primary task areas? *To answer yes to this question, a firm must have completed the work under the company name provided above as the prime or subcontractor performing at least 50% of the requirement." One year ago, we acquired a firm with outstanding AF experience in one of the primary task areas. As written, the red lettering in 2.2 would not allow us to use recent projects completed by this firm since they would not have been completed under our company name. It's hard to believe that the intent of the red lettering is to preclude us from using the project experience of recently acquired firms. Therefore we would appreciate clarification. May we use in the SF 330 Part 1 Section F the projects completed within the last three years by the firm we acquired?

Response: By limiting past performance submittal as described in MRQ Section 2.2, the Air Force can be assured that firms submitting have a proven successful track record of internal management, cost and quality control.

32. Question: What are the Small Business Subcontracting Goals for this Unrestricted Sources Sought?

Response: There is no set percentage subcontracting goal for this acquisition. Reference revised announcement Section I General Information, c. Large Business Participation, Special Notice.

33a. Question: If the prime contractor has local resources and can perform 100% of the scope at or below the costs of a small business would this be considered a benefit to the government?

Response: Yes, as long as the cost is “below” what local SB can provide.

33b. Question: Or, based on question 2.8 would the AF rather LB subcontract the work to a local small business even if price and proximity to the base are the same?

Response: Yes, if price is at or below that of LB.

33c. Question: It would appear from the questionnaire that we would be downgraded based on questions 1.5, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 3.3, 3.4 if we did not have any Small Business partners formally listed in the proposal. Is this a correct assumption that a Large Business would be downgraded during the evaluation if they did not have SB teaming partners in this sources sought?

Response: Yes, firm proposing qualified SB subcontractors that provide the Government a cost savings will receive a higher score in reference to Section 5.2 of the MRQ.

34. Question: Clovis NM (location of Cannon AFB) is a city of approximately 30,000 people. Other larger metropolitan areas such as Albuquerque, Lubbock, and Amarillo are more than 60 miles from Clovis. Traditionally the many of the services requested in this RFP have been completed by firms in these cities and much further, since many of the specialties required in this RFP are not active in the Clovis area. Would you consider revising question 2.7 from a 60 mile to a 150 mile radius for Cannon AFB?

Response: No. Reference revised MRQ.

35. Question: What are the page limits for the proposal?

Response: This is a SS/RFI not an RFP. You are responding to the announcement not submitting a proposal. Reference revised announcement Section III Submission Requirements, c. Organization / Page Limitations.

36. Question: Can you provide the set of labor categories (the excel spreadsheet referred to in the solicitation) that will be provided to the 6 firms selected to receive the RFP, so that responders can see what the expected labor categories are should they be selected to receive the RFP?

Response: No. The EXCEL workbook will be provided to firms receiving an RFP.

37. Question: Under Evaluation Factor 1) Professional Qualifications (c), you indicate part of the evaluation will look at professional registration of key personnel. Do you require the project executives (Program Manager and Program Executive) to also be registered? We have interpreted your solicitation that all design team members and project managers must be registered or certified since they are directly involved in producing and sealing the documents. Please advise.

Response: No, only the Prime Contractor Project Manager and any subcontracted “team leaders” must hold current professional credentials in the subject areas of the specific TO.

38. Question: Please confirm the qualified small business preferred location is within 60 miles of Cannon AFB, NM and Hurlburt Field, FL? (Per paragraph 2.7 of the EP2AE Questionnaire)

Response: Yes, within 60 miles of Cannon AFB, NM and Hurlburt Field, FL.

39. Question: In order to receive maximum points under criteria item (5) LOCATION, do you want to see an SF330 Part II for our offices located near the installation where the work will occur or would you prefer to see a map of our office locations or have us list the address of a couple of offices near the installation?

Response: Only the locations of offices that will perform the task order work should be provided.

40. Question: Is it acceptable to use the AFSOC logo within our submittal (Org. chart, cover, page headers etc)?

Response: No, this organization has exclusive use of its approved heraldic emblem. Use of the AFSOC logo is prohibited.

41. Question: Reference Item 63, C.O.M. (if applicable). Is C.O.M. “Cost of Money" the same as “Facilities Capital Cost of Money?”

Response: Yes.

42. Question: You state that you would like firms to submit their SS/RFI responses in a "straight cut top tab" standard manila file folder. However, there is no reference as to how you would like us to secure the individual pages of our submission within that manila file folder. Can we use something to secure our document in each folder, such as an ACCO fastener? If that is not acceptable, how would you prefer us to secure our document to ensure that no pages inadvertently fall out?

Response: Reference revised announcement Section III Submission Requirements, item d. Cover. Any type fastener or method of binding is acceptable.

43a. Question Part I: As part of answering Question 2.2 on the Market Research Questionnaire, it states that the prime firm should provide their responses in Part I, Section F of the SF330, and that we are limited to 8 pages (2 projects per task area). Question 2.3 states the same instructions for the subcontractors' past performance. Does this mean that we are able to submit 8 projects (broken down by area) for the prime firm AND 8 projects for our subcontractors? Or are the prime firm and the subcontractors limited to only showing 8 projects for the team as a whole?

Response: Yes, eight (8) for the prime contractor and eight (8) for the subcontractor(s).

43b. Question: If we are able to provide 8 projects for the prime firm AND 8 projects for our subcontractors, is that 8 projects for a combination of ALL the subcontractors we include on our team?

Response: Yes.

43c. Question: If we are able to provide 8 projects for the prime firm AND 8 projects for our subcontractors, how should we organize the matrix that will appear in Section VII - SF330 Part I, G? Should we submit Section G matrices for the prime firm's experience and the subcontractors' experience on separate pages in this section, or should we combine all the information into one matrix?

Response: Combine into one matrix. See revised announcement Section III SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, c. Organization / Page Limitations, Section VII.

44a. Question: Questionnaire Section 4.0 -- we are not aware of any summary report capability provided by the PPIRS system that can provide detailed results to answer your questions required in 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5. Please confirm that this information is still required.

Response: Yes. It is thought that by narrowing the scope of reporting “rating information” to (1) the past 3-years; (2) DUNS number of firm provided on the SF 330 Part I; and (3) limiting the query to NAICS 541310, the number of reports generated shouldn’t be too extensive; however, if the query generates an extensive number of reports, notify the CO via e-mail so this requirement can be re-addressed promptly!

44b. Question: Would information provided from the Rating Matrix from the ACASS system be acceptable?

Response: Response forthcoming and will be posted as soon as possible.

44c. Question: In addition to no reporting capability from the PPIRS system, the actual data requested varies from client. This information is not consistently reported in the same mannerism (e.g., GSA and USACE use different reporting terms).

Response: A-E type services, environmental planning, and programming services performed for the Air Force, and other DoD agencies, should be reported in ACASS. However, performance evaluations for these type services have been reported in CPARS, and “other” reporting systems with similar evaluation factors to CPARS. Since CPARS and ACASS are the two “primary” past performance reporting systems that feed into PPIRS, the following table is provided to “cross-level” the evaluation factors:

Department of Defense

The Air Force will average the individual ratings for each of the following categories to establish an “overall” rating:

· Architectural

· Structural

· Civil

· Mechanical

· Electrical

· Fire Protection

· Survey, Mapping, etc.

· Cost Estimating

· Value Engineering

· Environmental Engineering

· Geotechnical Engineering

· Master Planning

· Hydrology

· Chemical Engineering

· Geology

· Chemistry

· Risk Assessment

· Safety/Occupational Health

· Hydrographic Surveying

Mgt & Adherence to Schedules

Meeting Cost Limitations

Cooperativeness & Responsiveness

· Quality Control Procedures & Execution

[End of Questions & Responses #12 - 44]