Attachment_17_-_RFP_Questions_37-58_&_Government_Responses.pdf

Front Range Multiple Award Construction Contract (FRMACC)

(FA2517-19-R-A016)

Industry Questions/Comments and Government Responses

38. Industry Question/Comment: Section M Table 2 Unique Areas ‘missile alert facility’ is a very unique facility which unduly limits competition as the nature of the construction is not typically that unique. Suggest revising this to reflect actual construction requirements not a specific use of a building.

Government Response: A missile alert facility is one of the five unique areas that the FRMACC will support. See Attachment 16, Government Response to Question # 33.

39. Industry Question/Comment: RFP, Section L-1, General Instructions, para H and I.

Section L, Part L-1(H and I) states the Joint Venture Agreement must be received by the SBA prior to proposal due date to allow for processing. Historically, SBA will not accept a Joint Venture Agreement without all the supporting documentation for review or approval otherwise the agreement is returned as incomplete. The supporting documentation must include the final submitted proposal. Is it acceptable to submit the Joint Venture Agreement on the proposal due date to ensure we meet SBA requirements?

Government Response: No. IAW Section L, L-1, H. and I., “The Joint Venture Agreement must be received by the SBA prior to the proposal due date to allow for processing and SBA approval before award of any resultant contract.” Further, 13 CFR 124.513(e)(1), states “a Participant may submit a joint venture agreement to SBA for approval at any time, whether or not in connection with a specific 8(a) procurement.” If the joint venture decides to go after a requirement, they must submit to the SBA, an addendum to the Joint Venture Agreement based on the performance requirements of the contract.

40. Industry Question/Comment: In Table 3 Sec M it is stated to be considered ‘very relevant’, the offeror must show in a single past performance citation - Does this mean only one of the six projects if making it to Phase Two has to meet the criteria? If not please clarify what the intent is for this criteria.

Government Response: Revised Section M, C., Step 2., c., ii., Phase Two, page 4, “For Phase Two, an evaluation of each past performance information citation will be completed to determine project relevancy.”

41. Industry Question/Comment: For on-boarding purposes, for those firms that prsue the Tier 1 grouping what occurs in an instance in which you graduate from the 8a before you have the opportunity to be "on-ramped"?

Government Response: IAW 13 CFR 124.507 (d) Award to firms whose program terms have expired. A concern that has completed its term of participation in the 8(a) BD program may be awarded a competitive 8(a) contract if it was a Participant eligible for award of the contract on the initial date specified for receipt of offers contained in the contract solicitation, and if it continues to meet all other applicable eligibility criteria.

42. Industry Question/Comment: Attachment 5, L-3, Tab A, 6. & 7, page 8, Financial and Bonding Information Requests. Will the Government please explain how an officer of the Offeror can sign the form before sending it to their financial institution without rendering the form inert?

Government Response: Revised Section L, L-3, Tab A., 6 and 7 to add alternate methods for completing and submitting the financial and bonding information requests. The Government added Attachment 7a – Financial Information Request (Offeror’s Release), Attachment 7b – Financial Information Request (Financial Institution), Attachment 8a – Bonding Information Request (Offeror’s Release), and Attachment 8b – Bonding Information Request (Surety).

43. Industry Question/Comment: Many of our customers are federal agencies that utilize the CPARS System and are not authorized or unable to complete additional PPQs and/or our commercial clients have already completed PPQs for other proposal and have difficulty completing PPQs in a repetitious manner. Can you please allow the use of official CPARS evaluations or previously completed PPQs for the past performance documentation in lieu of new PPQ forms?

Government Response: No. IAW Section L, L-3., Tab C, 3. and 4., offerors are to provide a PPQ for each past performance information citation as well as, all CPARS or similar industry project evaluations (if applicable) for the past performance information citations. See also Attachment 15, Government Response to Question #5.

44. Industry Question/Comment: Please advise if and when a site visit/job walk is scheduled to take place.

Government Response: See Attachment 16, Government Response to Question #20.

45. Industry Question/Comment: Do we have a due date for RFIs?

Government Response: Yes. IAW Section L, L-2., A., “The deadline for all questions, concerns, and/or requests for clarification is no later than 10 calendar days from the date of solicitation issuance (SF 1442 Section A, Block 3).” The solicitation was issued on 19 September 2019.

46. Industry Question/Comment: Attachment 13 Past Performance Questionnaire Item G requires the offeror to enter a time period in Years and Months. However, in the case of reference contracts with a POP of less than 1-year, there is no “0” for years, and when filling out this section of the form, manually entering “0” causes the form to choose “2” for number of years. It is thereafter not possible to erase this value because the form is locked and no “0” option is present. The entire form must then be erased/re-started. In contrast, Section 2: Evaluator Information has a similar POP requirement but there is a “<1” option for contracts/durations of less than 1-year. Will the government please issue a revised PPQ form that allows for POPs of less than 1-year to be entered into Item G?

Government Response: RFP Amendment 0003 updated Attachment 13 - Past Performance Questionnaire, Section 1, G. to add an option for '0' year.

47. Industry Question/Comment: Item J in Section L of the RFP states:

Teaming/Partnering: If the offer is based on a teaming/partnering (prime contracting/ subcontracting) relationship, the offeror shall provide all required solicitation information for all parties including a copy of the signed and dated Teaming/Partnering (prime contracting/ subcontracting) Relationship Agreement. The agreement shall include information, which identifies the responsibilities for each entity under the subsequent contract. The agreement shall demonstratethe relationship between firms and identify contractual relationships and authorities to bind each entity of the teaming/partnering (prime contracting/subcontracting) relationship.

Teaming/Partnering performance will be evaluated and rated based on either party’s performance. The team/partner shall submit as one offeror.

Question: Since this is a design-build contract and Offerors are instructed to submit Teaming information – and – that teaming/partnering performance will be evaluated based on either party’s performance, we respectfully request that the Government revise Sections L and M for Factor 2 – Past Performance to allow/require for Offerors to submit at least one (1) project Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) and one (1) Project Summary for the DESIGN formal Teaming Partner (which is to be identified in other sections of the proposal) so that the Government can more realistically/reasonably evaluate the past performance of the whole team (“one offeror”). This could conceviably be either in place of one of the six (6) projects or as an additional project, Project #7.

Government Response: IAW Section M, C., Step 2., c., ii., Phase Two, the requirement for Subfactor 2 is a design-build construction project. IAW Section L, L-3, Tab C., 3., a., “Offerors shall provide a PPQ for each past performance information citation.” Offerors may provide their project summary on Attachment 13 – Past Performance Questionnaire, Section 1, C., 2, “If the project was a design-build, include a description of the design effort.”

Additionally, IAW Section L, L-3, Tab C., 2. Past Performance Summary, “Offerors should provide project information not contained in PPQ Section 1, CPARS, or similar industry project evaluations to explain the scope, complexity, and magnitude of work performed in the citation.” IAW Section L, L-3., Tab C., Subfactor 1 and 2., second sentence, revised to state “If in a team/partner (prime contractor/subcontractor) relationship, a maximum of 1 citation shall encompass work performed by the subcontractor.”

48. Industry Question/Comment: Thank you for the acknowledgement. Sorry, our mistake/oversight on the deadline. We generally see 10 business days before date as the deadline for submitting questions. Part of the reason for the late-breaking questions is that due to activities surrounding fiscal year end for the Government, some of our contacts have been unavailable to respond – including for requirements such as the PPQs. For that reason, I would also like to respectfully request a two (2) week extension to the deadline in order to ensure that the Government personnel we rely upon to complete these questionnaires can conclude their EOY activities, can be contacted, and then devote the necessary time to completing the PPQs.

Government Response: RFP Amendment 4 will extend the proposal submission due date and time listed in SF 30, Block 14.

49. Industry Question/Comment: Under Section L-Instructions, Conditions, and Notice to

Offeror's, it states "Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, and representations and certifications." In addition, under J. Teaming Agreements it states, "Teaming Partnering performance will be evaluated and rated based on either's party's performance. The Team/Partner shall submit as one offeror." Under L-3 Proposal Volume, item 6. Financial Informaton Request & 7. Bonding Information Request should we submit our Team/Partner's information as well? Or is just the past performance evaluated for our partner?

Government Response: No. Attachments 7 and 8 will be completed by the offeror (prime contractor for teaming agreements). See Sections L and M for teaming/partnering requirements.

50. Industry Question/Comment: Per the RFP, “Failure to provide the PPQs or failure to provide fully completed PPQs may impact an offeror’s past performance evaluation rating.” The Offeror has no control over our clients completing or submitting PPQs on our behalf. We have experienced many times, Government employees refusing or not allowed to fill out PPQs because CPARS were provided for completed projects.

Question #7’s response to an RFI stated “The PPQ provides more detailed information on the specific project that may not be provided in the CPARS evaluation”, but if the government/client chooses not to take the provide responses to the 37 questions asked within the PPQ, we request that this should not negatively impact the evaluation on the Offeror if a CPARS has also been submitted.

Government Response: See Attachment 15, Government Response to Question #5.

51. Industry Question/Comment: On Attachement 13, Past Performance Questionnaire, for our 4 citations related to Subfactor 1 - Disciplines, should we makre on Question 2 (under Contractor Self-Assessment) not applicable if Design was not related to the Citation? Could you please also confirm that under Atatchement 6 - Section M, C.

Factor 2 - Past Performance ii. Relevancy, that for Phase Two, Each subfactor will be evaluated independently. It states that "For Phase Two, two (2) subfactors will be evaluated for relevancy." Per Section L, 4 citations are required for Subfactor 1 - Discipline and 2 citations are required for Subfactor 2. - Design-Build. There is confusion in Section M, that both Disciplines AND Design-Build will be required by all citations. Could you please calrify?

Government Response: Revised Attachment 13 – Past Performance Questionnaire, Section 1, F., 1. and 2., to add a radio button for ‘Not Applicable’. IAW Section L, L-3, Tab C., for Subfactor 1 - Disciplines, offerors shall submit up to four (4) past performance information citations and for Subfactor 2 – Design-Build, offerors shall submit up to two (2) past performance information citations. Offeror shall specify if the citation submitted is for Subfactor 1, Subfactor 2, or both.” If an offeror submitted a citation that covers both Subfactors 1 and 2, this citation will be counted as two citations, one for Subfactor 1 and one for Subfactor 2.

52. Industry Question/Comment: For past Performance Citations, will projects where the offeror is other than a Prime Contractor be reviewed and evaluated as less favorable than projects submitted as a Prime Contractor?

Government Response: No. See Section L, L-3, Tab C.

53. Industry Question/Comment: Please provide clarification regarding RFI response #22.

It is our opinion that the statement in Section M, Table 2, “At least three (3) of the different unique areas listed below were included in at least one or more of the citations submitted” can be interpreted multiple ways. Due to the critical nature of this portion of our proposal we respectfully request clarification using the two tables provided below.

Would the projects in Table 1 Pass or Fail?

Would the projects in Table 2 Pass or Fail?

Table 1 Unique Areas

SCIF School Survivability

System

Missile Alert

Facility Historical

Preservation Project 1 X Project 2 X Project 3 X

Table 2 Unique Areas

SCIF School Survivability System

Missile Alert Facility

Historical Preservation

Project 1 X X X Project 2 X X X Project 3 X X X

Government Response: IAW Section M, C., Step 2,, c., ii., Table 2 and provided the evaluators determine that projects submitted satisfy the requirement/definition of one (1) of the five (5) unique areas, Tables 1 and 2 would pass as they indicate, “At least three

(3) of the different unique areas listed below were included in at least one or more of the citations submitted.” Other scenarios may also apply but are not indicated in the tables.

54. Industry Question/Comment: RFP, Section L (Attachment 5), L-1, General Instructions para J. Teaming/Partnering, “If the offer is based on a teaming/partnering (prime contracting/ subcontracting) relationship, the offeror shall provide all required solicitation information for all parties.” Please clarify what information is required to be submitted for subcontractors.

Government Response: Added Section L, L-1, J., second sentence, “The offeror shall include in their proposal subcontractor required information to include the subcontractor’s citations, consent letter, client authorization letter, and CPARS or Similar Industry Project Evaluations, if applicable.”

55. Industry Question/Comment: Attachment 6 – Section M, Evaluation Factors for

Award (pg. 4 of 8) Table 2 – Unique Areas: historical preservation (listed in the National Register of Historical Places). State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPO) are responsible for surveying, evaluating and nominating significant historic buildings, sites, structures and objects to the National Register. SHPO approval must be obtained prior to completing maintenance and repair of historical buildings and structures. Please confirm that work on projects which required, and obtained, SHPO approval will be considered historical preservation.

Government Response: Yes. Projects that required and obtained SHPO approval are considered historical preservation.

56. Industry Question/Comment: Under Section M -EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD, it states "This includes projects awarded prior to this performance, but still had performance during the recency timeframe." If work was conducted after the date listed in our CPARS for Estimated/Actual Completion date is that allowable? For example, change orders completed after the CPARS dated completion date, completion of O&M manuals, asbuilts as well as items that had to be replaced?

Government Response: Yes, provided the actual completion of the project is documented and verified by the customer/contracting office (evaluators) in Attachment 13 – Past Performance Questionnaire.

57. Industry Question/Comment: Under Section L-3. Proposal Volume, Tab A: Contract

Documents, 6. Financial Information Request, it states that "Offerors shall provide a letter from the offeror's financial instituion(s) authorizing the PCO to verify the offeror's financial responsibility." If we have changed financial instuitions in the past 6 months should we have both our current and past financial instituaion submit Atatchment 7, Financial Information Request?

Government Response: Assuming the offeror no longer has an open/active account with the financial institution, the answer is no. IAW Attachment 7 – Financial Information Request or Attachment 7b – Financial Information Request (Financial Institution), the financial institution is required to complete the current balances and the six (6) month average balance maintained for each account.

58. It is noted that there are multiple spelling errors throughout the Industry Questions/Comments.

Government Response: Industry Questions/Comments taken verbatim from contractors’ emails or Requests for Information (RFI).