Attachment_20_-_Solicitation_Questions_ _Answers.pdf

Solicitation No.: FA4460-16-R-0002

Attachment 20

LRAFB MACC Solicitation Questions & Answers

23 May 2016

Q1: There are two times for the Site Visits. Can you pick one or the other or go to both? Also what about accessing the base do we have to pre-register for the Site Visit?

A: Site visit attendance is not mandatory but is highly suggested. Offerors may attend either site visit. See Attachment 19 of the solicitation for information that is requested for submission but is NOT mandatory.

Q2: Is the 3:00pm walkthrough the same as the 9:00am walkthrough? Do you recommend attending both or one?

A: Both site visits are the same and attendance is not mandatory for either site visit.

Q3: The past performance requirements, requires projects to be completed in last 3 years .

Would you consider extending the period of coverage to last 5 to 7 years?

No.

Q4: The proposal is requiring PPQ in addition to the CCASS. Various customers are reluctant to do additional PPQ due to time constraints and schedules. Would you consider accepting either

CCASS or PPQ instead of requiring both?

A: Everything will be evaluated in accordance with Section M. Nowhere in L or M does it say that PPQs are mandatory. PPQs are not required as they are not something within any contractor's control outside of sending them to a customer and hoping they do their part. It is advised to have them submitted if possible, though. Performance evaluations will be pulled from

PPIRS and used in the evaluation as stated in both L and M so there is no need for offerors to submit information already in CPARS.

Q5: What percent complete should the projects be, to be considered acceptable, 100 percent or would a 70 percent complete project will be considered acceptable?

A: There is no set number for percentage completed. This is a subjective tradeoff.

Q6: Is this a new MACC or a re-compete of the previously awarded one?

A: As the existing MACC has reached its ceiling this MACC is meant to replace it.

Q7: If a re-compete could you please provide the names of current firms holding this contract?

A: Contractors currently on the existing LRAFB MACC are: HGL Construction, Alessi-

Keyes Construction, Flynco, Inc., Paragon Industrial Applications, Robinson Construction, and

Leetex.

Q8: Regarding the site visits scheduled for 26 May 2016, 9:00 A.M. and 3:00 P.M. CST, do we need to submit names/other information for our attendees?

A: It is not required but would be beneficial for offerors to provide the information requested in Attachment 19.

Q9: Amendment 0001 – page 5 of 7 – 3.1 c states to complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications in Sections C through K. Please confirm that there are no Sections C, D, and H.

A: These sections still exist in the solicitation. The amendment only contains the changes made in that amendment.

Q10: Where should the bid bond be placed in the proposal binders?

A: In Part I of the proposal.

Q11: If we have previously completed PPQs, can they be submitted with our proposal instead of soliciting new ones?

A: PPQs should come from customers. If previously completed PPQs are included in the proposal they will count towards the 5 page limit per contract.

Q12: There are conflicting times listed for the site visits. Page 97 of 101 of the Solicitation states 9:00 AM and 3:00 PM. Attachment 6 states 9:00 AM and 1:00 PM. Which is correct

(1:00 or 3:00)?

A: The seed RFP is incorrect and has been updated with this amendment.

Q13: Section L Instructions to offerors makes no mention of Attachment 5. Is this financial information to be included in our proposal? And if so, where do you want it placed in the proposal binders?

A: Yes, please include this document in Part I of the proposal.

Q14: What is the cut-off date for questions?

A: The due date for questions will be established as per Section L Paragraph 1.0b. The date will most likely be three business days after the site visit.

Q15: What information is required for individuals attending the site visit(s) or hand delivering proposal?

A: Please see attachment 19. Providing this information in advance is not mandatory for site visit attendance but will expedite the entry process.

Q16: How long in advance do you need information to process requests for base access?

A: Please see attachment 19.

Q17: May we revise Attachment 4 Past Performance Information to a more concise document as long as the content is not changed?

No.

Q18: Attachment 4 Past Performance Questionnaire Section 1 (page 6 of 11) states that if the agency/organization has had other contracts with the offeror, PPQs should be completed for these contracts as well. Please confirm that this is correct. (A task order contract could have a large number of projects in the last 3 years.)

A: Only if the contracts are recent/relevant.

Q19: Attachment 4 (page 8 of 11) states that these are SAMPLE questions. Please confirm that you want the PPQ sent out as is.

A: Do not modify the PPQ.

Q20: The Past Performance Information template (Attachment 4), states: “Provide the information requested in this form for each contract/program (citation) being described.” Please clarify that the forms should be completed for individual task orders/projects and not complete contracts.

A: Use the attached document for ever piece of past performance that is recent and relevant regardless of it being a contract or task order.

Q21: The Past Performance Information template (Attachment 4), states: (NOTE: If the company or division performing this effort is different than the offeror or the relevance of this effort to the instant acquisition is impacted by any company/corporate organizational change, note those changes. Refer to the "Organizational Structure Change History" you provided as part of your Past Performance Volume). We see no requirement to provide organizational structure change history in Section L. Please clarify if this is a submission requirement.

A: This is not a submission requirement.

Q22: The Past Performance Information template (Attachment 4), Section I requests information on compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns. As this is a total SB set-aside solicitation, most past performance projects/contracts will not have required tracking of SB utilization. Will we be rated lower if this is non-applicable to our projects?

A: As this is a small business set-aside it will not have any significant impact upon the evaluation.

Q23: Section L (Amendment 0001) 3.2 b (page 6 of 7) states: “Relevant performance includes performance of efforts that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude and complexity to the seed project described in this solicitation.” The rating chart for relevancy then states that Very

Relevant is defined as “essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires”. As the seed project is relevantly small ($100K - $250K), and the solicitation states that task orders could be as large as $10M, this seems to be a contradiction.

Will larger projects be rated less relevant?

A: The $10M has no impact on the past performance requested and is only a limit that will likely never be reached. Submit past performance in accordance with Section L.

Q24: Section L (Amendment 0001) 3.2 b (page 6 of 7) states: “Relevant performance includes performance of efforts that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude and complexity to the seed project described in this solicitation.” The rating chart for relevancy then states that Very

Relevant is defined as “essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires”. Complexity is defined as “the ability to perform and manage several large design-build project task orders at the same time and/or the ability to successfully perform and manage multi-disciplined task orders of a similar or higher magnitude than described in this solicitation.” The seed project is relevantly small ($100K - $250K), and the solicitation states that task orders could be as large as $10M. Will projects over $10M be rated less relevant?

A: See response to question 23.

Q25: Section L makes no mention of using the Attachment 4 Past Performance Information template provided. Are we allowed to use our own format if all of the information requested in

3.2 Past Performance Information is provided?

A: Use the attached Past Performance Information template.

Q26: We are concerned with sending out the Attachment 4 Past Performance Questionnaire with the outstanding question concerning the reference to Sample Questions. We are concerned that without a timely answer, our POCs will not have time to return the questionnaires by the

June 3rd deadline. Can this deadline be extended?

A: No.

Q27: The Attachment 4 Past Performance Information template is 3 pages (without allowing for expansion for response/answers). This leaves at best 2 pages for documentation demonstrating customer satisfaction. If we have a letter of appreciation/recommendation and our own independent survey that is 2 pages, we do not have adequate pages allotted for submission

(total of 5). Can the five page limit be eliminated? Or could the customer satisfaction documentation be excluded from the five page limit?

A: The five page limit stands. There will be no exclusions.

Q28: Section L, 1.b states that “questions must be submitted . . . by a date and time to be specified.” What is the last day that questions will be accepted regarding this solicitation?

A: See response to question 14.

Q29: Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices contains 10 line items with identical descriptions for IDIQ MACC Base Year, as well as 10 line items per option year with identical descriptions. Are these pages to be included in our Price proposal, and if so, what is our calculation to be based on?

A: Your price proposal will be completed on the Seed RFP document. The line items in the solicitation will be used to issue task orders against and nothing more.

Q30: Attachment 5 to the Solicitation is a “Financial Institution Reference Sheet” which appears to be a requirement for inclusion in our proposal. However, there is no instruction as to where Section L, 3.1 – Price Proposal (page 92 of the Solicitation) does not list “Financial

Institution Reference Sheet” among the requirements for the price proposal.

A: This document will be necessary to perform a responsibility determination in accordance with FAR Part 9. Please include this document in the price proposal.

Q31: Section L, 3.1 – Price Proposal (page 92 of the Solicitation) does not list a bid bond among the requirements for the price proposal. However, the 1442 part 13B states that an offer guarantee is required.

a. Please confirm that our bid bond should be included with Part I Price documents.

b. Please confirm that the bid bond is to cover the offeror’s quoted price for the seed project.

A: To be determined responsive all requirements of the SF1442 must be met to include providing a bid bond. The bid bond will cover the seed project amount. Please place this document in the price proposal.

Q32: For the projects/contracts to be cited under Section L, 3.2 – Past Performance

Information, please confirm that highly relevant contracts performed by the offeror as a subcontractor will be considered.

A: If the past performance submitted is determined to be recent and relevant it will be considered.

Q33: “Section L, 3.2 – Past Performance Information paragraph a, Quality and Satisfaction rating for Contracts Completed in the Past Three Years” states that Past Performance

Questionnaires from previous customers are to be sent from our customers to the 19th

Contracting Squadron. However, many of our references have filled out multiple Past

Performance Questionnaires for our proposals within the last 6 months. In order to prevent reference fatigue, may we utilize Past Performance Questionnaires which were submitted with previous proposals? If so, may we include them with our proposal, or may the offeror forward them to you?

A: No. Past Performance Questionnaires should be received from previous customers and not from the offeror.

Q34: Regarding the Past Performance Information form in the first 3 pages Attachment 4: as long as all information required by the forms is presented in the same order as shown on the forms, and is clearly labeled to conform with the forms' contents, please confirm that the offeror may adjust the format the form itself to ensure that all requirements (including page limitations) are fulfilled?

A: Do not alter the form.