QUESTIONS__2_-_19_Oct_16.pdf

FA4621-16-R-0001 MACC Solicitation

McConnell AFB, KS

QUESTION & ANSWERS – Questions #2

19 Oct 2016

Update to Pre-proposal Conference

In order to accommodate attendees, the location of the pre-proposal conference has been changed to

Room 24, Auditorium, in Bldg 412, Dole Center. It is in the same location, but further down the hallway.

There is no change to the date or time of the conference. Please reference Amendment 1.

Q&A from Offerors

QUESTION:

1. Will the Government accept previously completed PPQs in lieu of Attachment 11 that demonstrate similar requirements to Attachment 11 of the RFP? Some clients will not or are not allowed to complete additional PPQs when a CCASS or CPARS has been submitted.

ANSWER:

Yes. However, we ask that you still send our requested PPQ to your reference(s) and include a reference sheet with name(s) and contact information along with your past performance information.

The Government will make an effort to contact them if additional questions and clarification are necessary.

2. Will the Government accept CCASS/CPARS reports in lieu of the past performance questionnaire, Attachment 11? Some clients will not or are not allowed to complete additional PPQs when a CCASS or

CPARS has been submitted.

Yes, CCASS/CPARS reports are acceptable. See answer to question #1.

3. RFP specifies up to 7 projects, a minimum of 2 which must be design-build. What is the minimum overall number of projects, including the 2 design-build projects which Offerors may submit in order to achieve a “substantial confidence” rating assuming each projects meet all relevancy/magnitude requirements? To clarify, what is the minimum number of projects deemed acceptable for the

Government to assign a “substantial confidence” rating to an offeror?

This will be a subjective tradeoff evaluation, and the performance confidence rating is not merely based on the number of projects referenced. The level of RELEVANCY of past performance is determined according to the scope and magnitude and whether or not performance included two (2) or more design-build projects. Those relevancy ratings are then used to determine an offeror’s overall performance confidence rating. See Solicitation paragraph M-3.2.1. for a list of some of the important factors taken into consideration when evaluating past performance.

Keep in mind that although an offeror may not be given a “substantial” confidence rating, they still have the potential to be awarded a contract under a best value determination.

4. Section L.2.4, Paragraph 2, Section 2: Seed Project states: Please insert any related documents to the seed project, Price Schedule/price break-downs, or relevant information in this section for review such as working plans.

Will the Government please provide specificity regarding “relevant information such as work plans” insofar as how this information will be evaluated? Evaluation criteria listed in Section M pertains to price, and NOT to a Work Plan or other relevant information. Will this information be evaluated and if so, how?

Working plans were listed as an example for organization purposes of an offeror’s proposal. Documents outside of the Price Schedule will not be evaluated. Evaluation for award is based solely on price and past performance with past performance significantly more important than price. You need to complete and submit your proposal for the seed project in accordance with the seed project attachments.

If you have a teaming arrangement with sub-contractors, you may provide information as to how you intend to complete the seed project in this section.

5. Is there a previous contract for this work? Who are the incumbent contractors? How much of the previous contract was utilized?

The previous MACC contract’s period of performance was from 22 Sep 11 to 21 Sep 16 and was awarded to ten offerors. The entire ceiling of $60M was utilized. Contract awards were given to the following companies: Superior Lakeshore JV 2, LLC; Snodgrass & Son’s Construction Co., Inc.; FutureNet Group, Inc.; Warden Construction Corporation; Alexander-Weitz JV 1; National Contractors, Inc.; Web, LLC;

Ma-Chis Kawv IV, LLC; Miller Building Services, Inc.; and McKinzie Construction, Inc.

6. Is the government seeking the proposal of Architectural / Engineering design services in response to the subject solicitation?

No. Please reference related Questions and Asnwers #1 posted to FBO on 12 Oct 16.

7. a. Please confirm – Is the subject solicitation a 2 phase or single phase procurement?

b. Is there a set duration for the phasing on this seed project?

There are no phases of procurement. At this time, proposals are due 8 Nov 16 at 2:00 p.m. (CST). After the proposal due date, evaluations will be conducted in accordance with Section M of the solicitation and up to six awards will be made with one contractor receiving the entire scope of the seed project. If you are referring to seed project phasing, please see Solicitation Attachment #9, Drawing & Plans, Page G-

002, Summary of Work. There is a period of performance for each building of the seed project and an order of completion.

8. Can the time limit for past performance experience be extended to 6 years? This might allow more small businesses to participate.

Please reference Questions and Answers #1 posted to FBO on 12 Oct 16. The Contracting Officer has determined three (3) years of past performance data is sufficient.

9. Page 43, where the pre-bid/pre-proposal conference is discussed, states that questions are due 10/17.

The next page (44) “Notice to Offerors” states that questions are due “no less than ten (10) days prior to the RFP closing date.” What is the final due date for questions?

Initial questions are due 17 Oct 16 at 2:00 p.m. (CST) in order to provide sufficient time to answer them prior to the pre-proposal conference. Offerors can submit questions after 17 Oct 16, but these questions may not be answered prior to the conference.

Final questions should be submitted ten (10) days prior to the solicitation due date (i.e. 28 October at 2:00

PM) to provide reasonable time to answer, and to provide offerors enough time to evaluate answers for their proposals. Any question submitted less than 10 days prior to the solicitation due date may not receive a response.

ALL questions posed by any interested vendor are posted to FBO to provide all offerors the same information.

10. Page 47 (and a subsequent Question and Answer) mentions that we should submit subcontractor past performance for those we intend to use on the seed project. Are these subcontractors to provide PPQ’s?

If so, how many?

Subcontractor past performance is not required, but may be provided if the subcontractor(s) will be performing major or critical aspects of the work. If you have secured subcontractors for the seed project, you may use their past performance if it is relevant to completion of the seed project and to supplement your own past performance. If you have a teaming arrangement or joint venture, then all of the companies need to provide past performance as a whole.

There is still a limit of “up to” seven (7) past performance requirements for both the prime and subcontractor(s) together. There is no limit to the number of PPQs; however, the reference needs to be valid and applicable to that specific requirement (i.e., Contracting Officer/Administrator, Civil Engineer or equivalent, end user of the requirement). Having two PPQs (i.e., one from the Contracting Officer and one from the Contract Administrator) for the same requirement is unnecessary.

11. Will the government accept and evaluate Teaming Partner past performance for the evaluation of the general contractor submitting the proposal?

Yes. Please refer to page 48 of the solicitation, paragraph L-2.5.

12. The solicitation requires up to 7 Past Performance citations in each response and the Government’s sample file structure includes seven files for each Past Performance citation. Following this structure, the

Government would potentially receive up to 49 separate Past Performance documents in each response.

Can the Government confirm that this is their intention?

As stated in Attachment A, this is only an example. The names of the files are only listed as an example to what information would be applicable in each section. The Government is not going to fault contractors for placing certain documents in a certain location, or combining certain information. We are simply trying to provide a logical flow/example. Please use the example folder structure. The example files are simply there as an example. All offerors need to do is provide a “logical/reasonable” file name as to the contents.

13. Along with predecessor companies, would the Government allow the use of affiliated companies past performance, provided a meaningful commitment letter is submitted with our proposal?

If you are referring to a commitment letter as similar to a partnership/teaming agreement, then yes, assuming that the affiliated companies will have responsibilities under this contract.

14. Will the government accept and evaluate Teaming Partner past performance for the evaluation of the general contractor submitting the proposal?

Yes. Please refer to Solicitation Section L, Paragraphs 2.5 and 2.6, and Question #29 herein. Your teaming partner’s past performance information will be considered as part of your overall evaluation rating. Include a copy of the teaming agreement in your proposal. You may use past performance accomplished as separate companies, or past performance on projects where you have worked together.

However, if this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide past and present relevant contracts. You have a total of seven (7) past performance requirements you may submit for evaluation.

15. Pg. 43; Para. 5352.215-9001; subparagraph (c); This paragraph asks for questions and there has been one Q&A already issued, which some of the answers clarify the solicitation. However, this paragraph also states: “Terms of the solicitation and specifications remain unchanged unless the solicitation is amended in writing.” Please clarify the intent of the Q&A, since according to the above sentence we are not to propose/bid on the answers to the Q&A, unless included in an amendment. This has been an issue in the past and has led to protests.

Q&As only offer clarification to and are intended to support the solicitation. If answers to the Q&A conflict with the solicitation terms, then an amendment will be issued.

16. Pg. 44; Para. L-1.1; It appears the AF will allow a portion of the pre-proposal conference to take questions. (Reference: “The submission of written questions will not preclude anyone from posing questions during the conference.”) Please confirm this is the case.

Questions may be asked at the pre-proposal conference. The question due dates given (such as 17 Oct), are to allow the Government to answer questions in a timely manner before the pre-proposal conference.

Questions during the conference, or afterwards, will be posted later. The cut-off date for questions is no later than 10 days prior to the solicitation due date. (28 Oct, at 2:00 PM)

17. Pg. 46; Para. 3. Part II – Past Performance Information: The paragraph starting with “NOTE:”, implies that the AF is going to follow-up with clients on the status of the PPQ. Otherwise we have to call you (ie AF) and find out the status of each PPQ (ie if submitted or not). On pg. 47, para. (d), (iv) clarifies that we are to call the POC at the AF and confirm receipt.

However, we read later on Pg. 47, Past Performance Survey, that the Government will conduct a good faith effort to follow-up to obtain performance surveys but PPQs referred by the offeror and not received by the CO will not be evaluated.

Please clarify if the AF plans to call/send an email at least one time to each client listed in the PPQ.

The “NOTE” states that if you as the offeror submit Attachment 11, PPQ, filled out with your proposal, we will not evaluate it. Only PPQs sent directly from the reference will be accepted.

For those references who were sent PPQs, we will make a good faith effort to contact them and follow up if we have not received their evaluation. We may also contact them to clarify any information relevant to the PPQ they filled out. This is why we ask that your cover sheet include the reference/contact information of those individuals to whom you sent a PPQ. Although we will make an effort to contact the listed reference, to ensure timely receipt of the PPQ by our office, we ask that you contact the reference to ensure they have completed the PPQ.

18. Pg. 46; Para. 3. Part II – Past and Present Performance Information; (a): This paragraph requests information (letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, etc.) and corrective actions taken on various circumstances. Where do we compile this information, since Attachment A has two headings that may fit this requirement: “Description of project requirements” and/or “Other info about project for evaluation See Section M 3.2.1.” We want to make sure you get the information where you want it.

The file names shown in Section L, Attachment A, are simply examples of how you may organize your submission. Past performance information should be logically arranged in Part II of the folder as applicable. The minimum requirement is to have 3 main folders/parts (Cover Page information, Part I, and Part II).

19. Pg 47; Very Relevant: This rating requires: “Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.” The other ratings have somewhat similar requests from the solicitation. However, we could not find any detailed listing of scope and complexities in Attachment 1, SOW. Without a list of the detailed SOW, then this is very subjective.

The scope of the seed project is provided in the seed project attachments/documents. Also reference

Solicitation Page 46, Part II, paragraph (b), for definitions/guidance of scope, magnitude, and complexity, and Page 52, Paragraph M-3.2.1, for factors considered (i.e.; projects of similar contract type such as

ID/IQ or multiple award). Also see response to question #22.

20. Pg. 47; Listing of items (i) to (ix): Please clarify this order of materials requested vs those listed in

Attachment I, Example of Past Performance subfolder. Which one do we follow?

Items listed on page 47, paragraphs (i) to (ix) must be provided, but there is no particular order in which this information must be provided. Attachment A (Section L) is given only as an example.

21. Pg. 51; Para. M-3.1: All seems straight forward until the last sentence of the 3rd paragraph, which states: “All offerors will be evaluated equally using the same line items.” Does this imply something other than evaluating on the total proposed price?

The intent is to award the total proposed price if funding allows. However, the next paragraph in the solicitation states that the Government may award “the combination of line items that can be awarded within available funding.” Line item 0001AA is the base, and work included under Price Schedule line items 0001AB and 0001AC are options. Regardless of which combination of base and option items is awarded, all offerors’ prices are evaluated the same way using those same line items.

22. Pg. 52; Para. M-3.2.1: This paragraph states that “some of the important factors which will be evaluated during past performance evaluations include:”, which is followed by a list of 8 items.

However, #1 states “projects with similar magnitude to those typical or projected to MAFB.” Please provide a summary of those projects and descriptions, since this is an important factor. Attachment 1, SOW has a very limited SOW for future TOs in Para. 3.16, (a).

Typical project magnitude is between $2,000 and $10M as stated on page 46-47, PART II, para (b). The

Solicitation also states “similar scope and magnitude as this effort” (i.e.; several, large design-build project task orders at the same time, and/or the ability to successfully perform and manage multi-disciplined task orders similar to the seed project). Also see response to question #19.

23. Pg. 53; Table 2; See previous question about the relevancy ratings, since the scope and complexities are not defined anywhere we could find.

See responses to questions #19 and #22.

24. Attachment 11 – PPQ – Please clarify, precisely, what we fill out and what does the client fill out on the PPQ? The NAVFAC PPQ form is very easy to follow and is a standard on many other solicitations.

We suggest you consider following the DoD standard PPQ.

The reference fills out the PPQ. You should put their name on page 1 in the “TO:” block. If you want to assist them with the PPQ, you may fill out Page 2 (Part I, Respondent Information, and Part II, General

Information). Otherwise, all other information needs to be completed by the reference.

25. A REQUEST: When you issue an amendment, issue a full solicitation with the changes shown in a highlight or some other way to distinguish the changes. This makes it much easier for us to read and find those changes.

We will take this request into consideration for future amendments, but “distinguishing” the changes also depends on the type of change(s). Generally, the changes will be summarized in Block 14 of the amendment and/or in the Summary of Changes.

26. The questions and answers dated October 12, 2016 provided information regarding CPARS in question/answer 4. To further clarify, in order to lessen the burden on our Government clients that have previously provided a CPAR or a completed PPQ, may we provide a current contact for references and the completed documents in order to help the reviewers obtain sufficient information for evaluation?

Previously completed CPARS reports are acceptable, but PPQs submitted directly by the offeror will not be evaluated. To ensure we receive sufficient information for evaluation, we highly recommend the use of this solicitation’s PPQ at Attachment 11.

27. For joint ventures where should the joint venture agreement and teaming agreements be included in the submittal?

Place joint venture or teaming agreements in Folder 1, Cover Page, with the offeror’s basic information.

28. Does a bid bond required for this multiple award solicitation and if so kindly advise.

Please read the solicitation, specifically Page 3, Block 10, and FAR Clause 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee.

29. Because L-2.5 does not say whether or not a teaming partner's past performance will be evaluated, like L-2.6, which specifically says it will; Your response is the teaming partner's past performance will be evaluated.

Paragraph L-2.5 refers to teaming partners, while L-2.6 refers to joint ventures. You may provide past performance for up to 7 requirements between both parties, whether the efforts were previously performed as a team or as separate entities. Also see response to Question #14.

30a. Will there be a period of questions after the site visit for things discovered during the visit?

30b. Will there be time available to submit more RFIs after the subs go to the site visit?

Yes. Additional questions will continue to be answered and posted to FBO. Questions submitted after 17

Oct 16 at 2:00 PM CST, during the pre-proposal conference/site visit, or the day after by 2:00 PM CST, will be answered and posted by 25 Oct 16. The last round of questions are due NLT 28 Oct 16 at 2:00

PM. Any questions submitted after this date shall be answered at the discretion of the Contracting

Officer.

31. Is there a set duration for the phasing on this seed project?

Please refer to Attachment #9, Page G-002.

32. Is this project sales tax exempt? If the project is sales tax exempt can the government provide a sales tax exemption certificate?

Kansas sales tax exemption applies, and a certificate will be issued after award.

33. a. Provide site photos and building interior photos for existing HVAC conditions

b. Advise if additional site visit can be made to investigate project site.

c. Confirm if additional security clearance is required for this project site.

d. Provide a copy of sign-in sheet for pre-conference meeting

e. Provide a meeting minute and a slide show for the pre-conference meeting

a. This is part of the purpose of the pre-proposal conference. The Government will not be taking photos.

b. A Pre-Proposal Site Visit was already scheduled for this solicitation. Offerors were instructed to submit information for attendance no later than 13 Oct 16 at 2:00 PM local CST. It is not in the

Government’s best interest to conduct another site visit.

c. No. The solicitation does not specify additional security requirements for this project. For future requirements, if a higher security clearance is required, it will be part of the RFP requirements for that specific project.

d/e. See Far Clause 5352.215-9001, Paragraph (d).

34. a. Provide truck site access for delivery and hauling from designated gate to project site.

b. Provide potential staging area for each building

c. Confirm if building will be occupied during construction

d. Confirm if existing furniture or belongings will be moved by Government prior to construction

e. Confirm if temporary AC units needs to be provided during construction

a. See attached map of Contractor route, staging and parking area. (Below this Q&A)

b. See attached map of Contractor route, staging and parking area. The staging area is to stage equipment that can be stored outside only. There is will NOT be any indoor staging area or materials and equipment that need to be stored indoors (carpet, fan coils, etc) because McConnell doesn’t have an indoor staging area that would be adequate.

c. Read Attachment #9 – Specifications, Page G-002.

d. See response to Questions #1 posted on 12 Oct 16. Specifically, Question 9 Response under the “Anticipated questions and answers from Civil Engineering.”

e. See notes on Sheets FP101 (Bldg. 340 & 342) and FP101 (Bldg. 350). In particular, see Note 5. Other than this, temporary units are not required unless specifically designated on the plans. 22nd CES is not aware of any locations on the plans where temporary units are called for but there might be some.

35. Will the Government provide comprehensive written badging requirements for the project if badging is required?

If you are referring to base access badges, please read Attachment 1 – General SOW, Para 3.20.

36. Can the Superintendent also perform the duties of the CQC Manager and/or SSHO if that person has the appropriate qualifications?

Yes, the Superintendent can perform the duties of the QC Manager and SSHO provided that he is on site anytime work is being performed. If work is being performed and he is acting as the Superintendent, QC Manager, SSHO, he cannot leave the job site to purchase materials or equipment, run construction-related errands, etc.

37. Would 22 CONS please provide the as-built drawings and the hazardous materials reports for these three buildings?

We will make a copy of as-builts available to contractors. For a copy of as-builts, contractors must send a written request via email to: daniel.parks.2@us.af.mil.

A link will be provided to download a copy of as-builts using AMRDEC to the email that requested access. Only 1 request per company will be permitted.

38. Can the new ceramic wall tile be installed on the existing substrate? Or does the existing substrate need to be replace with cement backer board?

Existing substrate will have to be replaced. Sheet AE101 will be amended with instructions for replacing the substrate.

- We are currently working on an amendment for changes to the Drawings and Specifications. Please monitor FBO.gov

39. The Janitors’ closet shown on B/AE101 indicates porcelain tile. The finish schedule shows concrete.

Which is correct? If concrete, is it to be sealed?

The flooring in the Janitor’s Closet shall be porcelain tile.

40. Are the concrete floors in Electrical Room C7 and Mechanical Rooms C30 and C31 to receive a concrete sealer?

No, concrete sealer does NOT have to be applied to Electrical Room C7 or Mech Rooms C30 & C31.

mailto:daniel.parks.2@us.af.mil

41. The drawings consistently state that there are 10 quads per floor in Building 342. That would be a total of 120 dorm rooms; however, the price schedule states there are 132 dorm rooms in B342. There is a note on sheet DM101-DM104 and on all the mechanical floor plans at page grid 1/A to 1/B (top left hand corner) that indicates that there is an additional quad not shown on the drawings for B342. This additional quad would make the total number of dorm rooms 132. Please confirm that the seed project includes 132 dorm rooms in Building 342.

See response to Questions #1 posted on 12 Oct 16. Specifically, Question 1 Response under the “Anticipated questions and answers from Civil Engineering.”

42. Do the controls that are required to be designed need to be accomplished by a licensed engineer or is it acceptable for the Controls contractor to provide shop drawings for approval?

Some temperature controls are shown on the drawings. Other temperature controls are indicated to be design-build. For all temperature controls, submit complete temperature controls plans that document compliance with specs and plans for written approval prior to installation. Temperature controls drawings should be provided by a temperature controls contractor. A licensed engineer is NOT required.

43. Are we required to provide our own “network switches?”

Except as needed for installation of the work, the temperature controls system will be active and connected to the McConnell network. Any temporary network switches needed during the construction should be provided by the Contractor.

44. Is there any requirements for Co2 sensors in the space?

No C02 sensors are required as part of this project.

45. Will the fire sprinkler system and/or the fire alarm system need to be disrupted during construction? If yes, what if any additional security measures will the government require e.g. fire watch, temporary fire alarms, adjustments to sprinkler heads, etc.

See notes on Shts FP101 (Bldg. 340 & 342) and FP101 (Bldg. 350).

46. Does the Government have a fire alarm servicer that they currently work with?

Bldg’s 340 & 342 have a Simplex fire alarm system and any modifications to these systems will have to be done by Simplex. Bldg. 350 has a Notifier fire alarm system and any modifications to it will have to be done by Notifier.

47. What is the name and contact information of the person or persons that will need to be coordinated with for security and fire alarm and suppression systems work and/or disruptions?

For emergency situations, dial 911. For situations other than emergencies, a Security and Fire Alarm point of contact will be assigned once the Contractor begins work.

48. Has the work area been checked for asbestos? What is the Governments’ policy if asbestos products are encountered during construction?

All three Dorm’s were built in late 1990’s or early 2000’s. There is no asbestos or lead paint in these buildings.

49. Does the Government currently have a 3rd party testing service for those items requiring testing or is the contractor free to locate and hire applicable testing firms?

It is unclear to 22nd CES which 3rd party testing is referenced. 22nd CES is aware of commissioning, testing and balancing, and hydronic water testing requirements. For these tests, the Contractor shall hire 3rd parties who meet the specifications provided. For any other testing referenced in the documents, the Contractor shall follow the directions provided in the documents.

50. Are there any electrical plans for new work on Building 350?

See response to Questions #1 posted on 12 Oct 16. Specifically, Question 2 Response under the “Anticipated questions and answers from Civil Engineering.”

1240047841A Text Box See Question #34