Questions_ _Answers_(5_Mar_15).pdf

Questions & Answers (5 Mar 2015)

1. Page 8 of 60, BID SCHEDULE Paragraph SABER COEFFICIENTS lists general items that the contractor’s proposed coefficient is to be sufficient to cover their costs. One of the items listed is “consultant fees”

Question: Please clarify the type of consultant fees that are to be included. ( Ie If a project design requires professional engineering with stamped drawings are those costs reimbursed under a cost line item or included in the coefficient as a ”consultant fee”) ?

Answer: It is rare that a SABER project would require professional engineering with stamped drawings. In the event this was part of a project requirement, it would be identified on the individual delivery order and negotiated under RS Means, or as a non-priced item. Consulting fees included in the coefficient would be correspondence and coordination with manufacturing and industry representatives in the execution of projects.

2. Attachment 5, STATEMENT OF WORK Paragraph C 106.2 Publications lists a publication to be provided as “RS Means Facilities File Data Base”.

Question: RS Means does not list a publication by that name being available. Is this a misprint?

Answer: “RS Means Facilities File Data Base – 3 copies” removed from document. See Revised Statement of Work, dated 18 Feb 2015.

3. Attachment 5, STATEMENT OF WORK Paragraph C 112.2 requires the Contractor to sponsor team building workshops.

Question: Please clarify what the government intends for the contractor to provide as part of sponsoring the event.

Answer: Team building workshop language clarified. See Revised Statement of Work, dated 18 Feb 2015.

Related Question: Please more closely define the number and duration of the follow up workshops.

Answer: See Revised Statement of Work, dated 18 Feb 2015.

4. Attachment 5, STATEMENT OF WORK Paragraph C 302.3.1.1 states in part “Costs of items in Division 1 of the Means Facilities File Data Base are already included in the line item cost for that extension.”

Question: As explained in Question 2 above, that publication does not appear to exist. Please clarify.

Related Question: If this sentence is meant to say “ Division 1, RS Means Cost Data” then this paragraph is in direct conflict with Section 01 40 00 Paragraph 1.7.1.2 which better defines the elements of cost that are not included in a line item and should be covered by the contractor’s coefficient. Please clarify.

Answer: “RS Means Cost Data” changed to “Facilities Construction Cost Data” under C 302.3.1.1. Additionally, C

302.3.1.1 was also amended to mirror Section 01 04 00, Para 1.7.1.2. See Revised Statement of Work and Revised Section 01 04 00, dated 18 Feb 2015.

Follow-up Question (23 Feb 15): Per amendment #1, Statement of Work Paragraph 302.3.1.1 last sentence was changed and now conflicts with surrounding language. Please verify/confirm.

Answer: Our change to this section of the SOW was incorrect. This has been corrected and clarified in Amendment 2. See the revised Statement of Work (dated 23 Feb 15), Paragraph 302.3.1.1.

5. Attachment 5, STATEMENT OF WORK Paragraphs C 302.3.1.1.1 thru C 302.3.1.1.4 lists RS Means sections.

Question: The division numbering listed does not agree with the current RS Means numbering system.

Please clarify.

Answer: See above responses to Question #5. This section was amended to mirror that of Section 01 04 00, Para 1.7.1.2 of specifications using the Facilities Construction Cost Data.

6. Attachment 5, STATEMENT OF WORK Paragraph C 304.12.1.1 states in part “…shall be multiplied by the associated R.S. Means City Cost Index Weighted Average for Kansas City, Missouri.”

Question: Section 01 40 00 Paragraph 1.5.1.3 is in conflict when it states “use the most current published Weighted Average Total CCI.” Please clarify.

Answer: The City Cost Index Weighted Average for Kansas City, Missouri will be used to calculate costs for all delivery orders issued under this contract as stated in Attachment 5, Statement of Work Paragraph C 304.12.1.1. and in the SABER Specs, Section 01 04 00, Paragraph 1.5.1.2. Para 1.5.1.3 changed to “RESERVED”. See Revised Section 01 04 00, dated 18 Feb 2015.

7. Section 01 40 00 Paragraph 1.1.1.6 requires the contractor to provide e4Clicks and RS Means Training. The training is to be held on Whiteman AFB.

Question: Will the government be providing the facility for these training sessions?

Revised Answer (23 Feb 2015) : The correct section is Section 01 04 00. The Government will provide the facilities and computers for this training. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to provide the certified instructor and all training materials for this training. See Revised Section 01 04 00, dated 23 Feb 2015.

Related Question: Will the contractor be responsible to provide computers for the 4 clicks training?

Answer: No. Computers will be provided, see revised Section 01 04 00, dated 23 Feb 2015.

8. Section 01 40 00 Paragraph 1.5.1.1 refers to task orders at various military installations in Colorado.

( ie Peterson AFB, Ft Carson etc.,)

Question: The solicitation does not require work at installations other than Whiteman AFB. Has this clause been included in error? Please clarify.

Answer: Para 1.5.1.1 changed to “RESERVED”. See Revised Section 01 04 00, dated 18 Feb 2015.

9. Attachment 5, STATEMENT OF WORK Paragraphs C 303.1 thru C 303.1.2 explains markups to be added to Non-Priced Items. Section 01 40 00 Paragraph 1.6.1.3

Question: Section 01 40 00 Paragraph 1.6.1.3.a contradicts this with the statement “Do not apply any type of markup to these line items” Please clarify.

Answer: Section 01 04 00, Paragraph 1.6.1.3, revised to avoid contradiction. See Revised Section 01 04 00, dated 18 Feb 2015.

10. Section 01 40 00 Paragraph 1.5.3 states “The non-prepriced line items shall be summated and the appropriate coefficient applied”

Question: As there is no “appropriate non-prepriced coefficient” being proposed in the Bid Schedule, does this sentence refer to the mandated markups listed in Attachment 5, STATEMENT OF WORK Paragraphs C 303.1 thru C 303.1.2 ?

Related Question: Please clarify that the coefficient proposed for RS Means pre-priced line items will not be applied to Non Pre-Priced items.

Answer: Section 01 04 00, Paragraph 1.5.3 revised to read “The non-prepriced items shall be summated to provide the non-prepriced line item total.” See Revised Section 01 04 00, dated 18 Feb 2015.

Related Question: The indicated excerpt is from PAGE 01 04 00-6 of the Specification below:

i. The Contractor shall provide copies of e4Clicks software, and electronic databases sufficient to provide 1 network operation of six terminals concurrently and to operate two stand-alone laptop computers. This software shall be supplied to the Contracting Officer, within 21 calendar days of contract award and exercised contract periods.

Question: Will the expense incurred by the contractor in meeting this obligation be considered a reimbursable expense?

Answer: This is not a reimbursable expense and must be included in the Offeror’s coefficient.

11. Section L Part II Price Proposal Paragraphs A-E.

Question: What is the required number of copies of the Price Proposal?

Answer: As stated in Block 13 of the SF 1442, please provide an original and one (1) copy of your offer in response to the solicitation.

12. Section L Part III Past Performance Proposal Question: Part III – Past Performance Information requires Offerors to provide a Reference List identifying all businesses and Federal, State, or Local Government agencies for which the Offeror has been awarded a contract during the past five (5) years (maximum of 10 most recently awarded contracts). Further, the solicitation outlines eight items that must be addressed for each reference on the list. Is it acceptable to provide a summary Reference List/Table (outside the page limitation) followed by a two-page description per reference contract addressing each of the 8 required items in compliance with the 2-page per contract page limitation?

Answer: Yes, a summary Reference List/Table is acceptable and will not be counted against the page count for Part III.

Question: Please clarify if a Title Page, Table of Contents and Cover Letter can be provided outside of the page limitations stated for Part I and Part III?

Answer: Yes, the Title Page, Table of Contents and Cover Letter would be considered outside of the page limits stated in the

Question: Page 52 of the solicitation; paragraph F, states that Offerors shall submit a Reference List of their ten (10) most recently awarded contracts. Please provide clarification for joint ventures: In the case of a joint venture, is the requirement for a combined total of 10 contracts for the Offeror and/or its partners or is the requirement for 10 contracts for each joint venture member?

Answer: This would be a combined total of 10 contracts. The makeup of each is at the discretion of the Offeror.

Question: In regards to Part III – Past Performance Information, are documents that satisfy the Other Present/Past Performance Information requirement (e.g. Professional/Industry Awards, Letters of appreciation, recognition or commendation, etc.) excluded from the page limitation?

Answer: Yes, these are excluded from the page limitation, but please keep to information relevant to the evaluation for this

Question: Part III – Past Performance Information, item B states, “Offerors may include with their proposal, information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the Offerors corrective actions.” Is this narrative excluded from the 2-page per contract page limitation?

Answer: No, this information would be included in the 2-page limit.

Question: Please verify if a single stand-alone project is relevant to submit for the Part III proposal? If yes, what is the dollar range that would be considered relevant?

Answer: No, single stand-alone projects would not be considered relevant past performance.

Question: Please verify that an IDIQ contract that has a total value over $5M is relevant to submit for the Part III proposal. If so, does this contract have to be completed or can it still be open?

Answer: If the IDIQ contract meets the definition of relevant in Section L, Part III, Paragraph A. That dollar value would be adequate, but a determination as to whether the work meets this definition would have to be made. The contract does not have to be completed. Substantial work would need to be completed under a contract in order for us to evaluate the past performance of that contract.

Question: Are resumes part of the page count?

Answer: Yes, resumes are considered part of the page count.

Question: For Part III proposal – do awards have to be from highlighted projects? Are company awards allowed?

Answer: No, they do not have to be from highlighted project. Yes, company awards are allowed. However, please provide information that is relevant to the evaluation for this solicitation.

Question: Page 52, Paragraph "E", states that CCASS evaluations are to be submitted in lieu of the Performance Questionnaires if they exist. Contractors are instructed to "attach the evaluation to the questionnaire with the relevant solicitation number and submit directly to the 509th Contracting Squadron office before the official closing date and time." Does this mean that the government wishes to receive the CCASSs separately via fax, email, or mail (just like the PPQs), or is it acceptable for contractors to include the CCASSs within the proposal (Part III)?

Answer: CCASS evaluations “can” be submitted in lieu of Past Performance Questionnaires. CCASS evaluations can be submitted by the methods described for Past Performance Questionnaires (see response to question below), or they may be submitted with the offer, but they must be received no later than the date and time the solicitation closes.

Question: With regards to the government point of contact to receive the completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs): The point of contact and email address shown on page 52 of the solicitation, paragraph C, and is different from the email address provided in Attachment 2 (the PPQ letter). Please clarify which contact should receive the completed PPQs.

Answer: The correct point of contact is 509cons.sollgca@us.af.mil. This can be marked to the attention of SSgt Eric Wienke or James McCoy.

Question: Is there an overall page limitation for Part II Past Performance proposal? All that is stated is a 2-page per reference limitation.

Answer: You are correct; the limitation per reference is two (2) pages. The reference limitation is a maximum of ten (10).

Therefore, the page limitation for Part II, Past Performance Proposal is twenty (20) pages, excluding a cover sheet, title of contents page, and the PPQ or CCASS/CPARS record that corresponds to that particular project.

Question (27 Feb 15): If an 8(a) program participant eligible to bid this contract is ‘teamed’ with another non- 8(a) large business, is the ‘teaming’ entity considered the ‘offeror’?

Answer: For a teaming arrangement, the 8(a) contractor would be the prime contractor.

Question (27 Feb 15): If not, then will the Past Performance of ‘teaming’ partner in this instance be counted in the evaluation of at least 5 contracts?

Answer: Past performance of the teaming partner will be considered as highly as the 8(a) contractor. As for the reference to “5” contracts, the makeup of the past performance information provided is at the discretion of the offeror. There is no minimum or maximum for the parties involved. Please review the past performance requirements in Section L of the solicitation.

mailto:509cons.sollgca@us.af.mil

Question (27 Feb 15): If the ‘offerors’ are in a 'teaming’ agreement that is not a Joint Venture (which can have a cage code) then does the sanitized copy have to include only CAGE code of the prime contractor or of ‘all’ teaming partners?

Answer: The sanitized copy should state the CAGE code of the prime 8(a) firm only. Neither the prime nor the teaming partners should be named.

Question (27 Feb 15): Sec. L pg. 52 of 60 – Proposal Preparation Instructions, Part III(J), Joint Venture/Teaming Arrangement – Question: Understandably Sec 8(a) qualifying companies in SBA Region VII, as well as qualifying Joint Ventures in SBA Region VII would be considered ‘offerors’ – this is FAR specific. However, the evaluation and weight of ‘teaming’ partner’s Past Performance is not entirely clear in the FAR. With Past Performance being the deciding factor for low priced qualifying 8(a) companies, could the Gov’t. please elaborate on how important the Prime (or 8(a)) contractor’s past performance is as compared to the subcontractor or ‘teaming’ partner and who is actually considered the ‘offeror’.

Answer: As stated in Section M, page 59 of 60, Part III, Paragraph J, “Past performance regarding minor members of joint ventures or teaming arrangements will be considered as highly as the majority member of those arrangements.”

Question (27 Feb 15): Since this solicitation is restricted to Region VII, is there anticipation that there will be adequate competition from the Region?

Answer: Yes, based on our market research and coordination/approval in accordance with 13 C.F.R. § 124.507 with the Kansas City SBA District Office, we anticipate adequate competition based on a Region VII set-aside.

Question (27 Feb 15): Can an 8(a) company that qualifies from the region ‘team’ with a large business from outside of the region?

Answer: Yes, only the 8(a) contractor must meet the regional qualification requirements.

Question (27 Feb 15): Page 52, Paragraph F, first line, states that Offerors shall submit a Reference List “identifying all businesses and Federal, State, or Local Government agencies for which the Offeror has been awarded a contract during the past five (5) years”. Is this list limited to the contracts that meet the definition of “relevant” (as defined in Section L, Part III, paragraph “A” of the solicitation), or is this list supposed to include those contracts deemed relevant as well as other contracts the Offeror has been awarded in the last 5 years? (e.g., an Offeror may have 7 contracts that it considers “relevant”, with respective PPQs/CCASSs, but it may also have been awarded 3 other contracts within that timeframe that do not meet the relevancy definition.). The word “all” in Paragraph F, first line, is what raises this question.

Answer: The Reference List described in Paragraph F is your most recent contracts with Federal, State or Local Governments.

Further down in this paragraph, we instruct offerors to identify on this list those who were forwarded questionnaires, or that an Offeror submits CCASS/CPARS information in lieu of a PPQ. This list does not have to be the same contracts used for the Past Performance evaluation described in the previous sections of Part III, Past Performance Information.

13. General Questions Question: Please clarify that this is a single award?

Answer: This is a single award. Reference Page 53, clause 52.216-1, Type of Contract.

Question: Is there a font size limitation?

Answer: Please keep font size to a minimum of 11.

Question: When preparing our proposal should the POC named be changed from Derek Crader to Eric Wienke?

Answer: The POC listed will not matter for submission of an offer, as long as the proposal is properly marked in accordance with the solicitation.

Question: When will Attachment #6, Specifications be posted to the solicitation?

Answer: Attachment #6, Specifications was posted to the initial solicitation on 4 February titled as “Specifications (zip file).zip”.

Question (27 Feb 15): What percentage of the work will be done after hours? What percentage will be done in secure/controlled areas?

Answer: As we do not know what requirements we’ll have, a firm percentage cannot be provided for either question. After hours work is rare and is mostly limited to testing or power outages. Occasionally, we’ll get requests from the Contractor to work after hours for various reasons, but it’s rarely mandated. As for secured/controlled areas, historically, this has been approximately 5 to 10% of the work under the SABER contract. This is only an estimate and will not effect any future contract pricing.

14. Div 01 31 01 paragraph 1.1.1.3

Question (27 Feb 15) Div 01 31 01 states: “The contractor shall maintain a Job Foreman on each project site with work being accomplished. …..”. Is the intent of this paragraph for the prime contractor to have personnel on each active Delivery Order site at all times work is going on, or can this person cover multiple Delivery Order sites?

Answer: Your Site Superintendent (Job Foreman) can cover multiple sites. However, each site would need to have a site foreman or lead person at all times. This could be personnel from a site subcontractor also. The Site Superintendent required by Section L of the solicitation would cover multiple work sites though.

15. Div 01 35 29

Question (27 Feb 15): Per Div 01 3529 paragraph 1.6.1.1.a. “….. The Contractor Quality Control (QC) person can be the SSHO on this project. …….”. Question: Can the site general superintendent also be the SSHO on this contract?

Answer: Yes

16. Additional 8(a) Questions

Question (27 Feb 15): What is considered a ‘qualified 8(a) firm’? Does this mean that the 8(a) firm has to be serviced by SBA Region VII or headquarted there? Also, can a firm only contain a bona-fide office, or branch office, in Region VII to be considered qualified?

Answer: In accordance with 13 C.F.R. § 124.507, A Participant may have bona fide places of business in more than one location. In order for a Participant to establish a bona fide place of business in a particular geographic location, the SBA district office serving the geographic area of that location must determine if that location in fact qualifies as a bona fide place of business under SBA’s requirements*. A Participant must submit a request for a bona fide business determination to the SBA district office servicing it. The servicing district office will forward the request to the SBA district office serving the geographic area of the particular location for processing. In order for a Participant to be eligible to submit an offer for a 8(a) procurement limited to a specific geographic area, it must receive from SBA a determination that it has a bona fide place of business within that area prior to submitting its offer** for the procurement.

*The determination of a bona-fide office operating within Region VII is solely at the discretion of the SBA.

**Offeror’s will need to submit the completed SBA bona-fide business determination with their offer in order to be considered responsive and to be eligible for award This additional documentation will not count against any page limitation previously stated in the solicitation.

17. Bonding (5 Mar 15)

Question: What are the acceptable forms of proof that a firm can provide for the $750,000 reserve bonding?

Can an irrevocable line of credit in lieu of the reserve bonding be provided?

Answer: All that is required as far as responding to the solicitation and being considered responsive is the bonding capacity documentation as stated in sections L and M of the solicitation. After award, the reserve bonding is included on a SF 25, Performance Bond and SF 25a, Payment Bond. This bonding covers all concurrent delivery orders between $30K and $100K pusuant to the Miller Act. An irrevocable line (or letter) of credit, or other form of alternate payment protection, is not acceptable.

Related Question: Must we provide the proof of the reserve bonding with our proposal?

Answer: The proof of your bonding capacity is required as part of your proposal. See Section L of the solicitation for bonding capacity requirements.

Related Question: Will “reserving” $750K of the aggregate bonding at all times for the duration of the contract fulfill the reserve bonding requirement?

Answer: No. A separate $750K reserve bond is required in addition to the aggregate bonding requirements.

Related Question: Is it acceptable to renew aggregate and reserve bonding annually, like with the excercising of option years, versus having bonding open with a surety for the entire 5 years?

Answer: Yes.