Q A_Post_18_June_15.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

7TH CONTRACTING SQUADRON

DYESS AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS

Agile Combat Power

15 June 2015

MEMORANDUM FOR POTENTIAL OFFERORS

FROM: 7 CONS/LGCA

381 Third Street, Bldg 7238 Dyess, AFB 79602

SUBJECT: Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC) Dyess AFB Questions

1. Responses to questions submitted via RFI for FA4661-15-R-0002 are as follows:

a. Question: (Reference Pg. 49 Section L 4.0) How many projects can be included for Past Performance? Answer: There is no limit to the number of projects submitted as long as said projects comply with the other requirements stipulated in Section L.

b. Question: (Reference Pg. 50, Section L 4.0) Since our Govt performance evaluators have been repeatedly asked to complete PPQ’s for various RFP’s, some agencies will not complete the PPQ’s if CCASS ratings have been completed. May we submit copies of the CCASS rating in our Volume II in lieu of the PPQ’s? Answer: No. Offerors are responsible to ensure their reference sources receive, complete, and return the questionnaires on time. The Government shall consider the information provided from the Offeror and may well consider any other source when evaluating the Offeror’s past performance.

c. Question: (Reference Pg. 50, Section L 4.0) Some past projects have as many as 20 subcontractors. Do we really need letters of consent for subcontractors when it's the performance of the GC that you are evaluating? Answer: This requirement has been eliminated from Section L. Please refer to Amendment 1.

d. Question: (Reference Pg. 50, Section L 4.0) How do letters of consent comply with the 1 page per project limitation for Volume II per L-2.2? Answer: This requirement has been eliminated from Section L. Please refer to Amendment 1.

e. Question: (Reference Pg. 49, Section L 4.0) We have been in Govt Contracting for 30 years. Request Recency be expanded to past 5 years minimum i.e., Jan 1, 2010 to 1 July 2015?

Answer: No, recency is defined as projects successfully completed between January 1, 2012 and April 1, 2015.

f. Question: (Reference Pg. 50, Section L 4.0) Can PPQ’s in different format but with similar information be submitted in our Volume II in lieu of Attachment 4? Our raters are being asked to repeat essentially the same ratings for different RFP’s and some will decline to complete repetitive information. Answer: No, Attachment #4, Past Performance Questionnaire will be the required form. Offerors are responsible to ensure their reference sources receive, complete, and return the questionnaires on time.

g. Question: (Reference: FBO) Fbo.gov has Solicitation 1 and Solicitation 2 packages for download. Why are two packages available for download? What are the differences between the two solicitation packages and which is the correct package? Answer: There is no difference between the two solicitation packages posted to FBO. Due to an internet malfunction, the exact same solicitation package was posted twice. Unfortunately, FBO does not allow for the removal of individual document packages without deleting the entire solicitation. Offerors may use either package as they are identical in every aspect.

h. Question: (Reference Pg. 49, 4.0 - Vol II Past Perf) How many projects can be included for Past Performance? Answer: There is no limit to the number of projects submitted as long as said projects comply with the other requirements stipulated in Section L.

i. Question: (Reference [Drawings]) Plan sheets A-101 & A-102 for both buildings 7232 &7233 note that in the interior areas where HVAC equipment is to be removed, repair of the finishes for "flooring, wall base, wall paint and ceiling" is required. There is no information in the contract documents that indicates what these finishes are. Please clarify. Answer: Please refer to Sheet A-101 and A-102. Patching of existing finishes shall be done where removal of existing HVAC units were removed & damage from new construction. Contractor shall match existing finishes as much as possible. Contractor shall verify existing surfaces during site visit.

j. Question: (Reference Pg. 49, Section L, Para 3.2.4) Performance Objective #2 is to "provide drawings and documentation," however, it appears the Sample Project is Bid-Build.

Are drawings and documentation required to be submitted for this subfactor on the Sample Project, and if so, to what extent? Answer: This requirement has been eliminated from Section L. Please refer to Amendment 1.

k. Question: (N/A) FedBizOpps includes Solicitation 1 and Solicitation 2. Is this an errant duplication by the system or are there really two solicitations? If two solicitations, are we to propose on both of them? Answer: Please refer to the Answer to Question 'g' located within this document.

l. Question: (Reference Pg. 58, Section M-2.e, Para 2 AND Pg. 44, Section L, Para 1.1) We interpret the RFP to say that the sample project is not currently funded but that it may get funded by the end of FY15. Also, that there are task order projects (called seed projects in the RFP) that are already funded for the successful contractors in the MACC pool. Is our understanding correct? Answer: Yes, that is correct.

m. Question: (Reference Pg. 44, Section L, Para 1.0) Individual Task Orders may be up to $10M with a total of $100M. Does the Prime need to have the capability to bond $10M single and $100M aggregate? Answer: Yes, that is correct.

n. Question: (Reference Pg. 50, Section L, Para 5.0) The offeror's proposal shall include a signed copy of the Model Contract, and completed copies of Sections A through K. Sections C and D appear to be missing from the Model Contract. If these sections are applicable, please provide. Answer: Sections C and D are not applicable.

o. Question: (Reference Pg. 22, Clause 52.211-12 (A) and (b)) We understand that Liquidated damages will be specified per Task Order. However for this sample project, what are the LDs? Answer: Liquidated Damages for the Sample Project will be $427.81 for the first day and $301.90 for each subsequent day until project completion. This has been included in Amendment 1 (via the Sample Project Specifications).

p. Question: (N/A) Has the Government determined a Period of Performance for this sample project? Answer: The Period of Performance for the Sample Project is 385 calendar days. This has been included in Amendment 1 (via the Bid Schedule).

q. Question: (Sample Project Drawings) There doesn't appear to be any definition of the ceiling construction, i.e. drop ceiling, hard gyp, exposed, etc. Please define the existing and the replacement preferences. Answer: Typically, the exposed ceilings are reinforced concrete structural slabs with an integrally colored white surface bonding cement. This can be field-verified at the Site Visit.

r. Question: (Reference Pg. 47, Section L, Para 2.2.5) “Each volume of the proposal should be separately bound in a three-ring, loose leaf binder permitting the volume to lie flat when open.

Staples shall not be used. A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification, and the Offeror’s name. The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each binder. The requirement for identifying data does not apply to redacted copies. NOTE: THE COVER PAGE OF VOLUME III IS THE

ONLY PLACE THAT SHALL HAVE ANY IDENTIFYING FACTOR OF THE OFFEROR’S

COMPANY AND/OR LOGO. NO OTHER PAGE SHALL CONTAIN THIS

INFORMATION.” Is the Offeror’s name to be placed on the cover page of Volumes 1, 2, and 3, or ONLY on the cover of volume 3? Answer: As stated in Section L redacted copies of Volumes 1 and 2 should contain NO identifying factors of the offeror's company or logo. The only place (in redacted copies) that may contain such information is Volume 3.

s. Question: (Pg. 1, SF1442 [Section A], Para 13) Standard Form 1442 requires sealed offers in original and 2 copies while Section L, 2.2 requires 1 original, I redacted copy and I electronic copy. Please confirm the latter is acceptable. Answer: The SF 1442 does not allow for specificity in regard to what type of copies may be submitted. The requirement in Section L, 2.2 is correct.

t. Question: (Sections C and D) Is Section A the SF1442? The solicitation does not include Sections C and D. Section L, para 5.0 requires offerors to include a signed copy of the Model Contract and completed copies of Sections A through K. First, please confirm Sections C and D are not applicable. Second, what is there to 'complete' in the subject sections? Answer: Section A is the SF1442. For information on Section B, please refer to the solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.2. Section C (Description/Specifications/Statement of Work) is not applicable as those documents are incorporated via Section J. Section D (Packaging and Marking) is not applicable to a construction contract. Section E (Inspection/Acceptance), Section F (Deliveries/Performance), Section G (Contract Administration), and Section H (Special Contract Requirements) are included in the solicitation, however, Offerors are not required to submit any additional date as signature of the 1442 denotes complicity for these sections. Section I (Contract Clauses) does require the Offeror to fill out information for certain clauses. Section J includes the List of Attachments and Offerors are not required to submit any additional date as signature of the 1442 denotes complicity for this section. Section K (Representations and Certifications) does require information be submitted for each offeror.

u. Question: (Pg. 18, Section H-10, Para (b)) Off-ramp action may be required as detailed in the subject section, but up to that point, will all successful MACC contractors be afforded an opportunity to submit a proposal on all prospective Task Orders? Answer: Please refer to the Task Order Procedures in Section H-9 of the solicitation.

v. Question: (Pg. 19, 52.222) Please provide a 'building' and 'heavy highway' wage rate determinations for bid purposes. Answer: This has been added to Section J. Please refer to Amendment 1.

w. Question: (Pg. 21, 52.211-10) What is the required performance period for the Repair HVAC Bldgs 7232 and 7233 seed project? Answer: Please refer to the Answer to Question 'p' located within this document.

x. Question: (Pg. 22, 52.211-12) What is the liquidated damages rate for the Repair HVAC Bldgs 7232 and 7233 seed project? Answer: Please refer to the Answer to Question 'o' located within this document.

y. Question: (Pg. 45, Section L, para 2.0(d)) Where should the offeror make a 'clear statement in Section A' of the proposal documentation volume that the proposal is valid through 30 September 2015? If Section A is the SF1442, would Items 13D and 17 suffice? Answer:

Yes. Please refer to the instructions in Item 17 which states, "The offeror agrees to perform the work required at the prices specified below in strict accordance with the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in writing within ________ calendar days after the date offers are due. The minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)" Although Item 13D cannot be filled out, by filling out Item 17 and signing the proposal (via the SF 1442), the Offeror is agreeing to the terms and conditions of the solicitation.

z. Question: (Pg. 46, Section L, Para 2.2) Volume I, Technical, requires the offeror to provide a comprehensive Project Management Plan (PMP) that details the management approach used for design, site clearing, demolition, construction, completion, turn-over, quality control, schedule, management of designers, consultants and subcontractors, as well as our ability to coordinate and execute all work throughout the design and construction phases, hire qualified key project and support staff, account for fluctuations in the workload, etc. We are also required to include an explanation of the total project team management approach for both the design team and the construction team. Further, we are required to provide a resume for the Project Manager.

It is not practicable to develop and present a comprehensive PMP with a five (5) page limitation.

Would the Air Force consider increasing the PMP page limitation to twenty (20) pages to afford offerors an opportunity to make a comprehensive presentation? Answer: The goal of the five

(5) page limitation stipulated in Section L is to encourage offerors to be both succinct and clear in their narratives. The Air Force will not increase the page limit for this subfactor.

aa. Question: (Pg. 46, Section L, Para 2.2.1.1(b)) The subject proposal criteria affords the offeror an opportunity to provide tables, charts, graphs and figures to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. Can offeror proposal elements such as D- B team overview, an organization chart, design team resumes, summary schedule, etc. be included as an appendix that would not count against the PMP page limitation? Five (5) pages is insufficient. If an appendix is not acceptable, please let us know where these items can be included. Answer: The D-B team overview, organization chart, and résumé for the Project Manager may be included as appendices/attachments for the PMP. Additional appendices not required by Section L are not desired, nor will be evaluated by the Government. Please refer to the previous answer (z) on page limitations.

ab. Question: (Pg. 49, Section L, Para 3.2.4) The table in paragraph 3.2.4., Subfactor Two, lists Performance Objective 2. which states, "Provide drawings & documentation". What drawings and documentation are required in light of the fact that the solicitation drawings are sealed and appear to be 100% complete? Answer: Please refer to the Answer to Question 'j'

ac. Question: (Pg. 49, Section L, Para 4.0) The subject proposal criteria requires the offeror to provide a list of ALL of their most recent and relevant past performance data. Recognizing the Table 2.2, Volume II page limitation (3 pages, 1 per project), where should this list of ALL of our most recent and relevant projects be included? Answer: The 3-page limit shown in Table

2.2 in Section L, Paragraph 2.2 is an error and has been addressed in Amendment 1. The page limit is 1 per project submitted, with no limitations on the number of projects submitted, as long as those projects comply with the recency and relevancy criteria outlined in Section L, Para 4.0.

The list of all projects submitted may be placed at the front of Volume II.

ad. Question: (Pg. 49, Section L, Para 4.0) The subject proposal criteria requires a consent letter to be submitted with the offeror's proposal. Would the Air Force please elaborate on this requirement? In particular, since the client questionnaires will be returned directly to the Air Force, how would the offeror know if there is adverse past performance information to which it needs to respond? Further, where in the proposal should the consent letter, responses and client authorization letter(s) be included considering the past performance three (3) page limitation?

Answer: This requirement has been eliminated from Section L. Please refer to Amendment 1.

ae. Question: (Pg. 54, Section M, Para (a)(2)) Consistent with a 'best value' procurement, the relative importance of factors and subfactors is: Past Performance, Technical and Cost/Price.

Both Factor 2 and Factor 1 are represented as being more important than price. Employing this methodology, it is conceivable that a 'superior' past performance and technical proposal might not ever be reviewed if the offeror's price is slightly higher than the five (5) lowest-priced proposals, assuming all are technically acceptable. Are we interpreting the evaluation process correctly? Is there any way that all proposals could be reviewed for technical acceptability?

Answer: Please refer to Section M-2, Para (b), where the proposal evaluation process is addressed.

af. Question: (Drawings Sheet G-001) The Project Title on Drawing G-001 states, "Design Repair for HVAC System'. What design will the offeror be required to perform? The solicitation drawings are sealed and appear to be 100% complete. Answer: G001, G002, & all title block Titles: "Design Repair for HVAC System" is the project title assigned to the FNWZ 99-0013. There is no design effort required by the contractor for this project at the current time.

ag. Question: (Pg. 3 & 5, Section B) Section B of the RFP shows three CLIN items: 0001, MACC Design; 0002, MACC Construction; and 0003, MACC Downtime. The maximum amount for each CLIN shown on page 5 of 58 of the RFP is listed as $10,000,000. Please clarify if the maximum value of contract awards to a single contract holder for the full term of the contract and option years (5 years) for CLIN 0002 MACC Construction is $10,000,000. If it is not, can you please provide additional explanation? Answer: For IDIQ contracts, the contract software system requires Task Orders be built using CLINs found in the base contract. Three separate CLINs are provided to better enable Task Order matching should projects require design and/or downtime. As stated in Section F-2, Clause 52.216-19, and Section L Para 1.0 of the solicitation, Task Orders are not expected to exceed $10,000,000. However, please refer to Section H-9 Task Order Procedures for further information.

ah. Question: (Pg. 50, Section L, Para 4.0) Will the Department of the Air Force accept official CCASS evaluations in lieu of the Attachment #4, Past Performance Questionnaire? It has been our experience that many project POC’s are reluctant to answer PPQs for projects that already possess official CCASS evaluation. Answer: Please refer to the Answer to Question 'f'

ai. Question: (Pg. 47, Section L, 2.2.5) This section specifically says “…volume III is the only place that shall have any identifying factor of the offeror’s company and/or logo. No other page shall contain this information.” However, Table 2.2, Proposal Organization specifically requires each volume to have an original copy along with a redacted copy. Presumably, identifying information for each company would also appear on each original copy submitted.

These instructions are contradictory. Please clarify. Answer: Please refer to the Answer to Question 'r' located within this document.

aj. Question: (Drawings M-502) Some civil information appears to be missing. While some underground info is provided, there doesn't appear to be any definition of the existing soils, backfill requirements, etc. Please provide this info for accurate pricing. Answer: Refer to details & specifications. The following is a soil sample boring result from a 1990 construction project at Bldg 7232.

2. Please complete Attachment #6, Question Submission Form if your firm has questions concerning any aspect of the solicitation. All questions must be submitted to the 7th Contracting Squadron by 2:00PM CST on Tuesday, 23 June 2015. Specify the page, section, and paragraph number pertaining to your question. Late inquiries/questions will not be entertained.

Additionally, since offerors are required to perform in accordance with commercial and industry standards, information that is standard within the commercial industry will not be provided.