MACC_QA_Round_1_FINAL.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 22 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Holloman AFB MACC Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA4801-11-R-0003
About this file
This is not an amendment but rather a posting of additional clarifying information. Attachments to this post include MACC QA Round 1 (which consists of pre-site visit questions and answers) and Historical Workload (which consists of five powerpoint slides showing historical activity levels). A revised solicitation with extended response dates (responses now due 14 Nov nlt 1630 and round 2 questions due by 18 Oct) will be posted in the coming days as will a revised MACC SOW that deletes all.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 44
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Answers
| Category | Question | Answer |
| ADA/Handicap | The base cabinet described for the restrooms is not ADA. Is a wall hung lavatory acceptable? | Design stainless steel single bowl lavatory with 36" X 21" Wheelchair Vanity Cabinet |
| ATFP | Are there ATFP requirements for the Training Classroom? | Yes, please read the entire solicitation and all attachments, and UFC 4-010-01, Table 2-1 for Low Level of Protection for new construction. |
| BIM | Is BIM required for the classroom Task Order and for the contract in general? | Building Information Management is NOT required. |
| Certification | Will ASHRAE 189.1 apply to this project, and require continuous insulation? | ASHRAE 189.1 does not apply. |
| Certification | 1) Attachment 2 - MACC-SOW-19 August 2013-Page 4 of 19, Paragraph p states that the project must demonstrate the ability to achieve LEED v2.2 self-certification and must comply with the air force Sustainable Design and Development (SDD) implementing guidance. The SDD requires all projects meeting LEED minimum project requirements to be LEED silver certified under LEED 2009 and achieve a minimum of 20 points towards water and energy. The building meets the minimum requirements for new construction. | Even though this project meets LEED 2009 Minimum Program Requirements for new vertical construction , it does NOT need to meet any LEED requirements. |
| Certification | a. Is the intent to self-certify the project or to formally certify the project. | For the demo project, assume you will NOT have to meet Air Force LEED requirements, therefore, the cost of LEED certification shall NOT be included in the proposal. |
| Demo Project | 12. Page 66- Design- Is there a geotechnical report and a site survey report available for the demonstration project? | No |
| Demo Project Site | Our designers are working on the 65% design submittal for MACC demonstration project and want to confirm the building orientation in relation to the flagged corners at the site. I suggested the attached. Please concur and forward to other bidders if needed. | A site plan has been uploaded to Fedbizops showing an acceptable orientation. |
| Design | 3) One can interpret the MACC RFP requiring the design firm to prepare a 35% design for each DO RFP issued under the MACC. This would require the designer to commit significant fees with no assurance that they would ever be awarded a project. Is this the Government's intent? | If awarded a contract, a contract awardee is assured to be awarded at least the guaranteed contract minimum ($2,000). There is NO assurance that any contract awardee would ever be awarded a project beyond the guaranteed contract minimum amount as stated in the solicitation. |
| Design | 4) If an RFP for 35% design only is issued does the 35% design need to be completed as part of the RFP response? | There is no "design-only" project. All future projects will be either "design/build" or "build". All potential offerors should carefully read the solicitation and SOW. For information only, we are posting a chart on Fedbizops called "Awards by FY" that shows the level of activity from this office. It is our intention (but not a guarantee) to use, generally speaking, this MACC for requirements over $500K. Offerors must assess the state of federal budgets, their own situation and risk tolerance, and apply sound business judgement when and if this information is integrated into their calculation of any cost estimates or indirect FEP type rates. |
| Design | 5) General Provisions for Multiple Award Construction Contract, item e. Fixed Element Pricing (FEP): Questions: | |
| Design | i. In this scenario would the Government always issue two RFP's one for the 35% "design only", and one for the remaining 65% design and construction? | No. There is no "design-only" project. All future projects will be either "design/build" or "build". This is not an A-E contract. This is a construction contract that uses a "design/build" approach. Approach will vary with the project requirements, but most TOPRs will require a 35% design as defined in the Sow. Offerors will NOT be directly reimbursed for the 35% design. |
| Design | ii. Will the team who was awarded the DO to prepare the 35% "design only" be excluded from bidding on the DO for the remaining 65% design and construction? | The MACC contract is a "construction" contract with a "design/build" approach and is NOT intended nor considered by the Government to be an "Architect-Engineer" contract per FAR part 36.6. As such, the FAR 36.6 prohibition against the designer also being the builder does not apply, and neither does the statutory limit of 6% design cost. |
| Design | Will the government confirm that these three scenarios are correct? | All future projects will be either "design/build" or "build". |
| Design 65% | It appears that you are requiring a 60% design on all Task Orders at the proposal stage; this seems a bit advanced for a proposal. Is your intent to require 60% designs on all task order proposals? | The intent for this solicitation as stated in Section L is for a 65% design for the demonstration project. This is not typical for future task orders. More likely, future Task Orders will request a 35% design. |
| Design Cost | 1) Re: General Provisions for Multiple Award construction Contract item 2: Definitions, n. Design Cost (page 4 of 19): Please provide the United States statutes, FARS and/or DFARS that limits the design costs to a not to exceed value of 6%? | The MACC contract is a "construction" contract with a "design/build" approach and is NOT intended nor considered by the Government to be an "Architect-Engineer" contract per FAR part 36.6. As such, the FAR 36.6 prohibition against the designer also being the builder does not apply, and neither does the statutory limit of 6% design cost. |
| Design Cost | 6) Re: General Provisions for Multiple Award Construction Contract - We are confused by two the 6% statutory limit of the programmed amount, if applicable). Section 2. Definitions, item N. defines Design Costs as "Those costs identified by the Contractor, not to exceed the 6% statutory limit, as part of the DO process which represents the portion of the overall project cost attributed to preparation of the design for a construction project." Question: Are the total design fees limited to 6% of the overall project cost or are the fees associated with only the 35% design limited to the 6%of the overall project cost? | The MACC contract is a "construction" contract with a "design/build" approach and is NOT intended nor considered by the Government to be an "Architect-Engineer" contract per FAR part 36.6. As such, the FAR 36.6 prohibition against the designer also being the builder does not apply, and neither does the statutory limit of 6% design cost. |
| Design Cost | iii. Would the fee limit on the 35% "design only" DO be 35% of the total design fee limit of 6% of the total project cost? | Insert: The MACC contract is a "construction" contract with a "design/build" approach and is NOT intended nor considered by the Government to be an "Architect-Engineer" contract per FAR part 36.6. As such, the FAR 36.6 prohibition against the designer also being the builder does not apply, and neither does the statutory limit of 6% design cost. Delete: The fee for 35% design only will be negotiable up to the 6% limitation. |
| Design Cost | i. Would the designer only be entitled to 65% of the total design fee limit of 6% of the total project cost? | The MACC contract is a "construction" contract with a "design/build" approach and is NOT intended nor considered by the Government to be an "Architect-Engineer" contract per FAR part 36.6. As such, the FAR 36.6 prohibition against the designer also being the builder does not apply, and neither does the statutory limit of 6% design cost. |
| Design/Build | 2) Under this MACC there appears to be three scenarios where a DO may be issued: | There are only two types of task orders that may be issued under this MACC: a "design/build" (which will be the majority); and a "build only" in the rare circumstance where we already have a design to provide. An amendment will be issued to correct the SOW to remove the "design-only" task order type. |
| Electrical | Are floor outlets required in the training area? | No, install 20 amp receptacles in accordance with the building’s plan. |
| Energy | 7. Have these systems been reviewed to coordinate with the energy/sustainability requirements of the SOW? | Not Applicable since LEED certification not required on this demo project. |
| Energy | 8. If the systems are deemed not to meet the required energy performance are alternative systems acceptable? | Yes |
| Fence | Attachment 11 - SOW - Is 4 strand barb wire fence part of the project? | No. The barbed wire fence is NOT part of this project. |
| FEP rate | Are 35% design costs supposed to be included in the FEP rate? | Yes. Since future TOPRs will require all contract awardees to provide a 35% design with their response, and since they are NOT guaranteed ever winning beyond the guaranteed contract minimum, they may consider this cost as "proposal/bid preparation cost" and include it in the FEP rate calculation. Note that the SOW para 2.a.8.e.i. identifies "proposal/bid preparation costs" as an element that should be included in the FEP rate. It is ultimately up to the offeror to decide what to include in their FEP rate and how to recover the design costs, consistent with their own financial/accounting practices and the rules regarding allowability and allocability contained in FAR Part 31. Please note that NO UNALLOWABLE costs may be included in any FEP rate. |
| HVAC | 2. Is there a standard or preferred DDC control manufacturer or system beyond the LON requirements listed in the HAFB Design Compatibility Standards. | Preferred BPOC Router – Schneider Electric IA Series ENC-520 Enterprise Network Controller using NiagaraAX Software Package. All communications connections shall be made by the Contractor to government furnished Virtual Local Area Network (VLAN). Telephone modems will not be used for communication of EMCS. |
| Leed | b. What version of the LEED is to be followed-the SDD 2009 version or SOW referenced 2.2 version? | There is No LEED for the demo project. LEED requirements for future projects will be addressed in the TOPR when applicable. |
| LEED | Are there LEED requirements for the classroom building? | No. |
| LEED | Will the project be required to meet LEED Silver? | No. LEED is not required nor desired for the demonstration project. Even though this project meets LEED 2009 Minimum Program Requirements for new vertical construction , it does NOT need to meet any LEED requirements. |
| Mechanical | 9. Are mechanical systems allowed to be proposed that are not listed in he HAFB Design Compatibility Standards? | Yes. |
| Occupancy | What is the building occupancy, peak and average? | Assume a peak of 70 students plus 1 instructor and an average occupancy of 25 students plus 1 instructor. |
| Parking | Can ATFP setbacks be achieved relative to parking and to the controlled perimeter? | Assume yes. Design facility windows and doors to meet ATFP standards. |
| Parking | Is a parking lot required | No additional space for parking is required. Use the existing concrete pavement around trainer 17904 as parking for the new training facility (see location map attached to solicitation). |
| Parking | Attachment 10, Page 8/8, Project Location Plan - Does the area of the red box on the project location page 8 of 8 include the area for parking? | No, the existing pavements – the circular areas on the plans – will be used for vehicle parking . A sidewalk will be installed by the offeror from the nearest circular area (south) to the main entrance of the new training facility. No additional pavement will be part of this demonstration project. |
| Parking | Does the requirement for a parking lot still remain? | The vehicle parking for this facility will utilitize the existing pavements next to the proposed facility. No construction of parking areas is required under this demonstration project. |
| Past Performance | RFP Section M, page 74/76, item e - Can offerors provide information on an IDIQ contract as recent relevant experience or should offerors limit contract descriptions to a single project or task order? | You can provide whatever you want, but the Govt evaluation team will adhere to the definitions of recency and relevance that are presented in section M when considering the experience for impact on the overall performance rating. |
| Pre Fab Building | Attachment 11, SOW - The RFP states that the Fire Training Classroom is to be a pre-engineered building with metal exterior walls, HAFB Design Compatibility Standards encourage Zone 1 type buildings to have split face CMU on lower wall. Will split face CMU wall bases be required? | For this demonstration project, the CMU wainscot will NOT be required. |
| Sidewalks | What length of sidewalks are needed? | For this demo project, the contractor is to site the 40’ x 50’ pre-engineered building and design the 4’ wide sidewalk from the nearest parking area to the main entrance - the south pavement circle (see site plan). Actual distance as measured at site is 17.5'. |
| Signs | Attachment 11, SOW - Exterior Signs are not mentioned in the SOW. Will signage beyond the building identification be required? | There already is an exterior sign identifying the site for Fire Fighter Training. The only signage will be interior signs plus an exterior building number meeting Holloman standards. |
| Solicitation | a. Can the Government list all of the specific costs incorporated into the FEP rate? | No. Please read the entire the MACC solicitation and specifically sections B, L, and M of the solicitation and the MACC SOW for description of FEP rate. It is ultimately up to the offeror to decide what to include in their FEP rate and how to recover indirect costs and profit, consistent with the solicitation/SOW, their own financial/accounting practices and the rules regarding allowability and allocability contained in FAR Part 31. Please note that NO UNALLOWABLE costs may be included in any FEP rate, and realize that this rate, or a discounted rate, must be used in future task order competitions. Each offeror must balance the knowledge of their estimated indirect costs in the future, the risk associated with unknown levels of activity due to uncertain federal budgets, and the risk associated with unkown future success, etc, against the need to be competitive, while keeping in mind that this competition for the 3 to 5 basic IDIQ contract awardees will utilize the Lowest Priced/Technically Acceptable approach outlined in the solicitation. This is an acknowledgement that there is risk substantial here, and that's why offerors' participation is voluntary and appreciated. |
| Solicitation | Sec M (p. 71 of 76) appears to require a staffing plan for 9 individuals. | As a minimum, you must provide a staffing plan to include 11 individuals (including 2 superintendents and 2 drafting/surveyors). Note: offerors should identify individuals by name and demonstrate they meet the minimum qualifications. Merely stating that you possess personnel that meet the qualifications will not suffice. |
| Solicitation | Sec M (p72) indicates a (2) page limit to discuss QC, would these 2 pages be in addition to the 20 pages allowed for Factor 2, Sub factor 1? | No. 20 pages is the limit. |
| Solicitation | The 20 page limit for volume 2 does not appear to be able to accommodate such a plan would you consider allowing this to be added as an attachment or not accounting it against the page count? | No. 20 pages is the limit. |
| Solicitation | In planning out Factor 2, Sub factor 1 (between the requirements on page 66 a-e and section M-pg 71-72) and preparing to stay within the guidelines of formatting requirements of 1.5 line spacing and 2 pt font, we throw ourselves on your mercy to reconsider either increasing the page count or reducing the line spacing and font requirements. As specified, this will only allow 28+/-lines and 500+/-words for each page to cover no less than 43 items that we have identified as being required to be clearly and concisely explained in Sub factor 1. We beg to you reconsider and allow us more room to clearly address the large amount of information required by the solicitation | No. 20 pages is the limit. |
| Solicitation | Can the Government please provide the Financial Information Request referenced in Sub Factor 1: Construction Management and Capability? | Yes. It is posted now. |
| Solicitation | Can the Government please provide the Bonding Information Request referenced in Sub Factor 1: Construction Management and Capability? | There is no bonding form per se. Offerors should ask their bonding company to send a letter on their behalf. We must recevie it before the closing date. |
| Solicitation | The Government issued Attachment 8-4, Sample Past Experience List with the RFP. Are we required to submit this with our proposal? If yes, can you please indicate where within our proposal it should be submitted? | Not required. However, the offeror's proposal must provide the information requested in section L, and it will be evaluated in accordance with the procedures in section M. |
| Solicitation | Page 68 of 76 of the RFP references H. Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements.. Where within our proposal should it be included? | Please insert Table 1 at beginning of Volume 2 – Technical Proposal. |
| Solicitation | In the "Past Performance" section up of 6 recent projects can be submitted to illustrate relevant experience. As this is a Design-Build RFP can the projects submitted be from both the General Contractor and the Architect/Engineer? If so, can both submit 6 projects, or is 6 projects the limit for the combined Design-Build team? | Only the prime's past performance will be considered. If a Joint Venture, then the past performance of both partners will be considered. The stated limits still apply. |
| Solicitation | There is a discrepancy in the delivery address zip code. Pg 62 has 88330-8225, SF 1442 says 88330-8277 and FBO.gov says 88330-7908. I was hoping to get confirmation. | 88330-8225 |
| Solicitation | Please confirm the time due (on October 1st) is really 12:00 AM per the SF 1442. | The time is changed to 1630 MST. This means the package must be in my office and time stamped by 1630, not 1601. We go home at 1630. It is the contractor's responsibility to ensure the package arrives in time and in my office. We are not obligated to meet you at the gate. Strongly suggest you mail it in with plenty of time for shipping. If you show up at the gate at 1600 and we're all busy working other issues and can't come get it, and there is nobody here to receive it from you, your package will not be in my office and will not be time stamped. |
| Solicitation | Sec. M (p 71 of 76) indicates that the relationships with subcontractors can be demonstrated by a letter signed by a VP or higher. Will these letters count toward the page limit or can they be added as an attachment. | These letters can be attachments and do not count against the page limit. |
| Solicitation | 2. Page 63 of Solicitation, Page Limitations- Executive Summary is listed as exempt from the page limits, however, on Page 64, Section E, Factor 1- Price, the Executive Summary is listed as 3 Pages. Could you please verify the page limitations for the executive summary. | Executive Summary is limited to 3 pages. It is to be included as part of Volume 1, which has no overall limit, but the Executive Summary portion of it is limited to 3 pages. |
| Solicitation | 3. Page 65, Section e) ii Authorized Offeror Personnel- The section request the County and Facility Code. Can you please explain what is meant by a County and Facility code? | Just write down the county your facility is located in. Leave the facility code blank. |
| Solicitation | 4. Page 66, Sub Factor 1, Bank Reference- The Financial Information Request Form that is required to be filled out was not provided within the solicitation documents. Could you please provide the requested form. | It is now posted. |
| Solicitation | 5. Page 66, Sub Factor 1, Bonding – The Bonding Information Request Form that is required to be filled out was not provided within the solicitation documents. Could you please provide the requested form. | Offeror's should have their bonding company send a letter to the Contracting Officer with the requested information. The letter must be received by the closing date/time. |
| Solicitation | 6. Page 66- a) Design: “The contractor shall provide a complete 65% construction design which ensures the successful completion of the Demonstration Project..”. We respectfully request that the 65% design is limited to a 35% submission. A 65% design submission for this size of demonstration project will typically cost the Small Business Construction Contractor approximately $10,000-$12,000 from the Architectural Engineer Firm. The majority of all A/E firms will not provide a 65% design for a proposal without the associated fee. This is an extreme cost burden on all Small Business’s providing proposals for this contract. We respectfully request that this requirement is changed. | Submission of a proposal is voluntary. The solicitation is clear in that it seeks established general contractors with a history of success. It is our opinion that the demonstration project is relatively simple and straightforward and that a general contractor and his establish AE firm should be able to assemble a 65% design at minimal cost in comparison to the potential work at stake in this MACC acquisition. |
| Solicitation | 7. Page 67, a) Past Performance Information Sheet (PPIS): “Offerors shall submit information on at least three (3) but no more than six (6) RECENT contracts considered most RELEVANT in demonstrating performance abilities on the proposed effort. Also, Offerors shall include information, if applicable, on up to three (3) recent contracts performed by each joint venture partner considered most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort.” What is the maximum amount of projects that each Joint Venture partner is allowed and what is the minimum amount that each partner is allowed? | The overall limit applies. It is up to the offeror to decide how to allocate the information between JV partners. |
| Solicitation | 8. Page 67, b) Consent and Client Authorization Letter- The Consent Letter Form that is required to be filled out was not provided within the solicitation documents. Could you please provide the requested form. | It is now posted. |
| Solicitation | 9. Attachment 8-4 Past Experience List- A sample has been provided in the attachments (8-4), but we could find no reference to its requirement in Section L. Please clarify if this form was included within the attachments in error. | It's just a sample. You don't have to use it. |
| Solicitation | 10. Page 71- Sub-Factor 1- “Relationships may be demonstrated by a letter from each entity..” Where in the proposal submission should the letters of commitment be placed? Will these letters count against the page count requirements? | Letters are attachments and do not count against the page limit. Place them at the end of Volume 2. |
| Solicitation | 13. Page 67- Estimating Capability- Can you please provide us AF Form 3052? | |
| Specifications | Is there a survey of the site available? | Not required. Assume water and sewer supply lines and primary electrical power are within 50 feet of building. |
| Specifications | RFP - D.4.B.ii.1 (Page 73 of 76) indicated that the 65% drawings " will include dimensions and details, but not final sizing". Can you please elaborate on what is meant by "not final sizing"? We have gone over it with our design team and w cannot pin point exactly what this means. | "Not final sizing" means the 65% design includes dimensions for everything that can be dimensioned. Items such as mechanical equipment that can't be dimensioned until submitted and approved need not be included. |
| Task Order | Is there really a 35% only task order? How would this be awarded? | No. There is no such thing. See amended solicitation/SOW. |
| Wood Work | What length of casework will be required? | For this demo project, the contractor is to design the floor plan inside the 40’ x 50’ pre-engineered building to include the break area layout and the placement and layout of the wall cabinets in the break area. We expect the designer to use his/her professional judgement when determining what casework length shall be needed. |
| Zones | 1. The 2012 Holloman AFB Design Compatibility Standards references four distinct zones of HAFB. In which zone is the sample project located? | Zone 1 - mission |
| Zones | engineered building with metal exterior walls. Holloman AFB Design Compatibility Standards encourage Zone 1 type buildings to have split face CMU on lower walls. Will split face CMU wall bases be required? | For this project, no split face CMU wainscot is required. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .