Amendment 1 Attachment 1 Paving IDIQ Q_A.docx

Paving IDIQ

FA5000-R-21-0008

Questions & Answers

1. What do we anticipate will be the average size, in dollars, of the task orders?

a. The government anticipates 10 task orders with an estimate of 60% being airfield projects. The estimated average size for each is $2M. Information regarding the average amount of task orders and average dollar values annually is located in Section L, para. B.4(g) (page 60 on the original solicitation)

2. In regards to concrete and asphalt, where will the dump site for each material be located?

a. Concrete removed from jobsites is currently dumped in the gravel pit off the Richardson Highway.

b. Asphalt is currently dumped at two locations in the gravel pit off of the Richardson Highway. The location within the pit is determined by the need for recycling.

c. The aforementioned locations are what is currently done. Mission and project requirements may alter the location.

3. How much paving will be done by 673 CES compared to the contract?

3. The government is not clear as to the meaning of the question. Please see question 1’s answer if it addresses this question. The 673 CES does not perform paving except via task orders or other contracts. The 773 CES performs some paving projects using their own crew and equipment. Most of that paving is small M&O type work, however they do occasionally perform larger projects. The dollar value or expected future work by the 773 CES is unknown.

4. Will the bid for the seed project be incorporated with the spread sheet for the IDIQ or be completely separate?

a. The Unit Price should be filled out for both Tab 1- Roadway and Tab 3- Seed Project. The prices for Tab 3- Seed Project column shall be identical to Tab 1-Roadway’s CY21 prices. The quantities need to be filled out in Tab 3- Seed Project in accordance with your bid.

5. Is there any anticipation on alterations to utilities and/or draining system on the seed project (or any other project)?

a. Anticipated utility impacts to the seed project only include the storm water system between the two buildings.

b. Other task orders that will be awarded as part of the paving IDIQ contract may include utility conflicts that will need to be resolved.

6. Is there any anticipation for an expansion to the gravel pit extraction site?

a. Nothing is planned now. The base has 427 acres available at the site for gravel extraction. If the developed area where gravel is currently being mined becomes unusable, the 673 CES will designate a new area within the 427 acres and it will be the contractor’s responsibility to develop and operate the new site. See the attached aerial from 2011 and EA from 2008 for additional information.

7. Will there be an extended Statement of Work for the seed project at bldg. 5257?

a. No. Between the bid items for the project, the drawing, and the specifications associated with each bid item, the scope of work for the seed project should be clear. Bidders may ask specific questions about the project if something is not clear.

8. How many firms does the Government anticipate allowing to participate in the referenced IDIQ? What firms participated in the last airfield paving IDIQ? From a practical standpoint the Government is allowing 2 business weeks for firms to assemble a significant RFP with a seed project estimate. Will the Government consider extending the submission period?

a. This is a single award IDIQ. The previous IDIQ was also single award and the contractor was ASRC Civil Construction LLC. The government has extended the submission period.

9. What is the dimension of the Multi-plate culvert that connects the two sides of the gravel extraction area?

a. The CES does not have record drawings of the culvert. Rock trucks, front end loaders, and other large heavy equipment have successfully used the culvert.

10. Please confirm the seed project documents are for reference only and are not to be priced with the proposal.

a. In accordance with Section L, B.3.(a), the seed project will not be used in evaluation for the base IDIQ but used to meet the requirements of AFFARS 5316.504(a)(2) and award the first task order under resultant contract. However, the unit prices (not total price) for this seed project shall be identical to the prices for CY21. Bidding for the seed project is required to be considered for the IDIQ award.

11. SF 1442 and Page 65 states that a bid guarantee is required for the proposal. If the seed project is not to be priced, please clarify whether a bond is or is not required?

a. The seed project is required to be priced. A task order for the seed project will be issued upon award of the IDIQ. A bond for the seed project is required.

12. Page 59; Section 4. Part III – Past Performance Proposal; (b) Performance Surveys/Questionnaires. This section states that “PPQs shall be sent directly from your reference to this office marked to the attention of Mr. John Jeffrey and SrA Tyler Norris via e-mail to john.jeffrey.1@us.af.mil and tyler.norris.1@us.af.mil”; however, Attachment 12 requires PPQs to be sent to Michael Lankford michael.lankford.1@us.af.mil. Please clarify.

a. Please see revised Attachment 12. The correct contacts to send your proposal is Mr. John Jeffrey and SrA Tyler Norris.

13. Page 64; Section L requires a response to FAR 52.223-22. Please indicate which section of the proposal should contain our response to this requirement.

a. Due to limitations of the contract writing software, the text of the clause was placed in the wrong section (supposed to be in Section K). Please fill this clause in the section it is currently located (Section L, page 64).

14. The RFP indicates high annual task order(s) projection between $18M and $22M. If consistent over the 5 to 7 year contract period, equipment utilization/commitment is not an issue. Conversely, if there are years with a significant drop in task order revenues this complicates unit pricing given the investment into major on-site equipment supported by small annual revenues. Cost recovery of major paving equipment vs. task revenues. Will the Government provide Contractors with revenue information that allows the Contractors to provide competitive unit costs without unreasonable risk? Would the Government consider adding a per each mobilization/demobilization bid item?

a. The government does not anticipate falling below the task order projections stated in the solicitation nor does the government anticipate a significant drop in task order revenues. However, there is no implied guarantee of the quantity and volume of projects. Please refer to Sections B and I of the solicitation for ordering limits and maximum order and contract value. A separate mobilization/demobilization bid item is not being considered.

15. In regards to COVID-19, will vaccinated individuals prove sufficient for base access or will additional testing still be required for access?

a. Due to the nature of uncertainty of health protection measures, the contractor must comply with Section C, paragraph 1.7. “The Contractor is required to know the HPCON level and comply with the State of Alaska, local Municipality, and JBER Covid-19 Installation health mandates. Failure to comply with the guidelines or restrictions may result in suspended access to JBER or debarment.”

16. Section L of the solicitation limits past/current performance to 3 years. This is a very short time frame when considering up to 10 projects/contracts. Would the Government consider 5 years?

a. No. Part of the past performance evaluation is to evaluate the offerors’ ability to manage the number of simultaneous projects this IDIQ will require. The Government anticipates approximately 10 projects per year under this IDIQ. Offerors that must go back five years to find 10 projects will find it difficult to meet that requirement. Note that the solicitation does state “up to” 10. A small number of contracts, or even one contract that demonstrates the desired number of projects is sufficient. The Government does not request or desire 10 contracts with multiple simultaneous projects performed.

17. Section L 4 Part III (b) states to send Mr. Jeffrey and Mr. Norris. However, Attachment 11 Cover sheet states the PPQ should go to Mr. Huffines, and Attachment 12 PPQ states the PPQ should go to Mr. Lankford. Please advise the recipients of the PPQs to meet the requirements?

a. The recipients of the PPQs are Mr. Jeffrey and SrA Norris. Attachment 11 and Attachment 12 have been amended to state the correct recipients.

18. When will the Government issue an amendment that addresses questions to date? This is a significant RFP to pull together with only two weeks remaining. Does the Government anticipate an RFP submission postpnement?a

a. The RFP submission date has been extended via amendment no. 1. Please see amended RFP submission date.

19. Per the contract documents the contractors independent quality control is incidental. Would the government consider adding a pay item for this cost?

a. The government will not be adding a pay item for quality control. Quality control is the contractor’s responsibility.

20. Section I C3 states: The aggregate of the increases in any contract unit price made under this clause shall not exceed 7.5 percent of the original unit price. There is no percentage limitation on the amount of decreases that may be made under this clause. Will an increase of greater than 7.5 percent on a unit price for material shown in schedule be accepted providing supporting data can be submitted explaining cause?

a. No. The Government is not going to accept higher increases under this contract. Note that the increases, if any, will be to the prices in effect at that time based on the prices bid for each year. Also note that a similar clause was in the previous contract and prices never changed sufficiently to trigger it. Please refer to Section H 1.3 calculation for price adjustments.

21. Form 1442, 13b requires an offer guarantee. However, elsewhere it states that bid guarantees are required for task orders. Is the seed project considered a task order that should be accompanied by a offer guarantee in the proposal?

a. Please refer to clause 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee for the bid guarantee amount. The seed project is considered the first task order IAW Section L 3(a).

22. Does the incumbent contractor have existing task orders not yet completed?

a. No, the incumbent contractor does not have any task orders that are not completed.

23. Three-year cutoff. Solicitation page 60 of 69, 4.(f) identifies projects within the last (3) years. The number of airfield projects in Alaska is limited and this limitation creates advantage for the incumbent that has serviced JBER on a SATOC. Expanding relevant past performance to five years would promote reasonable competition. Will the Government allow project completed or in progress within the last (5) years to encourage competition?

a. JBER is not the only airfield in Alaska. Projects for other airfields are acceptable and expected. Additionally, the previous contract was awarded over five years ago. Therefore the Government is not aware of any potential offeror such an extension would benefit regarding the ability to show work on JBER.

24. Are Questions required via DoD SAFE?

a. No. Questions are not required via DoD SAFE and may be emailed.