Pre-Proposal_Conference_Minutes.pdf

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE MINUTES

MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC)

THROUGHOUT THE KMC AND SPANGDAHLEM AB

RFP # FA5613-19-R-0003

1. The pre-proposal conference convened on 07 Nov 2018, 0900 hrs, at building 518, on Ramstein Air Base.

2. Ms. Elizabeth Preston, Procuring Contracting Officer, 700 CONS/PKC, Construction Flight, welcomed all attendees and introduced the government panel comprised of individuals from 700 CONS, 86 CES/CEN and 52 CES/CEN to the contractors. Representatives from 52 CONS were unable to attend. All contractors signed in on the pre-proposal conference attendance sheet (Attachment 1).

3. The purpose of this conference was to provide an overall understanding of the objectives of the above referenced acquisition, to discuss the requirement, to explain significant elements of the solicitation and to give an opportunity for questions and answers (Q&As).

4. Ms. Preston pointed out the following topics to supplement what’s shown in the briefing slides (Attachment 3) during the conference:

a. Rules of Engagement: Ms. Preston indicated to all attendees that she would be the single point of contact for all communication regarding this source selection. Questions to the contract specialists or CE side by the current MACC contractors shall only refer to the current MACC contracts. Ms. Preston emphasized to all contractors to write their questions on cards which were distributed before the conference started. She also pointed out that the terms and conditions of the solicitation remain unchanged, regardless of remarks, explanations or answers unless the solicitation is formally amended in writing.

b. Administrative Comments: Referring to this subject, Mrs. Preston notified all attendees that the briefing slides, the conference minutes and the attendance sheet will be posted on FedBizOpps (FBO).

c. Announcements: Several deadlines were pointed out, i.e. RFP released date, proposal due date, upcoming amendment 0001 to include adding the missing shelfing layout drawings attachment to the Attachment 3, Seed Project SOW and revising the SOW to clarify the type of sprinklers are required for the Seed Project.

5. At this point of time Mr. Michael Klingel, Technical Advisor for the KMC Areas, 86 CES/CENMP, continued with the MACC program overview referring to the technical requirements of the MACC contract and the primary bases/geographically separated units to be served as indicated on the briefing slides. He further explained the procedure of the individual task orders (TO), including the roles of the TO request for proposals (TORFP) once the basic

MACC contracts are awarded. In addition, he indicated the difference of the three work elements and pointed out the contractor’s requirement of performing work equivalent to at least an average of twenty-five percent (25%) by his own workforce under each task order. Mr.

Klingel continued explaining the technical factor by pointing out the requirements and scope of work for executing and completing the seed project (35% concept design per statement of work) under subfactor 1. He instructed the contractors not to contact/use igr AG or Cammisar A&E firm as a design subcontractor due to these two firms’ involvement in developing the requirement. By using these firms, the offerors were cautioned that an automatic disqualification for award would kick in. Mr. Klingel further explained the Quality Management Plan (QMP) in regards to the contents requirement under subfactor 2.

6. Ms. Preston continued by pointing out the tentative milestones time schedule from the RFP issued/posted date up to the first TO issuance. She further explained the acquisition approach by indicating the type of contract, the government’s intend on the number of contract awards and reserved number of “on-ramp” contractors, the unrestricted competition, the basis of award and the eligibility for award. She also referred to the evaluation process and discussions by highlighting the government’s intent to evaluate and award without discussions and listing the three evaluation teams on technical, past performance and price. Concerning the price proposals, she pointed out that they will be evaluated on 100% construction price for the seed project which also includes the cost for completing the project to determine reasonableness. Ms. Preston continued highlighting several items of interest to remember such as the registration requirement in the system for award management (SAM) to be eligible for award. In addition, the proposals shall not include unnecessary information. They shall be clear and precise with sufficient detail for easy evaluation. She explained the required set up (three volumes) of the proposals: Volume I, technical portion including subfactor 1 (35% concept design for seed project) and subfactor 2 (QMP) being rated as acceptable or unacceptable; Volume II, past performance in reference to recency assessment, relevancy assessment and performance quality assessment. Rating definitions and samples of rating assessments were provided for informational purposes as indicated on the briefing slides; Volume III, price and other contracting considerations (price completeness and reasonableness, price data). At this point of time Ms. Preston provided several suggestions for building a solid proposal, such as carefully reading Section L, thoroughly reviewing all RFP attachments, providing detailed past performance information and ensuring PPQs are turned in, double checking the price figures, not proposing design cost separately and submitting the price in Euro.

7. Ms. Preston informed all attendees that she received three questions prior to the conference and provided the answers to those questions. The official answers to those questions were included in the Consolidated Q&A 2 (Attachment 2).

8. For informational purposes, Ms. Preston explained that the 4th and the last option period for the current MACC contract will run out on 10 Sep 2020. Since the overall maximum contract ceiling amount on the current MACC is being reached sooner than expected, the new MACC contract has to be awarded one year earlier prior to the current contract expiration. Currently, the contract is in its 3rd option which will run out on 10 Sep 2019. The new MACC contract is scheduled to be awarded on 01 Aug 2019. As a result, two contracts will be overlapping for a short period of time. It will be upon CE to decide which MACC contract to use for issuing solicitations/task orders during the overlapping contract periods. This will also depend on how close the current MACC is to the ceiling level.

9. The contractors requested how long they could still provide written questions under the solicitation. Ms. Preston informed them that questions are still acceptable until 17 Nov 2018.

10. Mrs. Preston informed all attendees that no one-on-one sessions were requested by the contractors.

11. No further questions were raised. The conference concluded at 1000 hrs. The site visit to the seed project site, Bldg. 2176 followed immediately after the conference. All questions raised from the site visit are also included in Attachment 2, Q&A 2.

ELIZABETH H. PRESTON

Contracting Officer

Attachment 1: Pre-Proposal Conference/Site Visit Attendance Sheet Attachment 2: Q&A 2 Attachment 3: Pre-Proposal Conference Briefing Slides