RFI_MACC for KMC_Redacted.pdf
PDF 385 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA5613-24-R-0007
About this file
This document is a Request for Information (RFI) regarding a Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC) solicitation for the Kaiserslautern Military Community (KMC) and Spangdahlem Air Base in Germany, solicitation number FA5613-24-R-0007.
The key details are:
- The MACC is an Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite-Quantity contract consisting of design-build, sustainment, maintenance, alteration, repair, renovation, and minor construction projects on various federal and military installations.
- The estimated program value is $950,000,000 over a 9-year performance period with a 5-year base ordering period and four 12-month option periods.
- Project task orders may range between $1,000 and $20,000,000.
- The draft RFP documents have been released, and potential offerors are encouraged to provide comments and questions by August 21, 2023.
- An Industry Day event and one-on-one sessions will be held to provide information on the Highest Technically Rated Offerors (HTRO) evaluation method.
- The Air Force intends to award to each offeror that meets the HTRO Minimum Technical Threshold Rating.
View the file
Other files
Show all 25
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC) Kaiserslautern Military Community (KMC) and Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany
Solicitation Number FA5613-24-R-0007
Use or disclosure of data on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal 2 RFI Log
Please reconsider how many of these individual project work samples that offerors have to submit to achieve a maximum score. This requirement is a burden on contractors and will be a significant burden on the Government’s evaluation team to review hundreds of additional pages of documentation that will result in an offeror’s proposal. It is also in direct conflict with the purpose of HTRO procurements in streamlining evaluation times for the Government.
Government Response #3:
The Government does not intend to change the number of individual trades or Work Samples to achieve a maximum score.
Question #4: Section L, para 4.6.1.6, the 60% individual trade participation of the total project requirement significantly puts a strain on both contractor offerors and the Government’s review team as this adds significantly more project work samples to have to be submitted with zero ability to submit work samples that could be utilized in multiple categories.
If an offeror has a work sample consisting of new construction or significant renovation of a facility, requiring all major trades to perform their respective scopes of work, this should qualify as a relevant project for all of these individual subcategories as it required the full scope of work for the individual trade. Using the Government’s current methodology, a project such as this would not qualify at all since no individual trade will add up to more than 60% of the total project value.
Section M states that is important for the Government to understand the offeror’s prior experience with the eight (8) individual construction trades. The Government can revise the requirement to include many more projects from offerors by stating: “Submit project work sample with (insert one of the eight individual trades) totaling more than €500k (or €750k).”
Please reconsider the current instructions and remove the 60% requirement for the individual trade subcategories to allow qualified prime contractor offerors to submit more than small, specialty repair-type projects.
Government Response #4:
The Government does not intend to change the percentage required for individual trades or Work Samples to achieve the maximum score. The intention of this category isn’t only to show ability to execute the individual trades, but also to ensure interest in smaller single trade projects.
Question #5: The Q&A states that: “At least 5 work samples (projects) should have been executed by the offeror itself.” Please confirm that, in the case of Limited Liability Company or Joint Venture with one or more entities that make it up, this means that any of the entities that make up the offeror can meet this requirement.
Government Response #5:
Correct, this means that any of the entities that make up the offeror can meet this requirement.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .