Roofing_RFP_QandA_February_21_2014.pdf

Enterprise Roof Replacement and Repair RFP

FA8056-14-R-0001

Please note the time period for Questions and Answers has officially ended IAW the Synopsis posting on 17 Jan 2014.

This is the final posting of the Q&A Document.

RFP Questions & Answers February 21, 2014

For reference, the following Questions and Answers provide clarification for the Enterprise Roof Replacement and Repair RFP. Questions are organized by topic and then by date; oldest to newest within each topic. Bolded dates indicate that the question has been added since the prior version of the Questions & Answers document was posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website.

Topic Index Page #

A. Process Clarification 1

B. Scope Clarification 7

C. Bonding and Warranties 8

D. Roof Types 9

E. Regional Breakdown / Limits on Proposing 10

F. Joint Venture 10

G. Subcontracting 17

H. Contractor Responsibility 19

I. 25% Mandatory Prime Contractor Performance 22

J. 80% Task Order Participation 23

K. Pricing 23

L. Technical Requirements 30

M. Small Business/Small Business Categories 40

A. Process Clarification

Date Posted On FBO

1. Question:

Just saw this requirement posted and it appears to be the same that was issued a week or so ago with Mr. Richard Porter as the Contracting Officer. This RFP has Mr. Luke Schultz. Did the Contracting Officer change?

Answer:

Mr. Luke Schultz will be the Contracting Officer for this requirement. Mr. Richard Porter, the previous Contracting Officer, has been assigned to a different workload. Mr. Schultz's contact info is

Address: 1940 Allbrook Drive, Building 1, Room 300 Wright Patterson AFB, OH 45433 Telephone: 937-257-2541 Email: luke.schultz@us.af.mil

2. Question:

When is the last day / time to submit questions or concerns regarding this acquisition, Roof Repair and Replacement Construction for the United States Air Force (USAF)?

Questions / concerns regarding this acquisition should be submitted no later than midnight, Eastern Standard Time, 5 calendar days prior to when proposals are due.

01/17/14 mailto:luke.schultz@us.af.mil

3. Question:

Will there be a site visit or any other pre-proposal meeting?

No; there will not be another pre-proposal conference or site visit. A pre-proposal conference was held back in April 2013. The details of that meeting are located at https://www.fbo.gov/notices/5315b78a19d92969b1bf45b7c5524c6b

Note: There are some changes from that pre-proposal conference information and the requirements in the final RFP.

4. Question:

I am having trouble entering some of the data on Attachment A – Proposal Cover Sheet Template.

It will not allow me to enter my 5 digit zip code

It will not allow me to enter the Offer expiration date of 10/24/2014, which would be 240 days from the offer due date

We are aware of the errors in attachment A. A solicitation Amendment correcting these errors will be released shortly.

5. Question:

The section indicates that RFP Section J, Attachment 1 - Roofing Management Plan and Attachment 2 - Roofing Price Matrix are only to be provided electronically. The Offeror will not be required to provide these items in the original hard copy volumes II and IV. Is this correct?

Answer:

Yes, Attachment 1 - Roofing Management Plan and Attachment 2 - Roofing Price Matrix are to be submitted electronically. This requirement is called out in RFP Section L, paragraph 3.7. Electronic submission of these attachments must be in accordance with RFP Section L, paragraph 3.6.

6. Question

2.1 In the Organization and Page Limitation table, the hard copy of the line item "Volume III Ref 7.3 Roofing Price Matrix" is required. Is this different from Attachment 2 roofing Price Matrix, which will only be provided electronically in referenced to the Section L, paragraph 3.7?

Answer:

Yes, that is correct. The submission required in RFP Section L, Paragraph 7.3 is Attachment 2 - Roofing Price Matrix. This matrix is required to be submitted electronically only. We will correct the table of contents in RFP Section L, in the Table at 4.2 to reflect this. Sorry for the confusion.

1/31/14 https://www.fbo.gov/notices/5315b78a19d92969b1bf45b7c5524c6b

7. Question All questions, concerns, requests for clarification are to be sent to both the Primary and Alternate Contracting Officers. The Primary and Alternate COs listed in 2.3 are the same contact, Luke Shultz. Is it the Government's intent to not have the Alternate CO?

Answer:

The Government intends to name a new Primary PCO, but hasn't yet finalized on who that will be.

Once we have identified that Primary PCO, the solicitation will be amended with the correct name and contact information. In the interim, please send all correspondence to Mr. Luke Schultz.

8. Question The Offeror needs to allow additional time for delivery by mail due to security screening on packages at the Wright-Patterson AFB mail processing facility. Can the CO provide an estimated or average time allowance for the security screening?

Answer:

No, the CO cannot provide an estimated or average time allowance for the security screening. Our best advice is to send the proposal well before the due date, and confirm that it was received. The POC is Mr. Luke Schultz, (937) 257 – 2541, luke.schultz@us.af.mil.

9. Question It is stated that the RFP document shall be returned in its entirety. Does this mean that the proposal needs to include pages 3-137 in its entirety?

Correct, the RFP must be returned in its entirety. We expect to see all pages returned, even pages 1-2 which were not identified in the question.

10. Question In the Q&A, having 60 days to prepare the proposal is mentioned several times, however, when this RFP was posted 60 days was not afforded.

Answer:

In the Q&A from the Pre-Proposal Conference held in April 2013, the AF did state that it would allow 60 days for response based upon an anticipated RFP release date of mid-June 2013. However, given the total amount of time that interested parties have had to consider their approach, pricing, and teaming, and the minimal degree to which the RFP has changed since April 2013, the AF believes that the current deadline is more than adequate.

The date proposals are due is as stated in the solicitation, on page 1 of the RFP, field 10, on SF 1442.

2/7/14 mailto:luke.schultz@us.af.mil

11. Question:

I am unable to enter a date in the Date field, Cell "I1", for any of the regions in the Roofing Management Plan, Attachment 1. I have tried several formats including the specified format, MM/DD/YYY, and have been unsuccessful with all attempts.

Answer:

That date field in Attachment 1 - Roofing Management Plan has been corrected in RFP Amendment 0003 posted on FBO on 2/10/14.

12. Question:

I am trying to put the company phone number in the Attachment A - Proposal Cover Sheet. The form requested (555-555-5555), and the form will not accept it.

Answer:

That phone number field in Attachment A - Proposal Cover Sheet, has been corrected in RFP Amendment 0004 posted on FBO on 2/14/14.

13. Question:

Since the estimated or average time allowance for the security screening cannot be determined, can I hand-deliver the bid package to Mr. Luke Schultz? What protocol do I need to follow? Please provide any form that needs to be filled out for access.

The process for base access will be posted to FBO the week of 17 Feb 14.

14. Question:

Reference: Page 114/137, table in section 4.2 and page 115/137, section 5.3. The table on page 114/137 lists 4 sections for Volume 1. Section 5.2 on page 115/137 does not show in which sections or tabs the required information should be placed. What should be placed in each of the sections/tabs for Volume 1 - Proposal Validity, Model Contract, Task Order 0001 Signed Statement, and Contract Information?

To clarify, in the RFP Section L, page 114/137, a table is listed with 4 Volumes. The requirement stated on page 115/137 Section 5.2 is fulfilled when the Offeror submits Attachment A - Proposal Cover Sheet Template, with Volume 1. We do not require the sections within each Volume to be organized in a specific matter with tabs as long as all the required information is included within each Volume. Please resubmit your question if this answer does not address your question.

15. Question:

There is an issue with the text when you try to print the 'Instructions' page of Attachment 3. Some of the text does not print?

We have no issues printing the document. Please review your printer settings.

2/14/14

16. Question:

Since the requirement for Volume lll will be only the Price Matrix and no paper copy, does that mean that no Binder for Volume lll is necessary since there will be nothing in it?

Answer:

No that is incorrect. As stated in RFP Section L, Paragraph 3.7, no hard copy is required for Volume III Price, however, a separate binder for Volume III Price is still required. This binder shall include the electronic version of RFP Section J, Attachment 2 - Roofing Price Matrix which shall be copied onto a CD/DVD. Reference RFP Section L, Paragraph 3.6.

17. Question:

Subparagraph 3.5 on Page 111 (Amendment 0001) states “Each binder in the proposal shall include a title page, table of contents and a glossary of any abbreviations and acronyms.” However, the table provided in subparagraph 4.2 on Page 114 does not include a title page or glossary of abbreviations and acronyms for any of the volumes. Please clarify if we should follow the instructions in subparagraph 3.5 or subparagraph 4.2.

The Offeror shall follow the instructions in RFP Section L, Paragraph 3.5.

18. Question:

Page 115 of the RFP states that “The Cover Letter Template, RFP Section J Attachment A, shall be included as the first page of this volume [Volume I] as discussed in Section 3.4.” Section 3.4 on Page 111 states that “The Cover Letter Template meets the requirements at FAR 52.215-1, paragraph (c)(2)…” However, in the table in Section 4.2 (Page 114), the Cover Letter Template is placed behind the Master and Volume I Tables of Contents rather than as the first page. Please confirm if the Cover Letter Template (Attachment A) is supposed to be placed as the first page in Volume I, or if a separate Title Page meeting the requirements of both FAR 52.215-1 paragraph (c)(2) and paragraph (e)(1) and

(2) is to be placed as the first page, with the Cover Letter Template (Attachment A) being placed after the tables of contents where indicated in the table in section 4.2.

Please submit the Proposal Cover Sheet Attachment A as the first page of Volume I. Reference RFP Section L, Paragraph 3.4.

19. Question:

We just wanted to clarify what it meant by submitting "Attachment 1 - Roofing Management Plan Worksheet" and "Attachment 2 - Roofing Price Matrix" electronically. Does this simply mean that these items should be included on the CD/DVD for their respective Volume ("Attachment 1 - Roofing Management Plan Worksheet" on the CD/DVD for Volume II - TECHNICAL PROPOSAL and "Attachment 2 – Roofing Price Matrix" on the CD/DVD for Volume III - PRICE) or is there some other method in which this items are to be submitted electronically or on-line?

RFP Section J, Attachment 1 and RFP Section J, Attachment 2, shall be submitted electronically on CD/DVD as explained in RFP Section L, Paragraph 3.6

2/19/14

20. Question:

Our company, is planning to hand deliver the bid proposal for the above referenced project next Wednesday. I know in the last set of questions and answers a response was given that the needed Security clearance information would be posted this past Monday for those people that wanted to hand deliver the proposal. I see that this information still hasn't posted to the FBO website. If you could please let me know when this information will be available as we have already booked a flight.

Answer:

In order to hand deliver the Proposal, please provide the following information to Ms. Carrie Cable or Mr. Andre White by 4 pm Eastern Standard Time, three (3) business days prior to the Proposal due date.

The following information should be e-mailed to Ms. Carrie Cable or Mr. Andre White.

The legal name of the person (as stated on the person's driver's license) who is hand delivering the Proposal

A valid email address

The state the driver’s license was issued from

The driver’s license number

The date and approximate time of the expected Proposal delivery

Acknowledgment they understand they should only use Gate 12A, Area A Across from 3660 State Route 444

Fairborn, Ohio 45324

Once base access has been approved the individual will be notified via email by Base Security.

The individual will then be required to print the base access guest pass from their own computer and bring it with them when hand delivering the Proposal.

Please allow sufficient time to get through the gate security check process; at certain times of the day there may be significant delays (morning, lunch, etc.).

The points of contact for base access are as follows:

Ms. Carrie Cable email: carrie.cable@us.af.mil phone: 937-257-4823 Mr. Andre White email: andre.white.7@us.af.mil phone: 937-257-2397

21. Question:

What is the anticipated award date? This information is required for the 8(a) Joint Venture application.

The anticipated award date is the last Quarter of 2014.

2/21/14

B. Scope Clarification

1. Question:

It appears that you intend to rely on Roofing Contractors to determine roof replacement, as opposed to roof repair or restoration, when an independent roofing consultant can make that determination without an ulterior motive. We also offer technical document preparation and in-progress, quality assurance inspections to assure we're getting what we're paying for. Can you provide any input regarding how we could go about pursuing this business?

The Small Business Administration may be able to provide advice on marketing your services.

2. Question Can a firm with a primary NAICS of 236220 bid as a prime? The answers to the questions do not say yes or no. We are an 8(a) Tribal Owned 236220 company with a secondary NAICS of 238160. In the NAICS of 238160, we are under the size standard.

Answer:

If a firm represents in System for Award Management (SAM) that it is a small business under NAICS 238160, it is eligible to submit a proposal.

What is the estimated construction range or budget for this bid?

Those firms that win IDIQ contracts will be awarded a $1,000 post award conference, and will be eligible to compete for construction work within the region of their successful proposal. Values of projects will vary, and will be identified by the ordering contracting officer. Ceiling values for the Regions are identified on page 68 of the RFP. They are as follows:

West: $80M Midwest: $20M Northeast: $40 M Southwest: $70 M Southeast: $115 M

Please note that in RFP Section L, the projected projects section that starts on page 123, the Government provided information concerning the size of Task Orders you may see in each Region.

C. Bonding and Warranties

Is the following correct? Bid Sureties are not required for this project, only Surety Letters stating the appropriate limits as associated with each region?

Correct, for purposes of winning an IDIQ contract, bid bonds are not required. The bond capacity letter must meet the requirements described in RFP Section L, Paragraph 6.4.4 found on pages 118-119 of the solicitation document. The bond capacity letter will be evaluated according to the requirements found in 11.2.4, 11.2.5, and 11.2.6 page 134 of the solicitation.

Bonding limits, the RFP states in the Midwest that the largest job could be 3,500,000.00 and a dozen could be over a 1,000,000.00 if that's the case could we just have 5,000,000.00 in bonding? And is the total bonding for 5 years? Just hard for an 8(a) small business to get that much bonding in the amount of 8,000,000.00.

Answer:

An actual bond is not required in response to this RFP. Instead the Offeror must furnish a bond capacity letter from an approved Surety, as per RFP, Section L, paragraph 6.4.4, which identifies its aggregate bonding capacity. Aggregate bond capacity is defined as the total value of bonded projects that an Offeror may carry at any given time. The aggregate bonding requirement will remain as stated in the RFP.

Actual bonds will be required after award of the IDIQ’s, when task orders are solicited.

The manufacturer of the roofing product must provide up to 20-year No Dollar Limit (NDL) warranty for water tightness for work that the Offeror performs. This is separate from the warranty the Offeror provides for work completed stated in 6.5.3. Is this correct?

Answer:

No. The manufacturer NDL is the same warranty as referenced in 6.5.3. We expect that the prime contractor will be capable of conveying to the Government the manufacturer's 20 Year NDL Warranty for installation work that is subcontracted. We will amend the RFP to clarify.

D. Roof Types

Does the Offeror need to have experience on all eleven (11) roof types in the region they are submitting a proposal?

There is no specific requirement for the Offeror to prove they have experience on all eleven (11) roof types in the region they are submitting a proposal. Offerors however, must demonstrate that they are capable of performing all eleven (11) roof types. This is accomplished with submission of applicator agreements and subcontractor prequalification documents per Section L, paragraphs 6.4.3 and 6.5.2.

Section L, 8.3 defines the Corporate Experience requirements for Offeror.

Does the Offeror need to have experience on all eleven (11) roof types to submit proposals in their two selected regions?

Answer:

There is no specific requirement for the Offeror to prove they have experience on all eleven (11) roof types in the region they are submitting a proposal. Offerors however, must demonstrate that they are capable of performing all eleven (11) roof types. This is accomplished with submission of applicator agreements and subcontractor prequalification documents per Section L, paragraphs 6.4.3 and 6.5.2.

Section L, 8.3 defines the corporate experience requirements for Offeror.

What is meant by "Metal (Hydrostatic) Membrane" as one of the roof types?

Structural Metal Roofing Systems are sometimes referred to as "Hydrostatic" (water barrier systems) and Architectural Metal Roofing System are sometimes referred to as "Hydrokinetic" (water shedding), but the inclusion of the word membrane in this roof type description is causing some confusion. Can you please clarify what is meant by "Metal (Hydrostatic) Membrane" by providing examples and manufacturers of these types of systems and describe how it is different than the "Metal Roof" roof type.

Answer:

What currently reads as Metal (Hydrostatic) Membrane Roof, is understood by others to mean Metal (Hydrostatic) Roof which is the intent. Any standing seam metal roofing manufacturer should supply product that meets the UFGS specified in the RFP. To understand the difference between Metal Roof and Metal (Hydrostatic) membrane please review the UFGS referenced in the RFP (page 9, item number 0007, and page 13, item 0011).

1/24/14

All roof types included in the UFC 3-110-03, Roofing, are included in the scope of this project, even if they are not specifically included within the 11 roof types listed in 2.3. Should the contractor use the UFC 3-110-03 for pricing?

Answer:

RFP Attachment 3 – Roofing Typical and Most Difficult Projects Descriptions, should be used for pricing.

Only 11 roof types in this RFP are in scope. Any roofing work done to these 11 roof types is included in the scope. UFC 3-110-03 contains additional roof types not included in the scope of this RFP. Use the instructions in the RFP, Attachment 3, for submitting the pricing information as required, for evaluation.

E. Regional Breakdown / Limits on Proposing

FA8056-14-R-0001 on this solicitation - the small companies are allowed to bid on no more than 2 regions. Are the Teaming large partners allowed to bid on all 5 Regions with different partners?

Please remember this is a 100% small business set-aside, therefore companies must meet the requirements of FAR 52.219-6. However, there is no restriction on the number of regions in which a subcontractor (large business or small business) may participate in work with small business and 8(a) Offerors on this solicitation.

F. Joint Venture

Per section 8.3, Corporate Experience of Offeror, if we plan to propose as a joint venture, will you accept experience from the individual firms? For example, 3 projects from Company A, 2 projects from company B.

Yes, for firms proposing as a formal joint venture, we will accept Corporate Experience from the individual firms.

On past performance in a joint venture does that have to be as a joint venture or can one company use their past performance?

Answer:

The past performance of the individual companies along with that company’s own past performance on any additional contracts performed under a joint venture can be utilized to satisfy the past performance requirement. Past performance of a different company to the joint venture will not be imputed to the Offeror, reference the RFP Section L, paragraph 11.2.2.

How do you determine experience if one company in the joint venture has more than 40 years of roofing experience and the other company doesn't have roofing experience, can we use just 1 of the companies experience?

Yes, as long as one company in the joint venture has 5 years of experience and meets the other experience requirements in RFP Section L, paragraph 8.3.

We are an 8(a) firm and would like to submit a proposal for the projects in the Southeast under a Teaming Agreement with a very experienced roofing company. As part of our proposal, we would submit to you the Teaming Agreement, including our roofing partner's commitment to perform the work jointly with us as it is awarded. Will you consider our Team's past experience and capabilities as the Offeror's?

Answer:

Only in the case of a formal Joint Venture, we would accept past experience and capabilities of your roofing partner. If the Teaming Agreement is a prime / subcontractor relationship, we would not accept the experience of the subcontractor. Please reference Section L, paragraph 8.4.1 and FAR 9.601.

We are an 8(a) contractor. Do we need to submit a teaming agreement if we are teaming with a small business partner? If so, where should we include this in the proposal?

Answer:

If entering into a formal joint venture, a document showing SBA approval of the joint venture is needed for 8(a). The RFP will be amended to require, prior to award, the Government will require evidence of a formal relationship among the Joint Venture members and to clarify where in the proposal it will be included. If the teaming arrangement is a prime / sub relationship, no teaming documentation is required other than what is required in Attachment 1 – Roofing Management Plan Worksheet.

6. Question:

Under RFP Amendment 0002 that was issued, USACE is requiring that all contractors that need a partner to meet the qualifications, has to be currently enrolled in a joint venture. This requirement creates difficulty for the smaller 8(a) firms and the rule seems not to support the growth of disadvantaged firms. The costs and effort of joint ventures for these specific contracts creates an undue burden on the smaller 8(a) firms. We request that Formal Teaming Arrangements be considered for the 8(a) firms with the intent of creating a joint venture if successful in obtaining an award on the contract. This type of arrangement would considerably ease the costs and constraints of the current language in Amendment 0002 and justify the costs and effort to assemble a formal joint venture if the teamed firms proposing are successful with an award.

Answer:

Your question referred to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), however this requirement is from the U.S. Air Force (USAF). To clarify, the requirement does not state that all contractors who partner must be in a joint venture to meet the qualifications. The Government will accept Small Business Teaming Arrangements (see below) for proposal evaluation; however, Small Business Teaming Arrangements that include 8(a) members must be formalized and approved by the Small Business Administration (SBA) as a Joint Venture under 13 CFR 125.1(u).

“Formal Small Business Teaming Arrangements” is not a reference found in 13 CFR 125.1. Small Business Teaming Arrangements include joint ventures and prime/subcontractor relationships between small businesses in accordance with 13 CFR 125.1(u). All Small Business Teaming Arrangements between prime/subcontractor must be provided to the Contracting Officer as part of the proposal submission in accordance with 13 CFR 125.1(u)(2)(ii).

Please also note that the SBA must approve an 8(a) joint venture agreement prior to the award of an 8(a) contract on behalf of the 8(a) joint venture (Reference 13 CFR 124.513(e)(1)). Joint Ventures that include 8(a) firms must submit their joint venture application to the SBA at the time of Offeror proposal submission to the USAF and the application must be approved by the SBA prior to contract award.

7. Question:

Please clarify if a signed Teaming Agreement between teaming partners will allow the team to use the experience of all team members?

Answer:

As the 1/31/14 response to question F4, only in the case of a formal Joint Venture, we would accept past experience and capabilities of your roofing partner. If the Teaming Agreement is a prime / subcontractor relationship, we would not accept the experience of the subcontractor. Please reference Section L, paragraph 8.4.1 and FAR 9.601.

8. Question:

Per Q/A dated 7 Feb 14, question #4, concerning Joint Ventures; with the original RFP absent of any language that JV's will be required for offering firms to use teaming member experience and now that it has been determined that Joint Ventures are going to be required, we respectfully request a 3 month time extension, to allow viable firms to create a formal SBA joint venture with their teaming partners.

Since that requirement was never a part of the Solicitation, it appears that this decision would serve as a basis for protest once the project is awarded. We also again request that this requirement be reconsidered and allow teaming arrangements to be allowed.

The terms of the RFP were not changed by the answer to Question #4 (Section F) provided on 7 Feb 14.

RFP Section L, Paragraph 8.4.1 provides that corporate experience of “The Offeror” will be assessed.

Only the prime contractor may be considered “The Offeror”, which does not include subcontractor experience. Therefore, the RFP terms remain unchanged and do not require that additional proposal preparation time be granted.

Regarding the request for teaming arrangement acceptance, please refer to the answer provided in Question # 6 (Section F). For further clarification on Small Business Teaming Arrangements or 8(a) Joint Ventures, please refer to 13 CFR 124.513(e) and seek guidance from your legal counsel and the

SBA.

9. Question:

In the Q & A dated 1/31/14, the government stated that "evidence of a formal relationship among the Joint Venture" must be included in the proposal. Can we submit a copy of SBA issued Joint Venture Agreement submitted for approval to meet this requirement? What other formats/documents are allowed to meet this requirement? The reason for this question is because the actual submission includes an inordinate amount of pages of supporting documents.

Answer:

As long as the information submitted, demonstrates that the SBA has received your application, and you meet the requirement per RFP Section L, Paragraph 5.7. Offerors do not need to submit the additional supporting documents.

10. Question:

I did not see an amendment to the solicitation stating where to include the document showing the SBA has approved the 8(a) joint venture. Can you please specify where this documentation belongs?

The document showing the SBA has approved the 8(a) joint venture belongs in Volume I - Contract Documentation. Please refer to RFP Section L, Paragraph 4.2 and Section L, Paragraph 5.7.

As the joint venture agreement application is still under consideration by the SBA at the time the proposal submission is due, it is our assumption that we may include a copy of the JV agreement as evidence that one has been submitted to the SBA and that proof of the approval of the JV may be submitted to the contracting officer prior to award. Is this so?

Answer:

The SBA must approve an 8(a) joint venture agreement prior to the award of an 8(a) contract on behalf of the 8(a) joint venture (Reference 13 CFR 124.513(e)(1)). Joint Ventures that include 8(a) firms must submit their joint venture application to the SBA at the time of Offeror Proposal submission to the USAF and the application must be approved by the SBA prior to contract award. Evidence showing a joint venture agreement has been submitted to the SBA must be included if the SBA has not approved the joint venture at the time the Proposal is due.

12. Question:

"Formal Small Business Teaming Arrangements" is not a reference found in 13 CFR 125.1. Small Business Teaming Arrangements include joint ventures and prime/subcontractor relationship between small businesses in accordance with 13 CFR 125.1(u). All Small Business Teaming Arrangements between prime/subcontractor must be provided to the Contracting Officer as part of the proposal submission in accordance with 13 CFR 125.1(u)(2)(ii).

This creates confusion. The only joint ventures recognized by the SBA are Mentor-Protege agreements and not teaming agreements. Teaming agreements are joint marketing agreements between two parties, where one is an 8(a) and the other may not be an 8(a). The confusion continues because you state that while you recognize 2 types of teaming agreements (Joint Venture - incorrect) and (Prime/Subcontractor - correct) you will only accept the experience of the joint venture - which is not a teaming agreement.

The Air force has a history of recognizing the joint merits of two parties aligned in a Prime/Sub Teaming agreement. In fact the CAFB all base roofing IDIQ is one such case where a prime/sub teaming agreement was accepted for experience and for financial qualification. Will you please clarify your position?

The SBA recognizes and approves 8(a) joint ventures other than 8(a) mentor-protégé joint ventures. If you are proposing as an 8(a) prime for an award in the one the regional 8(a) pools, we will only accept an 8(a) joint venture approved by the SBA IAW 13 CFR 124.512(a).

Small Business Teaming Arrangements are defined in the CFR and FAR and include both joint ventures and/or subcontracting arrangements. A Small Business Teaming Arrangements is more than a joint marketing agreement and must be formalized and submitted to the contracting officer with your proposal IAW 13 CFR.125.1(U)(2)(ii).

The following FAR and CFR citations are provided for ease of reference:

Teaming Agreements are defined in FAR 9.601 as: “Contractor team arrangement,” as used in this subpart, means an arrangement in which --

(1) Two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor;

or

(2) A potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

They are further defined in 13 CFR 125.1(u) as:

(u) Small Business Teaming Arrangement means an arrangement where:

(1) Two or more small business concerns have formed a joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor (for the definition of and exceptions to affiliation for joint ventures, see §121.103); or

(2) A potential small business prime contractor agrees with one or more other small business concerns to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract. A Small Business Teaming Arrangement between a prime and its small business subcontractor(s) must exist through a written agreement between the parties that is specifically referred to as a “Small Business Teaming Arrangement” or “Small Business Teaming Agreement” and which sets forth the different responsibilities, roles, and percentages (or other allocations) of work as it relates to the acquisition.

(i) A Small Business Teaming Arrangement can include two business concerns in a mentor-protégé relationship so long as both the mentor and the protégé are small or the protégé is small and the concerns have received an exception to affiliation pursuant to §121.103(h)(3)(ii) or 121.103(h)(3)(iii) of this chapter.

(ii) The agreement must be provided to the contracting officer as part of the proposal.

For 8(a) Joint Ventures 13 CFR 124.513 States:

§124.513 Under what circumstances can a joint venture be awarded an 8(a) contract?

(a) General. (1) If approved by SBA, a Participant may enter into a joint venture agreement with one or more other small business concerns, whether or not 8(a) Participants, for the purpose of performing one or more specific 8(a) contracts.

(2) A joint venture agreement is permissible only where an 8(a) concern lacks the necessary capacity to perform the contract on its own, and the agreement is fair and equitable and will be of substantial benefit to the 8(a) concern. However, where SBA concludes that an 8(a) concern brings very little to the joint venture relationship in terms of resources and expertise other than its 8(a) status, SBA will not approve the joint venture arrangement.

(b) Size of concerns to an 8(a) joint venture. (1) A joint venture of at least one 8(a) Participant and one or more other business concerns may submit an offer as a small business for a competitive 8(a) procurement so long as each concern is small under the size standard corresponding to the NAICS code assigned to the contract, provided:

(i) The size of at least one 8(a) Participant to the joint venture is less than one half the size standard corresponding to the NAICS code assigned to the contract; and

(ii)(A) For a procurement having a revenue-based size standard, the procurement exceeds half the size standard corresponding to the NAICS code assigned to the contract; or

(B) For a procurement having an employee-based size standard, the procurement exceeds $10 million;

(2) For sole source and competitive 8(a) procurements that do not exceed the dollar levels identified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, an 8(a) Participant entering into a joint venture agreement with another concern is considered to be affiliated for size purposes with the other concern with respect to performance of the 8(a) contract. The combined annual receipts or employees of the concerns entering into the joint venture must meet the size standard for the NAICS code assigned to the 8(a) contract.

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section, a joint venture between a protege firm and its approved mentor (see §124.520) will be deemed small provided the protege qualifies as small for the size standard corresponding to the NAICS code assigned to the procurement and has not reached the dollar limit set forth in §124.519.

13. Question:

Will you provide a rationale for not accepting the joint capability sets created by Teaming Agreements?

Answer:

A formal Small Business Teaming Arrangement as defined in 13 CFR 125.513(e)(1) for small businesses is acceptable. For 8(a) small businesses only the joint ventures that have been submitted with the proposal and approved by the SBA (by award) are acceptable as required by 13 CFR 124.513. The Government will accept the corporate experience of a Joint Venture but not a formal Small Business Teaming Arrangement based on difference in privity of contract between a Joint Venture and a formal Small Business Teaming Arrangement. The Government has privity of contract with a Joint Venture but does not with a formal Small Business Teaming Arrangement.

G. Subcontracting

Part 1 - From the RFP, Section C, statement 6.2.3 states "This documentation [pre-qualification process document (6.2.1)] may be requested by the Government and the Contractor must provide within 10 business days"; however, Section L, statement 6.5.2 states "The Offeror must provide documentation showing the criteria it described in response to paragraph 6.5.1 has been met for…". Does this solicitation proposal require attachment of an actual pre-qualification document (filled out by our subcontractor) or just a proof statement that criteria are met?

Yes the intent of 6.5.2 is for the Offeror to provide prequalification documentation for ALL the subcontractors that you list in Attachment 1 - Roofing Management Plan Worksheet. For example, if you have five (5) subcontractors we require pre-qualification documentation on all five (5) subcontractors.

The Roofing Management Plan Worksheet is non-binding, meaning the Offerors can pick other subcontractors during the period of performance. The purpose of RFP Section C, 6.3.2 is to allow the Government the ability to collect pre-qualification data on subcontractors that are added during contract performance, if the Government determines it necessary.

Is a contractor eligible to submit a proposal in a Region as a prime contractor and also be listed on another proposal as a subcontractor within the same region? Is it possible to be a prime in one region and a sub in another?

Answer:

Yes, one contractor may propose on up to two (2) regions as a prime contractor or joint venture member and also provide subcontractor services in other regions. However, due to bonding and capacity requirements, one contractor may not propose as a prime contractor or member of a joint venture in more than two regions.

Do we need to have a minimum amount of roofing subcontractors identified as possible subcontractors in our proposal criteria?

Yes - the minimum is five (5) unique subcontractors, reference RFP Section M, Paragraph 11.1.1.

Per instruction to Offerors item 6.5 Subfactor 3-Subcontracting Process Item 6.5.2 Is it a must to provide five (5) Subcontractors to meet the criteria for bidding?

Answer:

Yes. Per RFP Section L, Paragraph 6.3.1 the Offeror shall provide documentation showing that its qualification process has been accomplished for all subcontractor names provided (see 6.5.2, minimum five (5) subcontractors).

I have a question regarding the "counting" of subcontractors. If a roofing subcontractor has regional offices each of which is set up as a discrete limited liability corporation, can each of those regional offices be counted as a separate subcontractor?

Answer:

A discrete limited liability corporation will meet the requirement at RFP Section M, Paragraph 11.1.1 for a unique subcontractor, there is some concern however, that a relationship like this may be considered an ostensible subcontractor, reference 13 CFR 121.103.

Can contractors bid as a Prime Small Business Offeror and also as subcontractor to an 8(a) Prime Offeror in the SAME region?

Answer:

To clarify, a subcontractor does not submit a proposal. Presuming your question is “can a contractor submit a proposal as a prime, and also be a subcontractor under an 8(a) company’s proposal.” Yes, that is allowable.

The language of Section M, Paragraph 11.1.1 only requires listing subcontractors, "For those tasks that the Offeror may potentially subcontract" (emphasis added). If the Offeror does not intend to subcontract any roofing work is it still required to meet the minimum listing of five (5) subcontractors?

Yes - the minimum is five (5) unique subcontractors, reference RFP Section M, Paragraph 11.1.1.

RFP Section J, Attachment 1 - Roofing Management Plan makes the assumption that different projects will either be entirely self performed or performed entirely by a subcontractor. Our firm has primary crews which we augment with subcontractor forces. On every project we will provide field management and supervision and safety, while our subcontractor may provide the field labor. How do you propose we identify "mixed" or both self performed and Subcontracted?

Answer:

In Attachment 1 – Roofing Management Plan Worksheet, we define “Self-Performance” as “…construction work conducted by the Offeror’s own labor force (employees on the Offeror’s payroll)…” In the example you cited, “…primary crews…,” field management, supervision and safety would be an example of a project that may be listed as “Self-Perform.” Please note any arrangement must still comply with FAR 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting.

2/20/14

RFP states that a minimum of five (5) subcontractors are required for any activity the Offeror anticipates subcontracting. Is it acceptable to use different regional offices of subcontractors to acquire the 5 needed for each region? (i.e., if a roofing subcontractor has four different offices in a region does this count as 4 subcontractors required by the RFP to cover the region)?

Attachment 1 - Roofing Management Plan Worksheet - the "Instruction" worksheet: A discrete entity may meet the requirement. However, regional offices of the same company may not meet the requirement. There is concern that a relationship like this may be considered an ostensible subcontractor, reference 13 CFR 121.103.

Is it possible to mark both "Self Perform" and identify our subcontractor?

Answer:

No. Attachment 1 – Roofing Management Plan Worksheet may only have an entry of “Y” for Yes or “N” for No for Self-Perform. If you are going to subcontract any portion of that specific roof type, mark the column titled “Self Perform” as “N” and submit your subcontractor company name. Recall the Management Plan Worksheet is non-binding and actual subcontractors used at time of task order performance may be different.

Will you accept Co-Prime or Prime/ Sub Contractor Teaming agreements if the 8(a) is providing independent financial surety and management, whereas the teaming partner is providing expanded regional reach?

Answer If you are proposing as an 8(a) prime for an award in one of the regional 8(a) pools, an 8(a) joint venture must be approved by the SBA IAW 13 CFR 124.512(a), please review RFP Section L Paragraph

5.7 for requirements concerning the timing of submission and approval. We will not consider experience of a formal Small Business Teaming Arrangement if you are proposing as an 8(a) prime for an award in the one the regional 8(a) pools. You may have other subcontracting arrangements as long as the prime meets all the other requirements stated in the RFP.

H. Contractor Responsibility

Does an EMR rating of greater than 1.0 preclude a contactor from consideration for award of the IDIQ?

Yes, an EMR rating of greater than 1.0 will render the Offeror technically unacceptable, per RFP Section L, paragraph 11.2.2.

As stated in Clause H-02 Off Ramp Procedures, one of the factors a contractor can be off-ramped is if there are unsafe site conditions resulting in a EMR of greater than 1.0 during the contract period. Will an EMR rate based on only construction activities or on site activities be acceptable in meeting the mandatory <1.0 EMR rate for this solicitation as long as it is stated by our WC Insurance Carrier?

If a company has multiple Experience Modification Rate (EMR) ratings, the company (including all members of a joint venture) must provide each of their ratings in the RFP proposal submission. All EMR ratings must be below 1.0.

Further IAW (in accordance with) RFP Section C, Paragraph 5.3, the Contractor (i.e. all joint venture members) shall maintain an EMR for workers compensation of 1.0 or less throughout the IDIQ period of performance.

Many small businesses use staff leasing companies who handle the WC insurance administration. Will an EMR rate documentation from the WC insurance carrier of the staff leasing company or Professional Employer Organization (PEO) be acceptable in meeting the EMR requirement? The document lists our company name.

Yes.

Section 6.4.2 Safety states “The EMR must be reported on company letterhead from the company providing the Offerors workers compensation insurance"; however, workers compensation insurance will not provide EMR report because EMR is calculated and provided by the WCIRB, Workers' Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau of California. Would WCIRB report on EMR satisfy the requirement?

The EMR information must be on letterhead from the provider or administrator. The RFP, specifically Section L, paragraph 6.4.2, and Section M, paragraph 11.2.2, is being amended to provide a clarification on this requirement. This clarification will state that the EMR must be reported on letterhead from the company, agency, or bureau that provides or administers your workers compensation program.

On the RFP you mention an EMR rate if it goes above 1.02 that doesn't qualify us. Is this rate current or for the start of the job. Where do you insert the information in the binders?

You are to submit your current EMR rate as stated in the RFP, Paragraph 6.4.2 which states: " ...Safety:

The Offeror shall submit its current EMR used to compute its workers compensation insurance premiums."

The information is inserted in Volume II Technical of your proposal. See RFP Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS, paragraph 4.2, Organization and Page Limitations, Volume II, 6.4.2, Safety. Additionally, see RFP Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award, EVALUATION CRITERIA, Paragraph 11.2.2.

Are we able to use roofing IDIQ's contracts as past performance or would you prefer individual task orders under the roofing IDIQ?

Answer:

The work that you submit as Corporate experience must meet the relevant commercial roofing work criteria as stated in the RFP Section L, Paragraph 8.3.

For an 8(a) firm that has no experience prior to 2010, will it be acceptable to indicate not applicable or will the proposal be deemed non-responsive if past performance cannot be provided for 2009?

Answer:

If your proposal does not meet the 5 year requirement, as per RFP Section M, Paragraph 10, the proposal would be considered non-responsive and may require a determination of responsibility by the SBA, RFP Section L, Paragraph 8.5.

We are an 8(a) roofing contractor with years of experience on government roofing projects. We have experience with projects of the specified magnitude, however, completed those projects simultaneously within the same year. Would base-wide roof inspections/assessments that met the specified magnitude qualify for past performance? Please advise if this is acceptable.

Our requirement for 5 years of project experience is for corporate experience (RFP Section L, Paragraph 8.3), not past performance. The work that you submit as Corporate experience must meet the relevant commercial roofing work criteria as stated in the RFP Section L, Paragraph 8.3.

Reference: Page 118/137, section 6.4.1 - Quality Control and page 72/137, section 4.0 and 4.2. The qualifications required for key personnel shown in these paragraphs differ. Page 72/137, says the CPS and QCM must show 5 years previous experience in commercial roofing or construction. Page 118/137 says the key personnel must show 5 years roofing experience. Which is correct?

Answer:

The RFP amendment 0002, posted on FBO 2/7/14 clarifies that the CPS, QCM, and other key personnel must show 5 years of Roofing experience.

The RFP mentions having security on site on all jobs; define Security please? Is it a professional security guard or can we use our staff to handle this requirement?

Answer:

We understand you to be referring to the Most Difficult project description in Section J, Attachment 3

– Roofing Typical and Most Difficult Project Descriptions. In rare cases, the contractor may be required to provide security at the location. The individual task order will call out the requirements for that security. The Offeror must consider this in their Most Difficult project NTE pricing.

I. 25% Mandatory Prime Contractor Performance

If you are a qualified 8(a) Joint Venture are you obligated to do 25% of the contract total or is it 25% each?

The joint venture is considered a single entity when awarded a contract. The joint venture concern will perform at least 25% of the cost of the contract, not including the cost of materials with its own employees.

Reference: Page 112/137, section 6.3.1 - Management Plan, page117/137, section 6.3.5 - Limitation on Subcontracting, and Attachment 1 - Roofing Management Plan.

If the Offeror is a General Contractor (GC), the roofing work would typically be executed by a qualified subcontractor. The GC would execute all of the program and project management. Section 6.3.1 and Section 6.3.5 do not clearly state the Offeror must be able to self-perform roofing work. The Attachment 1 definition of self-performance is that the Offeror must perform construction with its own personnel. Is the Offeror required to self-perform some of the roofing work?

The Contractor will perform at least 25% of the cost of the contract, not including the cost of materials, with its own employees (FAR 52.219-14). Please reference the RFP Section C, Paragraph 5.1.

Self Performance: We are a specialty trade contractor AND we re-sell material directly from some of our manufacturers. Can we meet the 25% with the provisioning of material since we are also in the business of material sales?

The Contractor will perform at least 25% of the cost of the contract, not including the cost of materials, with its own employees (FAR 52.219-14). Please reference RFP Section C, Paragraph 5.1.

J. 80% Task Order Participation

RFP states that we have to bid 80% of all task orders, if we don't we will lose our position does a black mark go against us as work not performed, or do we just get kicked off the team?

The performance standard requirement is 80%, anything less than that is non-compliant with the terms and conditions of the contract. If that 80% is not met, the Government may use remedies up to and including off-ramping.

An IDIQ contract awardee that fails to bid on 80% of the task orders risks being off-ramped from the IDIQ. Bidding on 80% of the task orders, is a requirement of the contract, failing to do so would be considered “negative performance,” and may be recorded in the Construction Contractor Appraisal Support…