FA8201-20-R-0018 - FA8201-21-R-0001 - Draft RFP Q and A Matrix 2020-10-20.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 23 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA8201-20-R-0018
About this file
This document contains a draft request for proposal for the Hill Air Force Base Multiple Award Construction Contract IV opportunity. The solicitation seeks to award multiple indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contracts for six years to provide streamlined construction services at Hill AFB, the 75th Civil Engineer Group, and the Utah Air National Guard. Services will include all construction, design, remodeling and related efforts. The anticipated contract line item structure includes fixed-price CLINs for the base MACC IV effort and a post-award conference. Interested parties can provide feedback on the draft solicitation and attachments by submitting questions to the points of contact by September 2, 2020. The government expects to release the official RFP between June 8-14, 2020. The document also includes a matrix of questions and answers related to the draft documents.
View the file
Other files
Show all 29
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
Basic SOW
| MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC IV) FA8201-21-R-0001 - Oct. 2020 | ||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response |
Section L
| MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC IV) FA8201-21-R-0001 - Oct. 2020 | ||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response |
| 1 | Section L, 4.0 VOLUME III, FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE | Each Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with the format contained in Section L, Appendix A, Past Performance Questionnaire (maximum of three (3) contracts, if available) for Offeror/joint venture members. | Do the projects we use to provide past performance information in the Past Performance Volume need to be the same as the past project examples provided as required by Section L, 3.3.3 Subfactor 3: Contractor Requirements? | No. | |
| 2 | Section L, 3.3.2 Subfactor 2: Architect-Engineer (A-E) Qualifications | b) | A-E Qualifications shall be submitted on Standard Form (SF) 330, Section L Appendix D, for each discipline: Architectural, Civil, Structural, Electrical, Mechanical, and Fire Protection Engineering. | Please clarify. Is a seperate SF330 required for each discipline (meaning multiple SF330s) or are you looking for one SF330 that covers all disciplines? | a. One SF 330 document can be submitted, but it should include all the information required to represent the qualifications for each of the disciplines listed. |
b. One SF 330 can be submitted even if they are from different AE firms. Just note the each firm and the specific qualifications for each discipline.
c. One SF300 form should be provided for the entire AE team of firms. The page limit total for all firms is 75 pages.
| If a contractor has multiple A-E firms on a team, would a separate SF330 be required for each A-E firm on the team? | |||
| If there are multiple A-E firms on a team and each provides a separate SF330, would the page limitation of 75 pages apply to each SF330 provided? | |||
| 3 | Section L | 1. In Section 3.1 General, Page 11 of 30, says there are 4 subfactors: |
SF 1: Technical/Management Proficiency SF 2: Technical Approach SF 3: Management Approach SF 4: Sample Project
However, Section 3.3 outlines different subfactors:
SF 1: Basic MACC IV Plans SF 2: AE Qualifications SF 3: Contractor Requirements
| SF 4: Sample Project (SF 4 is the only subfactor that’s the same from Section 3.1 to 3.3.) | Please clarify what subfactors are wanted and what is wanted within each subfactor |
| Section L has been updated to reflect the correct subfactors of:1. In Section 3.1 General, Page 11 of 30, says there are 4 subfactors: |
SF 1: Basic MACC IV Plans SF 2: AE Qualifications SF 3: Contractor Requirements SF 4: Sample Project
| 4 | Section L. 3.3.1. | 2. Additionally, Section 3.3.1, SF 1: Basic MACC IV Plans, says that “The Offeror shall submit an approach for the Sample Project.” However, according to Section L Question 5 and 6, Basic MACC IV Plans are for the overall MACC, not the sample project. | Please clarify. | This has been updated to state these are for the basic MACC IV, not the sample project. |
| 5 | Attch 2 - Section L |
pg 6 of 30
| If all amendments are acknowledged in block 19 of the SF-1442, do you require the Offeror to submit the front page of any Amendments? | Yes, we still do require the front page of each amendment be signed and submitted. | |
| 6 | Attch 2 - Section L |
pg 8 of 30 Under binding and labeling it states that "a cover and spike sheet…" should be included in the document. What is a spike sheet? We're unsure what version you are working off of, but the latest version does not contain the word "spike."
If any of the previous version had “spike” it has since been changed to “spine.”
7 Attch 2 - Section L pg 8 of 30
| Is the Proposal Cover Sheet excluded from the page count? | Included clarification to state that the cover sheets are not included in the total page count. | |
| 8 | Attch 2 - Section L |
pg 8 of 30
| Do you want the information requested under FAR 52.215-1(e) listed on the cover of each volume or should it be a separate sheet inclued in each proposal volume? | Per the last sentence of paragraph 1.3.8, Binding and Labeling, "Any page containing proprietary information should be so marked." Therefore the markings described in FAR 52.215-1(e) need to be on any page containing proprietary information, not just a cover sheet. | |
| 9 | Attch 2 - Section L |
pg6 of 30
| Should the CD/DVDs be marked Original and Copy or Original and Backup Copy? | Per paragraph 1.3.1., the original copy would be labeled with, "Original" and the next copy would be labeled as, "Copy 1." | |
| 10 | Attch 2 - Section L |
pg 11 of 30
| Section L, 3.0 Volume II, Factor 2: Technical, 3.1 General, indicates that the Sections are to be organized by the listed outline. However, 3.3 Technical Subfactors provides a different organization, which is correct? | See Response to Question 3 above. | |
| 11 | Attch 2 - Section L |
pg 12 of 30
| Can you provide a sample of a completed cross reference matrix? | No we cannot provide a sample of a fully completed cross reference matrix, but we have included a snapshot of what the beginning of a cross-reference matrix would look like. | |
| 12 | Attch 2 - Section L |
pg 8 of 30
| 3.1.3 Cross Reference Matrix states that we are to complete a cross-reference matrix for the entire proposal, however, each volume is stated to be stand-alone with no cross-referencing to other volumes. Is a separate cross-reference sheet to be filled out and supplied in each individual volume? | Please utilize the cross reference matrix snapshot to assist with how this cross-reference matrix should be filled out. The purpose is to provide the Government with a clear map of where in the Offeror's proposal each of the elements in Sections L&M, the Basic SOW, and the Sample SOW, are addressed in the Offeror's proposal. | |
| 13 | Attch 2 - Section L |
pg 13 of 30
| Please clarify which sections (A, B, C…) of the SF330 are to be utilized to provide information under 3.3.2 Subfactor 2: A-E Qualifications, b). | 1. To clarify, all sections of the SF330 need to be completed by the prospective Offeror. To satisfy Section L, Subfactor 2 (b), the A-E Qualifications information is to be entered on the SF330, Part I, C. Proposed Team. | |
| 14 | Attch 2 - Section L |
pg 13 of 30
| What is the estimated construction cost of the Sample project? | The estimated magnitude of the Sample Project is stated in Attachment 04 - TEP Matrix in the Sample Project Rollup Costs Tab, Colum B, Line 4. IAW FAR 36.204 the magnitude of the project is (f) Between $1M and $5M. | |
| 15 | Attch 2 - Section L |
pg 19 of 30
| If a copy of Reps and Certs are listed on betasam.gov do we need to provide a hard copy in volume 4? | Yes, you still need to fill out clause 52.204-8. | |
| 16 | Attch 2 - Section L |
pg 6 of 30 Volume Organization states that all volumes shall be separately bound in three-ring binders. For Volumes 1 and 4 that do not have paper copies being submitted, should the CD/DVDs be submitted in binders? No, the electronic copies do not need to be submitted in binders. Each volume needs to be on a separate CD/DVD. This information has been added to Section L. 1.3.1.
Section M
| MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC IV) FA8201-21-R-0001 - Oct. 2020 | ||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response |
TEP
| MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC IV) FA8201-21-R-0001 - Oct. 2020 | ||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response |
| 1 | Attch 4, TEP | It appears some of the columns formulae are missing. |
This is what I was able to get from the DOD Safe file. If I have the wrong one please send me the correct.
The tab for the Sample Project Division Detail is the portion I believe is missing formulae. Attachment 4 – MACC IV TEP Matrix, has not been sent via DoD SAFE. The latest versions of Attachments 1-5, and 34-41 have been posted to beta.SAM.gov. For the latest version, make sure you are viewing the most recent posting. For the TEP Matrix the latest version is dated 18 Sep 2020.
Per the instructions at the top of the table, the information input into the Division cells must equal the sum of the, "Prime Contractor Total" and "Subcontractor Total". The Pricing Team will evaluate to ensure the Offeror's Division prices equal the sum of those two totals, during evaluation. It is up to the contractor to ensure they have entered the information correctly.
Sample Task Order SOW
| MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC IV) FA8201-21-R-0001 - Oct. 2020 | ||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response |
Draft Solicitation
| MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC IV) FA8201-21-R-0001 - Oct. 2020 | ||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response |
1 My question arises from the two posting I have found on beta.sam.gov for the MACC and also concerning the documents posted as the solicitation, SOW, and sections L & M.
I have found two posting on beta.sam.gov, and they are linked to each other. I am guessing that the listing that will be used going forward is the one under the solicitation number; FA8201-20-R-0018?
https://beta.sam.gov/opp/2bbed6dcf51945ff9ce2d91a8631c144/view
The other listing is under the solicitation number, FA8201-20-D-MACC, and seems to be a draft.
https://beta.sam.gov/opp/c45511a2fe1d491aac77ace0112a8bee/view#history I am guessing that the listing that will be used going forward is the one under the solicitation number; FA8201-20-R-0018?
https://beta.sam.gov/opp/2bbed6dcf51945ff9ce2d91a8631c144/view
The other listing is under the solicitation number, FA8201-20-D-MACC, and seems to be a draft.
https://beta.sam.gov/opp/c45511a2fe1d491aac77ace0112a8bee/view#history Both of them are drafts. The first posting was posted under Contract Opportunity Type: Sources Sought - which is used for market research.
The second one was posted under Contract Opportunity Type: Pre-Solicitation - which is required to be completed at least 15 days before RFP release.
When it is released, the official RFP will be posted under Contract Opportunity Type: Solicitation. Until the official RFP is released all the dates are subject to change.
The posting to watch for now is the Pre-Solicitation posting of FA8201-20-R-0018; however, the solicitation posting will be done under FA8201-21-R-0001 for the new fiscal year.
| 2 | On the listing for FA8201-20-R-0018, information is given for: A Site Visit will be conducted at Hill AFB on Tuesday, October 20, 2020. I had assumed this date would be adjusted once the final documents are posted because the solicitation is still in draft form. | Can you please confirm if the date of the site visit is later or will still be Oct 20th. | The date will be adjusted once the official RFP is posted. We have had to adjust the date back to 16 Dec 2020; however this date is not final. The official RFP posting will have the official Site Visit Date. Due to some issues encountered by the Government it has been necessary to move the date back. We will do our best to update the posting as we receive more information so that Offeror's may be prepared for the site visit. |
| 3 | The solicitation listed on this posting, which it says is still a draft, (although DRAFT is no longer a watermark as it was before) lists a due date of November 9th. | Is the due date of November 9th the current anticipated due date for the final proposal, or is this still a draft document? | |
| The due date is not November 9th. Even though the "Draft" watermark is not on the document does not mean it is official. The RFP is not official until it is released and posted under Contract Opportunity Type: Solicitation. Until it is officially release, all the dates and information are subject to change as the documents go through internal Government reviews. | |||
| 4 | Sections L&M and the Basic SOW documents on this posting also no longer say draft on them. | Can we take it that these documents have been finalized and are ready to be our guidance on preparing our proposal? | See response to Question 3 above. |
At this point we anticipate only minor changes to the documents. The most significant changes we expect now will be to the RFP release date, site visit date, and proposal due date, and those we hope to have solidified in the next couple of weeks. We do anticipate releasing the RFP and conducting the Site Visit sometime between the end of November to the beginning of December and having the proposal due date be after the new year; HOWEVER, this estimated time frame is still subject change.
5 Response date posted on beta.SAM notes Nov. 09, 2020 at 1:00 pm.
The most recent solicitation notes Nov. 11, 2020 at 2:00 pm.
| Which is the correct response date? |
| The response date has not officially been set. |
See response to Questions 1, 2, and 3 above.
| 6 | The site walk in Attachment 41 has been pushed to December, we are assuming the proposal date will be pushed as well, is this correct? | See response to Questions 1, 2, and 3 above. | |
| 7 | Is the official solicitation still in the works? And once the official solicitation has been completed will all the Attachments 01 – 41 be provided to allow for submission of a comprehensive proposal? | See response to Questions 1, 2, and 3 above. The current version of attachment 01-41 are available now. See the instructions posted in beta.sam.gov on how to request the bidder's library to receive copies of attachments 06-33. | |
| 8 | Can the government confirm the Q/A submission date be unchanged, and due by 2:00 PM (MDT), Friday, October 30, 2020? | The Government had not set a Q&A submission date and time; however the beta.sam.gov posting will be corrected to specify the Q&A response date and time for any further questions be October 26, 2020 at 12:00 P.M. MDT. | |
| 9 | Expectation of when the final solicitation documents will be released? | ||
| Expected bid due date? | See response to Question 4. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .