Atch 3-Section L-Instructions Conditions and Notices to Bidders 220712.pdf

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders (Addendum to FAR 52.215-1)

GENERAL INFORMATION

L1.1 General. This section provides guidance for preparing proposals as well as instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The proposal must include all data and information requested and must be submitted in accordance with (IAW) these instructions; incomplete proposals may be considered nonresponsive. Taking exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation may result in the proposal being found unacceptable. Do not merely reiterate the Statement of Work (SOW) or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation. In no case shall words like “we will comply with the requirements of the contract,” or equivalent statements, be acceptable to meet the requirements of this Request For Proposal (RFP). The Government will not provide reimbursement for any cost incurred during proposal submission. Proposals must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of the solicitation. Any commitments made in the proposal, to include, but not limited to the Quality Control Plans (QCP) called for in this solicitation, shall become part of the resultant contract. Any significant inconsistency, if unexplained, raises a fundamental issue of the Offeror’s understanding and/or ability to perform the contract.

L1.2 Proposal Format and Content.

L1.2.1 Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and not desired.

L1.2.2 Proposals shall be submitted in MS Word or searchable PDF format (MS Office 2016 compatible). The proposal when printed must fit on 8.5 x 11 size paper, in 12 point, Times New Roman, single line spacing, with one inch margins. Tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used when necessary to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc and shall be restricted to the 8.5 X 11 size paper and shall be no smaller than 10 point, Times New Roman. At a minimum, each Volume shall be submitted as a separate file.

L1.2.3 Titles and contents of the volumes shall be provided as defined in Table L.1. If page limits in Table L.1 are exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. The following will be exempt from page limitations for the RFP: Cover sheets; Table of contents; Lists of Tables; Lists of Drawings;

Glossaries; Acronym List; Compliance Matrix; Subcontractor Consent Letters; and Client Authorization Letters.

Table L.1

PARA. VOLUME TITLE COPIES PAGE LIMIT

L-2 Volume I – Administrative andResponsibility Material 1 No page limit

L2.1.1 Financial Capacity No page limit

L2.1.2 Organizational Conflict of Interest No page limit

L2.1.3 Contract Forms and Certifications No page limit

L2.1.4 Bid, Performance and Payment Bonds No page limit

L2.1.5 Bonafide Place of Business No page limit

L2.1.6 Contractor Team Arrangement No page limit

L-3 Volume II – Factor 1, IDIQ Management Proposal 1

L3.2 IDIQ Management 50

L-4 Volume III – Factor 2, Past Performance Proposal 1

L4.2 Summary 5

L4.3 Past Performance (PP) Information Sheets Limit 3 pages per citation

L4.4 Consent/Authorization Letters No page limit

L1.3 Electronic Proposal Submission. Offeror shall submit its proposal electronically through Email. If needed, break the file down into smaller sections in order to upload it to the system. PROPOSALS SUBMITTED THROUGH OTHER MEANS, NOT SPECIFIED, WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Clearly mark the description for each uploaded document by Offeror Name, Solicitation Number and Volume number. Proposals submitted electronically will be considered late unless all proposal documents are transmitted to and successfully received prior to the closing date and time for receipt of proposals (See L1.6). The Government is not responsible for technical difficulties associated with the transmission of any electronic files to the Government. The offeror is responsible for ensuring the successful electronic delivery of its proposals. Offerors are encouraged to submit proposals with sufficient time to ensure all proposal documents are successfully received prior to the closing date and time. The Contracting team will confirm receipt of your proposal. If offerors do not receive a confirmation, you can assume your proposal was NOT received, and should take steps to contact the Contracting team as soon as possible. Please be advised that timelines are determined by the date and time an offeror’s proposal is received by the Government, not when an offeror attempted transmission.

L1.4 Proposal Due Date/Time: 15 July 2022 / 2:00 PM MST

L1.5 Proposal Validity. All proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be binding on the offeror for a minimum of 365 days. The offeror shall make a clear statement in Section A of the proposal documentation volume that the proposal is valid for a minimum of 365 days from solicitation closing.

L1.6 Discrepancies. If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error or omission the offeror shall immediately notify the CO in writing with supporting rationale.

L1.7 Cross-Reference. Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with a minimum of cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Volumes shall not include individual glossaries, compliance matrices or acronym lists. Offerors shall submit, as a standalone document marked “Cross-Reference”, a comprehensive glossary, compliance matrix and acronym list. This “Cross Reference” document shall not be included in any volume and has no page limit. Lists of Tables and Drawings are not needed or required. If included, lists shall be placed at the end of the volume.

VOLUME I – ADMINISTRATIVE AND RESPONSIBILITY MATERIAL

L2.1 General. The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file; as well as assist the CO in making a responsibility determination. Offerors shall provide the following additional documentation.

L2.1.1 Financial Capacity. Interested Small Businesses with the capabilities necessary to meet or exceed the stated requirements shall submit a Letter of Evidence to a line of credit for at least $200,000.00 in order to demonstrate financial capacity to perform the work. Offerors who do not submit evidence of this line of credit will be excluded from competition.

L2.1.2 Organizational Conflict of Interest

L2.1.2.1 Notice Regarding Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) – Determination to Participate in Task Order Solicitations released under this Acquisition.

The acquisition of services under this solicitation may create actual or potential conflicts of interest for offerors and their prospective subcontractors. In assessing and addressing OCI, Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) will follow the guidance in FAR Subpart 9.5. OCI will be evaluated at the basic level and will be used during individual task order (TO) solicitations to preclude the need for resubmission with each TO proposal. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that both they and their proposed subcontractors are not restricted from participating in subsequent PAVING TO acquisitions due to an OCI caused by any existing or in-process AFMC contract. This includes all AFMC funded contracts or subcontracts, including those at Hill Air Force Base (AFB), Utah Air National Guard Base (UTANG), or other Geographically Separated Units (GSUs), as identified in the SOW.

AFMC prefers that offerors competing for the PAVING effort have no known OCIs. While mitigation plans will be considered, they create considerable work for the Government and each offeror to adequately mitigate OCI at the time of contract and/or task order award. Consequently, industry is encouraged to employ prudent teaming arrangements and avoid OCI concerns to the maximum extent practicable prior to proposal submission for the PAVING effort.

Certain capability areas under PAVING present heightened OCI concern to AFMC. PAVING contractors, in many instances, provide program management, advisory, and engineering support through existing AFMC programs and/or contracts. In some instances, this may create biased ground rules or impaired objectivity for an offeror or proposed subcontractor. In such cases, this will make that prime offeror ineligible for that specific task order award.

Establishing an acceptable OCI mitigation plan for PAVING will be challenging, if not impossible. Therefore, individual contractors and contractor teams are encouraged to contact the PAVING Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) during task order solicitations prior to the proposal due date to obtain an informal written assessment of whether their OCI mitigation efforts will be adequate. The informal assessment will not be binding upon the Government, but is intended to better inform industry of the Government’s probable response to its OCI mitigation efforts. Please note that a proposal of 100% subcontracting and firewalls WILL NOT be considered an acceptable OCI mitigation plan.

L2.1.2.2 Each offeror must submit, for itself AND its subcontractors, an OCI Disclosure Form and applicable supporting documents. The submission shall identify all of the team’s AFMC contracts or subcontracts, including any AFMC-funded contracts or subcontracts at the GSUs and Utah Air National Guard Base (UTANG) contracts or subcontracts. For each identified contract, the offeror shall disclose the contract number; name and telephone number of the Contracting Officer; a brief description of the work performed; and any other information, as applicable, for the Contracting Officer to determine possible OCIs.

This information shall be incorporated into the contract for use by the Contracting Officer during individual TO solicitations to preclude the need for resubmission with each TO proposal. Offerors shall be required to submit an updated OCI Disclosure Form at the TO level only when new contract awards have been made that meet the above reporting criteria. An offeror that has determined there is no actual or potential OCI shall provide a written statement affirming no OCI has been found.

L2.1.2.3 If an offeror has identified actual or potential OCI, the offeror shall submit a Mitigation Plan that addresses the conflict(s) in sufficient detail for the Contracting Officer to determine whether an OCI still exists or has been successfully mitigated. The OCI Mitigation Plan shall specifically address the OCI disclosures required in this section and explain how the prime contractor is in full compliance with this solicitation. As part of its Mitigation Plan, the offeror shall identify which contracts or subcontracts it will continue to support and those it intends to terminate or allow to lapse to eliminate any conflicts. The OCI Mitigation Plan will not be evaluated as part of Factor 1; rather, the Mitigation Plan will be reviewed in conjunction with the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination prior to award. An offeror with no actual or potential OCI risk shall include a statement to that effect as part of its proposal, and is not required to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan.

L2.1.2.4 An offeror’s failure to provide adequate information to avoid and/or mitigate an identified OCI may cause its proposal for a specific task order to be rejected and relieves the Government of any further responsibility to resolve OCI issues. OCI will be evaluated as a contractor responsibility determination in accordance with FAR Part 9 – Contractor Qualifications. Therefore, any notices to offerors regarding OCI and their responses thereto will NOT be considered negotiations or discussions in accordance with FAR Part 15.

L2.1.3 Contract Forms and Certifications.

L2.1.3.1 Proposal cover page which include the offeror company name, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code, Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), as well as the primary point of contact name(s), office phone numbers, cell phone numbers, and email addresses for individuals who are authorized to discuss the proposal with government personnel on behalf of the offeror.

L2.1.3.2 Section A – Solicitation/Contract Form

Complete blocks 14-20, and the Signature and Date block 20, of the Standard Form 1442, and include within Volume I under the heading “Section A – Solicitation/Contract Form”. A signature by the Offeror on the Standard Form 33 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept. Offeror shall list that proposal is valid for minimum of 365 days from solicitation close date on front page of solicitation. Offeror shall list all acknowledged amendments in block 19.

L2.1.3.3 Section K – Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors

FAR 52.204-7, System for Award Management, is incorporated by reference in Part II, Section I. The Offeror shall follow the instructions cited in this Section K, FAR 52.204-08 and complete all representations, certifications, acknowledgments, and statements electronically in the System for Award Management (SAM) accessed through as part of responding to this RFP (https://www.sam.gov). If a representation, certification, acknowledgement or statement cited in this Section K cannot be found in SAM, then the Offeror shall submit that Section K representation, certification, acknowledgement or statement. Failure to adhere to these instructions will render an Offeror as being ineligible for award.

L2.1.4 Bid, Performance and Payment Bonds

Bid Bonds will be required IAW Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.228-1 and 52.228-2 as specified at the TO level. Performance and Payment Bonds will be required IAW FAR Clause 52.228-15 and due not later than ten

(10) days after TO award notification. A minimum blanket bond capacity of $3 million for PAVING TOs is required. Additional bonding will be required if active PAVING projects exceed $3 million. The offeror shall provide evidence of a minimum bond capacity of $3M aggregate in the form of a prequalification letter from an A.M. Best “A” rated suretly (not a bonding agent).

L2.1.5 Bonafide Place of Business

Competition will be limited to Small Business (SB) firms with a bonafide place of business within the following geographic areas: Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, and the assigned NAICS code. All other SB Participants are deemed ineligible and will not be considered for award.

Definition: a bona fide place of business means a location where a participant regularly maintains an office that employs at least one full-time individual within the designated geographical boundary.

L2.1.6 Contractor Team Arrangement

Offeror’s submitting a proposal as a Contractor Team Arrangement shall provide a copy of their approved arrangement, outlining the roles and responsibilities of all partners.

VOLUME II IDIQ MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL

L3.1 General. Volume II shall address your proposed approach to meeting the requirements of Factor 1. Volume II must provide specifics and be complete. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. Offerors shall provide the following information to assess their capability.

L3.2 FACTOR 1 – IDIQ Management

L3.2.1 Program Management. The offeror shall submit a Program Management Plan (PMP) which includes a description of its management approach and corporate resource capabilities to execute all PAVING requirements delineated in the SOW. Proposed methods to accomplish requirements of the PAVING SOW should include descriptions of a team’s aggregate capability, management structure, key contractor personnel and organizational processes.

L3.2.1.1 Capabilities. Summarize the capabilities of your team to meet the requirements of the SOW. Include a summary of your team’s experience in providing services of similar scope. The contractor or contractor teaming arrangement shall be licensed/insured as a GC-B100 or possessone (1) of the following individual licenses at the submittal of proposal: S260 General Concrete Contractor, S400 Asphalt Paving Contractor, S310 Excavation and Grading Contractor, and S410 Pipeline and Conduit Contractor. All licensing requirements can be found underneath the Utah Construction Trades Licensing Act Rule R156-55a-101.

L3.2.1.2 Management Approach/Organization. Describe the organization structure that will ensure corporate support to this effort, which includes a summary of the total portfolio for which this organization is responsible. Describe how that structure will manage the PAVING efforts to include planning, monitoring, control and communication to manage cost, schedule and performance of awarded IDIQ and task orders. This shall include management of geographically dispersed efforts, multiple task orders and multiple subcontractors. Explain how your management structure will be capable of delivering PAVING requirements across the full range of potential workload as outlined in the SOW. Explain how your management structure will be flexible enough to allow rapid response to multiple, sometimes diverse tasks, when necessary. Show lines of authority and chain(s) of command to include teaming partner and/or subcontractor relationships. Demonstrate how the teaming arrangement will provide the expertise required to successfully perform all contract requirements. Describe how the offeror’s management of subcontracts will provide sufficient oversight placing the full burden of oversight and correction with the contractor to effectively manage subcontractors, develop processes for assigning subcontractors work, and integrate subcontractors, including a process for accounting any first tier subcontractor, sub-contract dollars expended and to provide for on-site task leaders to coordinate subcontractor efforts on task orders. The offeror shall summarize its plan for contract transition as it relates to an ability to respond to a released RFP, and its generic approach to transitioning task order performance. In addition, they shall highlight key milestones to reaching their full proposed manning in not more than 14 days after basic IDIQ award.

L3.2.1.3 Key Contractor Personnel: Describe proposed Key Personnel who will be tasked with managing the overall contract for the offeror and explain how the individuals fit within the offeror’s management structure. If proposed Key Personnel are contingent hire pending award, the offeror shall provide a contingent hire letter signed by the individual. IAW the SOW, all proposed key personnel, to include contingent hire pending award, will be incorporated into the Base IDIQ. If those personnel are not available, the offeror shall follow the procedures for replacement listed in the SOW within 14 days of award.

L3.2.1.3.1 The offeror shall submit documentation demonstrating the Offeror’s proposed personnel meet the qualifications IAW the SOW. Offerors shall submit evidence that the offeror’s proposed personnel who will fill the required positions, meet the SOW requirements and identify all required qualifications.

L3.2.1.3.2 The offeror shall submit documentation for the proposed personnel demonstrating they have the qualifications. The government reserves the right to formulate their own decision if personnel proposed meet the required qualifications based on positions or experience requirements and is not bound by the interpretations of the offeror.

L3.2.1.4 Quality Control Process. Describe your plan for quality control and furnish your Quality Control Plan (QCP). IAW the SOW, this plan shall include specific methods and procedures for quality monitoring and tracking that identify how you will be able to address problem areas quickly and ensure compliance with all contract requirements. The QCP shall be submitted as part of Volume II and is included in the Volume II page count. The QCP will be incorporated into the resultant contract.

VOLUME III – PAST PERFORMANCE PROPOSAL

L4.1 FACTOR 2 – Past Performance Contents. Submit information on the contracts considered most recent and relevant which demonstrate the company’s ability to perform the requirements identified in the SOW. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use this information and information obtained from other sources for an overall evaluation of past performance. The Government will not evaluate personal references. The offeror shall submit a Past and Present Performance Proposal (Volume III) that contains the following:

L4.2 Past Performance Summary. Provide a summary describing the role of the offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or contractor team arrangement partner. Include rationale supporting the assertion of relevance, but note the Government is not bound by the offeror’s opinion of relevancy. Clearly link past performance to the IDIQ Management areas identified in Section L3.2 as they relate to supporting the types of requirements listed in the PAVING SOW; explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort. This may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk.

L4.3 Past Performance Information Sheets (Attachment 5). The offeror shall submit a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 3 Past Performance Information (PPI) Sheets with an emphasis on the prime offeror or contractor team arrangement managing partner. In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant and/or recent past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror shall receive a Past Performance rating of “Unknown,” which equates to a neutral rating having neither positive nor negative evaluation significance. An “Unknown” rating is considered equivalent to an “Acceptable” rating, and will be considered for award. Offerors must submit information for those contracts which are relevant to demonstrate the ability to perform the work identified in the PAVING SOW.

L4.3.1 A minimum of one PPI sheets shall be submitted by the prime offeror or contractor team arrangement managing partner. The remaining PPI Sheet submissions may be from the Prime, subcontractors, or teaming partners. If proposing as a contractor team arrangement, at least one of the remaining PPI sheets shall be from the Mentor. Offerors are cautioned that a Government determination of “Not Relevant” for the required Prime PPI sheets will automatically prevent the offeror from obtaining an “Acceptable” rating.

L4.3.2 Prime/Managing Partner past performance may be as a Prime or subcontractor. Subcontractor, teammate, or mentor past performance may be as a Prime or subcontractor. All past performance as a subcontractor shall have been as a first-tier subcontractor.

L4.3.3 Past performance may be submitted at the contract or task order level. Offerors who submit a PPI sheet at the contract level shall clearly identify the actual performance they provided to the contract, in both dollar amount and personnel provided.

L4.4 Subcontractor Consent Letter / Client Authorization Letter. The offeror shall submit, along with the information required in this paragraph, a consent letter, executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or contractor team arrangement partner, authorizing release of adverse PPI to the offeror so the offeror can respond to such information. For each commercial customer citation, the offeror shall also submit a client authorization letter.

L4.5 Relevant Contracts. Recency will be determined based on contract references reflecting past and present performance over the past five years from the date of proposal submission. The Government will perform an independent analysis in determining the relevancy of a contract based on the data provided and/or obtained. When making relevancy determinations, the definitions in Table L.4 will be utilized.

Table L.4 Past Performance Relevancy Rating

Adjectival Rating Description

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

L4.5.1 For the prime offerors, relevancy is defined as contracts that are most similar to this effort; contract type, dollar value, types of services provided, complexity required on the contract being reviewed when compared to those of the PAVING requirements as shown in Attachment 6 – Paving Past Performance Relevancy Baseline.

L.4.5.1.1 The more an effort is similar in the areas outlined in the baseline, the more relevant that effort becomes.

No one relevancy criterion is more important than another when determining relevancy of an effort, but rather all criterion are considered holistically in order to subjectively assess one overall relevancy rating (per the definitions in Table L.4) for each effort. An effort does not have to be “Relevant” in all criterion in order to be determined “Relevant” overall. Additionally, an effort could hypothetically be “Not Relevant” in one or more criterion and still be determined “Relevant” for that effort overall

L4.5.2 For proposed subcontractors/teaming partners, relevancy is defined by that which reflects experience in the area of expertise the subcontractor is projected to actually perform under the program, (i.e. specific functional areas in the SOW).

L4.5.3 In the case of a newly formed business entity or in contractor teaming arrangements where the company is relying mostly on the past performance and experience of its key personnel, partners on the team, or on a major subcontractor(s), the proposal must clearly explain "whose" past performance, and "how" that past performance is relevant to the procurement. Resumes or letters of recommendation are not a valid past performance submission.

L4.6. Any past performance records (CPARS/FAPIIS) with an overall rating of Unsatisfactory or Marginal will result in a rating of unacceptable for the Past Performance Factor and disqualification for award