FINAL_Draft_RFP_Questions.docx

SABER FA8601-16-R-0010 DRAFT RFP Questions & Answers

1. Will comments and responses be posted to FBO? If so, will responses be binding for the solicitation? Comments will be posted and responses will be incorporated in the solicitation as practicable.

2. Is the ordering period provided in Section B firm or will the dates be adjusted in accordance with contract award? (i.e. is there a potential for Ordering Period 1 / base to be less than one year?) Dates will be adjusted with the contract award.

3. Please confirm that the technical design support indicated in Section 4.0 of the SOW may be provided by a registered A/E serving as a partner / consultant to the contractor and that the offeror does not need a full design team on their staff. The contractor may partner with a registered A/E.

4. Because the range of coefficients are so scripted, and based on our team’s more than 30 combined years of experience, we believe there is a strong likelihood of a tie of at least two firms. (in fact, often when a low is provided, may firms bid to low without understanding how it was developed). Will the Government please consider requiring the inclusion of a narrative regarding their understanding of the development of the coefficient, what is included/excluded, etc. for consideration as a part of the evaluation process? The lower bound on the coefficients has been eliminated, however the change for the contract to have strict adherence to RSMeans will still be incorporated into the Solicitation.

5. How will an awardee be selected if there are multiple technically acceptable offerors with the same price? The total evaluated price not only includes the application of the coefficients but also the price of the Seed Task Order. Based on this it is highly unlikely that we will have two or more Low Price Technically Acceptable proposals with identical Total Evaluated prices.

6. The email for the CO provided on page 59 of the solicitation does not match the email in the FBO posting. We believe it is a typo and should be corrected. This will be addressed in the upcoming RFP.

7. The SOW page 17 discusses that drawing files must be compatible with the current version of AutoCAD being used by the Government. Please provide the version currently being used, and also indicate, if applicable, how often it is anticipated to be updated over the course of the contract.

The SOW has been amended for the official RFP.

8. Please confirm that it is the intent of the Government that a partnering meeting may occur after 100% mobilization (30 days for mobilization v. 60 days to hold pricing meeting). Partnering meetings will be up to the GCM.

9. Solicitation page 58 is a blank page. It does not appear that any information is missing, but would the Government please review to confirm before the solicitation release? If there are any pages without text it is due to the contract writing systems formatting.

10. The SOW indicates that the Government may withhold up to10% of the final payment amount pending receipt of approved as-built drawings/CADD disks. Please confirm that payment will not be unduly withheld when there are significant delays in Government review. The Contracting Officer shall make any determinations on a case by case basis. Final payment cannot be made until they are officially approved.

11. There are numerous references to a seed / sample project – will there be a seed / sample project? If so:

• Where will it be submitted? Along with the RFP

• Please confirm it will be excluded from page limitations if in technical volume. Yes, the Seed Task Order will be excluded from page limitations.

• What will, and how will it, be evaluated? It will be evaluated in accordance with sections L & M of the official RFP.

12. Pg 59 appears to indicate that offerors are to submit Schedule B through Section M and reference information. Please confirm we are to resubmit the solicitation in full? Please indicate where it is to be included and confirm that it is not to be included in any page limitations if applicable. This will be specified in Section L & M of the official RFP when it is released.

13. Please consider excluding the List of Table and Drawings, Glossary, and Cross Reference Matrix from the limitation of 45 pages of text for Volume II? The limit has been increased to 50 pages and these items will be part of the page count.

14. Section L has several references to items applicable to the Basic Contract only and some applicable to the seed / sample project. Please clarify how these apply. This will be specified in Section L & M of the official RFP when it is released.

15. Please clarify the requirement for participation in the Joint Certification Program? If the offeror is a joint venture (JV), please confirm that this certification is required for the offeror only, the offeror in addition to the JV partners, the JV partners only, or otherwise clarify this requirement. An 8(a) Joint Venture has to be formally approved by the SBA. That formally approved entity then would have to be approved in the Joint Certification Program.

16. The instructions on page 61 for Subfactor I indicate to provide “all required solicitation information for all parties”. Does this apply to a JV, and does this apply to the entire solicitation or just the information in Subfactor 1? Yes, it does apply to a JV. Section L specifies what is required to be submitted for each Factor/Subfactor.

17. Please confirm that a joint venture is considered a teaming/partnership agreement and any instructions specific to that arrangement also apply to a joint venture. An 8(a) Joint Venture is a teaming/partnership that is formally approved by the SBA.

18. We respectfully request either the removal of Subfactor 1, Item D, especially the teaming agreement, from page limitation of Volume II or changing the inclusion of the teaming information to Volume I or the pricing volume as it unfairly restricts an offeror that is a JV or other team from utilizing the text space to fully prepare their response (and may even exceed the page limitations). This will be specified in Section L of the official RFP when it is released. From historical evaluations the page count has not been an issue, including for Joint Ventures.

19. Please provide instructions for the items identified in Item 6 on page 59 (SF 1442, bonding, Reps and Certs, etc.). Where are they to be submitted – is there a third volume? How many copies of each are to be provided? The information will be submitted with Volume III outlined in the official RFP.

20. If offeror is a joint venture, does the Government want 3-5 projects from each partner, or a mix of experience to total 3-5 projects? We require a total of 3-5 projects.

21. Given that the SOW indicates a need to be qualified to perform 100 simultaneous projects / task orders, will the Government consider changing the requirement from individual projects to IDIQ-type contracts? The requirement that a mere two of the task order /projects submitted must be concurrent does not seem enough to demonstrate an ability to successfully perform on this contract. Offerors need to demonstrate the ability to perform simultaneous projects and therefor the current requirements meet that standard.

22. Please consider if you will require any documentation within the proposal of 8(a) status and bona fide office? The RFP must be received from a contractor who has an Ohio address and the contact information must be for Ohio.

23. Please identify whether or not Volume I and Volume II may be submitted in the same notebook / CD? What about the pricing information? Each Volume should be submitted in separate notebooks & CDs.

24. Will Government evaluate all offers for technical acceptability before considering price or rank first by price then evaluate? All offerors will be evaluated as either technically acceptable or unacceptable. Of the offerors determined to be technically acceptable the lowest priced offeror shall receive the award.

25. Please identify the method the Government will use to evaluate the pricing prior to ranking? (price realism, comparison to the Government’s estimate, reasonableness, etc.) This will be specified in Section M of the official RFP when it is released.

26. Please clarify if the Government would like the Reps and Certs completed in full or if selecting that Paragraph D applies is acceptable. Yes, all required items in Section K must be filled out along with all online reps and certs.

27. Is there a bid bond required? (the Draft references a percentage of the cost of the seed task, but no indication of a seed task? (p39). Also, a bid bond is not indicated on SF1442) Yes a bid bond is required and will be specified accordingly in the official RFP.

28. Would you consider a letter of bondability to indicate offerors are prepared to meet the bonding requirements of $5Million for this contract? We recommend this level of protection to ensure that the offerors are able to meet the requirements of the Government to successfully manage the anticipated volume of work. In addition to the required bid bond, a letter of bondability from a surety company will be required specifying bondability of at least $5 million. This will be specified in the official RFP accordingly.

29. Is it acceptable to use 11x17’ sheets of paper for seed project docs (if any), organization charts, etc. and if so, how will these count against page limitations. This will be specified in Section L of the official RFP when it is released.

30. This draft provides no indication that past performance will be one of the evaluation criteria. Please clarify in the solicitation if this is not correct, including, but not limited to, what is required for submittal, how it will factor into the evaluation, etc. Past Experience, rather than past performance will be evaluated as detailed in Section L & M, Subfactor 2 of the official RFP.

31. On page 6 of the SOW, there is a description of a Management Plan to be submitted with the original proposal that is not well-aligned with the submittal requirements identified in Section L and the evaluation process in Section M. Please clarify these requirements.

Requirements clarified on SOW to better align with Sections L & M.

32. Given the size of a project organization to support up to 100 concurrent projects, and the overall volume of this contract (typically between 15-20 people), would the Government please consider removing the resumes from the page limitations on the technical volume and imposing instead a limit of 1-2 pages per resume? Otherwise, even a single page resume per team member would require over one-third of the allowable space for the response to the entire volume.

Submitting 15-20 resumes is not typical. Contractors need only submit resumes of those authoritative personnel illustrating only the necessary background information and experience to meet requirement. Section 5 in the SOW has been edited to better explain the technical evaluation.

33. Section 3.0 of the SABER SOW indicates that Cost Estimating / Negotiating is a performance capability that may be provided either at a local or remote office. However, Section 8.0 of the SOW indicates that estimating and negotiating are functions that shall be included within the site office. We strongly recommend aligning the SOW language to require these functions to be performed from the site office (either on-base or within 15 miles of Bldg. 30011 as defined). Otherwise, it is unlikely that the Government would obtain the required level of service necessary to manage the level of performance needed for a SABER contract of this size.

I cannot find the discrepancy in Sections 3.0 and 8.0 in the SOW. Sections were edited to provide clarity.

34. Will the Government be providing an on-base office or space for an on-base (contractor-supplied) trailer? If so, are there any costs associated with this to the contractor?

No. Contractor shall supply their own facility. Section 8.1 edited for clarity.

35. According to 13 CFR 124.513(c)(2), “the joint venture must designate an employee of the 8(a) managing venturer as the project [contract] manager responsible for performance of the contract”. The language in the SABER SOW stating that the Contract Manager must be an employee of the contract holder is in conflict with this requirement, and may prevent a joint venture from receiving SBA approval. With respect to a JV as the contract holder, please consider revising the language to state that in the case of a joint venture, an employee of the managing partner in the joint venture can fulfill the role of CM? This section will be revised accordingly in the official RFP.

36. Item 12.7 of the SOW indicates to install RS Means annual unit price updates each year at option renewal. However, Item 11.3 of the SOW indicates RS Means are to be updated effective 15 January and that the contract also incorporates RS Means quarterly updates as available. Please clarify the use of RS Means updates. (We recommend incorporating updates as they become available; this lessens the risk of significant price fluctuations for the offeror and typically results in more accurate coefficients for the Government.)

Sections 11.3 and 12.7 updated for clarity.

37. Page 22 of the draft RFP states, “During negotiations, the fixed price portion of the Task Order will be determined by multiplying the person hours agreed to by the hourly rate specified in the Section B. A not-to-exceed amount will be established for reimbursement of the material and travel expenses.” This, and the rest of section PZIOC I-004, does not seem to match the Statement of Work or the SABER pricing worksheet. Please clarify if the contractor is to bid hourly rates, and if so, how those rates are integrated into the task order pricing described in the Statement of Work? This will be addressed in Section I on the official RFP.

38. Please clarify if the Government is requiring stamped 100% drawings for every task order as indicated in Section 6 of the SABER SOW?

Nowhere in Section 6 or in the definition of the 100% design does it say the Government requires stamped drawings. Some language was edited for clarification.

39. Please define what is meant by 100% design. Is the Government requiring 100% design drawings as defined by the UFC?

As stated in Section 6.1.2, “Full, comprehensive 100% designs are not required to be submitted for approval by the Government during the course of the project...” Furthermore, all TO in this contract will be Design/Build, not Design/Bid/Build. Language in subject section edited for clarification.

40. Please clarify what is meant by the following statement in paragraph 11.1.1: “The RS MEANS labor costs are included as line items of work.” Are labor costs allowed to be added to estimates as line items?

Language clarified. Labor alone is not allowed to be added as line items to estimates.

41. Is design included in coefficient (per paragraph 11.1.6) or will design be added to the estimate using Coefficient C (per paragraph 11.1.6.3)?

When professional design is required, it shall be utilized through Coefficient D, NOT via RS Means (Coefficients A & B). Language and Coefficients updated.

42. Paragraph 11.1.6.3 states that the maximum coefficient for AE services is 1.10. Since this coefficient needs to cover the contractor’s liability for design, management of the design process, other administrative and overhead costs, and profit, would the Government consider increasing the maximum coefficient range for Coefficient C? The official RFP will not require a maximum for any coefficients.

43. Can the Government please provide more information in Section M regarding the pricing evaluation? This will be specified in Section M of the official RFP when it is released.

44. Would the Government consider a cap (e.g., 20% of contract volume; 25% of each task order) on the use of non-pre-priced items? Non pre-priced items are not very common and therefore a cap will not be necessary.

45. Coefficients A, B, C, and D on the SABER Pricing Worksheet do not match up with the descriptions in paragraph 11.1.6 in the Scope of Work. Please clarify. This will be addressed in Section L & M on the official RFP.

46. The minimum coefficients for the standard and non-standard coefficients on the bid form do not align with the description in 11.1.6.1. Please clarify. The Pricing Worksheet and the Statement of Work shall be revised to match each other on the official RFP.

47. Page 21 of the RFP states, “Priced task orders shall contain info as outlined on the Task Order Form (attachment to this contract).” Can the Government please provide the Task Order Form? This section will be revised accordingly in the official RFP.

Cover Letter added to 4.2.2.2 as “A”.

56. Will the contractor be required to provide a detailed seed project estimate? Will it need to be priced using E4 Clicks software?

A detailed seed project estimate will be necessary, but utilizing E4Clicks is not required for the seed project. Refer to section 4.2.2.5 Subfactor 3, C, iii for details on the seed project.