Draft_RFP_Government_Responses_to_Industry_Comments_30_Oct_14.pdf

Regional Engineering & Construction (RE & C)

DRAFT RFP - FA8903-15-R-0002

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

Fill In

1 L ALL

REGIONS

Page 1, Construction

Projects and

Page13, Para4.3

Under construction projects you list a long list of project types that this contract will perform. However on Page 13, the types are much more limited to 4.3,c.i thru iv regarding the technical requirements you want the offeror to write to. Will you include all the types in the final RFP and if not why are you focused on these project types?

The contractor is expected to be capable of performing the full spectrum of project types enumerated in paragraph 1. For evaluation purposes, the Government has determined that the specialized experience in 4.3,c.i thru iv have been problematic in past contracts and is critical for the offeror to detail their experience performing in these specialized areas.

2 L ALL

REGIONS

Page 14, Volume III Past

Performance

Based upon positive GAO decisions, for the purpose of Concurrent

Projects, recency, experience and past performance will you consider allowing the use of affiliated companies past performance if the offeror provides a meaningful commitment letter that the affiliate will participate in the performance of the contract?

For purposes of evaluation, only prime contractors and actual teaming partners past performance will be considered. Teaming partners may be affiliated companies, but legitimate Teaming Agreements as provided in the RFP must be included to document their team member status.

3 L ALL

REGIONS

Page 18, Para

6.2

Submitting fully burdened labor rates for over 90 labor categories for

11 years is a highly ineffective method for evaluating price on a FFP construction MATOC. Contractors with extremely efficient, experienced personnel will be inappropriately penalized under this scenario when they logically pay higher rates for their personnel, but require less time on a particular project. In addition, since materials, craft labor, and equipment costs are usually the highest percentage of price on a construction project, this price evaluation method will not provide pertinent information for a source selection decision. Would the Air Force consider using a sample/seed project scenario for price evaluation, which includes a detailed description of the pricing approach, as a better alternative for evaluating price?

Meaningful price evaluations for Multiple Award IDIQ source selections are difficult. As such, the

Government thoroughly discussed the pros and cons of a sample task versus a pricing model to include a combination of both. Given that this is a trade off source selection and the Government is placing more emphasis on the technical and past performance factors, the goal for pricing is that it be reasonable, complete and balanced as indicated in the Draft RFP. The

Government determined that a pricing model is sufficient for determining prices fair and reasonable at the IDIQ level. The basis for the Government's decision is that the majority of the task orders will be competed individually and the most meaningful pricing evaluations will occur at that level, after the most highly qualified contractors based on technical and past performance after award of the best value basic contracts.

Pick from Drop-Down

List for each Column

Any conflict with information provided during the Draft RFP responses and the information released with the Final RFP - the Final RFP will be the binding authority.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

4 ATCH L-11 ALL

REGIONS

All Pages This is not a Cost Plus, Time & Materials, or Labor Hours contract.

The benefit of providing fully burdened labor rates for over 90 categories for 11 years is not beneficial if the task orders will be awarded on a competitive price basis. Won’t task orders be issued on a lump sum, FFP basis without labor hours spent and labor rates paid being verified or audited by the Government? Are any rates necessary for proper administration of task orders? If the decision is made to include labor rates in the contract, would it not be more appropriate to set them for key personnel only?

1. Yes, task orders will normally be issued on a lump sum FFP basis.

2. The pricing model includes labor categories for task order administration, including Contract Managers and

Subcontract Managers.

3. A full range of labor rates are essential to assist with contract modifications or determining price reasonableness in awards with less than adequate competition.

5 M ALL

REGIONS

Draft Full LM doc, pgs 24-27;

Projects that are similar in scope, magnitude and complexity and demonstrating successful work conducted in remote and austere locations but performed OCONUS should indicate a high expectation or capability to perform the RE&C work in the CONUS regions. In the interest of allowing small businesses to be more competitive and demonstrate otherwise highly relevant experience, would the

Government consider allowing OCONUS projects to be presented as

Relevant or Highly Relevant for the RE&C regions?

Non-concur in regards to allowing OCONUS projects.

The Government considers work within any RE&C region as more indicative of the offeror's ability to perform the requirements of this contract. However, the Government has adjusted the Very Relevant requirement to allow for work performed within any region identified in the RE&C SOW.

6 M ALL

REGIONS

Table 3, Draft

Full LM Doc, Please clarify further what are the differences in requirements between

Option 1 and Option 2 in Section LM Full - Table 3 Past Performance

Relevancy Criteria? Must the work be within the same CONUS specified region as the bid for all the Options?

1. Both Option 1 and 2 have been revised as follows:

Option 1 must include an element from each category

(A - Specialized Construction Experience and B -

Delivery Circumstances and/or Methods), but must meet a $2M threshold.

Option 2 must include an element from Delivery

Circumstances and/or Methods (reference Option 1, category B), but must meet a $8M threshold.

2. The Government has adjusted the Very Relevant requirement to allow for work performed within any region identified in the RE&C SOW.

7 M EAST pg. 6/para. 1 With the austere budgets we have experienced over the past three years, and the required completion requirements, a more reasonable project value might be $3M versus $5M

The Government has reassessed and adjusted threshold to $2M in Option 1.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

8 M EAST pg. 5/para. 3 This language is confusing - what does” within one (1) year duration of construction performance from date of award” mean? Is that a project with a performance period longer than 1 year with 1 year complete? So it could be an incomplete project as long as 1 year of construction has been completed?

Your explanation of what the language portrays is precisely correct. If you include an in-progress project, it must have at least one (1) year duration of construction performance from date of award within the last six (6) years from release of RFP publication.

9 SOW EAST pg. 6/para. 3 What is the planned distribution of regional task orders between GCC’s and GC’s? It appears that General Contractors may get minimal work.

This proposal requires significant resources to prepare and if the intent is use GCCs for the majority of the task orders, that is a very important influencer in the bidding decision-making process.

There is no mention of General Contractors (GC) or

General Construction Contractors (GCC) in Para. 3 of the SOW. The Government is not categorizing any offeror as or differentiating between GC or GCC therefore this question is now moot. All references to

GC and GCC were removed from this RFP therefore there will be no distribution of regional task orders between GCC's and GC's. This description of Offerors was intended to be informational only and no categorization of Offerors by the Government was ever intended. To alleviate the confusion, the terminology was removed. TOs will be ordered IAW ordering procedures identified in Section H.

10 ATCH L-1 ALL

REGIONS

1/2 of 5, Program

Construction

Manager

Suggest removing the word "civil engineering" as the Bachelor Degree requirement and replace with "engineering" as done so for the Program

Manager as this position could be another engineering discipline such as structural, mechanical or electrical engineering and not just civil.

Terminology will be changed to be remove "civil" to be consistent with Program Manager qualifications.

11 ATCH L-1 ALL

REGIONS

1/2 of 5, Program

Construction

Manager

Is the government requiring the Program Construction Manager to have

5 years experience in construction management plus another 10 years of construction experience? It is unclear if the construction management experience can be part of the 10 years of experience as written. Suggest rewriting to require a minimum of 10 years of construction experience including 5 years of experience in construction management. The 15 years preference can remain as written.

Correct, requirement is a min of 10 years of construction experience including 5 years of experience in construction management - Attachment L-1 will be revised for clarity.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

12 ATCH L-1 ALL

REGIONS

2 of 5, Program

Health and

Safety Manager

Suggest modifying the requirement for the Program H&S Manager to have 10 years of construction experience to 10 years of experience conducting/overseeing H&S during construction and/or engineering activities. This would better fit the actual role. As currently written the requirement is asking for 10 years of construction experience would be totally unrelated to performing H&S duties within a construction environment.

Non-concur, current requirement adequately defines the minimum experience the Government considers necessary.

13 ATCH L-1 ALL

REGIONS

5 of 5, Project

Health and

Safety Manager

Suggest modifying the experience requirement for the Project H&S

Manager to request 10 years of overall health and safety management experience with a minimum of 5 years within the construction environment.

Nonconcur, current requirement adequately defines the minimum experience the Government considers necessary.

14 ATCH L-2 ALL

REGIONS

1 of 1 Please clarify that all attachments such as L-2 can be submitted in the native font size and margin setup and does not need to comply with the

ITO regarding such parameters. In this particular attachment the 1" margins clearly exceed the ITO requirements and therefore should be exempt.

Concur, language will be added to Section L to indicate this exemption.

15 ATCH L-3 ALL

REGIONS

Entire

Attachment L-3

Please clarify that all attachments such as L-3 or L-9 can be submitted in the native font size and margin setup and does not need to comply with the ITO regarding such parameters. In this particular attachment the 1" margins clearly exceed the ITO requirements and therefore should be exempt.

Concur, language will be added to Section L to indicate this exemption.

16 ATCH L-3 ALL

REGIONS

3 of 4 Category 5 lists Facility Construction - Non Critical Areas (Dorms, Hospitals, etc.) as a type of service showing a dollar amount of >$10M;

however, Table 3 within Section M shows a dollar amount of $7M for

"Option 2".

Concur, L-3 table was inaccurate and after further consideration will be revised to reflect $8M.

17 M ALL

REGIONS

6 of 10, Table 3 The definition for Very Relevant includes two options. Under Option

1, at least one element must be selected. Please clarify the one element is selected from either A (1-4) Specialized Construction and B (1-3)

Delivery Circumstances and/or Methods. It is unclear if one element from both A and B must be checked. Given how the form is presented as Attachment L-3, it appears one element from both A and B must be selected. Please clarify

The language states "include at least one element from each category." One element from both A and B must be checked to qualify as very relevant as well as the defined threshold.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

18 ATCH L-4 ALL

REGIONS

4 of 7 There appears to be a few references to UXO within the Draft RFP.

For instance, Attachment L-4 includes a brief description of services provided including any issues relating to emergency response, UXO/HAZMAT/HAZWASTE, types of construction and/or property control. What is the significance of including such items within an engineering and construction type project? UXO is also cited as an example of a specialty team partner in Section L, page 5 of 20, letter

(j).

Some anticipated projects may include UXO exposure

(e.g. Ranges). It is expected that the contractor can provide handling and removal services in the event that

Government personnel are not available to provide that service.

19 L ALL

REGIONS

Table 2.2 itemizes a number of elements required as part of the submittal, but does not list where the key personnel qualifications should be presented as a part of the submittal. Suggest resumes are included within Volume 2, limited to 2 pages each and exempt from page count requirements.

Resumes have been determined to be irrelevant at the

IDIQ level solicitations, and we are not requesting them in this submittal. Confirmation of minimum qualifications at the task order level will be required, and resumes for key personnel may be requested at that time.

20 L ALL

REGIONS

5/6 of 20 The Executive Summary page limit for Volume 1 and Volume 2 is 5 pages. The Executive Summary page limit for Volume 3 is 1/2 page per Table 2.2.

This is in error, and the Executive Summary page limit for Volume 3 will be changed to 5 pages.

21 L ALL

REGIONS

17 of 20 Suggest allowing the PPQ POC Summary Sheet and the actual client completed PPQs to be received with the actual proposal submission as opposed to 15 calendar days prior to the date set for receipt of proposals. Unless the government is contemplating a significant proposal response period of 8 weeks or more, it makes it very challenging to coordinate with government personnel to ensure both a willingness to complete and actual finalization of the actual PPQ.

The Government anticipates a proposal response period of 8 weeks. Therefore, requirement of 15 calendar days prior remains as described in Section L.

22 L ALL

REGIONS

2 of 20 A Project is defined as an individual task order issued under an IDIQ contract or a stand-alone project for government or commercial clients.

Suggest allowing the definition to include:

-Work performed under multiple task orders issued against one IDIQ contract to accomplish the work effort on a single site within a single installation or facility.

The definition is intended to identify projects that are reflective of the level of effort for individual task orders anticipated on this IDIQ contract. To permit submission of aggregated task orders to meet thresholds defeats this intent.

23 ATCH L-11 ALL

REGIONS

Cells L3, L4 and M3, M4

Both the home office and field tabs include the wrong time frames for

FY25 & FY26.

Concur, tables have been corrected.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

24 ATCH L-11 ALL

REGIONS

Profit is usually proposed during the task order proposal process and not included in the fixed ceiling rates.

The definition of fully burdened labor rates includes profit, as seen in the Draft RFP, Section L. Profit may be included separately, as applicable, for elements other than direct labor on task orders.

25 ATCH L-12 ALL

REGIONS

Field Average tab cells A8 &

A9

Why do select labor categories have only junior and senior selections? This is in error, Corrections to include mid level

Architect will be made to the Field Labor Table.

26 ATCH L-5 ALL

REGIONS

1 of 9 Regarding file naming convention, suggest adding project # to the current convention that only requires the contract name/solicitation #.

Noncur, the tool is auto populated and is not able to be tailored. Offeror shall comply with L-5 - PPI tool instructions.

27 ATCH L-5 ALL

REGIONS

1 of 9 Suggest allowing Offerors to download a version of the PPI Tool to fully understand how the system will working including such parameters that might be character limited.

PPI Tool is being provided as an Attachment to allow offerors to become familiar with software.

28 ATCH L-3 ALL

REGIONS

L.5.3.2 In reviewing the past history of this contract, it appears that there were a lot of projects valued at below $5M. Suggest the RFP should give more credence to smaller projects, with a request for 2 - 3 projects that are between $1M and $5M, and the rest >$5M.

The Government has adjusted the Very Relevant threshold to align with the level of effort for individual task orders anticipated on this IDIQ contract.

29 L ALL

REGIONS

L.3.0 Suggest adding a criterion under Factor 1 – Management Effectiveness and Capabilities (maybe under 3.1 b?) that gives credit for: (1)

Demonstrating an ability to manage multiple projects simultaneously across a geographic region of similar or greater size to those indicated in the REC RFP. (2) Demonstrating ability to perform multiple project functions (e.g. investigations, work plans and construction) simultaneously on different projects.

See criterion 3.1.d. in Section M.

30 ATCH L-1 ALL

REGIONS

Items 6 - 10 Items 6 through 9 all state that the positions will be assigned by the

Offeror upon award of the task order. Item 10 (Project Health and

Safety Manager) is also a task order level position, but does not state this criteria regarding assignment timing. Is this in error?

Concur, language will be changed to conform to other task order level positions concerning assignment timing.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

31 M ALL

REGIONS

Table 3

Option 2

Please confirm that any project over $7M will be counted as very relevant

Reference response - Question #6.

32 L ALL

REGIONS

Paragraph

5.3.2.2.b

The paragraph states that 3 PPQs need to be submitted per project.

Suggest it would be burdensome on the government POCs to fill out multimet PPQs. Based on our experience it can be difficult at items just to get one PPQ completed for a project. Would it be possible to only submit 1 PPQ per project versus 3 PPQs per project?

A PPQ is only required when an interim and/or final

CPARS report is not available for a project. For projects without a CPARS report, the government is requesting three (3) PPQs per project in order to ensure we receive different perspectives from various POCs;

this is standard practice on major IDIQs executed by

772 ESS and AFCEC. From our experience, we don’t receive 100% return rate on PPQs therefore, by requesting three (3) per project this will increase the probability of receiving input for each project you include in your proposal. All PPQs received will be considered, but if some responses are not received, it will not be held against the offeror; it is the offeror's responsibility to send PPQ to thee (3) POCs and provide their contact information (via PPQ POC Summary

Sheet) to allow the government to follow-up directly with POC if necessary.

33 L WEST Page 3 of 10 Suggest that Guam also be included in the West region since there is a large Air Force presence in Guam similar to Hawaii

Due to Guam's geographic location in proximity to

CONUS, Guam will be included in the Worldwide

Engineering and Construction solicitation.

34 L ALL

REGIONS

PAGE 16 of 20;

5.3.2.2

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or

Present/Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) (Attachment L-4)

b. The contracting officer will assess the Offeror’s performance on all recent and relevant projects submitted as part of your proposal. Offeror shall submit three (3) PPQs per each of the projects submitted.

Please clarify the need for 3 PPQs per project submitted. Is it the government's intent to require 3 separate PPQs from one client for each project? If so, this seems like an onerous requirement as it is often difficult to just get one PPQ for each project.

Reference response - Question #32.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

35 L ALL

REGIONS

PAGE 18 of

20; 6.2 Firm

Fixed Price

Labor Rates

(Pricing Model)

b. The labor categories identified in the Labor Rate Tables and corresponding Pricing Model are anticipated to be all inclusive of the labor categories expected to be used throughout the life of the contract.

The rates as proposed in the Labor Rate Tables by the prime and each teaming partner shall be contractually binding ceiling rates should

Offeror be awarded a contract. The ceiling rates shall be utilized for future competitive task orders, single-source task orders, and task order modifications; however, when competing for task orders, discounted or lower rates may be proposed.

Please explain how these labor rates will be used in relation to the task orders that may be issued on Firm Fixed Price task orders? How will the government determine accuracy of rates if high or low on fixed price bids? How will the price sheet be used once contract awards are made and task orders issued?

Also, how will subcontractor pricing be evaluated?

1. The pricing model is for evaluation purposes only.

The rates in the Labor Rate Tables will be awarded as ceiling rates, as proposed by the prime and teaming partners. It will be up to the individual primes and teaming partners to determine what rates to propose on task orders, but they cannot exceed the rates agreed to at award of the basic IDIQ for each team member.

2. At the task order level, the Government anticipates competition to establish reasonableness. Individual rates may be evaluated for high/low, depending on the task order specifics for modifications and one offer situations. 3.

Same answer as 1.

4. At the TO level, the evaluation of pricing (prime and subcontractor) will depend on the specifics of each task order...Competitive, Only one offer, etc.

36 M ALL

REGIONS

PAGE 8 of 10;

5.0 Factor 3

–Price

d. Price analysis will be conducted for each Offeror’s proposal. The analytical pricing techniques and procedures described herein may be used, singly or in combination with others, to ensure that the selection of the best value offers are reasonable, balanced, and complete

Please explain the price analysis that will be used to determine the

"best value" offer. The pre-solicitation language seems vague about this.

Technical and Past Performance factors are more important than price, and the Total Evaluated Price per

Region as established via the Labor Rate Tables and corresponding Pricing Model will be the price basis for assisting in determining best value. Total Evaluated

Prices for each prime by region will be evaluated IAW

Section M for reasonableness, balance and completeness. Each is described in detail in Section M.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

37 M ALL

REGIONS

TABLE 3 -

VERY RELEVANT Portion: A project must meet one of the two options below :

Option 1: Past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort...must exceed $5M and include at least one element from each category below:

A. Specialized Construction Experience

1. Aircraft Fuel Storage and Hydrant Systems

2. Airfield Pavements and associated equipment installation

3. Historical Building Renovations

4. Construction of Classified/Highly Secure (Restricted Access) facilities including sophisticated telecommunications systems

5. Non-standard or unique structures

B. Delivery Circumstances and/or Methods

1. Remote and/or Austere Environments

2. Design-Build Requirements

3. Sustainable Facility Construction

Option 2: Past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort (>$7M) and complexities this solicitation requires. Additionally, project shall be within the proposed region identified in the RE&C SOW.

The VERY RELEVANT portion of the table refers to remote and austere environments as a relevant delivery circumstance or method, yet the projects must be within each of the three regions. Other than parts of Alaska, none of the regions appear to have remote or austere conditions. Please clarify this.

While instances of remote or austere environments are expected to be rare, there are possibly instances for them in each of the regions. Any location where commercial availability of basic logistical support is difficult or absent can be considered remote and/or austere. The contractor must be prepared to provide that logistical support under these circumstances. A definition will be added to Section L.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

38 M ALL

REGIONS

PAGE 5 of 10 -

Factor 2 - Past

Performance, Section g.1.

(Recency)

Recency: As stated in Section L, Paragraph 5.3.2(b), Recency is defined as projects completed or within at least one (1) year duration of construction performance from date of award within the last six (6) years from release of RFP publication. The Government will consider only those projects which were completed or with at least one year duration from date of award within the last six (6) years from release of

RFP publication. In addition, credit will be given only for work actually completed as of proposal due date. Anticipated scope of work will not receive credit.

Please clarify, as the part of this paragraph that states that the project must be completed within the last 6 years of the RFP publication is clear; however, the language regarding at least one year duration is not clear. Does this mean that a project scheduled for completion within 1 year after the date of contract award is also recent. What is the expected date of award of this contract?

No, it does not mean that a project scheduled for completion within one year after the date of contract award is recent. A project that is ongoing but not yet completed must have at least one (1) year duration of construction performance from date of award within the last six (6) years from release of RFP publication to be relevant. Also note that a project in this situation will only get credit for the work that has been completed, and not for work scheduled but not yet in place. The expected date of release of the Final RFP is in

December 2014.

39 L ALL

REGIONS

Key Personnel includes a

Program

Security

Manager

Please clarify why this position is included as the RE&C will not be performing work in hostile environments.

While no hostile environments are anticipated, site security, and access management are still integral responsibilities for all projects, and it is expected that there will be an individual filling this role at the corporate level.

40 L ALL

REGIONS

Section

5.3.2.2d

Obtaining PPQs from clients is often a challenge. Providing a PPQ

POC summary sheet 15 days prior to the due date seems restrictive.

Please clarify why this list is needed 15 days before the due date and why not by the due date.

Reference response - Question #21.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

41 L ALL

REGIONS

Section 4.3

Management

Effectiveness and

Capabilities / page 13 of 20.

The Offeror shall submit a management plan that applies to all geographical locations identified within specific region (East, Central, West) included in AFCEC’s mission for the entire scope of the SOW over the period of performance for this contract. The plan shall include:

b. Technical approach for managing the following types of delivery circumstances and/or methods:

(i) Design-build requirements

(ii) Sustainable Facility Construction

(iii) Construction requirements in remote and/or austere environments

Please clarify what remote or austere environments are anticipated other than potential projects in remote areas of Alaska.

Reference response - Question #37.

42 M ALL

REGIONS

Section 3.1

Management

Effectiveness and

Capabilities / page 3 of 10.

(iii) The construction in remote and/or austere environments process at a minimum adequately addresses: specific practices and plans for staffing and logistical support for all aspects for performing construction requirements.

Please clarify what remote or austere environments are anticipated other than potential projects in remote areas of Alaska.

Reference response - Question #37.

43 M ALL

REGIONS

Table 3 Subject: Past performance relevancy: Category/Very

Relevant/Specialized Construction

Item 4: Construction of Classified/Highly Secure (Restricted Access) facilities including sophisticated telecommunications systems.

Question: Does that mean the highly secure facility construction

MUST include a sophisticated telecommunications system, OR, does it mean that a sophisticated telecommunications systems would qualify as a stand-alone highly secure facility construction project?

Any project for constructing a classified/highly secure facility will qualify including if it contains a sophisticated telecommunications system. However, a stand-alone sophisticated telecommunications system not associated with a classified/highly secure facility will not qualify.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

44 L ALL

REGIONS

4.3,b, iii. Also

M, 3.1, b, iii.

Also M Table 3

Question: Please define “remote and/or austere” as it pertains to the

REC. Do all three REC regions have “remote and/or austere” locations?

Reference response - Question #37.

45 L ALL

REGIONS

3.9.1.1 and elsewhere

Question: Are resumes for key personnel going to be required in

Volume II or anywhere else in the proposal?

Reference response - Question #19.

46 L ALL

REGIONS

5.3.2.1 and

5.3.2.2

Question: Volume III: Are Sections 5.3.2.1 (PPIs) and 5.3.2.2 (PPQs and/or CPARS) excluded from page count, and is there no limitation on number of pages submitted for PPIs/PPQs/CPARS?

Concur, language will be added to Section L to indicate this exemption.

47 L ALL

REGIONS

L and M Subject: Attachment L-3, description for Item 5, states that the magnitude of the effort must be greater than $10M but Section M, Table 3 – Past Performance Relevancy Ratings (p6 of 10) states that the magnitude of effort must be greater than $7M. Question: Which is correct?

Reference response - Question #16.

48 M ALL

REGIONS

Table 3 Section M, Table 3 – Past Performance Relevancy Ratings: Dollar values are too high, especially for small businesses. Under this contract, AFCEC will have projects with a RANGE of dollar values.

Therefore, a “very relevant” rating should be achievable with a

RANGE of project sizes. Something like this is recommended for very relevant rating for all 10 projects:

- All 10 project must be at least $500,000.

- At least 5 projects must be at least $1,000,000

- At least 2 projects must be at least $5,000,000

- At least 1 project must be at least $7,000,000

Noncur, the Government has adjusted the Very Relevant threshold to align with the level of effort for individual task orders anticipated on this IDIQ contract.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

49 M ALL

REGIONS

Table 3 Section M, Table 3 – Past Performance Relevancy Ratings: Regional geography is considered too strongly for a “very relevant” rating because:

- There are no unifying codes, regulations, geology, climate or other factors that are common to all the states in any region.

- Projects will almost always be performed on federal facilities, which makes the state or region nearly irrelevant.

- Under these evaluation criteria, for example, Company A, proposing on the East Region, which performed 10 projects in Mississippi, would potentially get a much higher relevancy rating than Company B, which performed two projects in Louisiana, two in Oklahoma, two in Kansas, two in Nebraska and two in North Dakota. Even though Company B clearly has the more diverse and relevant experience, Company A wins the day because its projects are all in the East Region, whereas none of

Company B’s projects are in the East Region.

Concur, the Government has adjusted the Very Relevant requirement to allow for work performed within any region identified in the RE&C SOW.

50 L ALL

REGIONS

5.3.2.2, c and d Requiring PPQ responses or any other part of the proposal 15 days prior to the proposal due date is completely unreasonable. This means that we would need to send the PPQs out 3 or 4 weeks ahead of the proposal due date to make sure the government receives the responses in time. This precludes our making any adjustments to our project lineup, or possibly finding alternate PPQ respondents, during the final, crucial weeks of the proposal period. PPQ responses should be due no earlier than the due date of the proposal.

Reference response - Question #21.

51 ATCH L-9 ALL

REGIONS

Please clarify that this form is for the Prime only? Language will Section L to clarify that the form is for the Prime only.

52 ATCH L-9 ALL

REGIONS

Attachment L-9 as instructed on the form could be very lengthy.

Would the Government consider excluding the form from the page count?

Attachment L-9 will be excluded from page count.

53 ATCH L-9 ALL

REGIONS

Please advise under which tab Form L-9 should appear: Management

Capability or Technical Risk?

Technical Risk.

54 ATCH l-14 ALL

REGIONS

Please clarify that the Contractor data sheet is to be completed for the

Prime only?

Confirm, prime only.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

55 L ALL

REGIONS

p. 24, paragraph

5.3.2.2.b

PPQs from three different client personnel with first hand project knowledge is nearly impossible to obtain and creates a burden on the government clients. Please consider requiring ONE PPQ per project, which is standard for the industry.

Reference response - Question #32.

56 L ALL

REGIONS

p. 24, paragraph

5.3.2.2.a &

5.3.2.2.b

Paragraph 5.3.2.2.a and 5.3.2.2.b are in conflict. Please clarify and revise. We suggest that (a) the Government accept a single

CCASS/CPARs in lieu of the PPQ Form (Attachment L-4); and (b) that for those projects without CCASS/CPAR, one PPQ is required (not three for each project).

1. Nonconcur, the Government is requesting interim (if applicable) and/or final Contractor Performance

Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) report(s) for all projects submitted (if available), in lieu of Past

Performance Questionnaires (PPQs). Therefore, some projects may have more than a single report if both an interim and final report were accomplished.

2. Reference response - Question #32.

57 L ALL

REGIONS

p. 25, paragraph

5.3.2.2.c

Paragraph 5.3.2.2 (c) states that PPQs from our customers are due 15 days prior to submittal date. We request that PPQs be required to the

Government by the submission date.

Reference response - Questions #21.

58 L ALL

REGIONS

p. 8, Table 2-2 For Paragraph 4.3, Management Effectiveness and Capabilities, we request the page count be extended to 50 pages to adequately present all the information required.

Nonconcur, the Government considers the 30 page limitation to be appropriate.

59 ATCH L-1 ALL

REGIONS

The RFP lists specific key personnel requirements, yet there is no requirement or place to put resumes. If required, in which factor are resumes to be included and will they be exempt from the page count?

Which resumes if any, should be included?

Reference response - Question #19.

60 M ALL

REGIONS

p. 8, Table 3 Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Item A5 under 'very relevant' criteria specifies "Non-standard or unique structures." What does the government consider "Non-standard or unique structures?" Would hospital/clinic/medical/laboratory facilities fit in this category?

No. Non-standard or unique structures include those employing unusual structural elements or materials used in unconventional ways to create a particular visual impact.

61 I ALL

REGIONS

39 DFARS 252.242-7005 Contractor Business Systems. Request that the

Government remove this contract clause because small businesses are exempt from Cost Accounting Standards.

Concur, the Government has determined that the clause is not applicable and will remove.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

62 L ALL

REGIONS

p. 18, paragraph

3.9.2.f

Most small businesses are not working with a cognizant DCMA office.

What should a Small Business do to satisfy this requirement if they do not currently have a cognizant DCMA office? Would the Government consider relaxing this requirement by restating it as: "The following information will be required: Firm name, Point of Contact (POC) and full contact information to include address, phone, fax, e-mail address, and cognizant Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) office

(if available)."

A financial capabilities assessment will be performed for each offeror to enable the CO to make a responsibility determination. Although a small business may not have had a contract with DOD in the past, you would still have a cognizant DCMA office (whichever

DCMA office serves your area). Therefore, this requirement remains as part of RE&C solicitation.

63 L ALL

REGIONS

p. 2, paragraph

1.0

Construction Projects, Typical projects include "emerging requirements". Please define emerging requirements and provide examples.

Emerging requirements are as yet unprogrammed projects indicated by broad policy statements but not yet quantified. Examples of emerging requirements include

Pacific Rebalancing, Africa Command (AFRICOM) initiatives, and troop drawdowns. Definition will be added in Section L.

64 ATCH L-13 ALL

REGIONS

Most small businesses are not working with a cognizant DCMA office.

What should a Small Business do if they do not currently have a cognizant DCMA office?

Reference response - Question #62.

65 SOW ALL

REGIONS

p. 19, paragraph

6.1.1

Paragraph 6.1.1 states that “The DOR shall be a prime contractor employee, be contracted directly by the prime contractor, or be an employee of a design firm that is contracted directly by the prime contractor.” The use of sub-consultants by design firms, especially for specialized projects, is standard industry practice. We believe that the statement as written is overly restrictive and will increase cost to the

Government as every small business will have to have a full-time specialty design on staff to meet the requirement. Also, since only some designers will have those specialty consultants on staff, some of the pool may choose not to bid certain task orders while larger firms will be better positioned and have an advantage even further limiting competition which is certainly not in the government’s best interest.

We recommend it state:

“The DOR shall be a prime contractor employee, be contracted directly by the prime contractor, be an employee of a design firm that is contracted directly by the prime contractor or from a specialty design firm that is subcontracted by the design firm.”

Since the prime contractor has Design Management responsibility, it is important for the prime contractor to have privity with all DORs. To allow cascading of designers through sub-sub-contracts and potentially beyond would eliminate this relationship. This does not require the prime contractor to have specialty designers on staff, but will require that the prime contractor sub-contract directly with the specialty designer.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

66 ATCH L-1 ALL

REGIONS

COMMENT: The RFP lists specific personnel requirements, yet there is no requirement or place to put resumes. QUESTION: If required, in which factor are resumes to be included and will they be exempt from the page count?...Which resumes if any, should be included?

Reference response - Question #19.

67 ATCH L-9 ALL

REGIONS

QUESTION: Please clarify that this form is for the Prime only? Reference response - Question #51.

68 ATCH L-9 ALL

REGIONS

QUESTION: Attachment L-9 as instructed on the form could be very lengthy. We suggest / ask that this form be excluded from the page count.

Reference response - Question #52.

69 ATCH L-9 ALL

REGIONS

QUESTION: Please advise under which tab Form L-9 should appear:

'Management Capability' or 'Technical Risk'?

Reference response - Question #53.

70 ATCH L-14 ALL

REGIONS

QUESTION: Please clarify that the Contractor data sheet is to be completed for the Prime only?

Reference response - Question #54.

71 H ALL

REGIONS

Page 29, Para 6 "If proposed project is determined to be within scope, funded, and ceiling capacity is available for non-AFCEC Air Force work, the Decentralized Ordering POC will contact AFCEC to obtain ceiling reservation, negotiate/sign a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with user, issue control number to user, and provide information about the Worldwide Engineering &

Construction contracts...."

QUESTION: Should this say Regional Engineering & Construction ?

Concur, revision will be made.

72 L ALL

REGIONS

Page 15 - 17, Para 5.3.2 (all)

QUESTION: PPQs from three different client personnel is difficult to obtain and creates a burden on the government clients. Please consider requiring ONE PPQ per project, which is standard for the industry

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

73 L ALL

REGIONS

Page 16, Para

5.3.2 (b)

"The contracting officer will assess the Offeror’s performance on all recent and relevant projects submitted as part of your proposal. Offeror shall submit three (3) PPQs per each of the projects submitted".

QUESTION: Does the contractor or teammate have to submit 3 PPQs from three different individuals for each project submitted that does not have a CCASS or ACASS report associated with it? Will the government rate the level of confidence higher based upon the titles of the three individuals?

1. Reference response - Question #32.

2. No, the titles of the individual will not impact the evaluation. However, the individual(s) should have been associated with proposed project.

74 L ALL

REGIONS

Page 16, Paragraph

5.3.2.2 (a & b)

Paragraph 5.3.2.2 (a) and (b) are in conflict. Please clarify and revise.

QUESTION: We request that (a) the Government accept a single

CCASS/CPARs in lieu of PPQ Form (Attachment L-4); and (b) that for those projects without CCASS/CPAR, ONE PPQ is required (not three for each project).

Reference response - Question #32.

75 L ALL

REGIONS

Page 17, Paragraph

5.3.2.2 (c)

Paragraph 5.3.2.2 (c) states that PPQs from our customers are due 15 days prior to submittal date. QUESTION: We request this to be changed so that PPQs are required to the Government by the submission date.

Reference response - Question #32.

76 L ALL

REGIONS

Page 5, Paragraph 2.2

(Table 2.2)

Table 2.2: for Paragraph 4.3, Management Effectiveness and

Capabilities

QUESTION: We request the page count be extended to 50 pages to adequately present all the information required.

Reference response - Question #58.

77 L ALL

REGIONS

Page 16, Paragraph

5.3.2.1

QUESTION: Can we use PPIs received previously or do the PPIs have to indicate this solicitation and be resubmitted to the Government for completion again? (Attachment L-3)

PPIs need to be submitted for this solicitation.

78 L ALL

REGIONS

Page 4, Paragraph

2.1.4, h. _

'Teaming'

COMMENT: This paragraph seems to conflict with the wording in

Attachment L-8. QUESTION:

Can you please add a statement which clearly indicates that, although

Offeror may submit only one proposal per region, Offeror is eligible to receive an award for any of the multiples of 'Choice of Competition' selected.

Nonconcur, the Government has determined that the

Choice of Competition process is clearly defined.

Reference Section M - paragraph G - page 10 of 10.

However, L-8 attachment and ordering procedures will be revised to ensure consistency.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

79 M ALL

REGIONS

Page 4, Paragraph 4.0 _

FACTOR 2 -

Past

Performance

Table 3 Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Item A5 under 'very relevant' criteria specifies "Non-standard or unique structures."

QUESTION: What does the government consider "Non-standard or unique structures?" Would hospital/clinic/medical/laboratory facilities fit in this category?

Reference response - Question #60.

80 M ALL

REGIONS

Page 4, Paragraph 4.0 _

FACTOR 2 -

Past

Performance

Recency: As stated in Section L, Paragraph 5.3.2(b), Recency is defined as projects completed or within at least one (1) year duration of construction performance from date of award within the last six (6) years from release of RFP publication.

QUESTION: If the Contractor submits PPIs for the design team member, does the design have to be:

1. Within the past 6 years, and

2. Either complete or in progress with at least 1 year duration of design from date of award?

PPIs on design firms are not required, nor recommended.

81 SOW ALL

REGIONS

Atch 1, Page 29 of 29, Paragraph 7.2

“As-built drawing documentation shall include a record of “signed and sealed” as-built drawings and specifications verifying that all development standards have been met.”

QUESTION: DORs will not seal as-built documents unless they observe 100% of the construction, which is cost prohibitive. As-built drawings are for record only, they are not construction documents, and thus there is no reason to seal them. This would be an exorbitant cost for doing something that is not normally required. We ask that you please consider removing this requirement.

As built drawings need to be based on signed and sealed design documents with deviations clearly marked and annotated by the construction contractor (one standard industry practice of this is known as "red line" drawings). Should substantive deviations have been made to the documents, it may be required at the

Government’s sole discretion that the revised documents be signed and sealed by the responsible

DOR. Appropriate changes to the RFP language will be made.

82 SOW ALL

REGIONS

Atch 1, Page 11 of 29, Para

4.11.2

Radiological Waste, Hazardous Material and Hazardous Waste

Permitting and

Reporting

QUESTION: Is 'biological' waste not included?

Yes, it is not included. Biological waste is not a normal bi-product of construction operations. In the event biological waste is encountered, it will be handled by task order modification.

Question/Comment Matrix

DRAFT RFP Responses Dated 30 Oct 2014

QUESTION

Section /

Attachment Region

Page

/Paragraph

QUESTION / COMMENT RESPONSE

83 SOW ALL

REGIONS

Atch 1, Page 16 of 29, Para

5.2.1

All key personnel for the prime contractor, to include the Project

Manager, Site Superintendent, Health & Safety Manager, and Quality

Control Manager or their CO approved designated replacement will be on site 100% of the time during all construction activities for the performance period of the contract.

QUESTION: Typically PMs are not on site 100% and this requirement will significantly increase cost for each T.O. Additionally, for smaller projects the Site Superintendent or other site personnel such as the

HSM or CQM responsibilities can be combined i.e. HSM performing

QCM responsibilities. Please consider these options.

The language will be revised to conform to the language in Attachment L-1 Project Manager: "shall be responsible for ensuring that practical and effective systems are developed to complete the task order and is expected to maintain a frequent on-site presence."

84 SOW ALL

REGIONS

Atch 1 Page 13 The project Superintendent must maintain a physical presence at the site at all times construction is taking place and is responsible for all construction and related activities at the site. The project

Superintendent must be from the Prime Contractor. (CDRL A007)

QUESTION: If proposing as a "Team" can the Site Superintendent be from a Team Member?

It is the prime contractor's decision to assign a site superintendent from a team member, unless otherwise specified at the task order level. The Site

Superintendent must have the authority to commit and bind the prime contractor in exercising his superintendence. It is not acceptable for the Site

Superintendent to have to request approval to make decisions on site.

85 SOW CENTRAL Atch 1, Page 19 of 29, Para

6.1.1

Referencing Paragraph 6.1.1

COMMENT: The use of sub-consultants by design firms, especially for specialized projects, is standard industry practice. We believe that the statement as written is overly restrictive and will increase cost to the Government as every small business will have to have a full-time specialty design on staff to meet the requirement. Also, since only some designers will have those specialty consultants on staff, some of the pool may choose not to bid certain task orders while larger firms will be better positioned and have an advantage even further limiting competition which is certainly not in the contractor's or the government’s best interest.

We recommend it state: “The DOR shall be a prime contractor employee, be contracted directly by the prime contractor, or be an employee of a design firm that is contracted directly by the prime contractor or from a specialty design firm that is subcontracted by the design firm.”

Since the prime contractor has Design Management responsibility, it is important for the prime contractor to have privity with all DORs. To allow cascading of designers through sub-sub-contracts and potentially beyond would eliminate this relationship.