MACC RFP FA9401-12-R-0002 Q A Round 2.pdf

Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC)

RFP, Pre-Proposal Conference and Site Visit Questions

Solicitation FA9401-12-R-0002

27 March 2012

ROUND 2

MACC FA9401-12-R-0002

The purpose of this document is to provide answers to RFP, Pre-Proposal Conference and Site

Visit questions for Solicitation FA9401-12-R-0002.

10. The solicitation synopsis on FedBizOpps contains the language “Current A&E contractors on contract at Kirtland AFB are not permitted to participate.” This language is not included in the solicitation documents. Please clarify if A&E firms that currently hold contracts at Kirtland AFB are ineligible to submit or be included in teams that submit for this solicitation.

ANSWER:

Amendment 4 dated 3/23/2012 in FED BIZ OPPS, incorporated, in section K, the following “Notice to Offerors”: IAW FAR 36.209, Current A&E contractors on contract at Kirtland AFB are not permitted to participate.

11. Please explain “ H” on page 3 of Attachment 5, states Mission Capability factor which does not match RFP.

Amendment 5 dated 3/23/2012 in FED BIZ OPPS, amended Section J, Attachment 5, Past Performance Questionnaire with new revision dated 3/23/2012.

Attachment 5, Past Performance Questionnaire, section 1(G) revised; the word Mission changed to Technical.

Attachment 5, Past Performance Questionnaire, section 1(H) revised; the word Mission

Capability changed to Technical/Technical Risk.

12. Attachment 5, Past Performance Information Sheet, item H. requires that offerors provide information for the subject project regarding each of the sub-factors under the Mission capability factor in Section L. There is no Mission Capability factor in Section L of the

RFP. Can you please identify the sub-factors we should address for each past performance project?

Amendment 5 dated 3/23/2012 in FED BIZ OPPS, amended Section J, Attachment 5, Past Performance Questionnaire with new revision dated 3/23/2012. Attachment 5, Past

Performance Questionnaire, section 1(G) revised; the word Mission changed to

Technical. Attachment 5, Past Performance Questionnaire, section 1(H) revised; the word

Mission Capability changed to Technical/Technical Risk.

Please refer to RFP Section M – M002(a)(1) for a list of all factors and subfactors.

Solicitation FA9401-12-R-0002

27 March 2012

ROUND 2

Please refer to RFP Section L 5.0 for the requirements of Volume III (Past Performance).

Please refer to RFP Section M – M002(c) for a complete description of how Past

Performance will be evaluated.

13. Do you anticipate any construction task orders being generated out of the above MACC contract that may require S/TS cleared personnel?

ANSWER: Negative; do not foresee this as a requirement.

14. Page 66/92, paragraph 2.2.2 of the solicitation documents says that all cost or pricing data shall be addressed ONLY in the Cost/Price Proposal and Contract Documentation

Volumes (Volumes 4 and 5). This information is contradicted by Volume 2, Sub-factor 2, page 69/92, paragraph 4.2.4 of the solicitation documents which requires that the offeror

“Provide a price schedule on AF Form 3052, attachment 31 and provide a separate detailed price breakdown describing the design effort and construction effort on price schedule, attachment 32” and “For construction, show material, labor and equipment quantities subtotaled by the sixteen division specification format as developed by the

Unified Facilities Guide Specifications (UFGS).” Please clarify if offerors are to provide this information in Volume 2, Sub-factor 2.

Per the RFP Section L 6.2, the offeror is required to submit an offer on the “seed project” by providing a price schedule on AF Form 3052, attachment 31 and a separate detailed price breakdown describing the design effort and construction effort on bid schedule, attachment 32. Please provide both of these attachments in Volume IV (Cost/Price) of your proposal.

15. Q&A Round 1, Question 2 response states that Tables of contents are not included in page limitations. Q&A Round 1, Question 3 response directly contradicts this by stating that the Narrative Summary and Master Table of Contents are included in the 3 page limitation for Volume 1. Please reconsider including the Master Table of Contents in this

3 page limitation. Including the Master Table of Contents (all 5 volumes) in the 3 page limitation effectively limits the Narrative Summary to 1 page at most.

If a table of contents is utilized in Volumes III, IV and V they are not included in page limitations.

The Narrative Summary and Master Table of Contents are included in the three page limitation defined in Table 2.2 for Volume I.

Solicitation FA9401-12-R-0002

27 March 2012

ROUND 2

16. The Attachment 5, Past Performance Information sheet, item I. requires that offerors specify key personnel by name and position for cross referencing between past performance projects and key personnel intended to perform on this contract. Volume 2, Sub-factor 1 does not require that offerors identify key personnel by name. Sub-factor 1 requires identification and interaction of key positions and the qualifications criteria for those positions. Please clarify if offerors are to provide names of personnel to fill each key position?

Per the RFP Section L 4.2.3, describe the hiring criteria for the key positions depicted on the organizational chart. Criteria shall describe the minimum level of education, any professional licenses, technical certification and/or qualifications, minimum experience and/or background, minimum skill levels, and required training necessary to hold the position described. Resumes and individual names are not required.

17. Volume 3, Past Performance Information, page 69/92, paragraph 5.1 states “This information is required on the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners who are proposed to perform 51 percent or more of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price or perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to overall successful performance.” Paragraph 5.3 on page 69/92 says

“If applicable include information on at least one (1) recent contract performed by each of your teaming partners and significant subcontractors that you consider most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort.” Please clarify, should teaming partners each submit 3 to 5 projects or should the team submit a total of 5?

Per RFP Section L 5.3, Past Performance Information on 3 to 5 recent contracts that you consider most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. This is a total of 5 projects per proposal, a total of 5 per team. Of the 5 total Past Performance

Questionnaires, if you have previous experience under a teaming arrangement, the

Government would like one of the five to include the teaming/JV Past Performance. If your proposal is not based on a teaming arrangement, it is at your company’s discretion to include or not include any previous arrangements. If your proposal is based on a teaming arrangement, it would stand to reason to submit five.

18. Per Amendment 0003 and 0004, Section M 002 Evaluation Factors, paragraph c. Past

Performance states that projects –

- “should be similar in size, scope, and complexity as those anticipated under this contract, i.e., having a project value between $50,000 and $1,500,000”

- However, Section H, paragraph 1.20 states that task orders may range between $2,000 and $3,000,000.

Solicitation FA9401-12-R-0002

27 March 2012

ROUND 2

Would the government consider extending the Past Performance evaluation factor of

$50,000-$1,500,000 for past performance relevancy to $3,000,000 since that is what the task orders can range to?

No, the $3,000,000 threshold was identified for the purpose of having Task Order executability for the infrequent occasions of requirements within that magnitude. The majority of requirements fall within the range identified, $50,000-$1,500,000. Therefore, if the dollar magnitude increase does not coincide with an increase to the scope and complexity, then changing the threshold from $1.5 M to $3M is not relevant.

19. FA9401-12-R-0002 Note the Interested Vendors list is not appearing on the FBO Website

This feature was not originally selected and cannot be changed.

20. Attachment 5, Past Performance Information Sheet, item J. asks “Describe the nature or portion of the work on the proposed effort to be performed by the business entity being reported here. Also, estimate the percentage of the total proposed effort to be performed by this entity and whether this entity will be performing as the prime, subcontractor, or a corporate division related to the prime (define relationship).” Did you intend that information is provided for the past performance project presented or the proposed effort

(the MACC IDIQ at Kirtland)?

ANSWER: The information is for the proposed effort (the MACC IDIQ at Kirtland).

21. Question 6 answered in the Round 1 Q&As allows the submission of CCASS performance evaluations in lieu of Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaires. Would the government like the CCASS evaluations to be included in Volume III – Past

Performance or would the government like the offerors to submit CCASS performance evaluations to Mr. Gilbert L. Martinez via email outside of the Volume III – Past

Performance? If CCASS evaluations are to be included in the Volume III – Past

Performance, do they count toward the 30 page limit stated in table 2.2 in paragraph 2.2?

Each CCASS evaluation is approximately 3-4 pages per project. With 5 projects from the prime and a couple projects from the teaming partner, that could be 21-28 pages.

ANSWER: CCASS is acceptable; however, CCASS only applies to contracts in excess of

$550,000. Section M of the RFP, M002(c)(2)(ii), states, “Projects should be similar in size, scope, and complexity as those anticipated under this contract, i.e., having a project value between $50,000 and $1,500,000 and include projects with the Federal

Government, state and local government agencies, and commercial customers”.

Companies have the latitude to assume the risk associated by not providing Past

Performance Evaluation Questionnaires and only using CCASS.

Solicitation FA9401-12-R-0002

27 March 2012

ROUND 2

Question 5 above: Per RFP Section L 5.3, Past Performance Information on 3 to 5 recent contracts that you consider most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. This is a total of 5 projects per proposal, a total of 5 per team.

If CCASS evaluations are provided by the contractor, it should be included in the

Volume III – Past Performance and would count towards the 30 page limitation.

22. Section L, Para. 2.2.1.1(b) limits font size to 12 for tables, charts, graphs, and figures.

Recommend this be changes to read that the font size for tables, charts, graphs, and figures be no smaller than 8 for clarity.

ANSWER: Per Section L, Para. 2.2.1.1(b), for tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 12 point.

23. The Past Performance Package, Attachment 5 of the RFP, is in a 10 point font. Does the

Government require that this be increased to a 12 point font when filled in for submission?

ANSWER: No, Attachment 5 may be filled-in with 10 point font.

24. Please Reference Section L, paragraph 4.2.4 Subfactor Two: Technical

Capability/Execution and Completeness of the Seed Project, which states in part:

“Provide the conceptual design proposal for the seed project as defined in the MACC

General Provisions, Attachment 6, and Statement of Work for the Seed Project …..

include all required drawings, written discussions, supporting engineering and planning documents, project schedule, price schedule and price breakdown by the Unified

Facilities Guide Specifications (UFGS)”.

The MACC General Conditions only refers to “Concept Design” in Section 01300, General Design Requirements, paragraph 4. Pre-Proposal Conference and Site

Investigation which states in part: This conference will be held prior to the development and submittal of a ‘Concept’ Design (when required by the TORFP) and associated Price

Section H, paragraph 1.18 TASK ORDER PROCEDURES.(e).1) states in part:

Contractor-Provided Design/Design-Build: MACC Contractors shall provide an initial

Concept‘ design consisting of drawings, sketches, outline specifications, design analysis, and/or other documentation as required by the Task Order Statement of Work….”.

Attachment 30, Statement of Work for the Seed Project states in part: “Bidder shall provide a price proposal, schedule and Technical Narrative which will be used to evaluate the proposal for this project”…...

Solicitation FA9401-12-R-0002

27 March 2012

ROUND 2

It is unclear what documentation is to be submitted for the Seed project and if drawings and price proposal, schedule and technical narrative are to be provided.

Clarification: Please verify that only a price proposal, schedule and technical narrative is required for the Seed Project or if other documentation as defined in Section H is required.

ANSWER: Section H only provides general information regarding Task Order

Procedures.

All the requirements listed in Section L Para 4.2.4 must be provided (conceptual design, price proposal, schedule and technical narrative, ect.). Attachment 31 (Price Schedule) and Attachment 32 (Bid Schedule) is to be provided in Volume IV (Cost/Price Volume).

25. Question: If drawings are required for the Seed Project, may they be provided in

11”x17”size and PDF format?

Per Section L Para 4.2.4, a conceptual design is required for the seed project.

Per Section L Para 2.2.1.1(b), 11”x17” is acceptable. PDF format is acceptable as part of your electronic submission.

26. In order to properly respond to the Seed Project technical and cost requirements, as-built drawings are required. Question: Will as-built drawings be posted for Building 909?

ANSWER: No, as-built drawings will not be provided. The SEED project study, Attachment 33 in the RFP provides the necessary information required for contractors to prepare a proposal which must be in accordance with RFP Sections L and M. In addition, the Government high recommends attendance at the Pre-Proposal Conference/Site Visit, information provided in Section L of RFP FA9401-12-R-0002.

27. Please Reference Section L, paragraph 2.2 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits.

The Volume II page limit is listed at 40 pages with no exclusions. Based on the extent of documentation that is required and a text size requirement of at least of 12 point, the page limit requirement is too restrictive. Question: Would you consider excluding the Seed

Project Section from the 40 page limit for Volume II?

ANSWER: The page limitation for Volume II is 40 pages including seed project section.

Keep in mind, Attachment 31 (Price Schedule) and Attachment 32 (Bid Schedule) is to be provided in Volume IV (Cost/Price Volume).

28. Please Reference Section L, paragraph 4.2.4 Subfactor Two: Technical

Capability/Execution and Completeness of the Seed Project, which states in part:

“Completeness of Seed Project MHMV 110112: Provide a price schedule on AF Form

Solicitation FA9401-12-R-0002

27 March 2012

ROUND 2

3052, Attachment 31 and provide a separate detailed price breakdown describing the design effort and construction effort on price schedule, Attachment 32”……

Clarification: The posted AF Form 3052s, Attachments 31 and 32 are identical; please clarify.

ANSWER: Attachment 31 (Price Schedule) is for contractors to provide a price based on major disciplines and Attachment 32 (Bid Schedule) should be utilized to give a more detailed breakdown of Cost/Price.

29. Please reference Section L paragraph 6.0 Volume IV – Cost/Price, 6.3 Estimating

Methodology. There are several submission requirements that appear to be for contracts that require costing information related to “level of effort”, “cost-plus”, “cost reimbursement” and/or “”time and materials” contracting mechanisms. These include:

6.3.1 Estimating System; 6.3.2 Purchasing System; 6.3.3 Accounting System; 6.3.4

Explanation of Estimating Methods Used; 6.4.5 Schedule of Hours by Labor Skill Mix;

and, 6.46 Probable Subcontractors.

Clarification: Since task orders issued under the MACC contract includes competition between prime contractors and delivery orders are issued as firm-fixed price contracts, the information required by the referenced Sections of the solicitation appear to be not applicable. Please clarify.

ANSWER: Competition does not exclude the Government’s responsibility to verify the following: 6.3.1 Estimating System; 6.3.2 Purchasing System; 6.3.3 Accounting System;

6.3.4 Explanation of Estimating Methods Used; 6.4.5 Schedule of Hours by Labor Skill

Mix; and, 6.46 Probable Subcontractors. The Government must ensure the above aforementioned are approved, adequate and technically viable.

30. Please reference Section L paragraph 7.0 Volume V – Contract Documentation, 7.3.4.6.3

Applicable Documents. Paragraph 7.3.4.6.3 states in part: “The offeror shall provide a list of any offeror, industry, commercial, and tailored Government standards, specifications, processes, and/or practices selected as compliance documents. The offeror shall also provide a list of all Government compliance documents intended to be used as compliance documents during the course of this contract. The offeror shall submit a list of these documents, including any tailoring instructions, as an annex to the proposed

SOW. The offeror shall submit the completed Proposed Compliance Documents as a separately bound document….”.

Since the MACC is an IDIQ contract, the identification of Proposed Compliance

Documents would be performed on a task order basis and submitted as part of the technical information in response to the individual RFPs or subsequent submittal process.

Question: Is there a requirement to submit a separately bound Proposed Compliance

Documents in addition to the other Volumes outlined in the Solicitation?

Solicitation FA9401-12-R-0002

27 March 2012

ROUND 2

ANSWER: If there are any known compliance documents, the contractor is required to submit such documentation to be included in the governing IDIQ. Any subsequent issues will be resolved as they become applicable to specific requirements.

31. Please reference Section L paragraph 2.2.1.1. Page Size and Format (b). Paragraph

2.2.1.1 states in part: “For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 12 point”. Most graphics require smaller text size in order to be presentable and visually effective.

Question: Would you consider allowing “legible text size” for tables, charts, graphs and figures in lieu of “no smaller than 12 point”?

ANSWER: The Government will accept 10 point text size for tables, charts, graphs and figures.

32. Is it possible to get directions to the MACC Pre-Proposal Conference? Which gate should I enter?

ANSWER: A map was provided with the RFP, Attachment 40. Contractors may enter through the Carlisle or Truman Gates.

33. Are the General Contractor's past performance documents due on April 3rd? Or is the

April 3rd due date only for the relevant subcontractors and "consent & authorization" forms?

ANSWER: Past Performance Questionnaires and the Past Performance Volume III is due no later than 1:00 PM MST, 3 April 2012.