TMACC ORDERING GUIDE.doc

ORDERING GUIDE

INDEFINITE DELIVERY/INDEFINITE QUANTITY

MULTIPLE AWARD

TOWER CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS

Foreword

The Civil Engineering Unit, Oakland (CEU Oakland), within the U.S. Government has established Coast Guard-wide contracts for tower and antenna construction, maintenance, inspection and repairs. The Tower Multiple Award Construction Contracts (TMACC) were awarded under the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (FASA), and the Clinger-Cohen Act, which require that prime Contractors be provided a fair opportunity to be considered for task order awards. The contracts are structured as indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (ID/IQ) contracts, using task orders for the acquisition of tower and antenna construction services. The contracts are available to all CG Components. This TMACC ordering guide contains all the information needed to use the contracts. Questions regarding these guidelines and procedures for placing orders against the contracts should be directed to the CEU Oakland. They will revise these guidelines, as needed, to improve and streamline the process of awarding and managing orders under the TMACC contracts.

The Civil Engineering Unit, Oakland

Jeff Cross

2000 Embarcadero

Oakland, CA 94606

Jeffrey.a.cross@uscg.mil Table of Contents

Foreword General Information 1.1 Background

1.2 Purpose 1.3 Scope of TMACC Contracts 1.4 FAR and FASA Relationship TO TMACC Contracts ……………………………..

2. Roles and Responsibilities 2.1 Requiring Activity 2.2 Contracting Officer – TMACC Contract 2.3 Contracting Officer – Task Order (TO) Level 2.4 Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative Task Order Level 2.5 Deliver/Task Order Contract Ombudsman

3. TMACC Ordering Procedures 3.1 Scope of TMACC Task Orders 3.2 Purchase Request Preparation 3.2.1 Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE) 3.2.2 Reserved ……………… 3.2.3 Task Order Request Package 3.3 Fair Opportunity

3.3.1 Fair Opportunity Exceptions 3.4 Task Order Process 3.4.1 Solicitation Process 3.4.2 Fair Opportunity 3.4.3 Task Order Proposals 3.4.4 Evaluation of Task Order Proposals 3.5 Task Order (TO) Issuance 3.6 Debriefings 3.7 Task Order Protests Appendix A. TMACC Glossary of Terms Appendix B. Task Order (TO) Request Checklist Appendix C. TMACC Proposal Evaluation Plan Appendix D. Sample Task Order Requests for Proposal……… Appendix E. TMACC Award Recommendation Document Appendix F. Sample Letter/Debriefing to Unsuccessful Offeror……… Appendix G. Sample COTR Letter/Appointment Letter Appendix H. Sample Past Performance Questionnaire………………………………….

Appendix I. Sample TMACC Task…………………………………………………………… Appendix J. Sample Davis Bacon Wage Decision……………….………………………

1. General Information

1.1 Background

The TMACC contract is a multiple-award, ID/IQ contract vehicle, specifically designed to acquire tower and antenna construction services that are required to meet the vast majority of the Coast Guard’s (CG) infrastructure needs. TMACC is a complementary program to those CG components warranted for construction contracting. The TMACC contracts have a base year with four one-year options. The contract allows for rolling admissions. CG activities are encouraged to use the TMACC contracts because they offer:

• A streamlined approach to tower construction contracting

• Ongoing competition between qualified Contractors

• Ease of use

TMACC contracts will be centrally managed and administered by the CEU Oakland with decentralized ordering by the Component organizations. Orders may be placed by any Contracting Officer (CO) in the CG.

1.2 Purpose

This document provides procedures for ordering services under the TMACC, and defines the roles and responsibilities of the major parties involved in the ordering process. Orders against TMACC may be placed by the CG component for use on its own behalf.

1.3 Scope of the TMACC Contracts

The scope of the TMACC contracts encompasses tower and antenna construction requirements at a national level. Task order limits are $3,000 - $1,000,000. The total annual aggregate will be $7,000,000.

1.4 FAR and FASA Relationship TO TMACC Contracts

The Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (FASA) has established a "general" preference for use of multiple awards, and in doing so:

•Authorizes exemption from the public notice requirement when placing orders;

•Limits protests in connection with the issuance of orders except on the grounds that the order increases the scope, period, or maximum value of the contract; and

•Mandates that multiple awardees have a fair opportunity to be considered for orders in excess of $3,000. Pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requirements, TMACC requires that each prime contractor be afforded a “fair opportunity to be considered” for each task order. Unless one of the exceptions cited at FAR 16.505 applies, the CO for the individual task order will announce each requirement to all TMACC prime Contractors. The appropriate FAR clauses have been incorporated in the TMACC contracts.

2. Roles and Responsibilities

The following describes the roles and responsibilities of the Primary Points of

Contact (POC) on matters regarding TMACC contract management and administration, as well as other administrative information.

2.1 Requiring Activity

Requiring activities include all Coast Guard components.

2.2 Contracting Officer (CO) – TMACC Contract

The CEU Oakland has the overall responsibility for TMACC contract management and administration. The CEU Oakland CO are the only individuals authorized to take actions on behalf of the Government to amend, modify or deviate from the contract terms and conditions. Each CG CO has authority to make changes to their task orders. The CEU Oakland CO may delegate certain specific responsibilities to its authorized representative who is the contracting officer’s technical representative (COTR). The CEU Oakland CO may also designate an alternate COTR for this contract. The CO will identify the COTR for this contract through a written designation. A copy of the letter of designation, with specific duties and responsibilities, will be provided to the contractor. The CEU Oakland CO is responsible for overall management, and administration, final closeout of the contract, and when necessary, shall:

• Provide scope oversight;

• Serve as liaison between the TMACC Contractors;

• Ensure compliance with contract requirements;

• Issue the CO's final decision on Contract Matters.

• DHS Component Contracting Officers shall issue CO final decisions regarding task order issues and handle all task order level contractual disputes under the Contract

Disputes Act; and issue all modifications against individual task orders.

2.3 Contracting Officer – Task Order Level

Services offered under the TMACC contracts will be ordered via task orders issued by a CO within the CG with construction authority. They must follow the ordering procedures set forth below and in FAR 52.216-18 (Section I of the TMACC contract). All construction warranted CO’s are authorized to use these contracts. All CG components are authorized to issue task orders for tower and antenna construction services from this contract in order to fulfill their requirements. The CO is responsible for preparing the task order Request For Proposals (RFPs) and for establishing the technical and price/cost evaluation teams associated with each task order. The CO will also formulate appropriate evaluation criteria and Factors as necessary to ensure quality competition and provide the best value for each effort. In no event will a task order change the requirements of the TMACC contracts. Should the contract user require such a change, specific approval must first be obtained from the CEU Oakland CO.

The CO shall be responsible for:

- Issuing task orders.

- Completing, with the contractor, any and all administrative contractual actions concerning individual task orders;

- Terminating task orders, for convenience or cause, and canceling task orders at no additional cost to the Government;

- Ensuring that task orders are within the scope of the contract;

- Approving or withholding payments, or authorizing partial payments of invoices;

- Completing contractor evaluations for task orders over $100K, with input from the assigned COTR;

- Administration and final closeout of task orders; and

- TMACC Contracts are intended for use by CG only. These vehicles are NOT

Government-Wide Acquisition Contracts (GWACs).

- Any other tasks under FAR Part 42.302 required in task order administration.

2.4 Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative (COTR) – Task Order Level

COs shall designate COTRs, in writing, who will be responsible for the day-to-day technical management and coordination of individual task orders (See appendix G). It is the CO’s responsibility to confirm that the designated person is a trained, certified COTR. A copy of the letter of designation, identifying specific duties and responsibilities, must be provided to the contractor. The COTR will represent the CO in the administration of technical details within the task order’s scope. The COTR is also responsible for the final inspection and acceptance of all deliverables and reports, and such other responsibilities as may be specified in the task order. The COTR shall provide input to the CO for the reparation and submission of required construction performance evaluations. The COTR is not otherwise authorized to make any representations or commitments of any kind on behalf of the CO or the Government.

The COTR does not have the authority to alter the contractor’s obligations or to change the task order specifications, pricing, terms, or conditions. If, as a result of technical discussions, it is desirable to modify requirements or specifications, changes will be issued in writing and signed by the CO.

2.5 Delivery/Task Order Contract Ombudsman

In accordance with FAR Part 16.505(a) (9) a contractor protest under subpart 33.1 is not authorized in connection with the issuance or proposed issuance of an order under a multiple award contract, except for a protest on the grounds that the order increases the scope, period or maximum value of the contract. Contractors shall contact the task order Level Competition Advocate of the appropriate Component to express concern with the issuance or proposed issuance of a task order on the grounds stated previously. The task order Level Ombudsman’s responsibilities are to:

• Address contractor concerns regarding compliance with task order award procedures;

• Review contractor complaints on task order contracts;

• Ensure all Contractors are afforded a fair opportunity to be considered for each task order, consistent with FAR 16.505(b); and

• When requested, maintain strict confidentiality of the contractor requesting assistance.

Ombudsmen shall not participate in the evaluation of proposals submitted on the basic contract; the source selection process on the basic contract; or the adjudication of formal contract disputes arising under the basic contract or any individual order issued under it.

The Contract Level Ombudsman for this contract is the U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters Competition Advocate, 202-372-3695. The Contract Level Ombudsman is responsible for the final recommendations/decisions for all orders under this contract, when resolution cannot be determined at the Component level.

3. TMACC Ordering Procedures

3.1 Scope of TMACC Task Orders

The TMACC contracts are structured as construction services IDIQ contracts under FAR Part 36, “Construction and Architect-Engineer Contracts”, utilizing firm-fixed price (FFP) task orders. The Contract shall be awarded to HUBZone firms. Both contracts are using North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code 237130.

3.2 Purchase Request Preparation

3.2.1 Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE)

The IGCE should be developed by the customer or designer and submitted to the CO as part of the task order request package which will be used to assist the CO in determining the reasonableness of a contractor’s cost and technical proposals. The IGCE is for GOVERNMENT USE ONLY and should not be made available to TMACC Contractors.

3.2.2 Reserved

3.2.3 Task Order Request Package

The contents of the task order request package is intended to provide the information required by the CO. This information is intended to define the services required and the amount and type of funds committed. This request package also furnishes the information required by the contractors to prepare a proposal in response to the task order RFP. The task order request package must also provide the name, title, address, phone number, e-mail, and fax number of the proposed COTR (See Appendix B for template). The request package must include all of the technical information the contractors will need to prepare and submit a proposal and it should include special instructions that should be highlighted in the initial announcement to the contractors. The proposal request must also include specific instructions for the submission of proposals, price only, oral presentations, evaluation selection factors and their order of importance and other information deemed appropriate.

3.3 Fair Opportunity

3.3.1 Fair Opportunity Exceptions

In accordance with the FASA and FAR Part 16.505(b) (2), the CO will provide all awardees a fair opportunity to be considered for each order in excess of $3,000, unless one of the conditions below applies:

• The agency need for such commodities is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays;

• Only one awardee is capable of fulfilling the Government’s requirements, with the necessary level of quality, because the supplies and/or services ordered are unique or highly specialized;

• The order must be issued on a sole-source basis, in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to a task order already issued under this contract (provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order) (see Note below); and/or

• It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee.

Note: If the order is a follow-on to a task order that was not issued under TMACC, or to a task order for which the TMACC awardees were not given the opportunity to compete, this exception CANNOT be used. In accordance with FAR Part 16.5, when an exception to the fair opportunity to be considered rule exists, the task order will be processed as a sole-source procurement and thus supported by a sole source justification. Given that FAR 16.505(b) (1) (ii) states, “The competition requirements in Part 6 …do not apply to the ordering process,” there is no need for the creation of a Justification and Approval prepared in accordance with FAR 6.3 to support a sole source procurement. The contract file shall document the fair opportunity exception used, and the basis and rationale for use of that exception (see Appendix B, Attachments 1 and 2 for guidance). If any TMACC Contractors are eliminated from competition for any reason, the task order request package should include the rationale for the elimination.

3.4 Task Order Process

This section defines the process by which fair opportunity will be afforded through a solicitation/proposal process, and how a task order will be processed, priced, and awarded. Task order request packages must indicate funding approval prior to further processing. Upon completion of all required approvals, the task order request package must be forwarded to the CO.

3.4.1 Solicitation Process

Depending on the nature and estimated dollar value of the acquisition, a legal and/or policy review of the task order RFP might be required. The task order CO will make a task order RFP available to all TMACC Contractors, unless a fair opportunity exception applies. The solicitation process will be conducted either manually, or via an electronic process, if available. The proposal request will set forth the Government’s specific requirements, a detailed description of the services required (if applicable), all deliverables, and the due date for proposal submission. The proposal request will also include specific instructions for proposal submissions. No unfunded RFP’s are allowed unless the RFP contains the “Subject to Availability of Funds” clause.

See Appendix D for a sample proposal request letter. Contractors will be provided adequate time to prepare and submit responses. The CO will determine the appropriate amount of time based on the estimated dollar value and complexity of the proposed task order. The due date for proposal submission(s) will be set forth in each task order RFP.

3.4.2 Fair Opportunity

Unless one of the exceptions at FAR Part 16.505(b) (2) applies, the CO will solicit a proposal for each task order requirement to all TMACC contractors using email, mail, or fax. This announcement satisfies the requirement for a fair opportunity to be considered. Each contractor will then evaluate the opportunity and determine whether or not to submit a proposal. The announcement will include, at a minimum, the following information:

• Project Number;

• Scope of Work;

• End user Customer organization;

• Evaluation criteria and Factors, if required;

• Contracting agency POC information (CO and contract specialist): name, phone number, e-mail address, and fax number; and

• Proposal due date.

3.4.3 Task Order Proposals

The task order RFP must be developed with one or more of the following instructions and elements of proposals considered:

Price Only Proposals

The task order RFP shall require a written firm-fixed price proposal. This part of the proposal shall include detailed pricing to accomplish the work.

Oral Presentations

In order to minimize costs associated with the initial selection process, our selection will be based on oral presentations. The presentations will be scheduled and can be made at an agreed upon site or by telephone. The oral presentation should include:

1. A rough price estimate which is expected to be within ten percent of the final negotiated price.

2. The schedule, duration, completion dates and unique factors affecting schedule and duration.

3. The proposed construction approach, focusing on industry best practices that may save time and or money.

4. Any unique advantages your firm may have for the proposed project, e.g., subcontractor arrangements, logistical advantages, etc.

Technical Proposals

Technical proposals submitted in response to the task order RFPs shall contain a complete cost breakdown to the extent practical.

Price Proposals

The task order RFP shall require a written firm-fixed price proposal. This part of the proposal shall include detailed pricing to accomplish the work.

Other Relevant Information

This information shall always be in writing and shall address relevant information as required by the contract or requested by the RFP. The Government will not reimburse awardees for costs associated with fair opportunity proposals.

No Response

If a prime contractor is unable to or chooses not to respond to a requirement, a NO RESPONSE must be submitted by the contractor. All NO RESPONSES shall include a brief explanation as to why the prime contractor has elected to forego the opportunity. A NO RESPONSE may be transmitted to the Contracting Officer via fax, e-mail, or mail. A contractor that continuously responds with “NO RESPONSE” may not have its option exercised.

3.4.4 Evaluation of Task Order Proposals

Evaluation and Discussions

Task order proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in the task order RFP (see Appendix C for evaluation plan template). It is anticipated that the majority of task order awards made under TMACC will be based on a technically acceptable/low price approach.

Proprietary Information

The ordering activity is responsible for ensuring that proprietary information contained in a prime contractor’s proposal is protected from unauthorized disclosure. It is the prime contractor’s responsibility to ensure that all proprietary information is appropriately marked.

Award Recommendation Documentation

After completion of the evaluation and any discussions, the CO shall prepare a complete award recommendation package (see Appendix E) to document the selection process. The package will also serve as evidence that the fair opportunity to be considered rule was applied, unless an exception was taken under FAR Part 16.505(b) (2). At a minimum, the required documentation shall include:

• A statement that an announcement of the task order requirement was made to all contractors eligible for receiving an award for the delivery requirement, or if an exception to the fair opportunity to be considered rule was cited (cite the exception);

• The selection criteria/methodology used to evaluate the competing contractors;

• The results of the evaluation; and

• The rationale for the recommendation of the task order awardee, including a summary of the price analysis and any negotiations conducted. The narrative must clearly support the final recommendation, and address the rationale for the decision.

The narrative must ensure that all offerors were evaluated in accordance with the cited criteria only – and that the cost/price element was not overlooked. Based upon the dollar thresholds in effect at the time of the individual procurement action, the award recommendation documentation resulting from the solicitation process should be reviewed by policy and/or general counsel.

3.5 Task Order Issuance

Task orders may be issued by e-mail, mail, fax, on an agency prescribed form. Under no circumstances is the contractor authorized to commence performance before issuance of a signed task order or other written approval provided by the CO. Unfunded task orders are prohibited.

3.6 Debriefings

If not selected for a task order, contractors may contact the CO to discuss the reasons for non acceptance (Appendix F). The CO and the unsuccessful contractor may discuss the reasons for non-selection; however, the CO may not:

• Discuss the other contractors’ proposals;

• Compare contractors’ proposals; or

• Allow a non-selected contractor access to the award decision documentation.

See FAR 15.5 for further guidance.

3.7 Task Order Protests

In accordance with FAR Part 16.505(a) (9), no protest under FAR Subpart 33.1 is authorized in connection with the issuance or proposed issuance of a Task Order under this contract. The only exception is a protest based on the grounds that the order increases the contract’s scope, period, or maximum value. See section 2.5 above for a discussion of the ombudsman’s role in addressing contractor concerns regarding compliance with award procedures and affording offerors fair opportunity.

Appendix A. TMACC Glossary of Terms

Best Value – The expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement. It involves the analysis of technical and cost proposals to determine which proposal offers the best trade-off between price/cost and performance whereby quality is considered an integral performance Factor. See FAR Part 15.101.

Debriefing – May be either oral or written and are held with successful or unsuccessful offerors, if requested. At the debriefing, the information in evaluations, which is based solely on the factors in the solicitation, is used to explain how the offeror’s proposal was rated under each specific evaluation criterion. The evaluation criteria discussed at the debriefings must include only those that can fairly and properly be used for determining source selection and shall only include information that pertains to the offeror being briefed (i.e., information shall not be provided relative to other offerors’ proposals or scoring thereof). See FAR 15.505 and 15.506. Note that the names of individuals providing reference information about an offeror’s past performance must not be revealed.

“Fair-Opportunity-to-be-Considered” Rule – All prime contractors are considered to possess the basic qualifications for success in the TMACC contracts awarded to them. Therefore, the statutory and regulatory requirement for “fair opportunity to be considered” (based on the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act and FAR 16.5) will be deemed to have been met by the announcement (through the designated Internet website or e-mail) of all task orders that do not fall under one of the exceptions at FAR 16.505(b)(2) (See Appendix B, Attachment 1 for the exceptions).

Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act (FASA) – FASA (Public Law 103-355) was enacted in October 1994, and was designed to simplify and streamline the federal procurement process. FASA raised the small purchase threshold from $25,000 to $100,000 and designated this as the simplified acquisition threshold.

Firm-Fixed Price Contracts – A type of contract suitable for acquiring construction services, on the basis of reasonable definite functional or detailed specifications and when the contracting officer can establish fair and reasonable prices at the outset, such as when:

• There is adequate price competition;

• There are reasonable price comparisons with prior purchases of the same or similar supplies or services, made on a competitive basis or supported by valid cost or pricing data;

• Available cost or pricing information permits realistic estimates of the probable costs of performance;

• Performance uncertainties can be identified and reasonable estimates of their cost impact can be made; and

• The contractor is willing to accept a firm-fixed price representing assumption of the risks involved.

Homeland Security Acquisition Manual (HSAM) – A manual of DHS-wide acquisition policy and procedures. The electronic version of HSAM is provided at www.dhs.gov and DHS online.

HUBZone (Historically Underutilized Business Zone) Concern – A small business concern that appears on the “List of Qualified HUBZone Small Business Concerns” maintained by the Small Business Administration (SBA).

Independent Government Cost Estimate (ICGE) – Assists the task order Contracting Officer (CO) in determining the reasonableness of a contractor’s cost and technical proposals. The IGCE is prepared by the requisitioner and submitted as part of the Task Order request package. It is for GOVERNMENT USE ONLY and should not be made available to the TMACC contractors.

Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) Contracts – Contracts for supplies/services that do not require or specify a firm quantity of supplies/services (other than a minimum or maximum quantity), and/or are used when the exact times of future deliveries are not known at the time of contract award. ID/IQ contracts are also known as task order or task order contracts that provide for the issuance of orders for the performance of tasks during the period of the contract.

TMACC– A multiple-award contract vehicle that provides all CG activities with access for tower and antenna construction services from multiple Contractors.

Oral Presentation – Delivering/presenting address to public audience.

Rolling Admissions – The Government may announce a new competition to add additional IDIQ holders to the existing pool of IDIQ contractors. The Government reserves the right to limit rolling admissions to specific socio-economic concerns and particular regions.

Small Business Administration Procurement Center Representative (SBA PCR) –

Procurement professionals, located in SBA area offices, responsible for the review and evaluation of small business programs in federal agencies. This office also assists small businesses in obtaining federal contracts and subcontracts.

Task Order – An order for services placed against an established contract or with government sources. In the case of the TMACC acquisition, Task orders are orders for tower and antenna construction services placed against contracts awarded under the TMACC solicitation.

Appendix B. Task Order Request Checklist

TMACC TASK ORDER REQUEST CHECKLIST

This form constitutes a request for contract support under the TMACC contracts. The requiring activity shall complete this form, together with the associated attachments, and forward the entire package to the appropriate TMACC Task Order Contracting Officer (CO) for processing (See Attachment 2 to this Appendix for a template of a cover letter to be used when a request is being forwarded to the CO for contract action).

1. Task Order Title.

2. Requiring Activity Point of Contact. Include name, title, organization, phone numbers for voice and fax, and email address.

3. Designated Order Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative. Include name, title, organization, phone numbers for voice and fax, and email address: (If same as Block 2, type “same).”

4. Attachments Checklist. Complete package must include all of the items listed in this block as required or applicable.

- Acquisition Plan or Copy of Advance Acquisition Plan

- Description of Requirement

- Funding document(s) (scanned or other electronic version is preferable)

- Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE)

- Proposal Evaluation Plan/Criteria (See Appendix C)

5. FASA (Fair Opportunity to be Considered) Exception.

The agency need for services is of such urgency that providing such opportunity would result in unacceptable delays. Only one such contractor is capable of providing services required, at the level of quality required, because they are unique or highly specialized. The order should be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency as a logical follow-on. It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee

If applicable, a FASA exception justification must be provided (see Attachment 2 TO this Appendix for a template).

APPENDIX B – ATTACHMENT 1

Fair Opportunity Exceptions

FAR 16.505(b) (2) cites four exceptions to competition (fair opportunity to be considered) under multiple-award indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity Task Order requirements. The exceptions are listed below, along with policy interpretations:

Urgency

This exception applies under circumstances involving a “public exigency.” The agency need for such commodities is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays. However, the user must demonstrate objectively that the public interest would suffer if the requirement were not fulfilled, e.g., failure to develop a program by a date mandated by Congress, etc. A failure to meet established work requirements is not a sufficient justification unless it can be demonstrated that some public interest is threatened.

Unique Requirements

This exception applies when only one awardee is capable of providing the required supplies or services, at a sufficient quality level, because the requirement is unique or highly specialized.

Follow-on Requirement

In this case, the order must be issued on a sole-source basis, in the interest of economy and efficiency, because it is a logical follow-on Task Order already issued under the TMACC contract. All awardees must have been given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order.

Guaranteed Minimum

This exception occurs when it is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee under the contract.

APPENDIX B – ATTACHMENT 2

MEMORANDUM

From: Requiring Activity

To: Contracting Officer

In accordance with FAR 16.505 (b) (2), the following is provided as justification to support an exception to the fair opportunity process under TMACC (only one exception should apply).

Urgency – The agency need for such commodities is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays.

Contractor Name:

Rationale (enter justification here):

Unique Requirements – Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required, at the level of quality required, because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.

Contractor Name:

Rationale (enter justification here):

Follow-on – The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency as a logical follow-on to an order already issued under this contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order.

Contractor Name:

Contract Number:

Task Order Number:

Rationale (enter justification here):

Minimum Guarantee – It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee under the contract.

Contractor Name:

Rationale (enter justification here):

The sample provided below is applicable to situations where a Component requests contracting support from the the Civil Engineering Unit, Oakland (CEU OAKLAND). A tailored version may be used internally by individual Components when placing their own Task Orders.

Appendix C. TMACC Proposal Evaluation Plan if Other than Price Only:

Basis of evaluation (check one): Best Value Trade-Off

Lowest-Price, Technically Acceptable Other

Non-Cost Factors

Evaluation Factors and significant sub-factors shall be listed, and their relative order of importance cited in adjectival terms. Numerical ratings shall not be used in the evaluation of TMACC to proposals. List the specific areas of your design approach requirements to be evaluated. These areas should correspond with, and relate to, specific requirements.

1. Construction approach a.

b.

c.

d.

List the specific areas of your past performance requirements to be evaluated. These areas should relate to specific work statement requirements.

2. Past Performance a.

b c.

d.

List any other evaluation criteria important to you, and their relative order of importance, below.

3. Other Factors (if applicable) i.e. Scheduling, Industry Best Practices a.

b.

c.

d.

Price/Cost Factor

Note that balancing cost against the non-cost Factors is how you make your best value trade-off decision, and as a result, a percentage is not applied to the cost Factor. Indicate whether all non-cost evaluation Factors, when combined:

Are significantly more important than:

More Important than:

Comparatively equal to:

...the Cost Factor

Appendix D. Sample Task Order Requests for Proposal

PRICE ONLY: SAMPLE 1

The Government intends to award the tower construction project 11-M4321 “Repair 200ft. Tower at the USCG Station Yankeetown, Yankeetown, Florida” as a task order under one of our current indefinite quantity (IDIQ) award term construction contracts. We do, however, reserve our right to make award by other means.

Our selection will be based on price competition. The enclosed General Requirements, Specifications, Drawings and Wage Decision No. __________ dated ___________ are forwarded for your use in preparing your proposal. Please provide a complete cost breakdown (labor, materials, equipment, subcontractor cost breakdowns, and mark-ups) no later than 4:00 PM on ______________. Proposals received after the time and date specified will be deemed late and not considered for award.

If you should have any questions, please contact the Contract Specialist, Mr ____________ at 555-1234 or _________________ at 555-1233.

Sincerely, Contracting Officer

PRICE ONLY: SAMPLE 2

Please furnish your detailed cost proposal for all labor, material, and equipment necessary to accomplish the project described in the enclosed Specifications dated 16 November 2010 titled:

TOWER REPAIR AT TRAINING CENTER PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA; PSN 74-R03074

1.

Site Visit: Site Visit: There will be a coordinated site visits on Thursday, 13 December 2010 at 10:00 a.m. The site address to meet at Building 150 at Petaluma, CA. Contact Janice Preston at (510) 535-7299 or email Jpreston@uscg.mil to confirm your attendance for the site visit by 12 December 2010. Please provide your company name as the names of the individual attendees. Each individual must show a photo I.D. to gain access to the Government base. If driving you will also need a valid driver’s license, proof of vehicle registration and insurance. Please allow additional time (approx. 20-30 minutes) for base access and to locate parking.

2.

Magnitude of Construction: $100,000 to $250,000.

3.

Bonds Requirements:

a.

Payment and Performance Bonds

1. Within 10 days of award of a task order the contractor shall provide good and sufficient surety or sureties acceptable to the Government as required by FAR 52.228-15, Performance and Payment Bonds-Construction (Jul 2000).

2. The contractor is placed on notice that in accordance with FAR 52.228-15, Paragraphs (b) (1) (iii) and (b) (2)(iii), the Government may secure additional protection by directing the Contractor to increase the penal sum of the existing bond or to obtain an additional bond.

b.

In the Payment and Performance Bonds form, identify the task order number along with the contract number.

4. Warranty Requirements:

5. Davis Bacon Wage Rates:

The General Wage Decision CA20100009 dated 12/09/2010, Sonoma, County is applicable to this procurement. The wage decision may be accessed at http://www.wdol.gov/dba.aspx#0.

6. Period of Performance: 90 calendar days after issuance of the Notice to Proceed after issuance of the Construction Notice to Proceed.

7. Evaluation for Award:

a. The Government intends to evaluate on the basis of price and conformance to the Solicitation requirement. The Government intends to proposals award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.

b. Price will be evaluated on the basis of reasonableness and competitiveness. An offeror’s proposal price will be determined by adding the contract line items to confirm the aggregated total of the price. The price will be analyzed by comparing the price proposal received in response to the solicitation in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b). Price will not be numerically weighted factors in the evaluation of proposals. If any prompt payment discounts are included in the offeror’s proposal, then the discount will be applied to obtain the evaluated total aggregate price.

8. Basic of Task Order Award:

The Government intends to award task order to the responsible offeror who has the lowest evaluated total aggregate price and whose proposal conforms to the requirement of the solicitation. The Government intends to evaluate proposal and award a contract without discussions. Therefore the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer determines them to be necessary.

If you have any questions, please contact me at (510) 535-7299. Please fax your proposal at 510-535-7290 by Close of Business, 5 January 2011.

ORAL PRESENTATIONS:

We have received authorization to negotiate a contract for the Tower Maintenance of Multi-Mission Station Oak Island, North Carolina. We intend to award the project as a task order under one of our current indefinite quantity (IDIQ) award term construction contracts. We do, however, reserve our right to make award by other means. Because of the project’s complexity, scheduling requirements and cost, we intend to make a selection based on the maintenance approach, scheduling proposal, and industry best practices you propose to implement with this task. Price is a significant factor, but not the most important.

*** Use this paragraph if scheduling a site visit***

A site visit has been scheduled for 9:00 AM on ___________ at _________________________ to discuss and define the scope requirements. It is highly encouraged that you have your design team and any major subcontractors attend this meeting. Should you need directions to the site, please contact _______ at _____________.

In order to minimize costs associated with the initial selection process, our selection will be based on oral presentations. The presentations will be scheduled within one week from the date of this letter and can be made at this office or by telephone according to your preference. The oral presentation must include:

1. A rough price estimate which is expected to be within ten percent of the final negotiated price.

2. The schedule, duration, completion dates and unique factors affecting schedule and duration.

3. The proposed design/construction approach, focusing on industry best practices that may save time and or money.

4. Any unique advantages your firm may have for the proposed project, e.g., subcontractor arrangements, logistical advantages, etc.

“Variation for RFP Letter wherein Oral Presentations are used.” Oral presentations will be recorded and should be kept to one hour or less in duration. We reserve the right to end the presentation if it exceeds one hour. Although written submissions will not be strictly prohibited, they should be kept to a minimum and will not be accepted after the date set for oral presentations. No extra credit will be given for such submissions.

Once we have made the selection, a firm fixed price task order will be negotiated. If terms, including price, vary significantly from those initially proposed or are deemed otherwise unreasonable, we reserve the right to make award to the other current IDIQ contractor or, if in the best interests of the Government, outside the task order contract.

You will be contacted within one week from the date of this letter to schedule your oral presentation. If you need additional information prior to being contacted, please do not hesitate to contact (insert name, phone number, and email address).

Encl: (1) Specification No. 11-L02005

(2) Drawings No. 11-L02005 (sheets 1 – 10)

(3) Wage Decision NC010004

APPENDIX D – ATTACHMENT 1

ORAL PRESENTATION

Evaluation Worksheet

Contractor:

Date of Oral Presentation:

Project Name:

1. Proposed means, method, duration of project and actual time on site.

2. Price.

3. Relevant past experience your firm may have for similar projects.

Evaluator Name: _______________________________

ORAL PRESENTATION

Contractor Selection Memorandum

MEMO TO FILE

DATE

RE: ORAL PRESENTATIONS:

1. Voting Board members consisted of the Chief of Contracts, and the Director of Projects. Non-voting members were the Contract Specialist, Commanding Officer, Supervisor of Design, and Project Manager. Oral presentations were conducted with the following contractors: on 1 March 2010. The oral presentations consisted of discussions concerning the evaluation factors of schedule, proposed construction approach focusing on cost and time saving techniques, unique advantages offered by selecting the firm, and rough price estimate. The best value decision was made to select ________ since they had the lower price, offered cost and time saving initiatives, and had a long term relationship with their intended designer. This memorandum serves as the written basis for selection of ______________.

2. _____________ base price proposal was in the amount of $934,000.00. ____ has entered into an agreement with a local General Contractor, who has a thorough knowledge of potential site conditions, familiar with USCG government personnel, and is located within 2 miles of the work site. They addressed the declining labor market issues and outlined a plan in which they would not be impacted by the unstable local economy and declining labor market. They also had developed up to 35% plans for their subcontractor pricing. Due to the limited work site, they propose to use the contractor’s home office site as the lay down/storage area for the work site. In an effort to reduce costs, they propose to …..…... They also had thoroughly looked at the LEED requirements and recommended several ideas to add points to our LEED rating. _______total contract completion is 120 days; however, they expect the USCG to be able to use the facility within 90 days. Due to weather conditions and paving restrictions the landscaping and paving will not be completed until late fall of 2010.

3. ______ price proposal was in the amount of $398,000. Their contract duration was similar to __________. Both firms expressed a desire to meet the completion date. ______proposed to use a sub-contractor 170 miles from the job site. Their subcontractor specialized in site and was not a general contractor. _______offered a back-up plan in case of labor shortages, however, they did not specifically offer suggestions as a means to save money or time on this project. _______had made contact with the Municipality to discuss the Master Plan and had a plan which addressed how they would incorporate these requirements into their design. ______has a solid plan to execute the project, however, their price was prohibitive. Subcontractor selection was based on competition. They are proposing to use reputable and proven firms that would minimize the risk to the government and the prime contractor. _______did recommended cost savings by using ….. _______did not follow the RFP direction to comply with a “true tower style” when proposing the “untrue style” for the tower. They incorporated various styles into the tower.

4. Based on the above factors it is determined to make award of this task order to _______ if a reasonable negotiated agreement can be reached.

SIGNED BY VOTING MEMBERS OF THE EVALUATION BOARD

Appendix E. TMACC Evaluation Team Award Recommendation Document

MACCAWARD RECOMMENDATION TOCUMENT (ARD)

A. Task Order Title:

(Enter the title as shown in the work statement) B. Recommended Prime

Contractor:

Check the name/number of the prime contractor for whom you are recommending an award.

Contractor ABC – Contract # 123

C. Justification:

Attach a narrative summarizing the results of the evaluation. Describe the evaluation methodology and best value analysis, if applicable, that led to the recommendation of the prime contractor that should be awarded the Task Order. The justification should be streamlined while containing the following:

1. Results of the Past Performance Evaluation. Provide results obtained from the performance evaluation Tool, e.g., CPARS, NIH, PPIRS, or discuss any additional past performance information you have evaluated.

2. Results from the Technical/Management Approach Evaluation. Discuss any information you reviewed for each of the vendors from a) their TMACC website, and

b) the technical proposals you evaluated.

3. Results of the Price Evaluation. Discuss and compare the results of the price proposals from each of the evaluated vendors.

D. Authorized Official:

Name, Signature and Date:

Appendix F. Sample Letter/Debriefing to Unsuccessful Offeror

[Insert date]

[Insert offeror’s name]

Title [Insert offeror’s title]

[Insert name of offeror’s company/organization]

Street

City, State ZIP

SUBJECT: TMACC Task Order Request for Proposal # [insert TO RFP number]

Dear [insert offeror’s name]:

This letter constitutes a written debriefing of your firm's proposal as requested in your e-mail message dated [insert date]. This debriefing will provide information regarding the Government's evaluation of the significant weak or deficient elements of your firm’s proposal. This letter contains only that information which the Contracting Officer is allowed by regulation to disclose.

Evaluation Results

After careful consideration, we determined that your firm’s proposal was not the most advantageous to the Government for the reasons stated below. The Task Order was awarded to: [insert successful offeror’s name and address] Your firm’s proposal contained significant technical deficiencies, most notably:

1. Did not adequately [insert information].

2. Demonstrated a lack of [insert information].

3. Was deficient in the representation of [insert information].

Additional Considerations

1. Past performance experience is not comparable TO [insert information].

2. Your company did not submit [insert information] that was included in the schedule of supplies and services.

3. Your company’s offered pricing was substantially higher than the pricing offered by the successful offeror.

Our award decision was based on the technical and price Factors identified in the Task Order Request for Proposal. The Government solicited [insert number] firms and received a total of [insert number] proposals. Award was made for [insert items and quantities awarded] at a total firm-fixed price of $___________.

I would like to thank you for your participation in this procurement and I hope the information provided above will assist you in future competitions.

Sincerely, [insert name]

Contracting Officer

Appendix G. Sample Contractor’s Notice of COTR Designation Letter / Appointment Letter Ladies/Gentlemen:

In accordance with (HSAR) 48 CFR 3042.7000, Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR), I have appointed *** (Insert full name of the COTR)*** as my technical representative (project manager) under Task Order Contract ***(Insert Contract Number)***. A copy of the letter of appointment is enclosed. This appointment is effective until this contract is completed or a written notice of termination is received from me, the Contracting Officer responsible for this contract, whichever occurs first.

As the COTR, this person has the authority to monitor the technical progress of the supplies, services, or construction that are required to be delivered under the contract. This includes visits to your plant or the place of performance, meetings and telephone conversations with your personnel, inspection, acceptance, or rejection of the contracted items and other duties that may be authorized by me.

The COTR cannot authorize or order the cessation of contract work except for portions that are non-compliant or safety issues, nor delete, change or waive any of the technical requirements or other terms and conditions of the contract. Should you desire a change (monetary or otherwise) to the contract, you must submit a written request to me for consideration. If appropriate, the change will be effected by a contract modification, after discussions and/or negotiations.