MACC Frequently Asked Questions.doc

MACC FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Question 1:

When I try to access the DoD SAFE website, I get a warning stating that the connection is not private. Should I click on the option to continue to the website anyway?

Answer:

Per the DoD SAFE website: Problems accessing the DoD SAFE site by external (non-CAC) users are typically due to SSL and/or client certificate issues. If the user receives a warning about a problem with the website's security certificate, this is because their browser is not configured to trust the DoD certificate authorities.

Users receiving the above warning should first verify that they are using the correct website (https://safe.apps.mil), and then choose one of the following options:

1. Import the DoD certificate authorities by following the instructions in the DoD Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) User Guide on Install Root, available at the following link: https://dl.dod.cyber.mil/wp-content/uploads/pki-pke/pdf/unclass-rg-installroot_5_2_niprnet_user_guide.pdf

2. Accept the risk and click on the option to continue to the website. (You may need to click on the “Show Details” link under the warning message in order to view the option to continue to the DoD SAFE website.)

Question 2:

The format for the proposal submittal is clearly outlined in the Instructions to Offerors. Are we permitted to provide a Table of Contents in addition to the required documents before Tab 1?

Answer:

As noted in Section 00100 (Instruction to Offerors) of the RFP, “Offerors are asked to submit only the information/exhibits required.” Any additional information submitted will not be evaluated.

Question 3:

Can we include photos as part of the description of the project on Exhibit B?

Answer:

Photos are not requested for Exhibit B and will not be evaluated. We recommend that you not alter the content or format of the Exhibits. Individual blocks on the Exhibits may be expanded; however, page limits, if stipulated, must be adhered to.

Question 4:

Is there a minimum number of projects we should submit for Experience (Exhibit B)?

Answer:

Any required minimum number of projects will be stated in the Proposal Submission Requirements for the Experience factor.

Question 5:

If we are a JV firm, does each JV partner submit 5 projects or is it a total of 5 projects between the two firms?

Answer:

As stated in the RFP, you can submit a combined maximum of five projects for the Joint Venture. This does not mean five projects for each JV partner. If more than five total projects are submitted for the evaluation of the JV firm, only the first five projects will be evaluated.

Question 6:

Might the Offeror receive a higher score if a Joint Venture is proposed for the Offeror? Might the Offeror receive a lower score if a Joint Venture is NOT proposed?

Answer:

No. The JV is evaluated in the same way as any Offeror.

Question 7:

The Proposal Submission Requirements under the Experience factor provide a description of what defines a relevant project. Does that mean that in order to be considered relevant, the projects we submit need to meet those requirements, including the project construction cost minimum?

Answer:

Yes. Projects outside of the relevant project description (defined in the Experience factor proposal submission requirements) or that fall below the construction cost minimum will not be considered relevant.

Question 8:

Can the dollar amounts shown on Exhibit B include escalation to today’s dollars to meet the relevant project construction cost noted in the proposal submission requirements for Experience?

Answer:

No.

Question 9:

Where can I obtain a list of examples of projects that are within the scope of this MACC?

Answer:

Examples of relevant construction projects within the scope of this MACC are identified in the Proposal Submission Requirements for the Experience factor. This is not an all-inclusive list of projects nor is it an indication of specific projects that will be procured under this MACC. The projects listed are a small sampling of the types of projects that may be included under this MACC.

Only projects within the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code shown on the SF1442 are within the scope of this MACC. To view additional examples of the various project types that fall under that NAICS code, you can visit the following website and enter the appropriate NAICS code into the "2017 NAICS Search" field.

http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch

Projects which are outside of the NAICS code shown on the SF1442 are not considered within the scope of this MACC and will not be considered for evaluation.

Question 10:

Can the aggregate of a Job Order Contract count as a single project experience?

Answer:

No. As stated in the RFP, PROJECT is defined as “A design-build or design-bid-build construction activity or task, with a single starting point and a single ending point.” COMBINED PROJECT(S) is defined as “Projects with multiple starting and ending points, performed under separate task orders, delivery orders, or multiple contracts combined in a single description. No credit will be given for work performed under MACC/IDIQ contracts in the aggregate or for multiple projects completed under more than one task/delivery order.”

Question 11:

Do the projects we submit under the Experience factor have to be completed by the RFP issuance date?

Answer:

Yes. As stated in the RFP under the Proposal Submission Requirements for the Experience factor:

· “Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be 100% complete (see definition) within the past five (5) years (see definition) of the date of issuance of this RFP.”

· “Projects submitted for the design team shall be 100% complete (see definition) within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. For design-build projects, the design portion of the contract shall have been completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. The design completion date shall reflect the date that plans and specifications were complete, signed off by an Architect-Engineer, and approved for construction, and does not include architect/engineering services during construction.”

The definition for “100% complete” is stated in the RFP as follows:

· For construction projects: The facility is completely constructed and ready for the intended use.

· For design projects: 100% plans and specifications signed off by an Architect-Engineer and ready for construction with final cost estimate. Does not include any Post Construction Award Support (PCAS).

The definition for “five-year period” is stated in the RFP as follows:

“The prescribed timeframe for this solicitation that refers to the period of time for which projects may be submitted for experience, past performance, or for prior support for small business. The five-year period is calculated by counting back five years from the initial RFP issuance date.”

Question 12:

Will the government allow Offerors to include previously completed Past Performance Questionnaires from the same customer points of contact in lieu of new Past Performance Questionnaires? Can these be US Army Corps of Engineers surveys that have slightly different questions?

Answer:

Yes, it is acceptable to submit previously completed Past Performance Questionnaires, as long as the evaluations assign an overall rating and cover the same criteria as the PPQ form included with the RFP.

Question 13:

Is a typed/electronic signature acceptable on a past performance questionnaire?

Answer:

A typed signature is not acceptable. Acceptable signatures include handwritten signatures or digital signatures via Adobe (or similar). If the signature appears questionable, the evaluator may be contacted to verify the information.

Question 14:

How many Past Performance Questionnaires can we submit for each project?

Answer:

Only one past performance evaluation will be considered per project. If more than one past performance evaluation is included, only the first will be considered. Note that if a PPQ is provided but an evaluation is in the CPARS system, the CPARS evaluation supersedes the PPQ.

Question 15:

Can an Offeror submit a CPARS evaluation for a project where they performed as a subcontractor?

Answer:

Yes, but the CPARS evaluation should identify the name of the Subcontractor (Offeror) in the evaluation and provide information to evaluate the Subcontractor’s (Offeror’s) performance on the project.

Question 16:

We are current and up-to-date in the System for Award Management (SAM). Does that suffice for the Representations and Certification clauses in Section 00600 of the RFP or do I still have to fill out those clauses and submit them with my proposal?

Answer:

Offerors must complete and submit Section 00600 of the RFP as part of their proposal even if the Offeror is registered in SAM. Section 00600 of the RFP contains clauses which are not found in the electronic Reps & Certs in SAM; therefore, we require them to be completed and submitted as part of your proposal.

Note: The clauses found in Section 00600 of the RFP are also broken out as a separate form titled “Section 00600 – Representations and Certifications” which can be found with the other RFP Exhibits.

Question 17:

I don’t have any employees who are Veterans. Do I still have to submit a VETS-4212 report?

Answer:

You are subject to the VETS-4212 Report reporting requirements if you have:

1. A current Government contract or subcontract in the amount of $150,000 or more that was entered into on or after October 1, 2015; or

2. A current Government contract or subcontract in the amount of $100,000 or more that was entered prior to October 1, 2015.

As stated in the Instructions to Offerors:

“If subject to the reporting requirements, companies must file an annual VETS-4212 Report, which shows the number of covered veterans in their workforce and number of new hires, including covered veterans hired during the reporting period. Instructions, information, and follow-up assistance is provided at VETS-4212 Internet site at http://www.dol.gov/vets/vets4212.htm or employers may contact the VETS-4212 customer support at (866) 237-0275 or e-mail at VETS4212-customersupport@dol.gov.

VETS-4212 Reports must be filed between August 1 and September 30 of each year following a calendar year in which a contractor or subcontractor held a covered contract or subcontract.

Upon the successful submission of a VETS-4212 report, federal contractors will receive an email confirmation of receipt notification for their records. Offerors shall include a copy of their confirmation notification email in their proposal as verification of submission. DO NOT SUBMIT A COPY OF THE REPORT ITSELF. If this requirement is not applicable to your firm, provide a statement that your firm does not have any contracts subject to this requirement.

A contract cannot be awarded to a contractor that has not submitted a required annual VETS-4212, Federal Contractor Veterans’ Employment Report (VETS-4212 Report) if subject to the reporting requirements of 38 U.S.C. 4212(d) for that fiscal year.”

Question 18:

On Form SF1442 block 14, what sort of code and facility code is it asking for?

Answer:

You do not need to fill out the code or facility code. In Block 14, you only need to provide the Offeror name and address.

Question 19:

Will the Contract require the Offerors to propose on EVERY Task Order under the MACC, or will we have the option to make a business decision on a case-by-case basis?

Answer:

As stated in the RFP in Section 00803 (Task Order Issuance Procedures), “Each Contractor is required to submit a reasonable number of good faith proposals for PTOs. Contractors are not obligated to propose on all Task Orders; however, they are required to contact the Contracting Officer at least two days prior to the site visit if they cannot participate in the walk through, or within five days of the proposal due date if they cannot submit an offer. Failure to provide this notification may impact future consideration for PTOs and exercise of an option.”

Question 20:

If the proposed design firm was the designer of record for the Offeror on a design-build project, could the Offeror complete the PPQ for the design firm?

Answer:

The construction prime contractor can complete an evaluation for the design firm only if the construction prime contractor is not the Offeror or any other member of the Offeror’s team proposing on the contract, as identified in Factor 1 Technical Approach. Since the Offeror and other members of the Offeror’s team are considered interested parties to this solicitation, they should not complete the evaluation; however, the design firm can request the client/owner to provide an evaluation. Past performance evaluations that are completed by the Offeror (or any other member of the Offeror’s team) for any member of the Offeror’s team will not be considered.

Question 21:

If an Offeror was both the Prime Contractor and Designer of Record on a project, may the same CPARS evaluation be provided for both Construction and Design Experience – or – is it preferred that a PPQ also be provided?

Answer:

In order for a CPARS evaluation of a Prime Contractor to also be considered for the Designer of Record (DOR), the CPARS evaluation must specifically address the DOR’s performance on the design portion of the project. If the CPARS evaluation does not specifically address the DOR’s performance on the design portion of the project, it will not be considered for the DOR. In that case, a PPQ should be submitted to demonstrate past performance of the DOR.

Question 22:

If the Offeror was both the Prime Contractor and Designer of Record on a project and the project featured meets the 100% design complete definition (but is not yet construction complete), will an Interim CPARS evaluation be considered acceptable, or is it preferred that a PPQ be provided?

Answer:

An Interim CPARS evaluation submitted for the design portion of a project will only be considered if it specifically addresses the Designer of Record (DOR)’s performance on the completed design portion of the project. If the Interim CPARS evaluation does not specifically address the DOR’s performance on the design portion of the project, it will not be considered for the DOR. In that case, a PPQ should be submitted to demonstrate past performance of the DOR.