RFP Letter.pdf

Request for Proposal Giant Voice Loudspeaker Tower Expansion Kirtland AFB

Instructions to Offerors/Basis of Award

1. Instructions to Offerors:

This is a competitive request for proposal conducted in accordance with (IAW) Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15.305.

A. Point of contact (POC): Contract Specialist Michael Chavez can be reached by email at michael.chavez.13@us.af.mil.and the Contracting Officer (CO) TSgt Steven Slosser can be reached by email at steven.slosser@us.af.mil.

B. Basis of Award: An award will be made IAW the evaluation factors listed within this RFP. The Government seeks to award a purchase order to the Offeror who is deemed responsible IAW FAR 9.1, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to this RFP’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications and all other information required by the RFP instructions). All claimed capabilities to meet the requirements shall be realistic and are subject to verification by the Government. Non-conformance with these instructions may result in rejection of the proposal or an unfavorable proposal evaluation, or being deemed ineligible for award. The CO will select the best submission which is judged based on the evaluation factors. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced Offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors, and the overall evaluation reasonably determines that the technical and/or overall business approach of the higher priced Offeror outweighs the price difference and represents the best value to the Government.

C. Submission of Proposals: Submit your proposal electronically in accordance with the table on the next page. All electronic submissions shall reference the complete Project Title (Giant Voice Loudspeaker Tower Expansion Kirtland AFB) and Project Number (MHMV201700001) in the subject line. Offerors must ensure that pricing information is only included in Volume II. Do NOT include any Pricing information in Volume I.

PROPOSAL CRITERIA/INSTRUCTIONS

mailto:michael.chavez.13@us.af.mil mailto:steven.slosser@us.af.mil

VOLUME REFERENCE TITLE

MAXIMUM

NUMBER OF

PAGES

I

Cover Letter 2 Factor 1

Subfactor 1

Technical

Technical Narrative 5 Subfactor 2 Gantt Chart Unlimited

II Factor 2 Price Unlimited

Volume I: Cover Letter and Technical Proposal

(1) Cover Letter shall include Offerors’ company name as it appears in SAM.gov;

cage code; company primary and alternate points of contact with email/phone and identification of the individual authorized to contractually obligate the company; a statement from the company that they understand the requirements specified within this RFP, and they will meet the performance standards and requirements therein; a statement that the company does or does not take exception to any of the requirements of this RFP; a statement that the company acknowledges use of non-Government advisors and/or specific information if proposing a teaming arrangement.

(2) The Technical Proposal should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the Technical factor. Address your technical solution for meeting or exceeding the Government’s minimum requirements of the technical factor. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By your proposal submission, you are representing that your company understands and will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the Statement of Work.

(3) Factor 1 – Technical. The Technical Factors are as follows:

SubFactor 1 – Technical Narrative

Offerors shall be responsible for all requirements regarding the design/build process, which will be used to complete the project from the design through the construction phases, to include the composition of the design/build team, a list of required permits, tests and surveys, and a list of code deficiencies to be addressed by the design.

For the purpose of this evaluation, Offerors shall provide a Technical Narrative, which demonstrates a clear, comprehensive, and viable approach in the following areas:

• The Offeror’s approach for coordinating outages with affected building occupants, as necessary per the SOW, paragraphs 8.3.1 and 8.8.

• The composition of the Offeror’s design/construction team as it applies to the SOW.

SubFactor 2 – Gantt Chart

Offeror shall submit a Gantt Chart detailing overall performance period, including design and construction phases, identifying all critical milestones.

NOTE: The Government reserves the right to incorporate the aspects of the Contractor’s Proposed Technical Solution evaluated as strengths into the resulting Task Order contract.

Volume II: Factor 2 - Price

The Offeror shall submit pricing information to support the completeness and reasonableness of their proposed prices for technical requirements. The pricing information submitted should fully support the SOW requirements for each major functional element specified in the SOW. A breakdown shall be provided which shows the skill mix, labor categories, labor rates and labor hours. Additionally, provide all proposed materials with applicable units of measure to include individual unit prices.

All unit and extended prices provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar.

Extended prices must be divisible by the number of units proposed. All loaded labor rates shall also be rounded to the nearest dollar.

D. Electronic Format: Each Offeror shall submit proposals electronically via email in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2016, Adobe Acrobat X Pro, MS Excel 2016, MS- Power Point 2016, and MS Project format, as applicable, to the POCs and email addresses provided in paragraph A.

E. Size and Font: Offerors submitting a proposal in response to this RFP shall submit a cover letter, technical proposal, and price proposal.

(a) Text, when printed, shall be single-spaced, on an 8 ½ x 11 sheet with a minimum one-inch margin all around (exception: see (b) Charts). Font shall be no less than Times New Roman 10 pt. Pages shall be numbered consecutively within each volume. The page limits prescribed are maximum page limits for each volume. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two (2) pages. Cover pages, tables of contents, cross-reference matrix, tabs, and glossaries shall not be counted against prescribed page limits. Pages submitted in excess of these limits will not be read or considered in the Government’s evaluation of the proposal. All proposal information shall be submitted in either MS Word or PDF format except for Pricing information (Volume II). Pricing information shall be submitted in MS Excel format. Each volume shall be submitted as a separately-labeled electronic file.

(b) Legible Charts/Drawings shall not be less than 11 by 17 inches or exceed 24 by 36 inches in size when printed, the text shall be no smaller than 8 point.

F. Evaluation: The Best Value assessment allows for a tradeoff between technical and price and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal or other than the most highly rated technical proposal to achieve a best-value award.

G. Comparative Analysis: Following receipt of responses to this RFP, the Government will perform a comparative analysis (comparing Offeror proposals to one another) in order to select the Offeror that is best suited to fulfill the requirements of the RFP. The comparative analysis will be based on the Offeror’s responses to the stated evaluation criteria across the factors outlined below, demonstrating the best technical solution. This may result in an award to a higher-rated, higher-priced offer if the Government determines that the technical rating of the higher-priced offer outweighs the price difference. The selection process is subjective by nature and professional judgment is implicit throughout the evaluation process.

H. Evaluation Factors: IAW FAR 15.1, regarding the relative importance of each factor:

Technical is more important than Price. Responses to this RFP will be evaluated against the following factors:

Factor 1: Technical Subfactor 1: Technical Narrative Subfactor 2: Gantt Chart Factor 2: Price

The Offeror’s proposal shall, at a minimum, address each of the factors, as they apply to the SOW; Specifications, Drawings and Guidance provided in the RFP attachments. The technical proposal should demonstrate the Offeror’s ability to perform the technical requirements.

FACTOR 1: Technical

Subfactor 1: Technical Narrative

The Offeror’s Technical Narrative demonstrates a clear, comprehensive, and viable approach to the following areas:

• The Offeror’s approach for coordinating system installation and their ability to comply with the attached Brand Name Justification.

• The composition of the Offeror’s design/construction team as it applies to the SOW.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Subfactor 2: Gantt Chart

The Offeror’s Gantt chart demonstrates a complete and realistic schedule in accordance with proposed Technical Narrative, SOW, Specifications, Drawings and Guidance provided in the RFP attachments.

The following ratings will be utilized for each Technical Factor Rating:

TABLE 1: Technical Ratings

Rating Description

Exceeds Requirements Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one *strength.

Meets Requirements Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements with no strengths.

Does Not Clearly Meet Requirements

Proposal does not clearly meet requirements of the solicitation and may require interchanges with Offeror.

Does Not Meet Requirements

Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and thus is unawardable.

* The Government will assign strengths for aspects of an Offeror’s proposal that exceed specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

FACTOR 2: Price

Price proposals should support the proposed technical approach and will be evaluated for (1) completeness and (2) reasonableness. Offerors whose price is determined to be incomplete or unreasonable will not be considered for award.

A. Completeness. The proposal will be reviewed to determine the extent to which all the price elements have been addressed. The Offeror’s proposed price and other information will be evaluated to ensure continuity and traceability of prices to the technical volume and between the initial proposal and any revisions thereto. The review will determine the adequacy of the Offeror’s proposal in addressing and fulfilling the RFP requirements.

B. Reasonableness. For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business.

The Government will determine prices fair and reasonable through the use of one or more of the price analysis techniques at FAR 15.404-1(b)(2).

I. Past Performance: Although past performance may not be used as an evaluation factor, the Government may utilize information obtained from other sources available to the Government such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). The Government reserves the right to obtain information relative to present and past performance through any available means, including the experience of the CO.

J. Magnitude of Construction: In determining the pool of proposals to be evaluated for “FACTORS 1 and 2,” the Government reserves the right to take into consideration the affordability of the proposal in relation to the requirement’s magnitude of construction. This magnitude of construction is provided as the value range identified in the Cover Letter.

K. Interchanges: Interchanges are fluid interaction(s) between the CO and the Offerors that may address any aspect of the proposal and may or may not be documented in real time.

The Government intends to make award based on the initial proposal submissions without conducting interchanges. Therefore, each offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to hold interchanges using Interchange Notices (INs) if, during the evaluation, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government. Offeror responses to INs will be considered in making the order selection decision. Interchanges may be conducted with one, some, or all Offerors as the Government is not required to conduct interchanges with any or all Offerors responding to this RFP. Once the Government determines the Offeror that is best-suited to meet stated requirements, the Government reserves the right to communicate with only that Offeror to address any issues, if necessary, and finalize an order with that Offeror. If the parties cannot successfully resolve outstanding issues, as determined pertinent at the sole discretion of the Government, the Government may communicate with the next best-suited Offeror, based on the original analysis and address any necessary issues with that Offeror.

If the Government begins communications with the next best-suited Offeror, no further communications with the previous Offeror will be entertained until after order award. This process will continue until an agreement is successfully reached and an order is awarded.

L. Exceptions: Offerors must clearly identify any exception to RFP terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions are unacceptable. Any exception determined unacceptable by the Government may result in the Offeror’s proposal being determined unacceptable and ineligible for award. This information shall be provided in the format and content of the table below within the Offerors proposal cover letter. If no exceptions are taken, include a statement stating so within the proposal cover letter.

RFP Exceptions

RFP

Document

Page/ Paragraph

Requirement/ Portion Rationale

SOW,

ITO,

Evaluation Factor, etc.

Applicable Page and Paragraph Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Describe why the requirement can/will not be met

The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but, rather, shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities or experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror's proposal.

2. Discrepancies

(a) If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the CO in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the Offeror is asking the CO to consider as related to the omission or error.

(b) If an Offeror believes that the RFP attachments contain flaws, errors, omissions, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall address the discrepancies with supporting rationale as well as the remedies in their proposed technical approach.

3. Use of Non-Government Advisors: Offerors are advised that technical and cost/price data submitted to the Government in response to this RFP may be released to non-Government advisors for proposal review and analysis. All non-Government advisors have signed non-disclosure statements. The non-Government advisor support will be provided by PAE-Perini

LLC.

Offerors shall complete paragraph (2) below, or provide written objection to disclosure as indicated in paragraph (1) below, if the Offeror objects to disclosure of a portion of the proposal, the consent in (2) should be provided for the remainder of the proposal. Include either paragraph

(1) or (2) below, completed as applicable, within the proposal cover letter.

(1) Any objection to disclosure:

(i) Shall be provided in writing to the CO within ten (10) calendar days of RFPissuance; and

(ii) Shall include a detailed statement of the basis for the objection. The detailed statement shall identify the specific portions of the proposal the Offeror objects to disclosure to non-Government advisors.

(2) I understand technical and cost/price data submitted to the Government in response to this RFP may be released to non-Government advisors. I consent to release of any (unless objection is provided in (1) above) proprietary, confidential, or privileged commercial or financial data provided by the firm(s) named below in response to this solicitation, to non- Government advisors for review and analysis:

Firm:

Name (individual authorized to commit firm):

Title:

Date of Execution:

4. Ombudsman. In accordance with AFFARS 5352.201-9101, AFGSC Ombudsman 10/1/2019, An ombudsman has been appointed to hear and facilitate the resolution of concerns from Offerors, potential Offerors, and others for this acquisition. When requested, the ombudsman will maintain strict confidentiality as to the source of the concern. The existence of the ombudsman does not affect the authority of the program manager, contracting officer, or source selection official. Further, the ombudsman does not participate in the evaluation of proposals, the source selection process, or the adjudication of protests or formal contract disputes. The ombudsman may refer the interested party to another official who can resolve the concern.

Before consulting with an ombudsman, interested parties must first address their concerns, issues, disagreements, and/or recommendations to the contracting officer for resolution.

Consulting an ombudsman does not alter or postpone the timelines for any other processes (e.g., agency level bid protests, GAO bid protests, requests for debriefings, employee-employer actions, contests of OMB Circular A-76 competition performance decisions).

If resolution cannot be made by the contracting officer, the interested party may contact the ombudsman, for AFGSC (Air Force Global Strike Command) acquisitions please contact the Director of Contracts, Air Force Installation Contracting Center, Operating Location – Global Strike (AFICC/KG OL-GSC) via the following e-mail workflow address:

ig.afica_kg.workflow@us.af.mil. Concerns, issues, disagreements, and recommendations that cannot be resolved at the Center/MAJCOM/DRU/SMC ombudsman level, may be brought by the interested party for further consideration to the Air Force ombudsman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary (ADAS) (Contracting), SAF/AQC, 1060 Air Force Pentagon, Washington DC 20330-1060, phone number (571) 256-2395, facsimile number (571) 256-2431.

The ombudsman has no authority to render a decision that binds the agency.

Do not contact the ombudsman to request copies of the solicitation, verify offer due date, or clarify technical requirements. Such inquiries shall be directed to the contracting officer.