ATTACHMENT 20 Q and A - W911S7-23-R-0001.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

U.S. ARMY MISSION AND INSTALLATION CONTRACTING COMMAND INSTALLATION

CONTRACTING OFFICE – FORT LEONARD WOOD

8112 NEBRASKA AVE, BLDG 11400

FORT LEONARD WOOD, MO 65473-8944

CCMI-CEU-LW 23 October 2023

SUBJECT: Questions and Answers, Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) IDIQ, Solicitation W911S7-23-R-0001

1. QUESTION: What is the expected magnitude of the MATOC itself?

ANSWER: $42 million

2. QUESTION: It mentions there is a bid guarantee required with submission. Can you clarify that although this is just a sample project you will need a bid bond and not just a bond capacity letter?

ANSWER: A bid guarantee is required with submission of your proposal. In addition, the offeror shall provide proof of payment and performance bonding capacity for the potential estimated annual amount of $20 million aggregate and a capacity to bond $5 million per task order, with verification from a securities or bonding company. Separately, a payment and performance and payment bond will be required for the sample project once awarded.

3. QUESTION: It states that a payment and performance bond is required with the RFP along with the bid guarantee. Usually, the payment and performance bond is submitted once you are awarded a project. Can you clarify what is needed?

ANSWER: Refer to question number two.

4. QUESTION: Will the Government confirm that contracts from sister divisional and affiliated companies can be used for experience and past performance purposes as long as there is a meaningful commitment letter submitted along with the proposal?

ANSWER: Offerors should provide the information as stated in section L, Volume III, Past Performance. Factor 2 will be evaluated IAW section M, Factor 2, Past Performance.

5. QUESTION: Would the Government accept CPARS in lieu of PPQ’s?

ANSWER: Yes, only for those actions listed in CPARS. However, CPARS should be relevant to this acquisition and within the past six years. Remember CPARS is not mandatory for all contracts and may not show an accurate past performance this is not the only system that the Government may use for evaluating past performance.

6. QUESTION: Would the Government provide the DB Wage Rates for Pulaski County since Fort Leonard Wood is located in that county?

ANSWER: Yes. Refer to attachments in Amendment 0002

7. QUESTION: Section B – Maximum Amount of Contract - The draft solicitation had a maximum capacity of $42M. The final solicitation has $5M. What is the total capacity of the contract? If the amount is the $5M is this a shared amount or individual awardee amount?

ANSWER: Refer to question number one. The size standard is $42M.

8. QUESTION: Section J – There is an Attachment 19 listed, but SAM.GOV did not include an Attachment 19. Please clarify.

ANSWER: Refer to attachments in Amendment 0002

9. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 1.C – Questions – Generally many contractors have the same questions and if they could see questions from other contractors, then may not ask that same question. We suggest you post the questions, which would save you time in fielding similar questions and answering them.

ANSWER: All questions and answers will be posted on SAM.

10. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.B.vi – There is a reference to an “Executive

Summary”, but does not give an indication where you want to see that included.

Since it is not included I the page count, we assume it is not in Volume II, since there is a page count. Please identify the Volume where you want us to include the Executive Summary?

ANSWER: Volume I

11. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii (Tab C – Cross Reference Matrix) – Can you give an example of what you want to see in this Tab? We can make assumptions, but that may put us at a disadvantage to those that would guess correctly. For example, if we mention Mr. QC in Tab D2 in the QCP and want to reference his credentials, we would refer the reader to Tab D1. Is this what you are looking for? We can provide an example from another agency that is published

– just let us know.

ANSWER: Your example is an acceptable format for the government to consider as a part of your submission.

12. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, i: For the organizational chart do you want us to show the AE as one box (just say AE) or show the AE personnel for the 11+ positions mentioned in the SOW? If you want the 11+ AE positions, then can the org chart be on an 11X17 page and counted as one page?

ANSWER: A page shall be an 8 ½ X 11’ sheet of paper. Note: It is not the Governments intent to obtain A&E services pursuant to this contract. The organizational chart should list only the key personnel.

13. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, i, 2: Key Personnel and Key

Subcontractors. Requirements state: “Shall provide a representation of the employees that will be utilized to perform under this contract.” However, there are only three Key Personnel listed (5 if you count the alternate Superintendent and QC). Are the five positions the only Key Personnel you want to see resumes/experience for?

ANSWER: Yes

14. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, i, 3 – Bid Guarantee and bonds – Do these documents fall within the 50 page limit? Normally these type of documents would fall within Volume 1 and not be part of the Technical Approach. Please clarify. (PS you have $100% stated – we assume you mean 100%).

ANSWER: The bid guarantee and capacity letter will not be included as a part of the 50 page limit. Refer to question number two.

15. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, ii, Tab D2, 3. – QCP – A fully detailed QCP may be 30 to 50 pages (or more), with all the requirements you are requesting. The page limit for Volume II is 50 pages. We can provide a generic QCP or one that was approved on a project, but in either case they should be excluded from the Volume II page count. Please clarify what you are seeking and to be included within the 50 pages for Volume II?

ANSWER: The Government is looking for a fully detailed QCP. The QCP will not be included as a part of the 50-page limit for Volume II.

16. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, ii, Tab D2, 3. – QCP – There is a reference to “…shall be with only high-quality materials…”. Please define “high-quality”, since typically if a product meets an industry standard or an engineering standard (i.e. ANSI, ASME, etc), then it is of that quality. Do you expect a “higher” standard, which may impact costs? Please define what those “high-quality” materials are.

ANSWER: Products must be new and meet current industry standards. If there are other “higher” quality materials required for a particular project, those will be addressed in the individual statements of work.

17. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, ii, 4 – Safety Plan – A fully detailed

H&S Plan can be 100 pages or more, if it includes the APP. The page limit for Volume II is 50 pages. We can provide a generic HSP or one that was approved on a project, but in either case they should be excluded from the Volume II page count.

Please clarify what you are seeking within the 50 pages for Volume II. As a suggestion, we could include a past HSP as an appendix, which we recommend not be part of the page count.

ANSWER: The Government is looking for a fully detailed H&S Plan, including the APP.

This will not be included as a part of the 50-page limit for Volume II.

18. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, iii, Volume III – Past Performance, subparagraph a: The current due date for the proposal is Oct. 13th. Can we include all information required in Volume III with the proposal, since it is due the same date?

ANSWER: All information is to be submitted by November 3, 2023. See amendment 0001. Early submission of past performance information will be acceptable.

19. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, iii, Volume III – Past Performance, subparagraph d: Second bullet: Attachment 1 in Section L – just to be clear you are not referencing Attachment 1, SOW, which would not make sense, but just want to make sure we didn’t miss something. Do you want the role of each firm that is included in the form Attachment 1 (we assume you mean Attachment 2) in Section L? Please clarify.

ANSWER: The attachments are contained in Section L. The Government is not referencing Attachment 1, SOW. The Government requires a signature and title of the individual who has the authority to sign for and legally bind the company on Attachment 1, SUBCONTRACTOR/TEAMING PARTER CONSENT FORM FOR THE RELASE OF

PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION TO THE PRIME CONTRACTOR.

20. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, iii, Volume III – Past Performance, subparagraph d: third bullet: Do you mean Attachment 1 in Section L for this one also?

21. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, iii, Volume III – Past Performance, subparagraph d: 5th bullet: As we read the one sentence in this requirement, it implies that you want the “road map” to go back six years, which is what you are limiting the past performance to. Please confirm this is the extent/time frame of what you want to see for the “road map”?

ANSWER: Yes. Agencies shall use past performance information that is within six years of the completion of performance.

22. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, iii, Volume III – Past Performance, subparagraph d: 6th bullet: The requirement states: “Sheets in accordance with Attachment 2 and 3 of Section L below are limited to 3 pages per reference.” A blank

Attachment 2 is two pages; and a blank Attachment 3 is five pages. Please clarify what you want, since this Volume III does not have a page limit. Likewise, this paragraph requires the rationale for relevance, the same or similar in nature, size and complexity to the services in the solicitation, which may require several pages to explain how the project aligns with the SOW elements.

ANSWER: The Government will accept a total of 10 pages per reference, including attachments 2 and 3 of Section L.

23. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, iii, Volume III – Past Performance, subparagraph e: PPQ – Many of our projects have CPARS or PPQs completed and can be submitted. In order to not duplicate effort for contracting officers or CORs, we suggest you allow offerors to submit CPARS and PPQs that have been completed and can be submitted with this proposal. This will save the Government time and from your earlier requirements, sounds like you will use those tools in any event.

ANSWER: Refer to question number 5.

24. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, iii, Volume III – Past Performance, subparagraph e: PPQ – In many cases the primary person that evaluated the project has moved on or taken another position and other personnel were assigned to their position, but the new folks do not know anything about the project. However, in most cases the contract reference person filled out a standard PPQ-0, which is the USACE Past Performance Questionnaire. Two items:

First – as we mentioned above the existing PPQ-0 includes the performance and the PPQ already exist, which will save government time.

Second – Trying to locate the project person and have them return the PPQ by Oct. 13th, in most cases, will be difficult.

Therefore, please consider using the USACE PPQ-0 as an alternate form.

ANSWER: The Government will accept a USACE PPQ-0 as an alternate form so long as it captures the same information requested.

25. QUESTION: Section L, Paragraph 3.C.ii,Tab D, iii, Volume III – Past Performance, subparagraph c: Per 52.216-19, the limit of TO’s can be $2,000 to $5,000,000. We understand you want projects that are similar in nature of work, size, and complexity.

However, the SOW allows for a broad range of projects, which could capture many similar projects. Many proposals limit the number of projects to submit to ten or in some cases five. A firm that has done a range of projects from $500,000 to $5M, could easily be 15 projects per year. This could equate to 90 projects over the last six years. Please consider limiting the number of projects for past performance.

ANSWER: There is not a requirement to submit each and every project completed over the last six years. The past performance data shall document a successful history of past contract performance and shall not go back any further than six years.

26. QUESTION: Page 64 – Sample Questionnaire Cover Letter: Please update the information in this sample cover letter; such as date, email information, phone and contact.

We could assume it is the same person we are sending these questions to, but want to make sure we have the right information.

ANSWER: An updated Sample Questionnaire Cover Letter including the point of contact information will be provided in Amendment 0002.

27. QUESTION: Section M, pg 67: Being an LPTA and the technical sections being a pass/fail, how will you evaluate proposals that all are acceptable technically? For example, if you have ten proposals and all are technically acceptable, how will you determine the five awards? Will it be on price?

ANSWER: Refer to Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award. The Government intends to award up to five MATOC base awards. Once the offerors have been deemed technically acceptable, the awards will be based on lowest prices technically acceptable. The sample project will be awarded to the lowest price technically acceptable.

28. QUESTION: Section M, pg 68, Paragraph 3.B.i, Subfactor 1, second bullet: The Key personnel start with “2. Project Manager”. We assume that is a typo, but want to make sure there was not another position. Please clarify/correct.

ANSWER: This is a typo. The key personnel starts with “Project Manager.”

29. QUESTION: Section M, pg 69, Paragraph 3.B.i, 3. Superintendent: We could not find Section 01 45 00 in the specifications provided. Please provide that section.

ANSWER: Pursuant to Attachment 1, FLW MATOC SOW, 1.5.1 and Section 6 refers to the Unified Facilities Criteria Guide.

30. QUESTION: Section M, pg 69, Paragraph 3.B.i, 4. Quality Control Manager (QC): We could not find Section 01 45 00 in the specifications provided. Please provide that section.

ANSWER: Pursuant to Attachment 1, FLW MATOC SOW, 1.5.1 and Section 6 refers to the Unified Facilities Criteria Guide.

31. QUESTON: Section M, pg 69, Paragraph 3.B.i, Sub-Factor 2; first bullet: There is a reference to Attachment 4 for additional guidance for the STO. Attachment 4 from SAM.GOV is dated May 25, 2023 and references RFTOP, but does provide any additional guidance on the STO. Is there something missing or did we miss something?

ANSWER: Attachment 4 – The RFTOP letter provides guidance on how to submit a proposal for the sample task order itself. Attachments 2-18 on the RFTOP letter pertain only to the sample task order. Refer to Section H6 – Request for Proposal. The RFTOP letter will be issued for each individual task order on the awarded contracts.

32. QUESTION: Section M – We have not repeated similar type of questions from Section L that apply to Section M. However, we assume you will make similar corrections from Section L to Section M, if needed.

ANSWER: If any changes are necessary to be made in section L, corresponding section M will be updated.

33. QUESTION: Statement of Work (SOW) – Page 3, Paragraph 1.4.2: There are 11 specific positions listed, which include “safety”, but does further define that position. Are you looking for a CSP or other similar level person? Please define this position and the credentials required.

ANSWER: Contractor personnel shall comply with applicable state and local safety and health requirements as well as Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, Army Corps of Engineer Safety Manual, EM 385-1-1, and Unified Facilities Guide Specifications (UFGS) Section 01 35 26, Governmental Safety Requirements.

34. QUESTION: Statement of Work (SOW) – Page 7, Paragraph 1.7.2; Key Personnel: The introductory paragraph names the Project Manager and QC Manager as key personnel, but the next paragraphs list three (ie 1.7.2.1, 1.7.2.2 and 1.7.2.3). Also the introductory paragraph includes an alternate for the Project Manager and QC Manager, whereas the solicitation requires an alternate for the QC Manager and the Superintendent. Please clarify/coordinate what positions you want to see alternates for.

ANSWER: The Government requires a name for Superintendent, Project Manager, and QC Manager. This can be a combination of any 1-3 people. An alternate for each position is required that is not any of the 3 individuals previously mentioned.

35. QUESTION: General – If there is a Government shutdown, will there be a corresponding extension to the proposal due date? Will there be an extension to the PPQ submission date?

ANSWER: There was not a Government shutdown; therefore, the proposal due date will remain the same. If the were to be one the SAM.GOV will be updated accordingly

36. QUESTION: General – If there is a Government shutdown and the questions have not been answered will there be additional time to ask questions?

ANSWER: There was not a Government shutdown. If there were to be one the SAM.GOV will be updated accordingly

37. QUESTION: SF 1442 Section 10 item 9 states that written questions should be submitted no later than 3:00pm CST on September 27th while on page 45 of 72 has questions to be submitted no later than 11:00 AM CST on September 27, 2023. Which time is correct?

ANSWER: The Government accepted questions until 3:00 p.m. CST on September 27, 2023.

38. QUESTION: Due to the yearend contacting requirements will you please extend the due date by two weeks?

ANSWER: Please refer to Amendment 0001. The due date for proposals is November 3, 2023.

39. QUESTION: Would you please allow electronic submission of the proposal volumes by email or another DoD site?

ANSWER: Electronic submissions will not be accepted. Offers shall be mailed through a commercial/Government carrier or hand caried.

40. QUESTION: Many of our government clients will not complete Past Performance Questionnaires, especially for projects that they have previously completed a PPQs and a CPAR. Please allow the submission of previously completed PPQs and/or the CPARs for completed projects.

ANSWER: Yes, only for those actions listed in CPARS. However, CPARS should be relevant to this acquisition and within the past six years. CPARS is not mandatory for all contracts and may not show an accurate past performance. The Government relies on other systems for evaluating past performance as well.

41. QUESTION: Is there a suggested format/sample for the Client Authorization Letter, as requested in the Past Performance instructions?

ANSWER: Please refer to Attachment 1, Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent form for the Release of Past Performance Information to the Prime Contractor

42. QUESTION: Do Client Authorization Letters count towards the 50-page limit?

43. QUESTION: Per 252.236 – 7001, will we be receiving contract drawings and/or specs?

If so, do we know whether they will be digital or hardcopy yet?

ANSWER: Contract drawings and specifications will be provided digitally. Refer to SAM.gov for the sample task order specs and drawings. Future task orders solicited to the MATOC awardees will be via email.

44. QUESTION: If and when comparisons must be made to justify domestic preference, is there a desired format specified for the price comparison breakdown?

ANSWER: There is not a desired format. However, all information in FAR 52.225-9 (d) should be included.

45. QUESTION: Is there a limit on the projects that may be submitted, would you consider limiting to 5 projects so that the number of projects do not become over whelming for review.

ANSWER: Refer to question number twenty-five.

46. QUESTION: In completing Attachment 2 can task orders from MATOCs be included rather than a single contract?

ANSWER: Yes. Please include the base award information as well.

47. QUESTION: Are Client Authorization Letters only required for commercial clients and not for government clients?

48. QUESTION: Is this MATOC a recompete of an existing contract for Ft Leonard Wood?

49. QUESTION: In the RFTOP letter has dates of April and May of 2023, has this TO been issued previously? Was it cancelled?

ANSWER: This task order has not been previously issued.

50. QUESTION: As stated in the RFTOP letter, is the pricing to be held for 30 days?

ANSWER: Refer to Amendment 0002. The pricing will be held for 120 days to match the requirements at 13 D.

51. QUESTION: Is the magnitude of the Seed Task Order still estimated between $100,000 and $250,000?

52. QUESTION: What is the estimated total amount of the MATOC? On page 3 DELIVERY/TASK ORDER MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND ORDER VALUE with the Maximum Amount is stated as $5,000,000.00 with the Maximum Quantity as 999.00 does this mean the ceiling of the MATOC is $5B?

ANSWER: The total amount of the MATOC is $42 million.

53. QUESTION: If a preconstruction conference is required, is it considered a billable item for all attendees and expensed included in the RFTOP pricing?

54. QUESTION: What is the anticipated dollar size range of the Task Orders?

ANSWER: The minimum order value for each individual task order is $2,000.00 and the maximum order value for each individual task order is $5,000,000.00.

55. QUESTION: What is the ranking of the factors and subfactors in Technical Acceptability relative to each other (i.e. is the project executed higher ranked than Organizational Structure).

ANSWER: There is not a ranking of the factors or subfactors in technical acceptability.

56. QUESTION: With the page limit in Technical Acceptability, it is not possible to present a full QCP or Safety Plan. Would the Table of Contents with description of key elements be ‘acceptable’?

ANSWER: The QCP and Safety Plan will not be included as a part of the 50-page limit in Volume II.

57. QUESTION: Based on all volumes ratings based on Acceptable or Unacceptable and price reasonableness how will the 5 awardees be determined if more firms are equally ranked for these values?

ANSWER: Refer to question number twenty-seven.

58. QUESTION: Does the free standing island have conduit(s) feeding it from under the floor?

If not, will we need to install conduits under the floor for the receptacles and existing com/phone outlet?

ANSWER: Existing conduit is fed from the ceiling.

59. QUESTION: Will the Heat Detector in the temp. kitchen need to be removed when the room is restored to original condition?

ANSWER: No

60. QUESTION: What type/brand of Fire Alarm panel is in the bldg.?

ANSWER: FCI 7200

61. QUESTION: How will amendments be issued? Will they be posted on SAM.GOV?

ANSWER: All amendments will be posted on SAM.gov.

62. QUESTION: What is the average size of task order anticipated on this contract?

ANSWER: Refer to question number fifty-four.

63. QUESTION: Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) – Can a CPARS evaluation be used in lieu of the PPQ form?

ANSWER: Refer to question number five.

64. QUESTION: Past Performance – Please clarify how many projects examples are desired for the past performance requirements and subsequent PPQ’s/CPARS and Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet?

65. QUESTION: Bid Guarantee – Per the solicitation, page 60, the bid guarantee requirement is for 100% of the price proposal, however this is uncommon and is typically 20 percent of the bid price or $3,000,000.00, whichever is less. Can you please confirm if a 100% of the price proposal bid guarantee/bond is correct?

ANSWER: Refer to question number two.

66. QUESTION: Sheet E1 indicates the installation of a heat detector in the temporary kitchen area. Will this heat detector be left in place or removed once work in the new kitchen is completed?

ANSWER: The heat detector will be left in place.

67. QUESTION: Is there a limitation on the number of past performance citations which may be submitted?

68. QUESTION: The government references the submission of “Early Proposal Information” in the Volume III Past Performance instructions, but the requested submission date is the same as the proposal due date, Oct 13, 2023. Would the Government consider having the Past Performance volume due on October 13th and the remaining volumes due on October 27th?

ANSWER: Refer to question number eighteen.

69. QUESTION: Is this a firm-fixed price contract mechanism for each task order?

70. QUESTION: Does military experience count towards the five-year experience requirement for key personnel?

71. QUESTION: Can the Project Manager be dual-hatted as the Quality Manager?

72. QUESTION: Will there be a requirement to erect privacy fencing around temporary storage/laydown areas?

ANSWER:

73. QUESTION: Will “as built” diagrams be provided in advance by the government?

ANSWER: See the attached documents to the solicitation for the drawings/specs for the sample task order project.

74. QUESTION: Will assessment parameters for liquidated damages be provided by the government?

ANSWER: Liquidated damages will be assessed pursuant to FAR 52.211-12, Liquidated Damages – Construction.

75. QUESTION: After relocation of the Ansul System, will the same Ansul System be required to be reinstalled in the renovated kitchen from the temporary kitchen?

ANSWER: The Ansul system will not be relocated.

76. QUESTION: What will the fire protection for the stove and flat top grill in the temporary kitchen be if the current Ansul system will be relocated back to the end state kitchen from the temporary kitchen?

ANSWER: Residential type ovens do not require a full ansul system; sprinklers will be sufficient for the space.

77. QUESTION: Is surface mount conduit acceptable for the electrical devices in the temporary kitchen?

ANSWER: Yes. Temporary conduit for the temporary kitchen space may be surface mounted.

78. QUESTION: How far back can the experience/past performance examples go? 3 years?

5 years?

ANSWER: Six years.

79. QUESTION: And what level of completion? 50%? 75%? Must be fully completed?

ANSWER: Unless specified, complete is 100% completion.

80. QUESTION: Volume II Page count – Volume II Technical Acceptability is limited to 50 pages however this section has considerable project information that will exceed 50 pages. The specific concern is with sections 1.3 Quality Control Plan and 1.4 Safety plan in Volume II, Tab D2 – Subfactor 2: Project execution. These plans, when made site/project specific, can generally reach 100 pages and 300 pages, respectively. Can the pages for the Quality and Safety plans be excluded from the page count or can this volume be increased?

ANSWER: The Quality Control Plan and Safety Plans will not be included in the 50-page limit in Volume II.

81. QUESTION: In ATTACHMENT 18 - Contractors Price Schedule Worksheet it states, “Do not use, calculate below” for line items 01 - General Requirements and 02 - Existing Conditions. Where shall we calculate these line items?

ANSWER: We will amend the form to allow for the proper information in Division 01 and Division 02 to be submitted; however, offerors are cautioned against duplicating information captured elsewhere.

The point of contact for this memorandum is Candi Caquelin, Contract Specialist, via email at candi.l.caquelin.civ@army.mil or via telephone at (573) 596-3218.

CANDI L. CAQUELIN

Contract Specialist