JOC_QUESTIONS_ _RESPONSES_-_W9124P-16-R-0006.pdf

JOC QUESTIONS – W9124P-16-R-0006

Solicitation Due Date: 26 September 2016 Site Visit Date, Time & Location: 19 September 2016, 1:00 PM CST, East Side of Building 5201 near the gated area with bollards.

Trial Proposal Project: Construct Technical Escort Training Facility SEED Project: Roofing Replacement Project 1.) Is there only one firm being selected for this JOC?

Yes. This will be a single award, Firm Fixed Price (FFP), Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Job Order Contract (JOC) 2.) Can you please let us know if there is a sample Gordian task catalog you want us to use for the Seed

Project?

Use the same software that is used for the Trial Proposal described in paragraph L.5.2.1. The coefficient prices for the seed project will be corrected during negotiations for the first task order.

3.) In regards to the SEED Project site visit it is stated on the attachment the SEED project site visit will be 6 days before the due date of 9/26/16 which would put us at 9/19 @1pm EST. Has this site visit date been set in stone or is there still room for this to be rescheduled?

Yes, the site visit will be on 19 September 2016, 1PM Central Standard Time.

4.) Latest addendum issued yesterday shows a sample project with related info. I would assume this is the SEED project you need to have priced out? Yet I was under the impression under section L of the solicitation the SEED project was going to be a roofing project. Can you please confirm the SEED project is no longer a roofing project but instead the one shown on Amendment 1? Lastly there are no task catalogs within the RFP. Please let us know if we can use another program task catalog from another client to put the SEED proposal together.

No. The seed project is a roofing project. The addendum drawings are for the Trial Proposal described in RFP paragraph L.5.2.1. The drawings for the seed project described in paragraph L.7.2 were issued with the initial RFP. You cannot use another catalog for the seed project. Use the same software that is used for the Trial Proposal described in paragraph L.5.2.1. The coefficient prices for the seed project will be corrected during negotiations for the first task order.

5.) Section L.4.4 says that proposals must be delivered to the address in block 8, but it also provides an address. The SF 1442 Block 8 address is Building 5303 Martin Road, but the address shown in Section L.4.4 is Building 5300. Please clarify which address proposals are to be delivered to.

Block 8, refers to the issuing office. All proposals are to be delivered to the lobby of the Sparkman Center, Building 5300.

6.) In Section L.7.1.1 Coefficients, the RFP states: "The proposal shall address all components listed in paragraphs B.2.1.7.1 thru B.2.1.7.4 in addition to any other components used to calculate the coefficients." There is no B.2.1.7, can you please provide an updated paragraph identifier so we are not making any assumptions?

Similarly, the next sentence in the same paragraph reads: "The estimated annual values for each CLIN, listed in paragraph M.2.4.3, shall be used to demonstrate the derivation of each coefficient cost," but there is no M.2.4.3. Can you please add this information to Section M or provide an identifier to where it can be located?

Correction:

“The proposal shall address all components listed in paragraphs B.2.1.6.1 thru B.2.1.6.3 in addition to any other components used to calculate the coefficients.”

“The estimated annual values for each CLIN, listed in paragraph M.3,4., (iii) REALISM shall be used to demonstrate the derivation of each coefficient cost,"

7.) In L.5.2.1 Subfactor A Trial Proposal - can you please provide some clarity regarding this portion of the submission? It appears that this volume is comprised of multiple pages and a cover letter created within the eGordianR software that are printed and submitted within the proposal binders at the same time as the rest of the volumes. There is no online submission for this factor.

In L.5.2.3 Subfactor C - Specialized Experience, it does not specify whether or not projects performed by Key Subcontractors will be accepted. Will the government consider adding the following statement as written under L.6.1.1 Past Performance Record? "If the Offeror submits experience or past performance examples performed by entities other than the Offeror (i.e., parent companies, subsidiaries, sister companies, or subcontractors), then the Offeror must clearly explain the relationship between the Offeror and the entity which performed the prior effort and the role that the affiliated entity or subcontractor will play in the performance of the JOC contract (i.e., the workforce, management, facilities, or other resources of the affiliated entity or subcontractor that will be provided by the affiliated entity or subcontractor and relied upon by the Offeror for contract performance)."

Correct. The trial proposal shall be printed and submitted within the Quality Proposal binder. The trial proposal is listed in the page count exclusions in RFP paragraph L.4.1.1. We will not revise RFP paragraph L.5.2.3. We are evaluating the prime contractor’s recent, specialized experience in construction projects of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity to the requirements of this solicitation.

8.) Would you please also confirm that the site visit is schedule for 19 September @13:00 local. May I ask the location we are to meet at for the site visit.

The site visit will be on 19 September 2016, 1PM Central Standard Time and the location to meet is on the east-side of building 5201 near the gated area with bollards.

9.) Section L.6.1.1 (Past Performance Record) states that "Offerors shall submit a Past Performance Record (PPR) for all contracts awarded within the past three years from the date of this solicitation which are of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity to this requirement. The Government will also consider any options or task or delivery orders awarded within the last three years, even if the base award occurred outside the three-year period." Because some projects can take years to complete, the RFP as written would exclude the eligibility of a contract completed as recently as last week if it was awarded prior to August 24, 2013. To allow an offeror to use such a recently-completed contract to demonstrate their past performance, these two sentences could be revised as follows: "Offerors shall submit a Past Performance Record (PPR) for all contracts AWARDED OR COMPLETED within the past three years from the date of this solicitation which are of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity to this requirement. The Government will also consider any options or task or delivery orders COMPLETED within the last three years, even if the base award occurred outside the three-year period." Would the Government consider revising these two sentences as suggested?

The PPR forms are exempt from the 10 page limit for the Past Performance section. Is there any limit on how long each PPR can be (e.g., 4 pages per contract)?

Yes. We will revise the PPR to say awarded or completed within the past three years. There is no page limit for PPRs.

10.) Section 8.3 of the above-referenced RFP lists several items to include with our proposal, such as Section A (SF 1442), Section G (Contract Administration Data), and Section K (Reps & Certs).

We see no specific information in the RFP about what is to be included for "Section G-Contract Administration Data." That section contains only information about the government's COR and invoicing information. Please clarify what we should provide for "Section G."

There are no submission requirements for section G.

11.) Will the government consider accepting CPARS in lieu of PPQs on this proposal? Several of our previous clients have told us that their command has instructed them not to fill out PPQs since they have formally rated in the CPARS system. Apparently in some agencies this has become standard, while many proposals request PPQs as the only way to conduct a past performance assessment. This makes it challenging for all firms to be rated fairly in this factor.

In accordance with L.6.1.2, Past Performance Survey, ‘The Offeror shall forward the Past Performance Survey shown at Attachment J20 to one of the points of contact listed on each Past Performance Record submitted.

Completed Past Performance Surveys will be emailed to the PCO at the address indicated on the survey. The Government must receive the completed Past Performance Surveys no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442 in this solicitation. ‘ If the POC, however, refuses to complete the questionnaire, then the Offeror should provide an explanation and evidence of this fact along with a copy of the formal evaluation from CPARS or other formal rating system. The Government may also use data obtained from other sources to evaluate Past Performance as described in RFP paragraph M.3.

12.) On page 8 (B.2), RFP states the Offeror must submit six coefficient factors. However, there is no explanation for sixth coefficient factor ‘Contract Manpower Reporting’. Please confirm if this Item No.

0006 & 1006 can be omitted. If not, provide an explanation of what needs to be filled in.

Correction: “The Offeror must submit five coefficient factors for each year of the contract.”

13.) In Section M under the Pricing Factor, RFP does not explain how the overall coefficient prices will be ranked. Provide how total 5 coefficients will be weighted and calculated for evaluation.

Pricing will not be rated but will be evaluated in terms of completeness, reasonableness, and realism. See RFP paragraph M.2.4.

14.) On page 9 (B.2.1.5), RFP states Appendix A contains credit card program for JOC. However, Appendix A is not shown on solicitation package. Please advise where Appendix A will be available.

Appendix A will be added in FedBizOpps.

15.) On page 12 (B4.1), there is a blank for Contractor’s Weight of UPB to be submitted. Please explain how this coefficient factor is different from coefficient factors in Section B (Page 3 thru 7).

The weight of the UPB is not a coefficient. It is the value for which the Offeror has determined that it can perform the tasks in the UPB excluding the items in the coefficient factors.

16.) On page 89 (L.7.1.1) RFP states that ‘The proposal shall address all components listed in paragraphs

B.2.1.7.1. thru B.2.1.7.4.).However, B.2.1.7.1. thru B.2.1.7.4. do not exist in this RFP. Please clarify.

Correction:

“The proposal shall address all components listed in paragraphs B.2.1.6.1 thru B.2.1.6.3 in addition to any other components used to calculate the coefficients.”

17.) On page 84 (L.5.2.2.1), there are total 22 sample projects listed. However, considering its Scope of

Work, some projects have unrealistically lower or higher project amount. Since project information (scope of work and its amount) is limited, please confirm which factor (scope or amount) needs to be based on in order to create the trial schedule.

Scope of work, project cost, and time required are all critical factors that must be considered when developing an adequate schedule. It cannot be one factor or the other.

18.) Can Contractor submit CCASS or CPARS in lieu of Past Performance Survey?

Please refer to answer to Question #11.

19.) On page 87 (L.5.2.3), RFP states Contractor must submit at least one new construction project of

5,000 square feet or more. Please clarify if Contractor can submit new horizontal construction work for this category .i.e. new parking lot, new road pavement, new playground, etc.

No. This will be a new construction project for a building or structure.

20.) In RFP package, L.7.2.3 Site Visit Memorandum states "The site visit for the seed project will be conducted at 1300 hours (1:00 p.m.) local time, seven (7) days prior to the closing date noted on SF 1442, at the project site.".

Would you please confirm if site visit is scheduled on Sept. 19, 2016 at 1PM local time?

Additionally, I do not see any due date & time for RFIs. Would you please advise when RFIs need to be submitted for this solicitation?

The site visit will be on 19 September 2016, 1PM Central Standard Time and the location to meet is on the east-side of building 5201 near the gated area with bollards.

This solicitation type is Request for Proposals, the proposals are due 26 September 2016.

21.) We were put on the approved bidders list as a SBA, not a 8(a) SBA. Can we bid this project? Item 10 on the SOA shows that it's has a requirement for a SBA 89(a), is this correct?

This is a competitive acquisition under the SBA’s 8(a) program. This requirement is limited to eligible 8(a) concerns..

22.) Are we only providing unit prices as listed in the RFP for future projects? What are the trial drawings used for?

Please provide a brief scope or description for this RFP.

The coefficient prices are for future task orders. The proposed coefficients for the winning bidder will also be used for the seed project described in paragraph L.7.2. The solicitation includes drawings for the trial proposal described in paragraph L.5.2.1 and for the seed project described in paragraph L.7.2.

23.) Is there a solicitation or pre-solicitation notice for this project that you could send us?

The solicitation number for this requirement is W9124P-16-R-0006 25.) Is there only one firm being selected for this JOC?

Yes. This will be a single award, FFP, IDIQ JOC.

26.) Can you please let us know if there is a sample Gordian task catalog you want us to use for the Seed

Project? We have a few of these contracts and can put the proposal together from another task catalog but I want not sure if the Army had a specific one they wanted used.

Use the same software that is used for the Trial Proposal described in paragraph L.5.2.1. The coefficient prices for the seed project will be corrected during negotiations for the first task order.

28.) The subject solicitation was cancelled and re-issued few times and would like to know if this project is active and the due date is current as shown September 26, 2016.

Yes, this is an active requirement and the due date for proposals is 26 September 2016.

29.) If there is a site visit for the seed project, the roof replacement of BLDG 5201. If so, what date will the site visit take place?

Yes, the site visit will be on 19 September 2016, 1PM Central Standard Time.

30.) We weren't able to find a due date on the solicitation, can you please verify this as well?

The due date for proposals is 26 September 2016.

31.) What percentage of the work can the JOC contractor "self-perform"??? Or is there a limit???

There is no limit. However, the prime contractor must be an eligible 8(a) concern, and the Offeror must comply with the subcontracting restrictions in FAR 52.219-14-Limitations on Subcontracting.

32.) Please clarify the evaluation of the Seed Project versus the Trial Proposal for technical capabilities. Is the evaluation of the Seed Project solely an element of the price proposal and therefore the technical inclusions are evaluated only to ensure that the basis for the price is adequate?

The trial proposal will be used to evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the JOC process. The seed project will not be evaluated. However, the price for the seed project will be negotiated with the winning Offeror, and the seed project will be awarded as Task Order# 0001 on the day of contract award.

33.) Please confirm that a site visit will be held for the Seed Project at 1:00 P M on Monday, September 19 at Building D001 or otherwise clarify the information provided in Section L.7.2.3. Will general contract information also be provided at this time?

The site visit will be on 19 September 2016, 1PM Central Standard Time and the location to meet is on the east-side of building 5201 near the gated area with bollards. Contract information is included on the drawings that were provided with the solicitation.

34.) Section L.4.3.3 addresses proposals shall be submitted in three separate envelopes or wrappers.

However, there are four volumes. Is it the Government’s intent that any of the volumes be packaged together?

Correction:

“Proposals shall be submitted in four separate envelopes or wrappers.”

35.) Are offerors to submit separate CD’s for each volume or is it acceptable for all volumes as separate files be submitted on the same CD?

All volumes except for the Pricing Volume can be submitted as separate files on the same CD. The Pricing Volume must be on a separate CD.

36.) Are USB drives acceptable in lieu of CDs for the electronic copies?

No.

37.) Please clarify if coefficients in Section B should be submitted in Microsoft Excel format. If so, is there an Excel form, or should contractors create their own forms?

Yes. All proposals that are not submitted on CD in Microsoft Office Excel format will be rejected by the

Contracting Officer and will not be considered for award. Offerors should create their own forms.

38.) Paragraph L.7.1 states, “Estimated phase-in costs shall be included separately in the Offeror's price proposal.” What are considered to be allowable phase-in costs? Are these costs for the contract or the seed project?

Phase-in costs are for the contract. Phase-in costs are costs that the Offeror anticipates to incur during the transition of responsibility from the incumbent Contractor.

39.) Please confirm that the Contractor’s Weight of the UPB Submittal will not be used to price individual task orders.

Correct 40.) Please confirm that subcontractor overhead is not be included in the Contractor’s Weight of the UPB

Submittal.

Subcontractor overhead and profit is one of the items included in the Offeror’s coefficient price. The weight of the

UPB is not a coefficient. It is the value for which the Offeror has determined that he can perform the tasks in the UPB excluding the items in the coefficient factors.

41.) What annual volume has been spent through the JOC in the last three fiscal years?

Approximate average of $90M/year.

42.) It appears that contractors are to provide 6 coefficients for each contract year. Will the coefficients be weighted to arrive at a single evaluated coefficient? If so, what weightings will be used? If not, please clarify how coefficients will be evaluated.

There will be five coefficient factors. Coefficient prices will not be rated but will be evaluated in terms of completeness, reasonableness, and realism. There is no weighting. See RFP paragraph M.2.4.

43.) Please confirm it is the Governments intent to utilize the Non-Prepriced Coefficient only for items not contained within the established pre-priced unit price book and NOT for pricing an entire Task Order?

Correct 44.) Are offerors required to submit the most recent audited financial statement including a balance sheet and income statement as discussed in Section L.8.2 on page 91 or for the two preceding fiscal years as addressed in DFARS 232.072-2 (b) (1) as indicated later in the same section?

Yes, submit the most recent financial statement.

45.) If the offeror is a joint venture formed through a relationship under the SBA’s 8(a) mentor-protégé program and a JV agreement is submitted, are both members of the JV still required to obtain letters of approval for participation from each Firm’s Board of Directors?

Yes 46.) If a partner in a JV does not have a corporate structure that includes a Board of Directors, please confirm that it will be acceptable to so indicate, and provide a letter from the Owner, President, or other officer of the firm with the authority to commit the firm to participation in a joint venture.

Yes. That is correct.

47.) What will be the process for submitting any RFI that result from the seed project site visit (if held?)

There will be limited time for the offerors to receive any responses from the Government.

There is no RFI for JOC task orders. Questions and clarifications are resolved at the site visit.

48.) Is the offeror to assume that all projects on the Trial Schedule Project List in Section L.5 are being provided to the contractor on the same day (e.g. September 1) and awarded on the same day (e.g.

September 30)? If not, please clarify how offerors are to develop an accurate schedule that reflects the projects listed. Whether or not the projects are staggered in distribution and award may affect the timelines, staffing, and subcontractor requirements

Any assumptions by the Offeror should be documented in the Trial Schedule proposal.

49.) Please confirm that the Schedule to be developed for with Trial Schedule List of Projects in Section

L.5 reflects only start and completion dates (i.e. a bar chart), and is not a full CPM schedule for each project.

This is incorrect. The trial schedule will be a detailed schedule for each requirement.

50.) Please confirm that all 8(a) firms nationwide (as long as otherwise qualified) are eligible to participate in this contract and that it is not subject to any geographic restriction.

Correct 51.) Regarding the Redstone Arsenal JOC (W9124P-16-R-0006) would the Government consider extending the due date by approximately 3-4 weeks?

Proposals will be due 26 September 2016, and will not be extended.

52.) From previous fiscal year, how many task orders were issued under this program? and what is its average task order value?

The contractor should be able to manage and control 100 or more active projects.

53.) For this fiscal year, does Government have any projection how many task orders will be expected and what will be typical task order size? It will help Contractors preparing staffing plan properly.

No, tasks for this requirement varies depending on budgets. However, the contractor should be able to manage and control 100 or more active projects.