12445122R0041 Questions Asked As Of 08122022.doc
DOC document 98 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 12445122R0041
- Issued by
-
Department of Agriculture Forest Service
About this file
This document contains a Sources Sought notice and description for a Design-Build construction project. The U.S. Forest Service is seeking capabilities statements for replacing buildings and site work at the London Ranger District Office Compound in London, Kentucky. The project includes demolishing existing structures and constructing a new 7,500 square foot office, 4,000 square foot warehouse, 3,200 square foot covered storage building, and additional prefabricated storage units. The selected contractor must achieve at least LEED Silver or two Green Globes certification and comply with solar ready standards. The new office and warehouse must incorporate mass timber designs. Interested parties must register to attend the pre-proposal conference on August 12th. Phase I responses are due by September 15th and the agency expects to award the contract in fall 2022. The project ceiling is $5.4 million. The solicitation will target small businesses under NAICS 236220 with a $39.5 million size standard.
View the file
Other files
Show all 37
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
COMMENTS MATRIX FOR USDA-FS ISSUANCES: 12445122R0041 London DBC DBNF KY (Please read instructions on back before completing form.)
| # |
| Class |
| Component and POC Name, Phone, and E-mail |
| Page |
| Para |
| Comment Type (C/S) |
| Comments, Justification, and Originator Justification for Resolution |
| A/R/P |
| 1 |
| 8/12/22 |
| Design-Build Phase I preproposal conference |
| No Govt action required |
| Bidder Comment: what were the standards for relevant experience for your past performance as far as magnitude of project? |
Resolution: Section L provides that guidance (transcript time 043:26 – 44:59) Projects in last seven years, emphasis on last 3
| 2 |
| 8/12/22 |
| Design-Build Phase I preproposal conference |
| No Govt action required |
| Bidder Comment: I think magnitude would be important to include since you know you don't want people probably presenting. |
Resolution: Not on transcript. The SF-330 provides section that provide magnitude information from the contractor. In particular, section F and H. This DBC project has a price ceiling of $5.4M for the compound.
| 8/12/22 |
| Design-Build Phase I preproposal conference |
| No Govt action required |
| Bidder Comment: -different perspective on the order of magnitude, I do see the value, but I also think there's a possibility for offers to put together an overall package of experience which may indicate you know a particular warehouse is one of their projects in that project is a lower order of magnitude, just to demonstrate that they can do all of the building types. |
-Individual buildings order magnitude may be just as valuable as the overall project magnitude.
Resolution: Not on Transcript. The evaluation board will look at “all relevant” experience and projects offered up as examples. Again, the London DBC project is for a “office/work compound” who’s facilities are different based upon their unique use. Design reference documents have been provided to increase the contractor’s knowledge of their use and requirements. There is nothing to say a contractor’s “single” facility” may/may not encompass the same essential functions as a multi-facility campus. It is the contractor’s duty to show its relevance and their abilities to execute their plan for the USDA-FS campus.
| 4 |
| 8/12/22 |
| Design-Build Phase I preproposal conference |
| No Govt action required |
| Bidder Comment: you're using a particular version of the PPQ's and that we should not incorporate for by reference any previously obtained PPQ. But if we are able to include a hard copy PPQ that may be on a different form than your PPQ. |
Time 49:1.3 Resolution: The government will accept a variation of the PPQ form if it conveys the same essential information.
| 5 |
| 8/12/22 |
| Design-Build Phase I preproposal conference |
| No Govt action required |
| Bidder Comment: -General notation. Concern over the lack of CPARs for engineering firms since they generally act as subcontractors on DBC projects. |
Resolution: This is a recognized situation for Engineering firms. The London DBC Phase I uses two methods to evaluate this issue.
Section M, Page 9 of 14 For DB projects where the offeror did not receive a past performance evaluation report that did not specifically address design performance, the offeror shall submit a PPQ specifically for the design work associated with the DB project. (See Question 4)
SF-330 Sections H and F allows for a DB engineering firm to outline their relevant projects AND the construction results.
| 6 |
| 8/12/22 |
| Design-Build Phase I preproposal conference |
| Amendment Required |
| Bidder Comment: - it appears the two forms are almost identical, and sometimes it is difficult to get clients to fill out these forms on a repeated basis, so it is very helpful if we can utilize forms we already have on file. |
- with it being fourth quarter spend down with people moving from agency to agency, it's very, very difficult to get these PPQ forms refilled out time after time.
Resolution: The USDA-FS understands the time and expense of obtaining “new” PPQ from previous clients. The USDA-FS will accept previously completed PPQ/Variation Forms under the terms/conditions of 12445122R0041.
Page 8, Section E, Criterion 3: Past Performance
A. Add after the last sentence. ”The contractor may submit an alternate form of PPQ that reflects “largely” the same information as the RFP Attachment B”.
B. Line 1, change the word “shall” to “may”. Add after the last sentence: “The contractor may submit an alternate form of PPQ that reflects “largely” the same information as the RFP Attachment B”.
| 7 |
| 8/12/22 |
| Design-Build Phase I preproposal conference |
| Amendment Required |
| Bidder Comment: page count limitation reference in Section M incorrect |
Resolution: Section M incorrectly references itself for page count limits on submittal. Change to reflect Section L
| 8 |
| 8/12/22 |
| Design-Build Phase I preproposal conference |
| Amendment Required |
| Bidder Comment: Reference to Grove Center Building |
Resolution: Delete reference in its entirety
| 9 |
| 8/12/22 |
| Design-Build Phase I preproposal conference |
| No Govt action required |
| Bidder Comment: Recording and Transcript of the Phase I Pre-Proposal Conference |
Resolution: The meeting slide deck, meeting transcript, Questions Asked, and amendment are posted to Sam.Gov. The MP4 video size is currently too large for distribution.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING SD FORM 818
Coordinating OSD Component: Use this form to provide consolidated critical and substantive comments to the OSD Component that originated the issuance. Complete the classification header and footer, columns 1 through 5, and the first two entries in column 6. REVIEW THE COMMENTS, resolve any conflicting views, AND CONFIRM THAT THE COMPLETED MATRIX ACCURATELY REPRESENTS YOUR COMPONENT’S POSITIOn. Upload the form to the DoD Directives Program Portal in microsoft word format, with a scanned copy of the sign SD Form 106, “DoD Directives Program Coordination Record,” or coordination memorandum.
Originating OSD Component: Use this form to consolidate comments from all coordinators and to record adjudication of the comments. (To add comments from an SD 818 submitted by a coordinator, use the “Copy” and “Paste” tools on the Microsoft Word Standard Toolbar.) When consolidating comments, place them in the order of the pages/paragraphs they apply to (e.g., all comments from all coordinators that apply to page 1, paragraph 1.a., should be grouped together as the initial entries; all comments that apply to page 1, paragraph 1.b., should be grouped together next, and so on). Complete column 7 and the third entry in column 6. Adjust the classification header and footer and columns 1 and 2 as appropriate.
Classification – Enter the highest classification of the comments. If all are unclassified, mark the header and footer accordingly and ignore the column.
Column 1 – Enter the number of the comment. Enter comments in the order of the pages/paragraphs they apply to.
Column 2 – Enter the classification of the comment. If all comments are unclassified, mark the header and footer accordingly and ignore the column.
Column 3 – Enter the appropriate information.
Column 4 – Enter the appropriate information.
Column 5 – Enter the appropriate information.
Column 6 – Enter the comment type. Place only one comment per row. Do not include administrative comments concerning non-substantive aspects of an issuance, such as dates of references, organizational symbols, and/or grammatical errors.
(C) Critical: When a Component has one or more critical comments, that Component’s coordination shall reflect a nonconcur. THE JUSTIFICATION FOR CRITICAL COMMENTS MUST IDENTIFY:
– Violations of the law or contradictions of Executive Branch policy or of policy established in DoD issuances. The GC, DoD, or his or her representative shall identify legal objections as critical comments.
– Unnecessary risks to safety, life, limb, or DoD materiel; waste or abuse of DoD appropriations; or imposition of an unreasonable burden on a Component’s resources.
(S) Substantive: Substantive comments are made when a section in the issuance appears to be or is potentially unnecessary, incorrect, misleading, confusing, or inconsistent with other sections, or when a Component disagrees with the proposed responsibilities, requirements, and/or procedures. A substantive comment is usually not sufficient justification for a Component to nonconcur on an issuance. Several substantive comments when taken together may be grounds for a nonconcurrence.
Column 7 – Coordinating Component: Enter the comment in the area provided. Enter your justification for the comment and your requested or recommended changes in the area provided. YOU MUST PROVIDE CONVINCING SUPPORT FOR CRITICAL COMMENTS IN THE JUSTIFICATION.
– Originating Component: Enter your justification for disposition of the comment in the area provided. Include any related communications with the coordinating Component. You must provide convincing support for rejecting critical comments.
Column 8 – Enter whether you accepted (A), rejected (R), or partially accepted (P) the comment. Your justification for disposition of the comment in column 6 must be consistent with this entry.
PAGE
SD FORM 818, JAN 09
PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .