Attachment 13 Questions and Answers Amendment 0003.pdf

Attachment 13 – Questions and Answers, Amendment 0003

Q1: Section C.2.7 of the solicitation “The maximum order the contractor is obligated to honor is

(1) Any single Task Order in excess of $3,000,000; (2) Any Task Order for combination of items in excess of $8,000,000; or (3) A series of Task Orders issued within 30 days that together call for the quantities exceeding the limitation in (1) or (2). Could you please clarify the intend of this section? Is the maximum task order value $3,000,000 with a combination value of $8,000,000?

Or will all task order be in excess of $3,000,000?

A1: The maximum single task order amount is $3M with a single minimum task order amount of $2k, and a combination limit of task orders of $8M. Anything over those amounts the contractors are not obligated to honor, but can at their own choosing. Reference FAR 216-19(d).

Q2: Is there a ceiling value of this MATOC?

A2: $45M

Q3: Section C.2.8 of the solicitation – Is the contractor required to provide design services for any task orders?

A3: No specific formal Architect and Engineering (A&E ) design services are required outside of the normal MEP process for a project. Offerors may need specific internal means and methods, calculations, proposed solutions, etc in which an offeror may utilize engineering or design support on their own desire to execute the project if they are not versed enough to handle the proposal and execution internally.

Q4: Can the government please verify that the NAICS code for this MATOC and all task orders is 238220?

A4: The primary NAICS code for this IDIQ is 238220 Plumbing, Heating, and Air-Conditioning Contractors. The system only allows for one single primary NAICS to be utilized, and that will be the NAICS code that is associated by default for every issued task order, with no ability to modify or edit.

Q5: For the Technical Evaluation Volume 3 Factor 2, Subfactor A, B, and C, are each of the requested prior experience projects required to be different, or is it acceptable if the projects overlap and one project may be rated for multiple Subfactors?

A5: This factor does not require the projects for each subfactor to be different. However, there is no limitation on them being different if a contractor so chooses. Just ensure that each document is submitted in each submission section and not just submitted once and then assume the Government will know it is for each factor. Present each document for each factor regardless if it is a duplicate project from another factor.

Q6: The government’s response to Q5 (Amendment 2) was a little difficult to follow. According to the response, we understand USDA requires a Superintendent, an employee of the prime contractor, to be onsite at all times when work is occurring. Additionally, the prime contractor’s Superintendent may “dual hat.” Per the response to Q5, “a Site Superintendent cannot execute the duties of a SSHO, they need to be independent to avoid any conflicts of interest.” Thus, in instances when the Superintendent is serving in a dual hat capacity, he/she can serve a secondary role (such as QC Manager), just as long as the secondary role not the SSHO. Based on the preceding statements, are we interpreting the contract requirements correctly?

A6: Correct, at no time shall the Site Superintendent “dual hat” roles of the SSHO, this needs to be a different person entirely to avoid any conflicts of interest. The requirement doesn’t not limit the “dual hat” of the Quality Control and the Superintendent, other than those limitations expressly identified in C.11.

Q7: In Section C.11, it states: “On-site representation from the prime contractor during construction activities is mandatory.” In addition to the Superintendent, does the prime contractor’s Site Safety & Health Officer (SSHO) need to be onsite at all times when work is occurring?

A7: The Site Superintendent shall be on-site as defined in C.11. The SSHO shall be onsite when/if the construction activity requires, in accordance with the submitted Site Specific Safety plan per task order.

Q8: Under Volume 3, Factor 2 Prior Experience, Subfactor A, Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Prior Experience, it states: “Recent is defined as projects performed within at least four (4) years from issuance of the solicitation.” By “performed,” we assume USDA is requiring projects which are completed or substantially complete within 4 years of the solicitation issuance date. In other words, new or partially completed projects are not allowed. Is this the correct interpretation of the project recency requirements?

A8: New or partially completed projects do not meet the past tense definition of “performed”. Projects must be completed or substantially completed.