Amend_1-_Attach_1_-_Answers_to_questions_140F0322R0004_(002)_4.pdf
PDF 94 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 140F0322R0004
About this file
This document contains a federal contract opportunity notice and related questions and answers file. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is seeking qualification statements from architect-engineering firms to provide 35% conceptual design drawings, specifications, and cost estimates for a new Fish Technology Center in Rio Vista, California. The unrestricted opportunity has a response deadline of April 6, 2022. Firms will be evaluated on past experience with water systems and governmental projects, as well as technical experience with hatcheries, aquaculture facilities, and projects over $10 million. The selected firm will receive a one-year, firm-fixed price contract for design services. Up to five of the most qualified respondents will be interviewed, with the highest-ranked firm invited to submit a fee proposal for negotiations and potential award.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Amend_1-_Attach_1_-_Answers_to_questions_140F0322R0004_(002)_4_1.pdf |
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
Amendment 0001
Solicitation No. 140F0322R0004
Title: A/E Design Services to provide 35% Conceptual design construction drawings for the Rio Vista Technology Center (RVFTC) in the City of Rio Vista, CA
Answers to questions received:
Question 1: Is it permissible to show our Section D – Org Chart and G-Matrix on an 11x17 page? If so, please clarify if this would count as one or two pages.
Answer: Yes and that would count as only one page.
Question 2: Is it permissible to use size 9-font in charts, graphs, and images?
Answer: Yes
Question 3: Would the USFWS please consider excluding SF330 Part II from the page count?
Answer: Yes
Question 4: To confirm, the only grading criteria to be used in evaluating SF330 response are:
o Factor 1: Past Experience Sections E, F, and H to be scored o Factor 2: Technical Experience Sections E and F to be scored
Answer: Correct
Question 5: In an effort to be considerate of our clients’ time and limited resources, would the USFWS please consider accepting PPQs which our clients have already completed for the Section F projects rather than requiring completely new PPQs?
Answer: Yes
Question 6: If we choose to show more than 5 projects, can you please clarify how the number of projects provided will impact our score?
Answer: The submission of more than five project will not negatively affect your score.
Question 7:Is it permissible to show more than 5 projects but only provide PPQs for the first 5? Would this have any negative impact on our score?
Answer: Yes and this would not negatively affect your score.
Question 8: Are we required to show a PPQ for every project presented in Section F?
Answer: No
Question 9: Is there a minimum number of PPQs we can provide?
Answer: No minimum on the number of PPQs to be provided.
Question 10: Are CPARS an acceptable replacement for PPQs?
Answer: Yes
Question 11: The solicitation name and use of the term bridging documents for the 35% drawings, specifications and cost opinion implies that the Service intends to use the work products from this project to help with procurement of a design-build contract for completion of the design and construction of the facility.
Is this correct, and if so, will the consultant selected for this project be precluded from being part of a team for the design-build project? Would this preclusion also apply to subcontractors on the selected consultant’s team?
Answer: We have no objections to the same team working with a DB contractor.
1. Question 12: Which option from the master plan is to be implemented?
Answer: None, the options are shown for reference. It is expected that options will be developed after the team has been selected.
Question 13: The Factor 2 submission requirements reference similar projects in the Pacific Northwest. Is this the desired technical experience for the FTC project which is located in the Sacramento Delta of California.
Answer: We do consider Sacramento to be geographically in the NW of the US.
Question 14: Are Past Experience and Technical Experience the only factors that will be evaluated in selecting the most highly qualified firms? What is the relative weight of the two factors?
Answer: Past Experience and Technical Experience are the only factors used to evaluate and select up to five
(5) of the most highly qualified firms on phase I of the selection process with past experience having a higher weighted value than technical experience.
Question 15: We are very interested in submitting our qualifications for this project, and are in the process of assembling a highly qualified team. However, because this is a very complex project, with many varied disciplines and expertise required, we believe it would be prudent for FWS to allow more time for qualified firms to assemble their teams and prepare competitive proposals. Therefore, we respectfully request a two week extension of the due date for submission of SF330s if that is possible.
Answer: Our agreement to the BOR does not permit us to extend the time frame for bidding.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .