140F0821R0011_Q_and_A_-_Responses_0001.pdf

Crab Orchard NWR Visitor Center Addition Solicitation # 140F0821R0011

Questions and Answers

1. Within the solicitation, we did not see any sections discussing a pre-proposal conference (FAR 52.236-26) or a site visit for this project. Will there be a site visit or preproposal conference for this project?

Response: No site visit or preproposal conference for this project. The Refuge is open to the public for set hours during the day. You can go to look where the building will be constructed and get a lay of the land. For the Refuge access hours, contact the Refuge Staff. If available, the Refuge staff will only answer questions regarding location of proposed building and lay of the land. If you have any technical or proposal questions, direct those to mark_tapp@fws.gov in an email 7 calendar days prior to the proposal response due date. Questions will be replied to by amendments to the solicitation.

Regarding the submission requirements, offerors are expected to submit the following:

Technical Ability to Deliver, Past Performance, and Offerors Capability. However in the evaluation criteria stipulate the following: “Evaluation Factor #1: Experience as a General Construction Contractor (GC) for general construction on Buildings,” “Evaluation Factor #2: Past Performance as a General Contractor on Building Projects for the last 5 years, “ and “Evaluation Factor 3: Price.” Please clarify the following:

2. Do these factors align with the submission requirements in section L.3.1.10, i.e.

Technical Ability to Deliver = Evaluation Factor 1, Past Performance = Evaluation Factor 2, Offerors Capability = Price?

Response:

L.3.1.10 submission requirement changed to below to match section "M"

Submission:

• Identifying cover page (limited to 1 page)

• Table of Contents

• SF 1442 signed

• Acknowledgment of Amendments if applicable (signed copies of the SF 30)

• Experience/Technical Capability (Maximum 5 pages each project)

• Past Performance (Maximum 5 pages each project)

• Price (Maximum 2 pages)

3. Which headings would the Fish & Wildlife Service prefer for the submission?

Response: Ensure the solicitation number 140F0821R0011 is submitted in your heading (s).

4. The section “Past Performance” is not to exceed 5 pages according to section L.3.1.10 however Evaluation Factor #2 stipulates that offerors should submit 5 projects. The PPQ is to be obtained and submitted by the offeror. This would mean the section would need to be a minimum of 20 pages (PPQ is 4 pages x 5 projects = 20 page) or max 40 pages for 10 projects. Please clarify.

Response: See response to #2 - revised submission requirements in section L.3.1.10 which match section "M" factors. Maximum pages are stated.

5. Are offerors allowed to submit previously obtained PPQs or CPARs for this project?

Response: Yes

6. Are any of these sections general narratives, or only previous project experience focused?

It appears from the Solicitation, there is nowhere for the offeror to discuss management approaches toward the proposed project, instead the offeror is only supposed to discuss past performance in the sections “Technical Ability to Deliver” and “Past Performance.” Are any of the sections, “Technical Ability to Deliver, Past Performance, and Offerors Capability,” allocated for the offeror to discuss implementation and management of this project or are these sections intended only for the discussion of past performance or previous projects? In other words, does the “Technical Ability to Deliver” need to include a discussion of how the offeror plans to specifically approach and carry out this project? Could the Fish & Wildlife Service clarify what they expect in these sections?

Response: The Government is not looking for a technical approach/implementation/management plan from offerors to carry out this project. Evaluation Factor 1 is evaluating past experience and offerors shall submit the information requested in Section M. Evaluation Factor 2 is evaluating past performance and offerors shall submit the documentation requested in Section M. The difference between past experience and past performance is past experience shows the offerors technical capability/experience constructing similar projects while past performance evaluates how well the offeror performed.