140PS126R0001_Design_Q_A_0004.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 22 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Multiple Award IDIQ Professional Fire Protection Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 140PS126R0001
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers document from the National Park Service (NPS) addressing clarifications on the solicitation for Multiple Award IDIQ Professional Fire Protection Engineering and Fire Protection Related Facility Management Services (Solicitation Number 140PS126R0001). The Q&A provides critical guidance on proposal submission requirements, staffing, and evaluation criteria but does not specify products or services, response dates, or pricing terms.
Key clarifications include: Section H submissions are limited to 20 double-sided pages for past performance; up to five project examples may be submitted in SF-330 Section I, Part F with no minimum or maximum requirement; resumes are required for all 16 required engineering disciplines, including the Computer Network Administrator position; a resume must be provided for a mid-level Fire Protection Engineer (5-10 years experience) to fill the gap between Principal and junior-level FPEs; the Electrical and Mechanical Engineers must demonstrate knowledge of fire protection and life safety systems design; subconsultants may be used within subcontracting limitations; dual-hatting (one person performing multiple roles) will be evaluated based on capability to perform in a timely manner; federal and private sector past performance are weighted equally and evaluated through CPARS, USACE/NAVFAC PPQ forms, and PPIRS; the demonstrative projects on pages 8-9 are fictional examples only and not part of evaluation; and short notice task orders may range from 30 to 180+ days with corresponding increased compensation. The document also addresses evaluation methodology, confirming that the government will rate individuals according to the position criteria they occupy regardless of submitted experience level, and that the Technical Evaluation Panel will evaluate each offeror's total team collectively rather than rating individual team members.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 23
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Questions | Answers |
| 1. Section L does not appear to provide a page limitation other than Section H. Please confirm there are no page limitations other than Section H. | Phase I, Page 54 of the RFP, Item Submission of any additional supporting material is permitted in Section H, per the instructions of the Standard Form 330, but only to the extent that it substantiates the relevant project work specifically described on the Standard Form330.Offerors are encouraged to submit Past Performance information in Section H and shall note that the government may utilize data obtained from other sources, to include additional references and the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), in the development of past performance ratings. Additional information submitted in Section H should not exceed 20 double-sided pages. |
| 2. Section L does not indicate how many project examples (SF-330 Section I, Part F) are to be included. Please confirm if there is a minimum and maximum number of project examples. | While there is not a minimum number or Maximum number of Projects, as stated in Section F: Example Projects Which Best Illustrate Proposed Team's Qualifications for this Contract. Item 19. Relevant Projects. Provide information on up to five projects in which the person had a significant role that demonstrates the person's capability relevant to her/his proposed role in this contract. |
| 3. Please confirm if the SF 1449 is to be completed and returned (along with Section H, Special Clause H3) | Please follow the instructions contained in PHASE I, on Page 54 of the RFP: These are the minimum requirements: there is no prohibition on submitting the SF 1449 if a contractor choses to do so. |
| 4. Please confirm that resumes are required for all 16 “Required Engineering Disciplines” included in Part B, Section II. | Yes, the NPS requires the resumes to properly evaluate the individuals a prospective offeror intends to use for the work |
| 5. Please confirm that a resume is required for the “Computer Network Administrator”. No special certifications or credentials are noted in Appendix A for this position, is that correct? | A Computer Network Administrator must have some form of credentialling to be a Computer Network Administrator |
| 6. Please confirm that there are only five fire protection engineer positions: Principal Engineer, FPE 1, FPE 2, FPE 3 and FP designer. Based on the information in Appendix A, there does not appear to be any requirement for submitting a resume for an engineer between 5 and 10 years of experience (typically mid level). | Since we were expecting the Principal Engineer to evaluate the work of the junior engineers, and we wanted that individual to have at least 10 years of experience, we didn't include the full range of fire protection engineering experience that may be available at a firm. We realize there is a gap in the 5 - 10 year experience level. Please explain why this fire protection engineer level is needed, let us know who you have to cover this level of experience, and include the resume with your submission. |
| 7. Appendix A lists the qualifications for the Electrical Engineer and Mechanical Engineer as having design experience with fire alarm and fire sprinkler systems, respectively. If those services will be performed by the Fire Protection Engineer, is it a requirement that the EE and ME have fire protection design experience? | The government expects that any firm offering Electrical and Mechanical Engineers would have people in those position who are knowledgeable of fire protection and life safety systems, how they work, and how they're designed. |
| Concerning required disciplines, will NPS view Prime Firm’s use of subconsultants to fill additional disciplines less favorably than if all were in-house? | The government understands that a vendor may require some measure of sub-consultants Please see the limitations on subcontracting section on Page 38 of the RFP Clause 52.219-14 |
| Will NPS allow dual hatting? | The government will evaluate each individual based upon their qualifications: It also understands that a smaller company may have people who perform more that one task. We will base the evaluation on ability to perform in a timely manner |
| Concerning Specialized Experience/project examples, will NPS view Fire Protection projects for different federal and municipal agencies as favorable/compliant? | NPS A&E services are a the same for the federal government as they are for the Private Sector and across all manner of disciplines: The Government receives the same sheets for its projects as any other company |
| How many contract awards does NPS plan to make? | Page 7, Paragraph 5 of the RFP_ The Government may elect to award a single IDIQ contract or to award multiple IDIQ contracts to one or more sources under this solicitation. |
| Section M, Step I, #3, states “Capacity to respond to expanded or multiple task orders on short notice and within established schedules…” Will the government please define what “short notice” means? | Short notice depends upon the task being performed: Standard contracting timeframes can be as little as 30-days and as long as 180 days or more…If the government expects a contractor to conduct a short notice procurement, it does so with the expectation that it will pay more than a standard contract: it will be on a case-by-case basis |
| Section M, Step 1, #4- Past Performance- Will the government please confirm that federal and private industry past performance are weighted the same, and that one is not evaluated more favorably than the other? | NPS A&E services are a the same for the federal government as they are for the Private Sector and across all manner of disciplines: The Government receives the same sheets for its projects as any other company |
| Section M, Step 1, #4- Past Performance- Will the government please confirm that CPARS and the standard USACE/NAVFAC PPQ form is acceptable for providing past performance evaluations? | Yes: At no point did the RFP state that only CPARS would be accepted for Past performance: In fact it clearly states: Past Performance on contracts with government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules. Offerors are encouraged to submit Past Performance information in Section H and shall note that the government may utilize data obtained from other sources, to include additional references and the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), in the development of past performance ratings. |
| Beginning on Page 20, the government lists the required disciplines and its definition of each. Would the government consider removing the junior positions (minimum 2 years of experience) from the required discipline? If these positions are evaluated, firms may not want to insert junior engineers here in order to be competitive. | The governments initial evaluation is qualifications based, not on price: furthermore, the government is interested in learning about the full range of experience any offeror brings to the table to perform the projects outlined in this contract, including those of junior positions. |
| If the government prefers to keep the requirement for the junior engineers, would the government be willing to evaluate them as ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE only? | On page 58 of the RFP, the government the government posted the following: Step 1 – Individual Evaluations: TEP members will individually evaluate offeror submittals and will assign each offeror an individual rating for each evaluation factor listed in this Solicitation. Each panel member shall evaluate each offeror’s total team, regardless of that panel member's professional discipline. The government will not rate each team member... |
| For the different disciplines required, the general experience required for some of them is a range (3-5 years). Will the government please allow firms to submit disciplines that exceed the years needs? | You may submit an individual with a higher level of experience, however, the government will rate the individual IAW the criteria of the position under which that person occupies… |
| Section L, page 54 states that questions are due April 16th, with proposals due April 23rd. With April 16th being a Thursday, and granting the government a couple of days to answer all questions and publish an amendment, that only leaves a couple of days for industry to respond to the amendment and adjust proposals. Will the government please extend the due date to May 1st to allow firms time to make adjustments based on that amendment? | The government answers questions on a weekly basis and if there is a request from multiple offerors neared the closing date, the CO will entertain extending the RFP |
| For section M, #2, specialized experience- there are three areas of competence to be demonstrated. But on Pages 8 and 9, there are 5 demonstrative projects. Do the projects submitted in section F need to be aligned with the evaluation criteria in section M AND the demonstrative projects on pages 8 and 9 or are the demonstrative projects merely examples of the type of work that can be expected through task orders on this IDIQ? | The examples on pages 8 &9 are termed Demonstrative Example 1 (Fictitious): This means they are EXAMPLEs of possible projects and are not part of the evaluation process… |
| Will the government please annotate how many projects it expects in section F of the SF330? (5 is standard but would like to confirm). | See Question #1 |
| Will the government list an “order of importance” factors in sections E and F (and possible H) that will be evaluated more favorably? | The RFP clearly states what is important: it is up to each individual offeror to submit projects that meet the terms and conditions of the RFP |
| Regarding the requirement for the Computer Network Admin- based on the general experience of the role defined on page 22, this reads like IT support. Can the government confirm they are looking for IT support and not a standard role such as Cyber security or communications/RCDD? | Historically this position has been for Data entry into a government database |
| Are the historic structures anticipated to be mostly WPA structures? If not, can the government provide examples of types and age of the structures? | The National Park Service (NPS) protects the full range of buildings from all time frames in our Nation's history, not only Works Progress Administration (WPA) buildings. The NPS even protects buildings built before our Nation's founding. A historical architect will be expected to know how to assess and protect all of these buildings from structure fires. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .