242212_RFQ RFIs.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

UNITED STATES SPACE FORCE

SPACE LAUNCH DELTA 30

10 September 2024

FROM: 30 CONS/PKA

1515 Iceland Ave Bldg. 8500, Rm 150 Vandenberg SFB, CA 93437-5212

SUBJECT: Request for Qualification (RFQ) Request for Information (RFI), Project Number

XUMU 24-2212, Delta 8 Secure Renovation, B12006 at Vandenberg Space Force Base, CA 93437-5212

Government responses to RFI questions received in response to Request for Qualification (RFQ):

242212, A&E Concept Design Delta 8 Secure Renovation in Bldg. 12006 at Vandenberg Space Force Base, CA 93437-5212 are shown in RED below.

1. Can you please clarify how past performance is going to be evaluated for this proposal? It is our understanding that Section F will be inclusive of 5 projects with a limit of 2-pages each. However, in the scoring table on Page 5, its noted that Past Performance will be evaluated in Section H and the limit is 2 pages per project. Are you wanting us to show 5 projects in Section F and additional project pages in Section H?

Past performance will be evaluated in accordance with evaluation factor 4 as detailed on the 242212 Delta 8 Secure Renovation, B12006 (Design) Request for Qualification (RFQ). The projects submitted in Section F, 5 projects with a limit of two (2) pages each, shall be the same projects utilized to complete Section H for evaluation factor 4.

2. Section H Page Limit: On RFQ Page 2, it mentions that "Section H, Additional Information, shall be limited to five (5) pages." However, on RFQ Page 3 under 4. Past Performance and again on RFQ Page 5 in the Page Limitations Table, it references the inclusion of two (2) pages of past performance narrative statements per project. With five

(5) Section F projects allowed, this would result in a total of 10 pages of Past Performance narrative in Section H, which exceeds the stated 5-page limit. Could you please clarify this? We suspect that you are only requesting two (2) pages total for a Past Performance summary statement in Section H, rather than two (2) page Past Performance statements per project.

Correct – the Government is requesting two (2) pages per project for a Past Performance Summary for evaluation factor 4. For evaluation factor 4, Section H shall be limited to ten (10) pages total, excluding CPARS or PPQs which have no page limit. The text in the RFQ has been updated to reflect this.

3. At the top of page two, the RFQ notes that “Section H, Additional Information, shall be limited to five (5) pages.” However, the instructions on Page 3 for Evaluation Factor 4 “Past Performance” notes that “Each design project example narrative shall not exceed two pages, with no more than three additional pages of supporting illustrations or photographs. Since there are up to five projects, this could result in up to 25 pages for Section H. We don’t anticipate needing this many pages, as due to the secure nature of our projects included in Section F, we are unable to include photos, other than in some cases and exterior shot of the building. Nonetheless, can you please clarify the page limits for Section H for Past Performance?

The Government is requesting two (2) pages per project for a Past Performance Summary for evaluation factor 4 excluding CPARS or PPQs which have no page limit. The three

(3) pages of supplementary illustrations and photographs per project has been moved to evaluation factor 2 specialized experience and technical competence. The text in the RFQ has been updated to reflect this.

4. Is there a total page limitation for the response?

No, there is not a cumulative total page limit for the response to the RFQ.

5. Will a site visit be available?

A site visit will be available for the most highly qualified firm during the Request for Proposal period. A site visit will not be held for the RFQ.

6. Program Manager Resume Requirement: Given that this RFQ is for a specific projectrc rather than an IDIQ contract, do we need to include a resume for a Program Manager? Typically, a Program Manager oversees the delivery of multiple task orders or projects with a team of Project Managers and support personnel. Since this RFQ is for a single project, could you consider removing the Program Manager position from the list of recommended professionals?

The professional qualifications recommended in the RFQ are not the required team composition, it is a team composition that the Government considers an adequate composition for the subject requirement. Equivalent positions will be considered equally.

7. Clarification on Roles - Engineering Technician vs. Draftsman: Could you please clarify the difference between an Engineering Technician and a Draftsman? E.g., is this just a CADD Designer. Additionally, would it be acceptable to submit one resume to cover both positions?

A Draftsman is considered a CADD/Drawing discipline, whereas an Engineering Technician is for things like a NICET or other.

8. SF 330 Resumes for Specific Positions: Do you require SF 330 Part I, Section E resumes for the following positions: Technical/Specifications Writer, Contract

Administrator, and Clerical? Or, can we demonstrate staff coverage for these roles within the Section D - Organizational Chart only, thereby eliminating the need for Section E resumes?

We do not need resumes.

9. Qualifications Due Date: If responses to these or other questions are responded to near, e.g., within the week leading up to the 9/16 response due date, can you consider extending the due date to allow responding firms time to review question responses and adjust accordingly.

The RFQ due date is being extended to 17 September 2024 by 3:00 PM PDT.

10. For Key Personnel in Evaluation Factor 1, would the Government prefer to see images of professional licensure (or webpage screenshots of individual license from the state Licensing search directory tool), or will state license numbers listed on SF330 Section E Resume suffice?

License numbers are adequate.

11. For projects in Section F – would construction administration/PCAS services (within the last 5 years) be counted as Professional services Completion Date field?

No, construction administration/PCAS services are not considered to be Professional Services for this requirement.

12. For projects in Section F – is the Government looking for Professional Services completion date within the last 5 years or Construction completion date within the last 5 years?

Specialized experience and technical competence within the past five (5) years pertains to the Professional Services completion date, not the construction completion date.

13. For Key Personnel in Evaluation Factor 1, would the Government consider removing the

Program Manager role/resume requirement? Since this is a singular project, it seems that a Program Manager isn’t required, as much as a Project Manager for the project. Or, perhaps the Government can elaborate on the requirements of the Program Manager role so we can prepare an appropriate resume?

The professional qualifications recommended in the RFQ are not the required team composition, it is a team composition that the Government considers an adequate composition for the subject requirement. Equivalent positions will be considered equally.

14. Will the Government consider allowing the use of cost estimating software MCACES MII in lieu of PACES? NAVFAC is a federal agency that often allows either MII or PACES software to be used on design projects – allowing the use of MII software could be a benefit to the Government on this Vandenberg project, as it is a more versatile tool, with the more updated database and easier to move forward when the project goes into

MILCON

No, MCACES is not acceptable for this requirement, PACES must be used.

15. For Professional Qualifications of Key Personnel, Criteria 1, what licensing, if any, is required for Engineering Technician? What will the primary duties for Engineering Technician be on this Vandenberg project? How many years of experience, or level of education is the government expecting an Engineering Technician to have? We’d like to show the most appropriate individual for this role, and would like more clarity on the Engineering Technician role.

The engineering technician role involves tasks such as creating shop drawings and performing technician-level duties that do not require an engineering degree. The role involves reviewing documents to ensure that engineering requirements are all included and referring back to the engineer as necessary. The engineering technician may also read specifications and help create a cohesive document. It is important to note that in California, engineering technicians are not required to be licensed unless they are performing work that meets the definition of professional engineering as defined by the California. Professional engineering is defined as any service or creative work requiring education, training, and experience in engineering sciences and the application of special knowledge of the mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences in such professional services or creative work as consultation, investigation, evaluation, planning, and design of engineering works and systems, planning the use of land and water, teaching of advanced engineering subjects or courses related thereto, engineering surveys, and the inspection of construction for the purpose of ensuring compliance with drawings and specifications. If the engineering technician role meets the definition of professional engineering, then the individual performing the work must be licensed as a professional engineer in the state of California.

16. On page 2, Civil Engineer is listed among the suggested disciplines. Given that the project is for a renovation inside of an existing building, it doesn’t seem like there is scope for a Civil Engineer. Can you please confirm that we should include a Civil Engineer as part of our team?

Specific teaming arrangements are contractor specific. Structural and/or architectural roles often overlap and may be used in lieu of as long as the tasks are defined and covered by engineers qualified to perform the work.

17. Within the SOW document there are mentions to an Appendix A Existing Site Layouts, Appendix B CSOC, CSOC-West Power and HVAC Requirements and CSOC-West layout and Potential Renovations, can you please provide these documents?

This question falls within the parameters of information that will be provided in the Request for Proposal phase of the award process. A response will not be provided at this time in accordance with directions given in the RFQ.

18. Are there any non-water-based fire suppression systems in the areas to be modified?

None are in the documentation, however, contractor as part of the concept design effort shall determine any and all testing requirements other than those listed in the SOW, FRD or other contract documents.

19. Can you confirm that the design will include all necessary testing and repair work, with no testing or repair required before or during document development?

Contractor as part of the concept design effort shall determine any and all testing requirements other than those listed in the SOW, FRD or other contract documents such as hazardous materials testing.

20. Are there existing records on the performance of current fire suppression systems that can inform the design?

This question falls within the parameters of information that will be provided in the

21. Should preliminary pipe layouts and hydraulic calculations be included at the 35% design phase, or is a conceptual design sufficient?

This question falls within the parameters of information that will be provided in the

22. What are the redundancy requirements for the server rooms, is a N+1 or 2N systems required?

Contractor as part of the concept design effort shall determine any and all requirements other than those listed in the SOW, FRD or other contract documents.

23. Does the building have a current Chiller or other HVAC system that we will need to tie into or should we anticipate providing all new for the project?

This question falls within the parameters of information that will be provided in the

24. Does the building have a current generator for the building that we will need to tie into or should we anticipate providing a new generator?

25. Within general design requirements, it has stated that at least one LEED accredited professional is required on the team, will the project be submitted for LEED certification?

LEED is not required. LEED professionals are not required. UFC 1-200-02 High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements is required.

26. Can you provide an existing floor plan with room numbers identified so we can clearly identify the areas/rooms in scope?

This question falls within the parameters of information that will be provided in the

27. Will the entirety of building 12006 need to be evaluated for accessibility compliance at parking lot, entrances/exits, drinking fountains, bathrooms, showers, etc.

Any and all items affected by or within the project bounds will need to be accounted for and designed per UFCs and other applicable code/law.

28. Please clarify if any sitework and improvements are anticipated under this contract.

29. Please clarify if any structural work, including seismic evaluation, is anticipated under this contract.

Seismic evaluation and structural work are needed if load bearing walls are modified.

30. Please clarify if any environmental / hazardous materials work is anticipated under this contract.

The environmental/hazardous materials work is part of the project.

31. Record Documentation: Are there complete, up to date (latest construction and maintenance) record / as-built documents (plans, installed equipment / systems documentation, etc.) in PDF, AutoCAD REVIT, CAD and/or other formats available for the existing facility and all of the infrastructure?

Refer to the SOW, limited documentation is available and should not be relied upon.

32. LCCA: Is a life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) required to identify and analyze at least three

(3) individual components’ and/or systems’ alternatives? If so, please define what level of infrastructure analysis is required, including, but not necessarily limited to:

a. Utilities (cooling [electrical, chilled water, etc.], heating [hot water, steam, electrical, etc.], normal / emergency power, etc.)

b. Air handling / ductwork

c. Air terminal units (VAV boxes, fan coils, etc.), registers, diffusers, grilles, etc.?

LCCA is not required.

33. Capacity of Existing Utilities: Are the existing utilities’ capacities; i.e., cooling

(electrical, chilled water, etc.), heating (hot water, steam, electrical, etc.), normal / emergency power, etc., considered adequate to support the remodeled / renovated spaces?

Any and all items affected by or within the project bounds will need to be accounted for and designed per UFCs and other applicable code/law.

34. LEED: Is a LEED analysis required? If so, is there a target level of LEED compliance / accreditation? Will the project be LEED certified?

See response to question 25.

35. RAM Analysis: Is there a minimum level of utilities / infrastructure reliability / redundancy (reliability, availability, maintainability [RAM]); i.e., 99.9%, 99.99%, 99.999% or other? If so, is a RAM analysis required to confirm the required RAM? If so, is the AE required to perform the RAM analysis? If the AE will perform the RAM study, is there a preferred method; i.e., software, for the RAM study?

36. Secure Boundary: What is the extent of the secure boundary for the ICD 705 certifications? Is it the whole building or just some of the rooms being renovated?

Refer to SOW for details on the site. Additional information will be provided in the RFP phase of this requirement.

37. Will an RCDD certification be required for the telecommunications designer on the project design team?

No, it will require Certified Tempest Technical Authority (CTTA).

38. Please confirm if there will be any NIST 800-171 compliance requirements (SPRS

Reporting Requirements) for the design team as a part of the forthcoming contract.

No, Must comply with ICD-705 requirements.

39. Please confirm that the maximum page count for responses, excluding section G and

CPARS and PPQ forms, is 37 pages per the table in the RFQ.

No, there is not a cumulative total page limit for the response to the RFQ.

40. Please clarify that the 5 projects from SF330 Section F are the same projects requested for Section H.

Yes, that is the requirement.

41. As many of our example projects are secure facilities at secure sites, we are not permitted to include photos of the completed projects or illustrations/drawings in marketing information. Please confirm that these projects will not be looked at less favorably. If there are other ways to securely transmit these project details, please let me know.

Photos are requested but not required, language in the RFQ has been updated to clarify this. Supplementary illustrations and photos are now to be included in Section F, Specialized Experience.

42. Per the RFQ, the design professional is to be licensed in the state the work is being performed at (California). Per the UFC 3-600-01 the design professional can be licensed anywhere in the United States to perform the work. Please confirm if a California license is required or if any state licensure is acceptable.

UFC establishes a minimum requirement; we require design professionals to be licensed to perform work in CA as CA has some differences in Seismic and other standards that we follow.

43. Will all existing walls remain or should we anticipate modifying the wall layout within the building envelope?

Refer to the SOW.

44. What is the extent of the site work?

Refer to the SOW for the requirements.

45. In evaluation factor (1) in the scope of work document it lists a planner under required services. What kind of planner is needed?

The planner is anticipated to perform tasks similar to those listed at https://www.wbdg.org/design-disciplines/planning

46. In evaluation factor (1) in the scope of work document it lists a civil engineer under required services. What work is anticipated for the civil engineer?

The civil engineer is anticipated to perform tasks similar to those listed at https://www.wbdg.org/design-disciplines/civil-engineering

47. Will the footprint of the building change?

other than those listed in the SOW, FRD or other contract documents. However, it is not anticipated that the building layout will change.

48. Can we use project examples from a team consultant?

Example projects must have been performed by the submitting firm or their joint venture partner, if applicable.

49. The scope of work identifies ICD/ICS-705 security requirements. Does this include tempest requirements?

50. Is there an existing secure perimeter at this facility?

This is a secured facility, there is a perimeter fence and gatehouse.

51. Is there an existing raised floor?

Refer to SOW for details on the site, additional information will be provided in the RFP phase of this requirement.

52. Are new secure lines anticipated to be brought into the existing building or are the existing secure lines adequate?

53. Does the square footage of the existing spaces meet programming maximums for the new spaces?

54. Do example projects for Section F and Section H need to be construction complete?

No, the evaluation is based off the respondent’s design efforts, not the construction effort.

55. Can we include additional projects for Section H that are different from the projects shown in Section F?

No, projects submitted in Section H, Past Performance, must match those submitted in Section F, Specialized Experience.