36C10F18R0679-A00006003.pdf

1. Solicitation Page 3 of 98 – “Offerors must submit their annual Vets-100 Report.”

a. Please confirm if the offeror is to submit their annual Vets-100 Report with their proposal. If so, in what Volume/Factor/Subfactor should it be included?

Government Response:

Disregard, All Offerors are required to be registered in Vets-100 Report, the Government verify self-certification on Vets-100 Report before making an award.

2. Solicitation Page 25 of 98 – C3. Technical Proposal Submission Requirements – “Offeror is required to prepare and submit an original and five (5) copies…”

a. This information conflicts with the information provided on the SF 1442 (Original and 2 Copies). Please advise the number of copies the offeror should submit.

Solicitation Page 25 of 98 – C3. Technical Proposal Submission Requirements of the solicitation is hereby revised to the following:

C3. Technical Proposal Submission Requirements

The proposal shall address the evaluation factors listed. Pay close attention to page limitations set within the technical factors as submission beyond the limit will not be accepted. Offeror is required to prepare and submit an original and two (2) copies plus CDs of the technical evaluation factors in a binder CLEARLY

MARKED: The technical proposal shall be divided into following sections as noted below.

3. Solicitation Page 27 of 98 – c. Technical/Management Approach – “… (as demonstrated by total and available bonding capacity, expected capacity in 2014,”

a. Please confirm 2014 should read 2019.

Solicitation Page 27 of 98 – c. Technical/Management Approach of the solicitation is hereby revised to the following:

Technical/Management Approach.

Concise, organized submissions that provide the information requested and that demonstrate a superior project delivery philosophy which includes effective measures to avoid cost or schedule growth (and does not deviate from the solicitation's requirements, and expresses cooperative philosophy regarding partnering, communication, commitment and conflict resolution) and that demonstrate a superior quality assurance/quality control plan and that document and demonstrate a superior organizational team and structure (including effective and clear lines of authority, responsibilities, and relationships) and clearly identify major subcontractors (that are all qualified, experienced, and have the capability to perform) and that demonstrate the Offeror’s superior capability to perform (as demonstrated by total and available bonding capacity, expected capacity in 2019, current workload, staff availability, project schedules for current and pending projects, and anticipated impact of the project on those schedules and staffing plans) and that demonstrate a well-thought and effective plan for sequencing work that demonstrates a clear understanding of the phasing requirements as identified and defined in the General Requirements of this specification as well as the efficient use of the site will be rated higher in technical/management approach than lengthy, disorganized, or confusing submissions that do not demonstrate a superior project delivery philosophy or do not demonstrate a superior quality assurance/quality control plan or safety plan; or that do not demonstrate a superior organizational team and structure or that does not demonstrate a superior capability to perform or that does not demonstrate a well thought and effective plan for sequencing the work or use of the site. Experience working on burner replacement, contractor must provide three specific examples of construction approach to medical facility projects completed within the last five years of similar size and scope.

4. Solicitation Page 32 of 98 – Subfactor 1A: Corporate Project Experience – 1. Submission

Requirements – “Submit a maximum of Three (3) completed construction projects within the last seven (7) years…”

a. Regarding the number of projects: This information conflicts with information found on Page 26 (a. Corporate Project Experience – “no less than three (3) and no more than four (4)”) and Page 33 (Basis of Evaluation: Factor 1, Subfactor 1A:

Corporate Project Experience – “… (maximum 5) …”). Please confirm the minimum and maximum number of projects the offeror should submit.

Solicitation Page 32 of 98 – Subfactor 1A: Corporate Project Experience of the solicitation is hereby revised to the following:

Factor 1, Corporate Experience – Factor 1 consists of three subfactors: 1A

Corporate Project Experience, 1B Personnel Experience and 1C Technical

Approach/Management Approach. The evaluation of subfactors 1A, 1B, 1C are of equal importance to the determination of Factor 1 rating.

Subfactor 1A: Corporate Project Experience:

Submission Requirements: Submit a minimum of three (3) completed construction projects within the last five (5) years by a Construction contract and/or contract similar in size ($2,000,000.00 - $5,000,000.00) for Construction as defined by the VA, see article A1.2).

b. Regarding the number of years: This information conflicts with information found on Page 26 (“…completed (within last five (5) years) …”). Please confirm the maximum number of years for which the submitted projects should have been completed.

Construction Management: This factor will be evaluated on the basis of corporate project experience, personnel experience, and technical/management approach where these sub-factors are equal in importance.

Corporate Project Experience.

Concise, organized submissions that provide all the information requested and; that are effectively coordinated with other aspects of the proposal and;

that clearly document the offeror’s relevant corporate experience with examples of a minmum of three (3) projects completed within last five (5) years that were awarded under NAICS Code 238220 of similar size ($2,000,000 to $5,000,000) and scope (boiler burner replacement), and complexity that were delivered without significant price or schedule growth and; which demonstrate the offeror’s superior capability to perform (including an experience modification rate of less than 1.0 and no OSHA or EPA violations in the last 3 years) shall be rated higher in Corporate Project Experience than lengthy, disorganized, or confusing submissions that do not provide all the information requested or; that fail to demonstrate relevant experience with at least three (but no more than four) projects of similar size, scope, and complexity, completed in the last 5 years, or which demonstrate significant price or schedule growth or; which demonstrate less than superior capability to perform (including an experience modification rate of greater than 1.0 or serious, willful, or repeat OSHA or EPA violations in the last 3 years).

The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s experience or Offeror’s team experience, where allowed, in performing relevant construction projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the Offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. Proposals that fail to provide required and complete information will be rated lower. Relevant projects where the

Prime and Sub-contractors have previously worked together will receive a higher rating. Relevant projects that demonstrate design build experience will receive a higher rating. Offerors providing more projects than the minimum of similar size and scope will be more favorably rated.

5. Solicitation Page 32 of 98 – Subfactor 1A: Corporate Project Experience – 1. Submission

Requirements – “Indicate the number of Construction projects construction contractor and AE have completed together.”

a. It is our understanding that this is a Design-Bid-Build project. Please advise if the inclusion of “A/E” in this sentence is an error. If it is an error, please advise what

“A/E” should be replaced with, or if the entire sentence should be omitted.

Disregard the following language: Scoring will be more favorable if both criteria are met.

Indicate the number of construction projects constructions contactor and AE have completed together.

6. Solicitation Page 33 of 98 – Subfactor 1B: Key Personnel Experience – 1. Submission

Requirements – “Architect/Engineer Field Representative.”

a. The list of Key Personnel featured in this section conflicts with the list of Key

Personnel featured on Pages 22, 25, 31, 32, 40, and 49. Furthermore, it is our understanding that this is a Design-Bid-Build project. Please confirm that the Key

Personnel featured in this section should mirror the list of personnel from Pages

22, 25, 31, 32, 40, and 49.

Solicitation Page 33 of 98 – Subfactor 1B: Key Personnel Experience – 1. Submission

Requirements – “Architect/Engineer Field Representative” of the solicitation is hereby revised to the following:

Factor 1, Subfactor 1B: Key Personnel Experience (Specialized experience and technical competence):

Submission Requirements: The Offeror shall demonstrate the relevant experience of key project personnel who will be assigned to this project.

a) Supply this biographical data for key personnel for at least the following:

(Note if one individual is proposed for more than one position listed):

i. Overall Project Manager

ii. Construction Project Manager

iii. Project Superintendent

iv. Safety Manager

v. Quality Control Manager

7. Solicitation Page 34 of 98 – Subfactor 1C, Technical Approach/Management Approach

Submission Requirements – d) Ability to Staff Project – “Project Personnel Experience

(Specialized experience and technical competence proposed in). The Offeror shall demonstrate the relevant experience of proposed key project personnel who will be assigned to this project. i. Position that the individual will hold in regard to this contract/project team, description of duties and what percentage of the individual’s time would be committed to the project during construction phases. ii. Describe job related educational experience including degrees, certificates, etc., and granting institutions.”

a. As the information needed to satisfy this requirement is centered around our proposed key project personnel, we respectfully request that this requirement be moved to Subfactor 1B: Key Personnel Experience.

d) Ability to Staff Project: Demonstrate the ability to staff the project for the scope of work required; describe how the construction Team will be structured, i.e., how many firms are involved and the responsibility of each firm for this project. Indicate the extent to which resources and personnel will be drawn from various sources: in-house, subcontractor, and/or separate consultant firms. Describe Construction management approach, including but not limited to management of multiple subs/trades working in parallel on several different facilities at one time. Describe construction material staging plan. Project Personnel Experience (Specialized experience and technical competence proposed in). The Offeror shall demonstrate the relevant experience of proposed key project personnel who will be assigned to this project.

i. Position that the individual will hold regarding this contract/project team, description of duties and what percentage of the individual’s time would be committed to the project during construction phases.

ii. Describe job related educational experience including degrees, certificates, etc., and granting institutions.

Project Personnel Experience (Specialized experience and technical competence proposed in).

i. Overall Project Manager

ii. Construction Project Manager

iii. Project Superintendent

iv. Safety Manager

v. Quality Control Manager

8. Solicitation Page 35 of 98 – Subfactor 1C, Technical Approach/Management Approach

Submission Requirements – e) Management Approach/ Capability to Perform

a. We respectfully request that the VA revise this sub-section as the majority of the requirements featured are either duplicates from other subsections or are unclear.

Please see the following examples.

i. I.1.; II.; & III.

1. These requirements appear to be duplicates of a) Project Delivery

Philosophy, c) Company Quality Control Plan, and b) Project

Organization Chart and Narrative.

ii. 1.2. “Proposed construction Period Peer Review technical/administrative by VA & RFP AE)”

1. We are unsure of what this is, and what information should be submitted to satisfy it.

iii. IV. “The Offeror shall describe in a written narrative the plan for phasing the work so that the facility remains operational.”

1. This appears to be the requirement for a Phasing Plan, which is requested under Subfactor 2A: Phasing Plan.

iv. VI. “…current available bonding capacity and expected available capacity in 2013/2014.”

1. We believe 2013/2014 should read 2018/2019 or 2019/2020.

Revised to read the following subsection, all terms and conditions remains the same.

Subfactor 1C, Technical Approach/Management Approach Submission

Requirements: Provide a brief narrative describing the Offeror’s method to manage the project to achieve construction objectives as described in the RFP. Include at minimum all aspects covered in to scope of work. The following shall be included in the narrative:

1. Management Approach/ Capability to Perform: – The Offeror shall demonstrate the following, relevant to the subject procurement.

I. Offeror shall clarify its intended uses of the portions of the site indicated to be available to the contractor elsewhere in this RFP for materials staging, temporary trailer offices, employee parking, and other activities as shown in the construction solution material.

II. Provide the offeror's total bonding capacity (from Offeror’s surety), current available bonding capacity and expected available capacity in 2019.

III. Provide the offeror's current workload and availability of staff proposed in Factor 2 Project Personnel Experience to manage the project. Include project schedules for current and pending projects, as well as the anticipated impact of this project on those schedules and staffing plans.

9. Solicitation Pages 35/36 of 98 – Factor 2, Schedule – Submission Requirements AND

Basis of Evaluation: Factor 2, Schedule – Entire sections.

a. The solicitation language currently featured under both of these sections appears out of place. It appears to be a separate/smaller RFP, or section, that may have inadvertently been placed here. Please advise.

Factor 2, Schedule:

Submission Requirements:

1. The progress schedule will be in a time scaled bar graph format. The horizontal axis will be scaled for time beginning with the Notice to Proceed and concluding with contract completion. The vertical axis will show the milestones and major portions of the contract work. All schedule items will show a start date and a completion date. The detailed schedule, will indicate specific tasks with dates for each step of the process including, refer to specification 01 32 16.17 Bar Chart.

2.

a. Construction Period: Mobilization; Demolition method and sequencing;

Demolition; Preparing areas for construction; Interior finishing; Utility installation; Procurement and installation of equipment; Timing of relocation of existing equipment; Site utilities, Tests and final inspection. Indicate each Phase.

b. Schedule shall indicate all elements of the construction timeline, from notice to proceed (NTP) (in order to establish a common baseline among all offerors, assume NTP date of October 30, 2019 (Before or After) to contract completion, including but not limited to preconstruction meetings and submittals, and any applicable permits and approvals, Site utilities, demolition, material lead times, concrete work Fencing, and post-construction submittals, close-out.

2) The Offeror shall specify how much allowance has been made for bad weather in the schedule, the days of the week and the hours of construction operations during each phase of the work, and the percentage of contract completion that will be achieved at the end of each month of the contract.

Basis of Evaluation: Phase II, Factor 6, Schedule: The basis of evaluation will include the bar graph detailed schedule considering the extent to which the Offeror demonstrates a clear understanding of the construction requirements for the construction period of performance. The Government will evaluate the likelihood that the work will be performed in accordance with the stated schedule given the technical requirements of the

RFP.

10. Solicitation Pages 36/37 of 98 – Subfactor 2A Phasing Plan AND Basis of Evaluation, [Subfactor] 2A, [Phasing Plan] – Entire sections.

a. The solicitation language featured under both of these sections appears to be the requirements and basis of evaluation for the Schedule. Please provide us with the requirements and basis of evaluation for the Phasing Plan.

Submission Requirements: Factor 2, Schedule, Subfactor 2A Phasing Plan

Phasing Plan - The Offeror will describe in a written narrative the plan for phasing the work so that the medical center remains operational. The narrative will also detail how the contractor intends to prepare the site, disassemble, relocate, reassemble, and reactivate utility services to the facility within any specified time limits.

Basis of Evaluation: Factor 2, Schedule, Subfactor 2A Phasing Plan

The basis of the evaluation will take into consideration the offeror’s ability to provide an example of a phasing plan for construction and temporary boiler mobilization to closeout for this project ($2,000,000 to $5,000,000) noting all significant risks involved with burner replacement and actions taken to mitigate, reduce and avoid risk to medial center operations, works site, keep the site safe and secure. Clearly outlined plan for service connections and disconnections that maintains N+1.

11. Solicitation Page 37 of 98 – Factor 2, Subfactor 2B Proposed Schedule – c) – “… (in order to establish a common baseline among all offerors, assume NTP date of February

01, 2014) …”

a. Please provide us with an updated NTP date we should use for the schedule.

Schedule shall indicate all elements of the construction timeline, from notice to proceed (NTP) (in order to establish a common baseline among all offerors, assume NTP date of October 30, 2019) to contract completion, including but not limited to preconstruction meetings and submittals, and any SHPO permits and approvals, utilities, demolition, material lead times, utility installations, abatement, testing/adjusting/balancing, commissioning, construction and post-construction submittals, close-out.

12. Solicitation Page 39 of 98 - Subfactor 3A, Past Performance Questionnaires – “Provide a minimum of three (3) projects that are completed or approximately 90 percent complete.

Include project name, location, initial dollar funding limitation, final construction cost, and project point of contact with telephone number and email address. Projects should be from 2012 – present and include current client contacts, project due date, final cost estimate compared to the contract award amount (note whether bid or negotiated).”

a. We respectfully request that the VA omit this information from this subsection as the majority of this information is provided under Subfactor 1A: Corporate

Project Experience. Also, the projects that will be featured under that section will be the same projects for which PPQs are requested/submitted.

This subfactor shall remain as stated.

13. Solicitation Pages 42-47 AND Spec Section 23 09 11 Pages 73-76 – PPQs

a. It appears we were given two different PPQ forms. One is featured in the

Solicitation and the other is featured in the Spec Book. Please advise which PPQ form we are to use.

Offeror shall use Past Performance Questionnaire found on pages 42-47 and disregard

Spec Section 23 09 11 Pages 73-76 – PPQs in the attached solicitation documents.

14. CPARS in lieu of PPQs?

a. Please advise if the submission of CPARS, in lieu of PPQs, is permissible. We have heard from numerous Contracting Officers and Contracting Officer’s

Representatives that they would prefer not to complete PPQs if completed

CPARS evaluations are already in the system and available for use.

The Government will not accept CPARS, in lieu of PPQs

15. Revise/Reissue Solicitation and Extend the Due Date

a. Given the number of ambiguities in the solicitation RFP requirements, we respectfully request that the VA revise and reissue the solicitation under a new

Amendment, and with an extended due date so as ensure there is enough time to submit a fully compliant proposal.

The project is hereby extended to 4/19/2019 2:00 PM PST.

16. I have a question from the burner company. Will a Siemens LMV5 control work with the

BMS system or do we need a specific burner control?

Offeror’s must read the specification and drawings in its entirety before proposing a specific burner control system.

17. Would like clarification for some of the requirements for past performance. There seem to be a few contradicting pieces of information in the Solicitation:

- Page 26: Construction Management Section 1a.

No less than 3 projects, no more than 4. Within the last 5 years

- Page 29: Section 3A

Min. 3 projects, since 2012 (also on Page 39)

- Page 32: Section 1A.1

Max 3 projects, within the last 7 years

- Page 33: Basis of Evaluation

Offerors Providing more projects (Max 5) will be more favorably rated.

Please see Government responses for questions 2-6.

18. Can subcontractors' jobs be included, and count towards, past performance?

FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii)

(iii) The evaluation should take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition.

19. Page 27 of the solicitation states that a shorter schedule would be viewed unfavorably but on the following page (page 28) states that a shorter schedule will be viewed favorably.

Could you please clarify?

All short schedule will be rejected, Offer shall disregard language stated on page 28 stating otherwise.

20. Can the SSHO and the Superintendent be the same person?

Please see solicitation attachment 01 35 26-page 14 Section C for clarification.

21. Can you confirm that the Price Proposal and Technical Proposal are to be submitted together as one binder and not two separate volumes?

Offeror shall submit both the Technical and Price proposal together in one binder for proposal evaluations.

22. Can you clarify if the bid should include One original and Two copies or One Original and Five copies? The SF1442 and Proposal Preparation Instructions have conflicting information.

Government Response:

Offeror shall provide on original and two copies of their proposal for Government evaluations