36C24619R0078-0002001.pdf

1. Is the solicitation number listed for this project to “Replace Building Transformers” the same number for the project that was cancelled? The issued amendment stated “The presolicitation issued under solicitation number 36C24619R0078 is here by cancelled.”

The presolicitation was cancel due to Statement of Work was incorrect at that time. The current solicitation is active

2. Please confirm the conflicting due dates for all materials:

a. The FBO document indicates a response date of June 13th

The correct date for Past Performance Questionnaire is due on June 13, 2019, the FBO site is incorrect the solicitation/SF330 is due on June 20, 2019

b. The text on the first page of Form 252 states in one paragraph, that “you are required to submit answers to the following evaluation criteria within 14 calendar days from the date you receive this Request for Architect-Engineer Services for the attached Scope of Work…” and in another paragraph, it states that “answers to above evaluation criteria are required to be submitted to Bryant Guerrant and Patrick Stultz no later than June 20th 2PM EST.” Any RFP questions are due 14 days after the solicitation is posted, solicitation is due on June 20, 2019 @ 2PM EST.

c. The PPQ forms (which say the project is for “Upgrade Fire Alarm Systems”) is due back to the VA on June 7th. It is revised with the correct project title; see attachment.

3. Will you issue a revised PPQ form with the correct project title?

It is revised with the correct project title; see attachment.

4. Is the Scope of Work represented in its entirety on page 2 of the solicitation document, entitled “Design Criteria for Professional Engineering and Design Services” under “Project Description”?

No, the Statement of Work should be read in its entirety, there are requirements listed throughout the document.

5. Please confirm whether an SF330 is also required, as indicated on page 1 of the solicitation document in the last sentence “All offerors shall submit a statement of capabilities based upon the attached statement of work a SF330…” in addition to the “INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION” beginning on page 19 of the solicitation documents, which said in Item #3 of the General Instructions: “Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements.”

a. If an SF330 is also required, are we to duplicate the requirements listed in the (b).

SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS, 1. Part I. Technical Proposal found on page 19 of the solicitation document?

SF330 is to be included.

6. Also on Page 19 of the solicitation documents under (b). SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS, 1. Part

I. Technical Proposal, it indicates a total of 25 pages (15 pages for “Professional Qualifications, Design Schedule & Experience” and 10 pages for “Design Quality Control plan”). Do the Tabs or cover pages count towards the total number of pages?

Yes. Tabs and cover pages count towards the total number of pages.

7. On page 20 of the solicitation documents under (c) GENERAL INFORMATION, it indicates that the format be as follows: “A page is defined as one face of an 8 ½” x 11” sheet of paper…”.

May the “Design Schedule”, which is required to be submitted in Microsoft Project format, be an 11” x 17” page, if necessary, and would that count as two pages?

11x17 is acceptable; it will count as one page.

8. On page 22 and 23 of the solicitation documents, it seems that resumes are required for both Sub-Factor 3 - Specific Experience and Qualifications; and Sub-Factor 4 - Quality Control Plan, 2. MINIMUM STANDARD OF ACCEPTABILITY b. “Names, qualifications (in resume format)….”. Please confirm whether both are required and is the format of an SF330 resume what is required, or should it be in narrative form, up to two pages each?

Provide information on SF 330; resumes can be added as additional information if needed.

9. In PART II – PAST PERFORMANCE, is the only criteria required for this section to be the Past Performance Questionnaires that are to be returned directly to the VA? Would any existing CPARS evaluations be acceptable in lieu of the Past Performance Questionnaires?

The Government will pull CPARS data for offerors; the past performance questionnaires are to provide relevant experience outside of Government contracts.

10. Is there a page limit for PART II – PAST PERFORMANCE if additional information is allowed?

Information should be conveyed on either the past performance questionnaires or CPARS evaluations.

11. Can PPQ evaluations come from the specialized engineering sub-contractors’ projects?

Yes, if the projects are of relevant size and scope.

12. On page 22, Under Sub-Factor 2 – Specialized Experience, 1. CRITERIA: it appears there is an error stating that evaluation will be based on “fire protection systems in a hospital environment”. Please confirm that this is an error and is meant to say “Transformers”.

Amended as follows:

CRITERIA: This factor will evaluate the Offeror’s technical competence, based on successful completion of projects, in the design of replacing transformers in a hospital environment.