36C24726R0026 AMENDMENT 0001 RFI LOG.pdf

36C24726R0026

VISN 7 CONSTRUCTION MATOC

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) LOG

AMENDMENT #0001

QUESTION #

RELATED

SECTION/CLAUSE

REQUESTED

CLARIFICATION/INFORMATION

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

Section 1.2.8.3 Since by the due date, the Technical and Price volumes will be submitted electronically, would be allowed for the hard copies of the technical to be delivered after the due date?

No. IAW Section 1.2.8.3, Offerors shall submit four (4) hard copies by the proposal due date and time as specified…”

Sections 1.2.6 and 1.2.7

We are confused about the Proposal Contents. We know we have to price every seed individually, but do we have to make a separate Technical per each SEED project?

Submit a technical proposal and a price proposal for each seed project you would like to be considered for in accordance with

1.2.6 and 1.2.7. For example, if you would like to be considered for seed project #1 and seed project #2, you will submit a technical and price proposal specific to seed project #1 and a technical and price proposal specific to seed project #2.

1.2.3.1(a)(5)a Please confirm if this is a hard line requirement for single project/task order limit.

Correct section 1.2.3.1(a)(5)a. to read “Provide information from an acceptable surety in accordance with FAR 28.202 Acceptability of Corporate Sureties, reflecting sufficient bonding capacity to meet a single project/task order limit of $10,000,000.00 and MATOC aggregate amount of $30,000,000.00."

1.2.1.4 Just to confirm, we are required to bid all

three seed projects as part of the proposal?

No. Offerors are not required to submit a proposal on all three seed projects. IAW 1.2.1.4 - As part of the solicitation, three demonstration seed projects are included. Offerors must propose a firm-fixed price for at least one of the seed projects to be considered but are not precluded from submitting a firm-fixed price proposal for up to all three demonstration seed projects.

1.1.7 Do we need to register for the site visit and

is there a personnel restriction on attendance?

No. The requirement to register for site visits is not listed in the solicitation.

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) LOG

AMENDMENT #0001

QUESTION #

RELATED

SECTION/CLAUSE

REQUESTED

CLARIFICATION/INFORMATION

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

52.236-7 Is a GC Contractor License required in all three states?(typically this doesn’t apply to Federal projects but I want to be sure.)

A general contractor license is not mandatory; however, contractors are responsible for obtaining any necessary licenses and permits, and for complying with Federal, State, and municiple laws, codes, and regulations IAW 52.236-7. Offerors should submit GC License IAW section 1.2.7 if they possess one.

N/A Is there a distance restriction requirement for the (8) facility locations? I have seen before where you must be within 4 hours of each location in order to bid.

No. A distance restriction requirement for the (8) facility locations is not listed in the solicitation and not required at this time.

1.2.3.1(a)(5)a Is the $30,000,000 bonding capacity a minimum eligibility threshold for award of the overall MATOC contract, or is it an evaluated element under Factor 1, Subfactor 1 (Experience) that would be rated on a sliding scale relative to the offeror's demonstrated capacity?

It is an evaluated element under Factor 1. Correct section 1.2.3.1(a)(5)a. to read “Provide information from an acceptable surety in accordance with FAR 28.202 Acceptability of Corporate Sureties, reflecting sufficient bonding capacity to meet a single project/task order limit of $10,000,000.00 and aggregate amount of $30,000,000.00.”

1.2.3.1(a)(5)a Since the three seed projects included in the solicitation have magnitudes ranging from $2,000,000 to $10,000,000, will the Government consider an offeror whose surety demonstrates bonding capacity sufficient to cover the seed project(s) proposed on, even if that capacity is below the $30,000,000 maximum per task order amount?

See answer to question 8 above.

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) LOG

AMENDMENT #0001

QUESTION #

RELATED

SECTION/CLAUSE

REQUESTED

CLARIFICATION/INFORMATION

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

1.2.3.1(a)(5)a For MATOC holders whose bonding capacity is below $30,000,000, would the Government limit their eligibility to compete only for task orders within their demonstrated bonding range, or would such firms be excluded from the MATOC entirely?

See answer to question 8.

1.4.10, 1.5.10, 1.6.10

If we submitting pricing on all 3 seed projects is a bid bond required for all 3?

Yes, a bid bond it required for each seed project proposed on as stated in section 1.4, 1.5, and 1.6.

Attachment 2 For the “ATTACHMENT 2 CONTRACTOR SURETY LIMITATION” form, for the question “What is the contractor’s rating”?

What this question is referring to? According to what our surety tell us, the surety itself has a AM Best Rating, but us as contractor don’t. Should we just say NA on it?

The contractor's rating related to Contractor Surety Limitations refers to the evaluation of the contractor's financial stability, experience, and reliability by a surety company. This rating determines the maximum amount of bonding capacity or surety coverage the contractor can secure. A higher rating indicates a stronger, more reliable contractor, allowing for larger surety limits. Ratings are usually listed as letter grades, such as A+ (Excellent), A (Good), B+ (Fair), B (Marginal) B- (Poor). Offerors surety should be able to provide a rating. If the surety company is unable to provide you with a rating, N/A is acceptable.

SEED #2_Project 557- 20-101 Drawings

Unable to open/receiveing error messages when opening drawings for SEED #2 (Relocate Radiology & Nuclear Medicine to 5A,Dublin GA).

Answer will be provided in a future amendment.

1.2.1.4 Are we required to submit a proposal on

all 3 projects? Please clarify See answer to question 4.

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) LOG

AMENDMENT #0001

QUESTION #

RELATED

SECTION/CLAUSE

REQUESTED

CLARIFICATION/INFORMATION

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

1.2.1.4 If answer to above is no not required to

bid on all 3 seed projects will proposals that do not quote more than 1 project be evaluated differently than proposals quoting 2 or 3 Seed Projects? Please clarify.

No, offerors are only required to submit a proposal for one seed project and will not be evaluated differently than offerors proposing on more than one seed project.

1.2.6, 1.2.7, 1.2.8.1, 1.2.8.3

Page 11 thru 15 describe Factor 1 Technical ; Factor 2 Quality Control and Factor 3 Price Evaluation suggesting that there are three separate binders required but on page 17 it references two binders, a Technical Proposal and a

Price Proposal. Please clarify number of Binders.

Factor 1 consists of two subfactors, Experience and Quality Control. Factor 2 is past performance, and factor 3 is price.

Technical proposals should be in one binder seperated by tabs (Tab A through Tab D) as described in 1.2.6 (electronically to elissa.goodman@va.gov and joyce.powers1@va.gov per 1.2.8.1 in addtion to hardcopies as required per 1.2.8.3. Price proposals shall be submitted IAW Section 1.2.7, electronically only to elissa.goodman@va.gov and joyce.powers1@va.gov.

1.2.6 On page 13 it references Factor 2 as the

Past Performance and on page 17 it has Tab D: Facotr 3 Past Performance.

Please clarify if this should be Factor 2 – Past Perfromance

Correct 1.2.6 Tab D to read "Factor 2 - Past Performance"

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) LOG

AMENDMENT #0001

QUESTION #

RELATED

SECTION/CLAUSE

REQUESTED

CLARIFICATION/INFORMATION

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

1.2.3.1 Page 11 states that the limit is 40 pages

for the Techncial proposal. If the answer to above is that there are only 2 binders Techncial and price proposals only than is 40 pages enough to pages to include Experience, Quality control and Past performance into 1 binder. Please clarify

Limit technical proposal to 40 pages. Quality control plan does not count toward 40 page limit.

SEED #2_Project 557- 20-101 Door Schedule

On the door schedule on drawing page A600, most of the doors are listed as door material "SCV". In the list of abbreviations on the drawing page A001, there is no SCV. There is an SCW abbreviation for solid core wood. Should all of the doors on the door schedule shown as SCV actaully be SCW?

Answer will be provided in a future amendment.

SEED #2_Project 557- 20-101 Door Schedule

Door number A154 is shown to be an RF Shielded door on the door schedule. We could not locate any specific;ations for RF Shielded doors. Is there a specification for this door type or do we need to price what we think is best to quilify our bid?

Answer will be provided in a future amendment.

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) LOG

AMENDMENT #0001

QUESTION #

RELATED

SECTION/CLAUSE

REQUESTED

CLARIFICATION/INFORMATION

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

SEED #2_Project 557- 20-101 Door Schedule

On drawing page G001, quite a few of the wall types show an STC50 requirement. The door schedule does not show any doors needing to be STC rated nor is there a specification for STC doors. Do any of the doors on this project require an STC Rating?

Answer will be provided in a future amendment.

SEED #1_Project 534- 23-910 Spec Section 09-66-16

On the Table of Contents, it has a Spec Section 09-66-16 - Terrazzo Floor Tile.But in the Spec book it goes from 09- 65-16 to 09-67-23-40 skipping 09-66-16.

Please put this missing spec section out with an amendment.

In the Table of Contents 09-66-16 reference to “Terrazzo Floor Tile” was removed. This was erroneously left in the document during design. See attached revised specifications titled "ATTACHMENT 8R - SEED1_PROJECT

534-23-910_ SPECIFICATIONS REV 4"

Section 1.2, Multiple Subsections, and Items

Will an offeror that submits on only one of the seed projects be evaluated less favorably than an offeror which submits on multiple (two or all three) seed projects if all other factors are equal in evaluation?

Offerors that submit on only one seed project will NOT be evaluated less favorably than offerors which submit on multiple seed projects.

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) LOG

AMENDMENT #0001

QUESTION #

RELATED

SECTION/CLAUSE

REQUESTED

CLARIFICATION/INFORMATION

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

Section 1.2, 1.2.1.1; 1.2.10.2;

1.2.12.1

In order for potential offerors to properly evaluate the viability of this opportunity can the government provide more clarity on the number of potential awardees of this MATOC. Industry considers the number of awardees as critical information as it relates to making go/no go decisions on opportunities such as this. The VA, and specifically the prior iteration of the VISN 7 Construction MATOC awarded more than 30 contracts.

The government does not antipate awarding less than 20 but reserves the right to award more or less.

Section 1.2, Multiple Subsections, and Items

Will the government award more than 5 IDIQ Contracts?

See answer to question 24.

Section 1.2, Multiple Subsections, and Items

Will the government award more than 10 IDIQ Contracts?

See answer to question 24.

Section 1.2, Multiple Subsections, and Items

Will the government award more than 20 IDIQ Contracts?

See answer to question 24.

Section 1.2.3, 1.2.3.1.b.1

Is the offeror to submit a complete quality control plan for each of the seed projects?

Yes. Each seed project will be evaluated seperately. The Quality Control Plan should be specific to the seed project proposed on and does not count toward 40 page alloted for the Technical Proposal.

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) LOG

AMENDMENT #0001

QUESTION #

RELATED

SECTION/CLAUSE

REQUESTED

CLARIFICATION/INFORMATION

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

Section 1.2.3, 1.2.3.1.b.1

Quality Control Plans regularly exceed the page limitation for entire 40 pages allotted for the Technical Proposal, please confirm that the government wants a complete Quality Control Plan submitted as part of the technical proposal?

A complete quality control plan should be submitted specific to each seed project (not general to MATOC) and will not count toward the 40 pages alloted for the Technical Proposal.

Section 1.2.3, 1.2.3.1.b.1

The Quality Control Plan is included in the page count of the technical proposal?

See answer to question 29.

Section 1.2.3, 1.2.3.1.b.1

Do offerors need to submit a quality control plan for each of the seed projects it is proposing on?

See answer to question 28.

Section 1.2.3, 1.2.3.1.b.1

Is it the governments intent for offerors to provide their approach to Quality Control for the MATOC and not a specific plan?

See answer to question 28.

1.2.3.2 Would be acceptable to use previously

completed PPQs with proof of delivery (email) from the reference that completed it?

No. Past performance shall be provided IAW 1.2.3.2.

1.3.6 Due to the magnitude of these projects

and the MATOC itself, will there be any other site visit dates?

Additional site visits are not scheduled at this time. If additional site visits are scheduled in the future, an amendment will be posted with detailed information.

RFI LOG