36C25622R0014 - RFI Register.pdf

Solicitation No. 36C25622R0014; Project 520-22-102 Replace Multiple Fat Roofs, Biloxi

RFI Q&A Register:

Proposal RFI #1 – Are we to install coping over the existing stone cap at perimeter?

Response: NO. The stone coping / cap will be RECAULKED between the joints, and flashing will work in conjunction with the existing stone coping

Proposal RFI #2 – Are gutters and downspout to be replaced?

Response: NO. The existing Gutters and Downspouts are in good condition. The Downspout catch pans are to be reused and adhered to the NEW roofing.

Proposal RFI #3 - Please indicate an aerial indicating all sections of Bldg 31 to be included in pricing as the original drawings did not include all sections per the site visit discussions.

Response: Building 31 – Green indicates Areas to be Removed and Replaced

Building T-104 /T-105 – Green indicates Areas to be Removed and Replaced

Proposal RFI #4 – Will shop fabricated metal be approved for this project as long as it is fabricated in the correct gauge?

Response: Shop fabricated metal is approved as long as it meets specifications of related functional device or fixture.

Proposal RFI #5 – What roof system are we to price for T-104 & T105? It was noted at the pre bid that the system included in the specs may be incorrect.

Response: The roofing system recommended for T-104 and T-105 will be a TPO Membrane. Updated Specifications will be included with this RFI.

Proposal RFI #6 – Please confirm that we are to price this project with pricing for the day submitted with no escalation included in pricing. Since materials are now based on time of shipment and that time frame is unknown to contractor/manufacturer/owner, owner will approve additional escalation costs with contractor once materials are delivered to job site if contractor can show documentation of pricing escalation difference.

Response: Pricing for this Project is to be submitted in PRESENT Day monies.

Proposal RFI #7 – Does this project have any liquidated damages?

Response: NO. This project does not contain any liquidated damages.

Proposal RFI #8 – Will weekend work be allowed?

Response: Plan on NO weekend work. The WORK Day can be adjusted, based on justification.

Proposal RFI #9 – The schedule proposed is to be based on if materials were to be delivered as soon as NTP is sent out? Then provide updated schedule with realistic time frame once materials are shipped.

Please advise.

Response: YES. Propose a schedule as if material delivery was not an issue. An updated schedule will be required once the NTP is in effect and materials are ordered.

Proposal RFI #10 – Specs call for only 5 days of materials stored on roof. Is there any way to remove this, allowing for contractor to store materials as needed on roof? This would save money on lifts for owner.

Response: The Specifications call for ONLY five days of materials. This is an all-encompassing specification that protects the Government from ambitious Contractors. 5 days of Materials ONLY.

Proposal RFI #11 - Is there any asbestos found in the roofs?

Response: NO. The Existing Roofing Materials are Modified Bitumen / Metal.

Proposal RFI #12 – Are we to remove existing roof drains and overflow drains and install new? If so, will retrofit drains be approved to be installed?

Response: YES. The existing roof drains, primary and secondary, are in substandard condition. Retrofit Drains shall be suitable for the conditions and designed for LOW to NO maintenance.

Proposal RFI #1 – We understand that Exhibit B – Past and Present Performance Questionnaire is requested to be submitted to the Contracting Office by prior clients to satisfy the Factor 2 – Past Performance requirements. However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain PPQ’s from prior clients on a project-by-project basis, especially if they have already filled out a CPARS evaluation for us.

We intend to include CPARS evaluation forms with our proposal, but if we are unable to get our prior clients to send PPQ’s to the Contracting Office by bid time, will our offer be deemed unresponsive?

42.1501 General.

(b) Agencies shall monitor their compliance with the past performance evaluation requirements (see 42.1502), and use the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) metric tools to measure the quality and timely reporting of past performance information. CPARS is the official source for past performance information.

Response: No, please refer to the last paragraph noted on pages 26-27 of the solicitation (exert below):

Offerors without a record of relevant past performance will be assigned a neutral rating in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv). However, the proposal of an offeror with no relevant Past Performance history, while rated “Neutral” in Past Performance, may not represent the most advantageous proposal to the Government and thus, may be an unsuccessful proposal when compared to the proposal of other offerors.

Proposal RFI #2 – Can we use subcontractor past performance to meet the Factor 2 – Past Performance requirements, provided we present an executed teaming agreement with that subcontractor?

Response: Yes, please refer to page 26 of the solicitation (exerts below):

The Government may evaluate Past Performance information through the use of Exhibit B completed by the offeror's references; use data independently obtained from other Government or commercial sources, including, but not limited to, Government databases; and/or rely upon personal business experience with the offeror. The evaluation may take into account Past Performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, and/or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to this acquisition. Past Performance information on contracts not listed by the offeror, or that of planned subcontractors, may also be evaluated. The Government may contact references and contact parties other than those identified by the offeror, and information received may be used in the evaluation of the offeror’s Past Performance. While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing current accurate and complete Past Performance information rests with the offeror. The Government reserves the right to obtain and evaluate Past Performance information from any source it deems appropriate.

An offeror with limited or no past performance may receive a rating based on the evaluation of its subcontractors and/or key personnel, provided an EXHIBIT C SUBCONTRACTOR INFORMATION AND CONSENT FORM has been executed and included in the proposal for proposed subcontractors and/or potential key personnel not employed by the offeror. These ratings shall have the same weight as the ratings of the offeror.

Proposal RFI #3 – Could the VA please clarify the nature of the “Project Engineer” role called out in Subfactor 1b. Key Personnel & Experience? Does the VA intend for this person to act as an assistant project manager?

Response: The “a. Project Manager” & “b. Project Engineer” are two separate key personnel roles and will be evaluated accordingly as outlined under Subfactor 1.b Key Personnel & Experience on pages 24 – 25 of the solicitation (see highlighted verbiage below). As such, the VA does not intend for the “Project Engineer” to act in the capacity of an “Assistant Project Manager”.

1b. Key Construction Personnel & Experience: The Offeror shall provide a resume (page limitation: two

(2) pages per requested resume) for each of the following key construction or contract personnel that includes their expertise and experience in managing/overseeing construction services of providing, removing, and installation of new Atactic Polypropylene (AP) Modified Bitumen Flat Roofing (or Equal Systems):

a. Project Manager

b. Project Engineer

c. Site Superintendent

d. Lead personnel for any known major subcontractors.

For each resume, include company name; name of individual; listing relevant experience; qualifications such as specialized training; education; and a list of successfully completed projects of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity (in a Hospital facility or similar working conditions) within the last five (5) years from proposal issuance date. Superintendent shall have a minimum of five (5) years of experience managing or supervising multiple projects of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity. If the person listed as proposed superintendent is not a current employee of the offeror but intends to become one upon award of the contract, OFFEROR SHALL SUBMIT A COPY OF A COMMITMENT LETTER FROM THAT PERSON AS A PART OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL to verify offeror will be hiring him/her and he/she intends to accept the position. For any subcontractors identified, provide a resume of the lead person who will be directly involved in the work subcontracted for that company, identify any key personnel that will be assigned to the contract resulting from this solicitation, and the relevant experience of both the company and any key personnel that were identified. Please delineate the approximate percentage of work the prime contractor will perform and the approximate percentage of work the subcontractors (collectively) will perform. The VA will use the information provided to evaluate, among other things, specialized experience, and technical competence.

(END)