36C26318R0063-0003002.docx

Responses to Questions/Clarifications Submitted on or before January 25, 2019:

Q: We want to clarify that need a PPQ (Attachment 6) for both awarded and completed projects for the past 3 years from the Contracting Officer.

A: Past Performance Client Questionnaire (Solicitation Attachment 6) shall be submitted for relevant contracts awarded and/or completed within the last three (3) years. Offerors shall request that clients complete the questionnaire, and instruct the clients to forward directly to the contracting office via the provided e-mail. Questionnaires must be submitted by the Offeror’s previous and current clients/evaluators directly to the contracting office.

Q: What about VAMC projects we have already received a PPQ or CPAR evaluation – should we submit these to you in this section? Will these count as pages?

A: Offerors may use VAMC projects; however, a new Past Performance Questionnaire shall be submitted directly to the Contracting Office via email by the client completing the questionnaire. The Government has access to the CPAR records; therefore, no need to submit as part of your proposal submission. CPAR evaluations may be used by the Government as other sources per IDIQ MATOC RFP Proposal Preparation Instructions, Section 5.3.6. The questionnaires are not part of the 15-page limit for this section. The 15-page limit should include information as outlined in the Past Performance Index.

Q: Is there a minimum/maximum of projects you are looking for? (RFI re: Volume II, Part 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE) A: No minimum or maximum number of projects; however, the Contracting Officer will need enough information to evaluate past performance to assess the risks associated with an offeror’s likelihood of success in performing the solicitation’s requirements.

Q: If accepted into the MATOC, will contractors be required to bid all projects for all locations or can we just select Fargo and Sioux Falls?

A: Contractors will not be required to bid on all projects; however, Contractors awarded a MATOC, shall be able and willing to work at all specified locations within the region.

Q: Specification Section 087100 references hardware set HW-E2 but this is not referenced in the door schedule. Please clarify.

A: This refers to the new door to the vestibule. This is the only door in the project.

Q: Specification Section 099100 is referenced in the TOC, but is missing from the specifications. Please provide.

A: Addressed in Amendment 0002.

Q: Specification Section 101400: There is not a sign schedule indicating what signage is needed/desired and where it will be located. Please provide additional information.

A: Specification Section 10 14 00 should be deleted in its entirety as there is no signage required.

Q: Please confirm the project is tax exempt.

A: This project is not tax exempt under South Dakota’s tax laws. In accordance with FAR 52.229-3, all applicable Federal, State, and local taxes and duties that the taxing authority is imposing and collecting on the transactions or property shall be included and covered by this contract and any task orders.

Q: Can the roles and responsibilities of the Superintendent, QC, and SSHO be covered by the same person?

A: This will be dictated by the specifications of each task order and will typically be based on the size, complexity, and risk level of the project. Role sharing may be allowed in some cases if the contractor can show that they have the capability to perform all duties simultaneously without impact, however, there will likely be task orders that explicitly require all roles to be handled separately. Because of this, we expect the response to this technical evaluation factor to describe the contractor’s ability to support projects when dedicated Superintendent, QC, and SSHO are required, in addition to describing their typical staffing of the Superintendent, QC, and SSHO roles when the requirements for their staffing structure aren’t specifically dictated by the task order.

Q: Specification Section 09 91 00 - Painting is missing from the spec book. Can you please provide the missing specification section for Painting?

A: Addressed in Amendment 0002.

Q: We are checking on the possibility of having the deadline extended an addition 15 days for the proposal due date. We are unable to get some of the past performance questionnaires out to some of the government entities that are currently shut down.

A: At this time, an extension is not provided. Past performance questionnaires can be submitted by references from either inside or outside the federal government, so long as the performance is recent (within the last three years) and relevant (for the same or similar work).

Q: Please provide the sign in sheet from the site visit.

A: Addressed within this Amendment 0003.

Q: Solicitation, Page 18, Section 2.4; Regarding the company’s relevant experience, what is the maximum and minimum amount of relevant projects to discuss within this section? Additionally, does the government have a preferred project experience form/chart available that they desire to be submitted within this section?

A: There is no maximum or minimum number of relevant projects required for this section. No specific format is required for this section; however, it must follow the IDIQ MATOC RFP Proposal Preparation Instructions.

Q: Solicitation, Page 14, Section 5.3.2; We respectfully request the government allow the submittal of CPARS in lieu of PPQs – we desire the government to have the most relevant and up-to-date information in regards to Past Performance experience/projects. Many key individuals involved on past projects are no longer at their positions, and the new individuals will have little to no knowledge of past projects.

A: Past performance questionnaires can be submitted by references from either inside or outside the federal government, so long as the performance is recent (within the last three years) and relevant (for the same or similar work). The Government has access to the CPAR records; therefore, no need to submit as part of your proposal submission. CPAR evaluations may be used by the Government as other sources in evaluating Past Performance per IDIQ MATOC RFP Proposal Preparation Instructions, Section 5.3.6.

Q: Solicitation, Page 13, Volume 2 – PRICE Index Matrix, # 3; The government has requested offerors to complete Attachment 7a, however it appears it was no provided with the original package. Please provide.

A: Attachment 7a was included; however, it has been included in this amendment as well.

Q: Attachment 8; The provided Attachment 8 appears to be a Modification log, and not a Cost Breakdown Sheet typically submitted with pricing. Does the government have a preferred form for offers to submit their Cost Breakdown on? If so, please provide.

A: Attachment 8 is the Modification Cost Breakdown that will be required for all task order priced change order request as per the General MATOC Scope of Work, Section 5.3. Offerors shall provide a pricing on both Attachments 7 and 7a in accordance with the SF1442, Block 17 and per IDIQ MATOC RFP Proposal Preparation Instructions, Section 5.5.1.

Q: Can you provide these in 11x17 sheets – so the line items be clearly visible vs 8 ½ “ x 11” as required by 4. PROPOSAL FORMAT, 4.6. (re: Volume 1, Part 1 – Technical, Section 5.2.1 – Detailed Schedule for Seed Project) A: The detailed schedule may be submitted on a sheet(s) no larger than 11X17 in order to be readable. All other proposal sheets (including charts other than the schedule) must comply with the format as provided in IDIQ MATOC RFP Proposal Preparation Instructions, Section 4.

Q: For clarification, you require consecutive pages regards of tab; or you mean start at lets say Page 1 for each tab. (re: Volume 1, Part 1 – Technical, PROPOSAL Section 4.6: “For ease of reference, consecutive tabs with reference is required”) A: Consecutive page numbers for each Part regardless of tabs. For example, Volume 1, Part 1 - TECHNICAL Index would be number 1-75, Volume 1, Part 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE Index would be numbered 1-15, etc.

Q: May we forward to you past completed PPQ or the CPAR Evaluations already completed for projects we want to demonstrate our relevant past performance; (re: Volume 1, Part 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE, Section 5.3.2 – Completed Past Performance Questionnaires or CPAR evaluations) A: A new Past Performance Questionnaire shall be submitted directly to the Contracting Office via email by the client completing the questionnaire. The Government has access to the CPAR records; therefore, no need to submit as part of your proposal submission. CPAR evaluations may be used by the Government as other sources per IDIQ MATOC RFP Proposal Preparation Instructions, Section 5.3.6.