Amend0003_WMATOC RFI and Responses.pdf

Contractor RFI and Responses WMATOC Solicitation No. 47PL0123R0035

Amendment 0003

1. The government issued a WMATOC SF 1442 with Amendment 1. The original SF 1442 has more details in Blocks 3, 6 and 13 and then the address changes in block 7 and 8 of the Amendment 1 SF 1442 from the original SF 1442. Are offerors to complete the WMATOC SF 1442 from Amendment 1 and submit it in Volume 1, Tab 2 or are we to complete the original SF 1442 issued with the solicitation in Volume 1, Tab 2? Or are we to complete both and submit it within the Volume 1, Tab 2?

Answer: Offerors should use the most recent version of any form issued with the Solicitation.

Amendments can be acknowledged either on the SF1442 or using the Amendment SF30.

2. In Amendment 1 the government issued an SF 1442 for the Seed Project and for the WMATOC. In block 13, bullet d the SF 1442 for the seed project states 60 days and the SF 1442 for the WMATOC states 90 days. Can the government please clarify which timeframe the government would like the offerors proposals and bid to be valid for?

Answer: 90 days.

3. In question 15 of the Amendment 0001 Contractor RFI and Responses the government answered the question “Yes, the form needs to be completed and submitted to demonstrate financial capability to perform under the IDV. Financial capability is a component of both Factor 2, Subfactor 2 - Resource Management (See Section M 5.2.2.) and a Determination of Responsibility (See Section M-13).” It is unclear if the answer “Yes” was in reference to both questions of if the GSA Form 527 needs to be completed and submitted and if it is to be submitted in Volume I Administrative Documentation. Can the government please confirm that the completed GSA Form 527 is to be completed and returned in Volume I?

Answer: GSA requests submission of GSA Form 527 with Volume I Administrative Documentation.

4. On RFP page 37, paragraph M-6.1.1 the government states “The requirements for this factor are met when the Offeror demonstrates itself as a business providing verifiable information and references for five (5) projects completed over the last five (5) years”

However, on page 25 paragraph L-4.1 the government states “The offeror shall provide past performance information for each project listed in the offeror's previous experience in response to Factor 1 Relevant Experience of this solicitation.” And in Factor 1 Relevant Experience, there are multiple locations the government requests five construction projects and five design projects, total of 10 projects.

A. Can the government please clarify that the evaluation criteria in paragraph M-6.1.1 will be applied to all 10 projects, and not just five?

Answer: Evaluation criteria in M-6.1.1 realates to Factor 4, Subfactor 1- Past Performance. An offeror has met the submission requirement when it can demonstrate verifiable information and references for five (5) projects completed over the last (5) years. Section L-4.1 which also relates to Factor 4, Subfactor 1- Past Perfrmance requests past performance information for all projects submitted for demonstration of Factor 1 - Relevant Experience which is ten (10) total projects.

Offerors must submit past performance information for each project provided in Relevant Experience. When evaluating this past performance information, the offeror will be deemed to have met the submission requirements for Factor 4- Past Peformance if at least 5 of those 10 submitted projects can be verified (through PPQ or CPARS). For those projects which are not verified/demonstrated there will be a neutral rating as stated on Page 26.

This difference acknowledges that an offeror may not be able to demonstrate, nor GSA be able to obtain, Past Performance information for all 10 projects submitted under Relevant Experience (for example, there may not be a CPARS and/or submission of a PPQ for each project submitted).

B. If this is not the correct interpretation and the evaluation criteria in M-6.1.1 will only beapplied to five of the projects, can the government please clarify if it will be applied to the five construction projects or the five design projects?

Answer: Past Peformance review will be applied to all submitted projects. To meet the submission requirement and receive a rating, at least 5 projects must have verifiable and demonstrable past performance ratings which demonstrate the characteristics listed in Section M-6.1.1, numbers 1-4. The submitted projects must meet the factors listed. Offerors with fewer than 5 demonstrable, verifiable projects will be given a neutral rating.

5. [RE: Seed SOW] confirming there is no “Attachment 7_9…” file?

Answer: Amendment 0003 to this Solicitation provides “Attachment 7_9 SOW Attachment D_Waste Management.pdf” to the OIG Space Reduction SOW which was inadvertently omitted.

This document has been added to Google Drive. Offerors must follow the instructions included with the Soliciation to obtain access to Google Drive documents for the Seed Project.

6. Section L-4.2. Factor 4, Subfactor 2 – Performance Quality Assessment requires that Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) be completed and submitted. In lieu of PPQs, would it be acceptable to provide copies of the finalized Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) for the projects we are submitting? This would relieve our government clients of having to re-evaluate projects they have already officially evaluated via CPARs

Answer: The Solication states, in relevant part: “The Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) is a required system and one source of past performance information, when available. In addition to CPARS, the use of Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs, Section J - Exhibit 5 Form PPQ of this solicitation) may be utilized to present relevant and recent past performance information.” [emphasis added]. In addition, the solicitation cautions that “the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests on the offeror.” GSA is required to review CPARS to evaluate past performance, when available. The offeror may use PPQs to demonstrate past performance. The burden rests upon the offeror to ensure that there is suffiicent information available to GSA to evaluate performance.

The offeror may use PPQs to ensure that burden is met.

[End of Document]