47PM0424R0017 RFI RESPONSES 2024 3 20.pdf

No. Questions Answers

In reading through the RFQ, our understanding is that this would be a CM responding as the prime contractor with the design andconsulting firms being contracted under the CM rather than direct to GSA. Is our understanding correct?

Design and consulting firms will be contracted under the Design-Builder, with the Design-Builder serving as the Architect Engineer of Record (AEoR). A separate construction management contract will be solicited by the Government; however, design services will not be provided under that CM contract.

As noted in the “Instructions to Offerors,” we have downloaded the PDF of the RFP and hovered over the orange dots.The links are working. However, the pages included in the RFP are labeled “Existing Conditions Capture” and we are seeing photos of existing conditions, but no drawings. Should there be additional pages that include links to bridging drawings?

The Existing Conditions Capture issued with the RFQ includes one set of architectural existing conditions drawings that have been linked to existing conditions photographs of select areas. Additional existing conditions drawings of the building and the surrounding site and pre-concept core-shell diagrams will be provided with the Government's issuance of the RFP. No bridging drawings will be provided as part of this Solicitation; the Contract is a pure design-build contract, and design services will be provided as laid out in the GSA P100 Submittal Matrix , under "Design/Build" and beginning with a "Post Award Concept" submission. Detailed information describing Design services will be provided with the Government's issuance of the RFP. Offerors are encouraged to attend the RFQ Site Visit.

Our firm downloaded the Solicitation Package for 47PM0424R0017 on Friday, Feb 23rd.

The Solicitation Package within Sam.gov is a general posting with Public Access attachments. However, in reviewing the package we realize that the portion listing project-specific requirements (pages 1 of 62) has a banner marking of Controlled Unclassified Information. Please advise as to any specific handling requirements in effect for this solicitation material.

This Information is Unclassified. The requirements for safeguarding, disseminating, and destroying CUI are provided in Section III.H (5) of the Agreement and GSA 3490.3 CHE .

4 if I’m reading the solicitation correctly the PLA is not required for the RFQ but will berequired for Phase II. Is that correct? This is Correct, PLA will be required in Phase 2 RFP

The document states that it contains Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) however, the Solicitation document itself is not controlled on SAM. I was wondering if the solicitation should be marked as controlled on SAM or if it is public information?

Information is not public. Reference the Government's response to RFI #3.

The RFP currently lists two dates for RFI submission, March 20, 2024 at 1:00 PM (page 6/33 Section I.E.) andMarch 21, 2024 at 11:00 AM (page 6/33 Section I.G.). Please confirm the correct date.

March 20th at 1pm

7 The RFP indicates that the minimum type size is 11-point. Please allow smaller type sizes for tables, charts, andillustrations as long as the information can be easily read Allowed for tables and charts

To receive an Outstanding rating for Factor 1 Past Technical Experience, the offeror must provide two or moreprojects that meet “more than six of the characteristics” required by the definition provided for a Similarly ComplexProject. “More than six” would be all 7 of the criteria. Please confirm that this should read, “a minimum of six”which would align with Factor 3.

No change; Offerors must meet the requirements as stated in the Solicitation

To receive a Good rating for Factor 1 Past Technical Experience, the offeror must provide at least one project thatmeets “more than six of the characteristics” required by the definition provided for a Similarly Complex Project. “More than six” would be all 7 of the criteria. Please confirm that this should read, “a minimum of six” which wouldalign with Factor 3

No change; Offerors must meet the requirements as stated in the Solicitation

To receive an Outstanding rating for Factor 2 Past Performance, the offeror must provide two or more projects thatmeet “more than five of the characteristics” required by the definition provided for a Similarly Complex Project. Please confirm that this should read, “a minimum of five.”

No change; Offerors must meet the requirements as stated in the Solicitation

GSA SOLICITATION NUMBER: 47PM0424R0017

ROB- Floor Modernization RFQ QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS [DATE: tbd by GSA]

To receive a Good rating for Factor 2 Past Performance, the offeror must provide at least one project that meets“more than five of the characteristics” required by the definition provided for a Similarly Complex Project. Pleaseconfirm that this should read, “a minimum of five.”

No change; Offerors must meet the requirements as stated in the Solicitation

Factor 3 Lead Design Team allows submission of qualifications for two Lead Designers. In the case of a leaddesign firm/architect of record and a design subconsultant to that lead A/E, would the design subconsultant to ourlead architect of record be acceptable as one of the two Lead Designers?

In the event that a Lead Design Team of two members is proposed by the Offeror, one member of the Lead Design Team may be permitted to be employed by a firm subconsulting with the Designer. The other Lead Design Team member must be employed by the Designer. Section IV.K.10 of the Solicitation, which reads "The Lead Designer(s) must be employed by the Designer and..."

may be amended with the aforementioned clarification. All requirements that apply to the Lead Design Team shall continue to apply to each Lead Designer. The responsibilities of the Lead Designers as Key Personnel and of any replacements by the Offeror of those Key Personnel after Award shall also continue to apply to both Lead Designers and, therefore, to any firms, agreements, contracts, etc. employing those personnel that are impacted by the Offeror's future need to replace a Lead Designer.

Factor 3 requires submission of PPQs (4 - 5 pages each) and also indicates that performance recognitiondocuments such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms ofperformance recognition should be included with the PPQs for this section. Please confirm that the PPQs and theadditional documents requested are excluded from the 30-page maximum page count for this section

The description or listing of such past performance recognition documentation is included in the 30-page maximum page count for the Offeror's response to this Factor. The Offeror may choose to separately provide copies of the recognition documentation listed in its response to this Factor in a TAB 5 at the end of VOLUME 1, in which case the copies of the recognition documentation will not count against the Factor response page limitation.

Factor 2 Past Performance requires that the offeror list two references for each project, and also requires that theofferor obtain a PPQ (submitted directly to GSA) for each project.

Please confirm that only one PPQ is requiredper project

Offerors must provide one blank PPQ to each of the references whose information the Offeror submits in its response to the RFQ Separately, the contact information of those references is required to be submitted by the Offeror to the Government in its response to this Factor. This gives the Government an opportunity to receive PPQs from references and to directly contact past performance references, if the Government has questions about the PPQ or does not receive a PPQ but would like to follow up regarding the Offeror's past performance. The evaluation of Offerors is not negatively impacted if PPQs are not returned by references. The maximum number of PPQs expected to be returned for each Offeror (Designer and Constructor combined) is therefore twelve, and the minimum may be zero.

Given the extent of the detailed narratives requested for Factor 1, subfactors b, c, d, and e, which each requirediscussions of key design and/or construction issues/conflicts, coordination of the issues/conflicts, how theissues/conflicts were resolved, lessons learned, scope changes, impacts to schedule and budget, and howcommunications means and methods prevented or mitigated risks and changes, among other specificrequirements, we respectfully request that the page limit for Factor 1 be increased to 6 pages per project to allowofferors to adequately provide the details required.

Confirmed. Language under Factor 1 reading "All subfactor information provided for any single project shall not exceed four pages." may be revised to read "All subfactor information provided for any single project shall not exceed six pages."

Language under Factor 1 reading "Based on the above, the total amount of information to be provided by the Offeror shall therefore not exceed 26 pages." may be revised to read "Based on the above, the total amount of information to be provided by the Offeror shall therefore not exceed 38 pages." This maximum shall be reflected in the table provided in subsection II.B.B of the Solicitation.

Please consider extending the Step 1 submission due date 8-10 days to allow sufficient time to provide all requireddetails and make adjustments/revisions in accordance with RFI answers once they are posted.

No extenstion will be allowed