Amendment 0001 - VA ST NASA 1(9).pdf

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

693C73

N/A

VA ST NASA 1(9)

THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO:

SEE SCHEDULE

693C73

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

22001 LOUDOUN COUNTY PARKWAY - QUANTUM PARK

BUILDING E2, SUITE 300

ASHBURN, VA 20147

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

22001 LOUDOUN COUNTY PARKWAY - QUANTUM PARK

BUILDING E2, SUITE 300

ASHBURN, VA 20147

693C73-23-R-000023

SEE BLOCK 14

1 5

07/19/2023

07/06/2023

RFQ Amendment No. 0001

Info Page 1 of 4

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Amendment No. 0001 Project No.: VA ST NASA 1(9)

NASA Wallops Island Causeway Bridge over Cat Creek, Phase 1 Solicitation: 693C73-23-R-000023

Phase 1 - Request for Qualifications (RFQ)

The purpose of this Amendment is to:

1) Revise the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) as follows:

a) Factor 1 item 5 to remove 1 page maximum.

b) Factor 2 bullet 5 to revise the Key Personnel authorization.

c) Phase I Submittals to add the past performance evaluations as an appendix.

2) Provide Optional RFQ Site Visit sign-in sheets and summary of responses to questions/clarifications asked by the requested deadline of July 11, 2023.

Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Changes

1. Delete the first sentence of Factor 1 item 5 and substitute the following, page 7:

Provide general description of the removal of the existing bridge discussing the positioning of the cranes, hauling trucks, and other construction equipment to remove the existing superstructure and substructure components while avoiding damage to the subsurface utilities and minimizing environmental impacts.

2. Delete the first sentence of Factor 2 bullet 5 Construction Quality Control Manager (CQCM) and substitute the following, page 9:

The Offeror’s authorized representative in charge of the construction quality control.

3. Delete the second sentence of the second paragraph in Phase I Submittals and substitute the following, page 15:

The SOQ should contain no more than seventy-five (75) pages typed on one side only, excluding past performance evaluations. The SOQ should contain an appendix for the past performance evaluations with no page limit.

Info Page 2 of 4

Responses to Questions/Clarifications Received on/before July 12, 2023

1. We respectfully request that the (3) three past performance evaluations be omitted from the

75-page count requirement.

Response: Request accepted, see RFQ changes.

2. We respectfully request the size project be reduced to $40M. In escalated dollars this size project may actually be equal in size as this solicitation.

Response: No change. The government may consider projects of lesser value with justification provided of the escalated dollars.

3. We respectfully request the past project history for the lead designer and contractor be extended from 10 years to 15 years.

Response: No change.

4. What is the required time commitment for the Environmental Protection Specialist position during construction?

Response: The contractor shall have an environmental protection specialist available throughout construction to address any issues that may negatively impact natural resources and provide weekly reports. This would likely not require full-time employment.

5. Reference RF[Q] page 7: “5. Provide general description of the removal of the existing bridge (1 page maximum) [. . .]” This is the only requirement in the RF[Q] with a specific page limit (within the overall limit of 75 pages). Would FHWA consider lifting the page restriction on this discussion point so that we can better describe our approach to removal of the existing bridge?

Response: Request accepted, see RFQ changes.

6. Past performance evaluations from owners come in various formats, some reaching several pages in length. Would FHWA please confirm that the evaluations we include in response to Factor 3, paragraph 3 (RFP page 13) are excluded from the page limit?

Response: See response to Question 1.

Info Page 3 of 4

7. Reference RF[Q] page 15: “The SOQ should contain no more than seventy-five (75) pages typed on one side only.” Are any other requirements excluded from the 75-page limit (e.g., letter of transmittal, certain sections of the SF 330)?

Response: Cover letter and Past Performance evaluations are excluded from the page count.

8. Reference RF[Q] page 15: “All SOQs shall be written using Times New Roman with a font of 12-point.” Does this requirement apply to pages provided on US Government Standard Form 330 Parts I and II? The form itself does not specify a font requirement but typically is completed in Arial size 10 point font.

Response: 12-point font is required for all sections.

9. RFQ, Appendix E NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form, Summary of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Compliance, page 3 of 9, indicates that a proposal to conduct additional survey for bats in 2023 was also included. Please provide additional information related to the proposal to conduct additional survey for bats in 2023 so we can determine if time of year restrictions need to be built into our project schedule.

Response: The survey was completed, and the report is currently under review by US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). No signs of bat presence/roosting were documented within the existing structure. The acoustic survey did not document regulated bat activity in the area. We do not anticipate a time of year restriction for bridge demolition or for the removal of trees greater than 3” near the bridge approaches. This is subject to USFWS concurrence with the report findings.

10. RFQ, Appendix E NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form, Summary of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Compliance, page 3 of 9, fourth line from the bottom indicates “np properties would be affected…”. Please confirm that “np” should be “no”.

Response: No historic properties will be affected by the project.

11. RFQ, Appendix E NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form, Additional Agency Coordination and

Compliance, Navigational Clearance and 408 Compliance, page 4 of 9, contains an incomplete sentence “Additional Coordination with the Coast Guard, including published notifications to mariners, regarding the proposed bridge replacement.” is provided. Please provide the remainder of the sentence and/or provide the context/meaning/intent of the sentence.

Info Page 4 of 4

Response: “[FHWA conducted] [a]dditional [c]oordination with the Coast Guard, including published notifications to mariners, regarding the proposed bridge replacement.”

12. Since the Part II form of the SF 330 is required for each team member firm (includes branch office(s)), are they included in the 75-page limit?

Response: Yes, they are included in the page count.

13. On the RFQ plans it states the utility relocations are by others. Please confirm that the existing utilities will be relocated prior to construction by others and the design-builder will only be responsible for removing the abandoned utilities on the existing bridge with its demolition.

Response: Utility relocation will be completed by others. Additional information on utility relocations will be provided during Phase II Request for Proposal (RFP).

14. RFQ, Factor 2 indicates that both the Construction Quality Management Control Manager

(CQCM) and the Construction Superintendent(s) are both in charge of construction. Please clarify if the RFQ should rather state that the CQCM is in charge of the construction quantity control.

Response: Yes. See RFQ changes.