Amendment 008.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

NATIONAL MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (NMACC III) SMALL BUSINESS POOLS

Proposal Due Date and Time has been extended.

See Continuation Page

U.S. Coast Guard Facilities Design & Construction Center 5505 Robin Hood Rd Suite K Norfolk, VA 23513

70Z04723RNMACCSB

1 4

02/06/2023

01/17/2023

7 0 Z 0 4 7 2 3 R N M A C C S B

CONTINUATION PAGE

This amendment is being issued to incorporate the following change:

Proposal Due Date and Time are hereby extended from February 21, 2023 at 2:00p.m. to March 14, 2023 at 2:00p.m. local (Norfolk, VA) time.

Questions and Answers (numbering continues from Amendment 007):

96. Given the recent answers to Q/A confirming our eligibility, we request a 1-2 week extension to compile our teams qualification package.

Answer: See Amendment Language

97. While the Government has changed the threshold for the minimum one (1) project from $15M to $10M, the Evaluation Factor replacement text in AM05 (and implied in AM06): "Offerors providing multiple projects within the Tier #2 dollar threshold may receive a higher rating that those that only provide a single project within Tier #2 dollar threshold."

Given the change from $15M to $10M for the minimum one (1) project, is the intent still to rate projects in the original Tier 2 value range (ABOVE $15M -$25M) higher than projects submitted which could span the $10-$15M range? If so please confirm, if not please change the definition of Tier 2 to match the new evaluation approach.

Answer: The Government does not anticipate a change at this time.

98. Can the Government please provide a conformed solicitation document that includes all changes made by way of amendments? The number of amendments and frequent changes to instructions and evaluation criteria are becoming difficult to track. It would help a great deal if Offerors could refer to a single document and minimize the likelihood of unnecessary mistakes.

Answer: The Government will not provide a conformed copy. Offeror should prepare their own conformed solicitation

99. Will the Government please consider extending the due date for Phase One proposals by two (2) weeks to give Offerors more leeway in obtaining completed PPQs and incorporating the changing requirements into their pursuit strategy?

100. Amendment two removed the sentence that states that only one project can be utilized for Key Subcontractors. However the answer to question 78 contradicts that statement. The RFP calls for demonstration of two (2) projects with waterfront structures. This type of construction is typically handled by a specialty subcontractor that typically concentrates on this type of specialty construction.

Can the government please verify that we can utilize the experience of a specialty subcontactor for these two projects as long as they meet the criteria required.

Answer: Offeror may use the experience of a specialty subcontractor to meet the waterfront projects as long as they meet the required criteria.

101. Page 106, This section states that offerors proposing multiple design firms should submit relevant project experience for all design firms. Please verify if we wanted to submit the required two projects for experience with new construction or major renovation of waterfront structures with one firm and the remaining project experience with both new construction and renovation with another firm, that this is acceptable. The answer to question #78 appears to contract this statement. Waterfront design is a specialty design service and thus we would like to have a firm on our team that specializes and concentrates in this practice.

Answer: Question 78 was answering a question for Sub-Factor 1.1 Construction Experience. Sub-Factor

1.2 Design Experience states: "Offerors proposing multiple design firms should submit relevant project experience for all design firms (including: GSA UIDs & Cage Codes). Failure to do so may result in a lower rating. Offerors are still limited to a total of seven (7) projects for Design Experience."

102. Due to the amount of questions that have been asked, and the numerous questions surrounding subcontractor projects, can the government please give the contractors additional time to work with our teaming members on the revised requirement for past performance. Can the government please consider a one week extension?

103. Per Amendment 0005, in Factor 1 we are required to provide projects with a final preferred contract cost of $6,000,000 to $15,000,000. Revised Factor 1 Amendment 0005 also states to provide at least (1) project over $10,000,000. Is it the government's intent to evaluate a bidder's past experience as less favorable if contract cost on more than (1) project exceeds $15,000,000?

Answer: The Government's does not intend to evaluate multiple projects that exceed $10M less favorable.

104. In Amendment 7, the Government responded to an RFI with an indication that “The $5M to $9M is the preferred range” of project size. Previously the Government had indicated that $6M to $15M is the preferred range of project size. Please clarify the preferred range of project sizes to allow offerors to select their best mix of projects for submission.

Answer: Amendment 001 amended the solicitation language to indicate the preferred range is $6M to $9M. The answer to the question in Amendment 007 was directed at the question only, it did not change the language in the solicitation.

105. If the preferred range is now $5M to $9M, please address how the required $10M project will be evaluated and confirm it will receive the same consideration for relevancy as projects within the preferred range.

Answer: The $10M project will be evaluated the same as the other projects required within the factor.

106. Will multiple projects above $10M receive the same relevancy consideration or only the first required project?

Answer: Multiple projects above $10M will receive the same relevancy consideration.

107. Attachment B, Item 15 requests information of subcontractors participating in the project, with space to submit 5. Please confirm it is the intent that proposers provide the top 5 and are not required to submit all subcontractors as the list of all firms may be quite lengthy and could max out the page limitation on the form.

Answer: This is an Offeror's business decision; however, any pages submitted for a single project beyond the page limitation will not be reviewed/evaluated.

END OF AMENDMENT