Amendment 012.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 RESERVE POOLS 2 & 3

Proposal Due Date remains unchanged.

See Continuation Page

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

70Z04723RNMACCSB

1 4

02/22/2023

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 changes:

1) Section M: Factor 2: Technical Approach

DELETE: Higher rating may be given to offerors who thoroughly describes their Subcontractor Management Plan and how long-term subcontractor relationships are cultivated and meeting subcontracting goals on past projects.

REPLACE WITH: Higher rating may be given to offerors who thoroughly describes their Subcontractor Management Plan and how long-term subcontractor relationships are cultivated.

Questions and Answers (numbering continues from Amendment 011):

154. We apologize for the length of the question. However, amendment 2 removed the requirement for the limit for one project from a subcontractor. Question 63 in Amendment 3 seemed to clarify this.

However, the answer to Question 78 and Question 79 contradicts this statement and limits construction projects to one per subcontractor. However, Question 100, appears to allow two projects from a single subcontractor. We respectfully request that the government allow a maximum of two projects from a single subcontractor for waterfront construction. Our reasoning is based on the fact that waterfront construction is a specialty construction practice. A Small Business General Construction Contractor tends not to have this type of waterfront experience. We would like to utilize the experience of a waterfront specialty subcontractor to demonstrate the required two projects for waterfront construction. In order to meet the current requirement, we would have to put two waterfront subcontractors on our team.

This does not make sense for us to have two separate waterfront subcontractors on our team. Any subcontractor on our team is committed to bidding work for all waterfront task orders. The division of responsibilities or geography is not attractive to any subcontractor if it has to be divided. We respectfully request that the government allow a maximum of two projects from a subcontractor for waterfront construction.

Answer: In an attempt to answer multiple questions regarding key subcontractor experience, the Government seems to have contradicted itself. Therefore, the following answer clarifies and the answer supersedes the answers to Questions 78/79 and 100.

Requirements, as of Amendment 002, state the Offeror shall have acted as the prime contractor on a minimum of four submitted projects. This leaves the remaining projects to demonstrate multiple key subcontractors experience. The intent is one project for each key subcontractor; however, the Offeror may submit more than one project for specialty subcontractors, such as waterfront subcontractor to meet criteria requirements. Total projects submitted for Construction should be at least 5 and no more than 7.

Total projects submitted for Design should be at least 5 and no more than 7.

155. Attachment B.1 requires one column for contract amount and one column which requires Offeror's Share of Responsibility for Total Construct contract. For Design-Build projects for a design firm, what information should be provided for these columns. Is it strictly design information or a combination of design and construction information?

Answer: The B.1 Attachment for the Design Firm should include the amount of Design Costs for the Share of Responsibility column.

156. The last bullet regarding the evaluation of the technical approach reads" higher ratings may be given to offerors who thoroughly describe their subcontractor management plan and how long term subcontractor relationships are cultivated and meeting subcontracting goals on past projects. " Small businesses do not have subcontracting goals for their projects. Can this language be removed from the evaluation criteria?

Answer: See Amendment Language

157. Attachment B.2 requires to list construction trades in item 15. If it is a design project that was completed as a design-bid-build, are design firms required to fill out item 15 for construction?

Answer: If the construction trades are known item 15 should be filled out. If trades are unknown item 15 should indicate trades unknown.

158. Are projects exceeding $25M in construction value considered as favorable as projects within Tier #2?

Answer: See Section M, Paragraph M.4, Factor 1: Experience

159. The Representations & Certifications section has sufferred from a formatting error (headings and subheadings are jumbled), can the Government re-issue a correctly formatted copy of section K for all offerors?

Answer: The file was created with Microsoft Word M365. If you have an older version of Word that may cause formatting issues.

160. Page 99, section L.2 asks for a FAPIIS Certification. Can the government please clarify how they would like the offeror to demonstrate FAPIIS Certification?

Answer: FAPIIS certification is part of the Entity Information Resonsibility/qualification information on SAM.gov

161. Page 99, section L.2 asks for "SAM Registration" as a deliverable. Can the government please clarify how they would like this deliverable to be submitted? It is too vague.

Answer: See Amendment 001 Question #3

162. Page 99, Section L.2 shows the Surety Bonding Letter as a deliverable that would occur before TAB 1, 2, and 3. On page 107, Factor 2 states that a formal letter from the bonding company is to be provided, which would be in a different place from what is asked on Page 99, Section L.2. Can the government please confirm or clarify where they would like the surety bonding letter to be placed?

Answer: See Amendment 005 Question #70

163. We would like to request a time extension of two weeks for the Bid Date.

Answer: Proposal due date remains unchanged

164. If the contractor is submitting a proposal for both Pool 2 and Pool 3, are we required to submit two separate DoD Safe Drop Off Request Code emails for Phase One proposal submission? 1. There are no user accounts for DoD SAFE. In order to submit a proposal in response to this solicitation, Offerors shall submit their point of contact (POC) name and email address and indicate if they are submitting for Pool 2 or Pool 3 via email to both point of contact names identified below in Section L.8 (Electronic Data Submission Points of Contact) to obtain a “Request Code” for DoD SAFE “Drop-off” of the Phase One proposal.

Answer: One email with Point of Contact for person submitting proposal with a statement asking for a drop off code for Pool 2 and Pool 3 is sufficient.

165. With many USCG bases supporting the aviation mission , please confirm that runways will be considered relevant projects for Factor 1: Experience

Answer: Yes, runways are considered relevant

166. Box 15 on Attachment B entails a list of construction trades/subcontractors associated with each respective project. For Design Experience, answer to RFI #139 submitted by another potential Offeror states "Offer [sic], with assistance from A/E , should fill out Box 15.

However, in many cases the Offeror submitting a proposal in response to this RFP was not the constructor on Design Experience projects. Additionally, some of the Design Experience projects may be Design- Bid-Build in which the DOR had no involvement with the ultimate construction of the project or may not have had significant involvement with specific trades or subcontractors on Design-Build projects. We respectfully repeat the request to remove this requirement for Design Experience as it isn't relevant to many or most projects submitted under Design Experience.

Answer: See answer to question #157 above.

END OF AMENDMENT