National AE III QA_2 DEC.pdf

70Z05023RNATAE

National AE III Q&A 2 December 2022

1. Can you prime and be a sub?

Answer: There is not anticipated to be a prohibition.

2. When will the synopsis be issued?

Answer: Final synopsis is anticipated to be issued 2 Dec.

3. Can an entity be a member of a UR JV as well as a SB JV and be eligible for an award of both the UR and SB contracts?

Answer: There is no prohibition anticipated.

4. Will a similar number of awards be made across small, unrestricted, partial for recompete?

Answer: Please see synopsis. Award is intended to be made to up to approximately six (6) large businesses and up to approximately four (4) small businesses.

5. Please provide any insight on cyber work.

Answer: There is not anticipated to be significant requirements directly related to cyber. See statement of work in synopsis.

6. Will Small Businesses be required to show Professional Engineering and Registered Architectural licensure in all 50 states or will licensure in the individual's home state be sufficient?

Answer: Firms must have Licensed Engineers and RAs on staff. They would then be responsible for obtaining the services or licensure reciprocity necessary to develop designs and drawings in the jurisdiction the project is being performed to meet regulatory guidelines (i.e. stamp drawings, obtain permitting, etc.).

7. Does the USCG plan to use the TORN process to select AE firms for various task orders? If so, please describe process in detail.

Answer: The task orders issued under the awarded contracts will be competed under Fair Opportunity, FAR 16.505(b), which will be awarded based upon the qualifications of the firm as required to best meet the requirements of the task order with the exception of orders set aside for small businesses as allowed by FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F). When fair opportunity is provided, all firms, including any small business may compete for selection as the most highly qualified firm for that task order. After qualification based selection, task order is negotiated using established rates. Please note that FAR 16.500 requires that we select contractors and conduct placement of orders consistent with FAR subpart 36.6.

8. Are you planning an Unrestricted and a Small Business pool? And if so, how will work be competed between these two pools?

Answer: The resultant contract will contain a partial small business reserve in accordance with FAR 19.502-4(a) as up to approximately four contracts will be reserved for this multiple-award procurement.

The Contracting Officer will have discretion to limit fair opportunity for task orders for the small business reserve in accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F) for any action below $250,000. Any small business awarded a contract will be allowed to compete for any task order.

9. How many small businesses will be selected for this IDIQ?

Answer: Up to approximately 4.

10. Would you recommend Large Business sub to Small Business if they don't have a large portfolio with the specific DHS clients or does project type experience outweigh specific client experience and Large Business should consider pursuing as PRIME?

Answer: Please review synopsis. Contracting office can clarify aspects of draft synopsis, but will not provide recommendations.

11. Plan or need for construction administration and inspection services Title II during construction?

Answer: This is not anticipated. Please see statement of work in synopsis.

12. Can we extend the # of Section F projects from subconsultants from 3 to 5?

Answer: Section F projects from subconsultants are limited to 3.

13. How will CUI be handled?

Answer: CUI would be addressed at task order level as needed.

14. In evaluating proposals, how will USCG evaluate different types of projects e.g., projects for private, Federal Government, or DoD clients? Will certain project types be considered more favorably?

Answer: Please review synopsis.

15. Please confirm that questions are due on 11/15/22, and not the SF 330 forms.

Answer: Yes, Draft Synopsis Industry comments were due 15 November 2022. See final synopsis for SF330 due date and submission procedures.

16. Can a firm be selected as part of an UR JV for a LB seat and also be selected for a SB seat as part of a SBA approved Mentor Protege JV arrangement?

Answer: There is no anticipated prohibition.

17. Are prime’s required to be Engineering firms? Or can they be Architectural?

Answer: FAR 36.601-4 describes what architect-engineering services should be considered to be. It is the offeror/firm’s responsibility to ensure eligibility. The NAICS code is 541330.

18. When do you anticipate the issue of this solicitation?

Answer: The solicitation including rate proposal request will be issued to the selected, most highly qualified firms in approximately Summer 2023.

19. Will the SB set-asides be nationwide?

Answer: Yes to include United States and Territories. SB need to be able to provide the resources to fulfill the contract requirements.

20. Is there a possibility of a Nationwide USCG PMO contract, and if so, would firms on this A&E contract be in conflict with that procurement?

Answer: A Nationwide PMO contract is not currently anticipated. In the event a PMO contract was contemplated, there could be potential conflicts of interest.

21. To compete, as long as the full team is covered it doesn’t matter who is prime?

Answer: Please review the synopsis. If you still have a question, please be more specific.

22. How does they agency conduct construction administration and inspection services...is this done by the agency staff or by consultant contract? it was not clear in the synopsis. thank you.

Answer: The agency uses both government and contracted resources to perform construction administration and inspection services. The approach varies by contract/project.

23. What is required for industry response on November 19?

Answer: Draft Synopsis Industry comments closed 15 November 2022.

24. The NAICS Code is 541330, Engineering. Can the prime firm be registered under the Architecture NAICS Code?

Answer: It is recommended that prime firm is registered for NAICS code 541330. It is the offeror/firm’s responsibility to ensure eligibility.

25. Can a firm submitting as a large business prime JV also submit as part of a small business mentor-protégé JV, or will they be precluded from award of one or the other?

Answer: Please see answer to question 3.

26. What is the best way to connect with the Primes? Can we ask for their contact info?

Answer: The attendee list from the virtual industry day is attached at sam.gov.

27. Was the NAICS code change from Architecture to Engineering the main change to the Draft Synopsis?

Answer: It is the responsibility of the offeror/firm to review the synopsis. A track changes version will capture changes between draft and final synopsis.

28. Will there likely be an OCI between a firm winning this A/E contract and also winning the USCG D- B NMMAC(large or small)??

Answer: We rely on the critical professional judgement of our AE firms in all manner of issues to include representing our best interests in potential litigation with other parties. Our view is that this level of professionalism and trust requires that our AE firms limit participation to a single client on each project. We do not support potential split loyalty on any of our projects and will employ policies that ensure that AE firms can represent our best interests without any conflicts in the face of any controversy. In addition to the above, we want to avoid even the appearance that any one potential offeror has superior knowledge which might interrupt the integrity of the procurement process and create an unfair advantage. For these reasons:

1. For the DBB project delivery method: We do not support an AE firm taking on additional responsibilities on a project designed for us. We view that the AE firm is expressly forbidden to participate in construction per FAR 36.209.

2. For the D-B delivery method: We do not support an AE firm taking on additional responsibilities on a project where they developed our bridging documents. We view that the spirit of FAR 36.209 applies to the situation to the combined design and construction contract (D-B Contract); as such, we do not support an AE firm participating in construction where they have provided support to the bridging documents.

29. Are there any significant changes to the process from the previous AE IDIQ?

Answer: No significant changes, however it is responsibility of offeror/firm to review.

30. Can you provide the link again on the seminar for how to do business with USCG on 12/7?

Answer: Slides from virtual industry day are posted to SAM.gov.

31. Can you also please include attendees list?

Answer: Posted to SAM.gov.

32. Will these A/E services be used for both the USCG NMACC Large & Small programs OR will there be a new A/E Small Business IDID for the Small pool projects?

Answer: Requirements developed by AE firms may be used for each of the NMACC pools as well as other IDIQ contract vehicles. There is not anticipated to be a separate National AE contracting vehicle comprised exclusively of small businesses.

33. Page 4 states: “For projects showing experience under RELEVANT PROJECTS, Block 19 under PART I, projects shall have the design or project deliverable 100% complete within the past ten (10) years of the posting date of this synopsis.”

There is always some confusion how to assess construction phase services provided on a project that the A/E was responsible for design, particularly when design and construction were provided under one contract or Task Order. For some projects, the last deliverable by the A/E are the “As-Built” drawings provided well after the project is constructed and even occupied. The design documents may have been completed 5 years earlier than when the “As-Built” drawings are provided. So is it the goal to consider perfectly acceptable a project where the “As-Built” drawings were provided by the A/E 9 years ago (a project deliverable 100% complete within the past ten (10) years), while the final design documents were completed 12 years ago? It seems there should be some better clarifying language to ensure submitters can provide all their relevant projects, and ensure someone does not mistakenly submit something that is not considered relevant.

Answer: The design or project deliverable needs to be 100% complete within past 10 years of posting date of synopsis.

34. Page 5 states: “(14) Hazardous materials surveys and/or abatement/remediation planning;”

I expected to read “abatement/remediation design” rather than planning. I’m assuming it’s desirable to have qualifications in actual designs for advertisement and contractor execution rather than just experience in planning, and the work “planning” should be replaced with “design” or “design documents”

Answer: No change to synopsis. Plan development for abatement or remediation is deemed appropriate.

35. Page 6 states: “Past performance will be evaluated in terms of . . . 5) Small Business Subcontracting .

How will Small Business Subcontracting be evaluated for Small Business firms? As a small business, we often receive a “N/A” or similar on CPARS assessments, as we have no small business plan or goals to be rated against in our use of small contractors. The criteria states this will be evaluated, but it would help if

(or if not) it will be evaluated for small businesses, and if evaluated what form the information might be provided in.

Answer: For Small Businesses past performance will not consider Small Business Subcontracting as it is not applicable.

36. Page 6 states: “Escalation rates for the annual ordering periods after the base will be negotiated prior to award of each contract.”

Escalations can be highly variable and difficult to fairly assess at the time of award. We highly recommend looking into using an appropriate inflation metric to escalate rates appropriately for future dates. It is the goal of the A/E community to be paid fairly for the work, and not inappropriately compensated (either too much or too little) based on unpredictable inflationary factors. If escalation is too low compared to actual inflation in the economy, the government runs the risk of firms refusing to continue working on the contract. There has been some talk of “on ramps” for the contract – allowing other firms to joint the contract in the future. If these firm were then allowed to negotiate rates based on the date they joined the contract – that would potentially put them at an advantage to execute work at better pricing. If fair escalation is not included, it may violate the intent of negotiating fair and reasonable price for the work. We would suggest a government prepared index that has an applicable sub-category, such as the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics “Employment Cost Index for total compensation, by ownership, occupational group, and industry”, and utilizing the subcategory of “Professional, scientific, and technical services” to determine annual escalation: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.t01.htm

Answer: The contracting office will consider at time of solicitation and rate proposal request from selected most highly qualified firms.

37. Page 7 states: “All pages submitted will be considered as part of the page count with the exceptions of cover letter (limited to 1 page), Part II – General Qualifications, joint venture paperwork, front cover, back cover and divider pages/tabs (must not contain information related to selection criteria), pages defining acronyms, and past performance submissions.”

It seems a bit buried here as to what will not count towards the page limitation, but nonetheless it is very important that this statement remain in the final version, and remain very clear. Currently it seems to provide the right clarity.

Answer: No response.

38. Page 9 states: “The Government has established a 14-day turnaround for the A-E firm’s proposal after receipt of the RFP.”

We recommend this extending to 21 or 28 days for turnaround. Particularly for small businesses, if key staff are on vacation at the time proposals are requested, it can make responding very difficult, especially if there are multiple sub-consultants that need rates also. If there is not a significant driver for this contract that would make a 14-day turnaround critical to the contract’s success, we would suggest a more reasonable time to provide proposals.

Answer: Contracting office will take this under consideration at time of solicitation/rate proposal request, but anticipates selected firms to turn around proposals in expedient fashion.

39. Section 1. Contract Information – Paragraph 4: Representative subcontracting goals are provided in the table in this section.

SDB goals are comprised of 8(a) and non-8(a). The percentages for 8(a) of 10% and Non-8(a) of 5% do not total the SDB goal of 22.5%. Please provide further explanation.

Answer: The representative goals percentages are separate from each other. SDB goal of 22.5% was not calculated to reflect the combination of 8(a) and non-8(a) small businesses.

40. Would the government require separate reporting for 8a utilization on ISRs and SSRs through the eSRS? Currently eSRS does not have a field for the 8a category, only SDB.

Answer: We do not anticipate separate reporting, but will clarify by time solicitation is issued to selected, most highly qualified firms.

41. Section 3. Selection Criteria, B. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence, first paragraph:

“Up to ten (10) projects with the design or project deliverable 100% complete within the last 10 years of the date of the synopsis”. Since AE task orders with design may also contain construction phase services (i.e., RFI and submittal reviews), will the government concur that a project may be used if design is 100% complete even if construction is not complete and therefore construction phase services may not be complete?

Answer: The design or project deliverable needs to be 100% complete within past 10 years of posting date of synopsis.

42. Will any of the task orders include historic buildings and/or facilities?

Answer: Some of the task orders may include requirements for historic buildings/facilities.

43. Is it expected or required for the small business to have expertise in all of the facility types- i.e., the buildings that fall under special construction? (p. 4, Description of work, no. 3)

Answer: Please review synopsis.

44. Please clarify what type of residential buildings would be part of this contract?

Answer: TBD. Please review synopsis. This DHS enterprise-wide contract is intended to provide prompt responses on an as-needed basis for miscellaneous general A/E services including architecture, mechanical, structural, civil, electrical, geotechnical, and coastal engineering services to meet the majority of DHS's architect-engineering services needs within the 50 United States and its Territories.

45. Can a firm submit qualifications as the prime offeror, as well as be a consultant on another team?

Answer: Yes.

46. Do the projects have to be 100% construction complete?

47. At the recent November 10th industry day, you stated the RFP would be released on November 30th, would you consider a 6-week extension because of the Christmas, New Year’s Eve, and New Year holidays due to office closures?

Answer: Current SF330 submission due date is 18 January 2023.

48. 1-Contract Information – given the national footprint for the small business pool holders (confirmed by contracting during the industry day), many firms will likely need to use mentor-protégé JVs in order to cover the wider geography. Will this be allowed? If so, will a large business (OTSB) be permitted to submit twice – one on for the large business pool, and again as part of a M-P JV for the small business pool? Please clarify in the final synopsis.

Answer: Offeror/Firm can submit as M-P JV and can submit twice as OTSB and M-P JV (SB pool) as long as they meet eligibility requirements.

49. 2- Description of Work – Please provide more clarification on use of this new IDIQ by other DHS components? Which ones are likely to use? If it is primarily limited to USCG and those others w/ facility needs (CBP, USSS, FLETC, FEMA) you should state these clearly, just not limited to.

Answer: This is a non-mandatory DHS strategic sourcing contract vehicle. The components you have highlighted have been the most frequent users outside of DHS of the contract vehicle.

50. 2- Description of Work – in previous versions of this AE IDIQ, contract holders were not allowed to “shop” the IDIQ to other DHS components. Will this be the case on this new AE IDIQ? In other words, are there limitations on the contract holders as to how they can ‘market’ the IDIQ across DHS and if so can these be clearly stated in the synopsis as your expectations of contract holders?

Answer: Contract vehicle needs to be used consistent with scope and ordering guide. The fair opportunity and QBS process will be used for task orders.

51. 3-Selection Criteria, A-Professional Qualifications – the Project/Task Order Manager should not have an asterisk(*) for a required “professional engineering license, registration, certification.” Traditionally this is a different career path within the AE industry (separate from Designer or Production), especially for many who were officers in the military and who spent much of their careers as a project engineer/project manager managing work and who did not have the ability early on to work under PE/RAs to become registered/licensed themselves. As a Task Order PM on this contract, they will not be signing/sealing task order documents/drawings (unless they are “dual-hatting” as an engineer or architect, in which case license/registration would be required for that role). So a professional registration/license is not applicable to their contract responsibilities. By requiring a PE license/registration for this Task Order PM position, the USCG will be limiting firms (especially small businesses) on their ability to bring their most highly qualified and experienced project managers to the contract - many of whom would come from a military facilities and contract mgmt. background. This artificially limits the competitive field available for USCG. A PMP certificate is also not wide-spread within the industry and should not be “required” for this PM role. However, as many agencies will do, it could be referenced in the evaluation criteria as a plus or differentiator for the PM role if one is provided.

52. 6-Submission Requirements - Is the GSA SF330 fillable form required or can other software programs be utilized to create this standard GSA SF330 form with the requested font and margin requirements?

Answer: For consistency of the forms, please use the GSA SF330 fillable form for submission.

53. We attended the virtual industry day presentation on November 10th, and it was mentioned that in order to be eligible for an award a firm, including its subconsultants, must be able to provide a 3rd party overhead audit. Although the term “audit” is used generically, changes in the law have greatly expanded the requirements and therefore the costs of providing audits. We typically provide a third party compilation report performed by a licensed CPA. Would this be acceptable?

Answer: Yes as long as it is consistent with FAR 31.105 including verification of allowable costs consistent with FAR.

54. RE: 4. Contract Structure: “The contract will include a base ordering period, with nine subsequent annual ordering periods for a total duration of 10 years. Labor and overhead rates will be negotiated prior to award of the contract. Escalation rates for the annual ordering periods after the base will be negotiated prior to award of each contract.”

Will each ordering period be set up as an option?

Will Escalation rates be negotiated only once at base contract award, or before each option ordering period?

Answer: Each annual ordering period is not an option. The current intent is to negotiate escalation for each annual ordering period prior to award.

55. RE: 2. Description of Work “Work may include, but is not limited to, miscellaneous general construction engineering and architectural services including architecture, mechanical, structural, civil, sanitary, geotechnical, telecommunications, arctic engineering and coastal engineering. Services to be obtained may also include assessment of existing conditions, review of project designs, analysis of alternatives, focus on sustainable design recommendations for cost effective alternatives and development of final designs and construction contract documents.”

Would work may also include electrical, environmental, and mission beddown/homeporting feasibility studies?

Answer: Description of work is not all encompassing.

56. RE: 2. Description of Work “2. Studies and reports, including:”

Should the following types of studies be included? Historically, these types of studies have been included in previous IDIQ tasks.

Assessment of the feasibility of locating new, existing, future missions at new candidate locations to include data collection, gap analysis, recommendation(s), etc.

Data collection, analysis, and assembly of DD Form 1391 based Planning Proposals (PP), and Project Planning Reports (PPR); to include alternative identification, analysis, and prioritization; PP and PPR economic analysis.

Topographical surveys

57. RE: 3.B. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence:

(1) Design-build bridging documents for government or commercial facilities;

(2) Design of vertical government or commercial facilities

(3) Design of horizontal government or commercial facilities

Please consider removing “or commercial” or clarify what commercial facility would mean under this contract.

Answer: Commercial is indicative of non-government.

58. Please consider adding “, including airfield pavements” to (3)

Answer: No change.

(5) Design of industrial facilities;

Please consider adding “and aviation facilities” to (5)

Answer: Additional substantiation would be needed to consider aviation facilities within the realm of industrial facilities.

59. (9) Application of Department of Defense Antiterrorism / Force Protection and Security Engineering Construction Standards;

Please clarify whether USCG foresees using DoD AT/FP UFC in future projects, as DHS is pivoting toward Interagency Security Council Physical Security Requirements instead.

Answer: To be determined. Would be identified at task order level.

60. (11) Topographical & Hydrologic surveys;

Does this term “hydrologic” refer to Bathymetric or Hydrographic surveys? If not, please elaborate on foreseen hydrological needs.

Answer: Yes.

61. (15) Facility condition assessments.

Please consider adding “of government facilities, incorporating use of sustainment management system” to (15)

Answer: Not added to synopsis.

62. RE: “Once all firms are ranked for individual criterion, the Slate Selection Board will evaluate these rankings to determine an overall ranking of all firms. The Slate Selection Board will consider the numerical rankings for each criterion, the relative order of importance of the evaluation criteria, and underlying facts that resulted in rankings.”

Will the final numerical ranking of the firms be published?

Answer: Publishing of final numerical ratings is not anticipated.