Questions from Industry_AK_AE_Re-Compete.pdf

Ques�ons from Industry Dra� Synopsis

D17 ALASKA ARCHITECT & ENGINEERING SERVICES Indefinite Delivery-Indefinite Quan�ty (IDIQ) Mul�ple Award Task Order Contract MATOC (70Z08724RJUNE0001).

1. Chenega Security 360 specializes in various security/intrusion detec�on systems. Do you an�cipate any task orders or associated work requiring these types of devices as a standalone requirements or part of a larger requirement.

USCG Answer: Our current projec�ons through September 2025 do not indicate this type of work. I cannot confirm at this �me if this type of work will come up or not.

2. Reference 3B. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence – out of allowed maximum of 6

Sec�on F projects, how many can be supplied by subcontractors?

USCG Answer: Only one (1) project can be submited from a subcontractor.

3. Reference 4. Contract Structure - “Firms must have a 3rd party audit of overhead rates prepared prior to submission of rate proposals (Defense Contract Audit Agency or other 3ʳᵈ party).” My understanding is that DCAA audit cannot be requested by the contractor and must be requested by the Government. Because the audit od overhead rates must be completed prior to start of rates nego�a�on, does USCG have an approved list of 3rd par�es that can be contacted to carry out this audit?

USCG Answer: If your firm does not receive annual rates from a Federal Agency, then you may request a 3rd party audit from an independent CPA. This is a risk the contractor must determine they are willing to take since the audit informa�on will not be required un�l the Request for Proposal (submission of rates) is released.

4. Reference 6. Submission Requirements, p.8 - “The Government has established a 14-day turnaround for the A-E firm’s proposal a�er receipt of the RFP”. Does this statement pertain to rates proposal only or both rates proposal and SF330 quals submission? In case of the later, we respec�ully request USCG to consider a longer response window for SF330 submission.

USCG Answer: The 14-day turnaround is for the Request for Proposal (rate submissions). Only those firms selected by the Slate Board from Part 1 of evalua�ons (SF 330s) will receive cRequest for Proposal. Submission for SF330 will be 35 Calendar Days.

5. I was wondering what the USCG’s target release date is for the final synopsis? Is the final synopsis the phase at which firms will submit their completed SF330s, or is there an addi�onal step in between?

USCG Answer: There are no addi�onal steps between release of final synopsis and contractor submission of SF 330s.

6. Paragraph 3.A.: “Longevity with the firm” as an evalua�on factor can be a challenge with SB firms. Given the dynamic labor market, highly experienced staff may cause a firm to fail this evalua�on test due to a change in employment. Further, FAR 36.602 Selec�on of firms for architect-engineer contracts, does not include employment longevity as a selec�on criterion.

USCG Answer: We have changed longevity to con�nuity. Although this is not a criterion per FAR 36.602, USCG would like to know how long personnel have worked with firm; either as employee or as subconsultant.

7. Paragraph 3.B.: “Submit no more than (6) projects…” Of these six projects, the solicita�on prescribes five project types that must be submited (2 DBBs, 1 DB RFP, 2 engineering services).

The solicita�on further describes fourteen facility types, four primary AE services and fourteen task experiences required under this contract. Capturing all items listed in just six projects is a challenge, with only one project being discre�onary. Recommend up to twelve projects be allowed to be submited.

USCG Answer: The (14) facility types, (4) primary AE service types and (14) task experiences are informa�onal. We included these to ensure the firms responding were aware of the tasks and facili�es they may be presented with under the IDIQ. For evalua�on purposes, USCG only wants to see (6) project submitals covering 2 DBBs, 1 DB RFP, 2 engineering services and the final project is at the firm’s discre�on.

8. Paragraph 3.C.: “Demonstrate how the firm will provide the most highly qualified team for each task order.”: This statement appears to be more aligned with Paragraph 3.A. Professional Qualifica�ons, versus capacity to perform mul�ple TOs.

USCG Answer: The intent of this statement is for the firm to show how they will balance USCG Task Orders and other business/projects assuming the resumes submited under Professional Qualifica�ons are your most highly qualified personnel.

9. Paragraph 6: Please consider expanding the page count from 40 to 50 to allow for the necessary informa�on to address the firm's experience with the 14 items listed under sec�on 3B. Please also consider including language that Part II will be excluded from this page count.

USCG Answer:

Excep�ons to page count (must not contain informa�on related to selec�on criteria):

Cover Page (Limited to 1 page) Part II – General Qualifica�ons Joint Venture paperwork front cover back cover divider pages/tabs pages defining acronyms past performance submissions (this is limited to evalua�on printout from ACASS or CPARS and the Past Performance Ques�onnaire atached)

Supplemental past performance informa�on may be submited in Sec�on H but will be included in the page count.