EIC A_E RFP 396466 Addendum 1.pdf

Property and Procurement

Management Division Building 1005S P.O. Box 5000

Upton, NY 11973-5000

Date: 02/10/2023

ADDENDUM NO. 1

to

Request for Proposal RFP No. 396466 for

Electron-Ion Collider (EIC) Architect-Engineering Services

GENERAL: This Addendum is to amend Request for Proposal RFP No. 396466.

Material, work, and workmanship, except where specified otherwise in this Addendum, shall conform to all requirements of Contract Documents and become a part thereof.

https://sam.gov/opp/39357e4fbdb24e4c93401f51dedb7796/view

CLARIFICATIONS:

Question 1: Is previous experience of EIC facilities a pre-requisite requirement?

Answer 1: No.

Question 2: Have the Room Data Sheets for each of the buildings been signed off by the BNL?

Answer 2: No, these are examples only and are expected to change to represent the best designs of the responsible A/E firm engaged.

Question 3: The design info references 60% design completion – is this a correct assessment and are there any areas yet to be finalised if not signed off?

Answer 3: No areas are finalized, and designs are not yet "signed off".

Question 4: Is there a clear membership of stakeholders and a project leadership team?

Answer 4: Yes, the team is defined in the documents.

Question 5: Is there a single client liaison lead responsible for decisions and what is the BNL’s design stage approval process?

Answer 5: The Infrastructure Division Director is the Technical Representative for this contract. The design review process will include BNL's SMEs and is outlined in the milestone table.

Question 6: Has HDR been invited to submit a response to the RFP?

Answer 6: No restrictions have been made on proposal submission.

Question 7: Can you provide a list of Prime firms that we can contact regarding that?

Answer 7: BNL does not keep a record of "Prime" firms for teaming purposes.

Question 8: Is HDR precluded from proposing on this RFP given their involvement during the Concept Design?

Answer 8: No restrictions have been made on proposal submission.

Question 9: Section 5.3.4 of the RFP references an Attachment G with Enclosure

1. Attachment G does not appear to be included with the downloadable files.

Please provide this.

Answer 9: Reference to Attachment G Enclosure 1 has been removed. BNL will not provide a Small Business Plan Template.

Question 10: Section 5.3.4 notes stretch goals of 50% Small Business. Please clarify if this is 50% of the total design team contract value or is it 50% of the subcontracted design team value (i.e, total design team contract value minus the prime contractor portion of the design team fee).

Answer 10: The stretch goals represent percentages for subcontracted design teams.

Offerors certified as a Small Business do not need to complete a plan.

Question 11: The milestones in Enclosure 1 do not distinguish between

Preliminary and Detailed Design stages. Please confirm there would be payment milestones for each.

Answer 11: BNL is open to negotiate alternate payment terms during Phase II of the process.

Question 12: Is the intent that payments would only be made at the end of milestones or is there an opportunity to invoice between milestones based upon and agreed schedule? It would be challenging for us and our subconsultants to only invoice and receive payments every 4 months or so.

Answer 12: BNL is open to negotiate alternate payment terms during Phase II of the process and the subsequent payment will be based on the negotiated payment milestone schedule.

Question 13: Statement of Work calls for a Preliminary Design 60% Review

Submittal (Milestone #4), and Preliminary Design Report Submittal (Milestone #

5). Are these two separate submittals with the same deadline? The milestone dates for both are 36 weeks from NTP.

Answer 13: There are two submittals. The Design Review is intended to consist of relevant drawings and calculations, the Design Report is the descriptive text that includes the design basis, assumptions, and other descriptive information.

Question 14: Please confirm the number of Submittals and number of Cost

Estimates / VE studies.

Answer 14: There are six (6) submittals and two (2) Value Engineering studies. Cost estimates are ongoing and will be reviewed at Budget Reconciliation meetings.

Question15: “Attendance of a project overview site walk will be mandatory for prospective Offerors as a part of the Phase One process”.

When will this site visit take place and can we sign up to attend?

Answer 15: Reference to site visit during Phase I has been removed. No site visit will be provided during Phase I. The site visit will be scheduled during Phase II of the procurement process and offered only to the short-listed Offerors.

Question 16: The nature of first-of-a-kind/one-of-kind projects like the

Brookhaven EIC means that comparable past performance qualifying projects are rare. Jacobs requests that BSA remove the 15 year recency requirement from the RFP? If unwilling to remove the requirement, we request changing the time scale to 20 years? Jacobs maintains key personnel who connect to older projects and are available to support EIC who have only gained in experience and ability to deliver complex cutting edge technology projects over time.

Answer 16: BNL acknowledges this point and will extend recency of accelerator project experience to 20 years for all offerors.

Question 17: Could you clarify if this design-only RFP requires a CM/GC team member?

Answer 17: No, it does not.

Question 18: Attachment A includes the following term incorporated by reference – Article 73/ Service Contract Labor Standards (Aug 2018)

(agreements greater than $2,500 and as designated in the agreement) /52.222-41.

Please verify if this article is applicable and provide the relevant Wage

Determination attachment.

Answer 18: This article is not applicable.