11R20017 Amendment 0005.docx

DOCX document 80 KB Posted

Attached to
Fire Life Safety
Solicitation number
DTRT57-11-R-20017
Issued by

About this file

Amendment 0005 attachment.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Amendment 0007 3 1 2012.pdf PDF
11R20017 Amend 0006.pdf PDF
SF30 11R20017 Amend 0005.pdf PDF
11R20017 Amend 0004.pdf PDF
Amendment 11 30 2011.docx DOCX document
1960_20.pdf PDF
11R20017 Amend 0003.pdf PDF
DOT APL HSPD 12.pdf PDF
11R20017 Amend 0002.pdf PDF
FLS Pre-Proposal Conference Webinar SlidesMGRC —
11R20017 Amend 0001.pdf PDF
11R20017 SCHEDULES.docx DOCX document
DTRT57-11-R-20017 SOL.pdf PDF
Show all 13

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Solicitation DTRT57-11-R-20017 Amendment 0005 This amendment is issued to provide the following responses to additional questions received.

Question 1.On the bottom of the 2nd page under the description for the STAFF ENGINEERS (FIRE PROTECTION) it states: “Certification as a Registered Professional Engineer (PE - Fire Protection).”

Is this an error? Requiring Staff Engineers to be registered professional engineers means that no staff other than Admin and CAD technicians are permitted to work on this contract, as Staff Engineer is the lowest level of identified personnel in the RFP for this contract. The GSA defines a Staff Engineer, as follows:

There is no mention of a requirement for a Professional Engineer registration.

Please advise.

A: Our requirement (to meet our RFP defined standards) is to show 3 to 6 resumes of staff engineer candidates of your choosing that are PE licensed in Fire Protection to be considered “key staff engineering personnel” for our program. In addition, we are requiring a matrix of your fire protection personnel available for use on this contract to satisfy the RFP levels of effort, labor categories including the functional areas. This matrix is intended to show the experience depth and breadth within your company including subject matter experts. Refer to section L.5.B Staffing in the RFP for instructions. For clarification purposes, we encourage each bidder to show additional staffing within the matrix that could be accessed within the labor categories defined.

Also, refer to Amendment 003, posted December 01, 2011, Question and Answer Section, Question 1, repeated as follows:

1.Currently six (6) separate labor categories are listed in the table contained within section B.3. Of these, three (3) are identified as being “key.” Does the Government have any specific minimum qualification requirements for any of these categories; especially those considered to be “key”? Otherwise, is it the Government’s intent that contractors shall utilize their own internal definitions/qualification requirements for each? Is it allowed that contractors also propose (bid) other labor categories that they believe may be beneficial in supporting the work requirements outlined in the statement of work?

A: See Amendment 0003 for the minimum qualifications for Key Personnel and other personnel.

The contractors shall use the labor categories defined.

2.On the Fed Biz Ops website where the solicitation is advertised it identifies that this is not a “Set Aside” project. Being so, it is assumed that a business that is considered a large business or one that is not considered one of the following: a “small business”; “small disadvantaged business”; “women-owned business”; “HUBZone business”; or a “disabled veteran-owned small business” can submit a proposal for this solicitation. Several sections, such as K.1 (page 44) eludes to the small business. In at least on location (page 49) the solicitation eludes to the “performance of large business concerns complying with the Subcontracting Plan goals for small disadvantaged business concerns.” Finally section L.6.D Part III – Subcontracting plan identifies that businesses who are not small must submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

If a Large Business were to bid this project, and they carried one or more small businesses as sub-contractors, is it required that there be at least one of each: a “small business”; “small disadvantaged business”; “women-owned business”; “HUBZone business”; or a “disabled veteran-owned small business” on the team?

A: All offerors that are large businesses must submit an acceptable subcontracting plan in accordance with the solicitation and FAR Clause 52.219-9 (JAN 2011).

3.The table identifying the “Level of Effort” on page 3 [section B.3] and the “Level of Effort” table on page 57 [section L.6.C.1] do not match. During the pre-proposal webinar, something to this affect was mentioned. Will an Amendment to the Solicitation be posted correcting the tables with regard to “Level of Effort”? If so, when should we expect to see that Modification?

A: See Amendment 3 for the corrections to the solicitation in this area.

4.The table under (1) Key Personnel and Resumes (on page 53) states the minimum and maximum quantities of resumes for Program Manager, Sr. Fire Protection Engineer and Staff Engineers total are 7 and 14. There is no place for the minimum and maximum quantity of Subject Matter Experts, as identified in Schedule 3. Is there a minimum and maximum quantity of resumes for Subject Matter Experts that would increase the totals past 7 and 14?

A: No, there is no requirement for Subject Matter Expert(SME) resumes. However, SMEs should be identified in the staffing matrix by name, degree/certifications, expert subject, years of experience on subject, and geographical location.

Please note the following Revision to L.4F to the solicitation:

Add the following:

Offerors shall submit 5 copies of each of the technical and cost proposals.

See revisions to Amendment 3:

Please also note that questions 7 – 11 were incorrectly numbered due to a formatting error. The numbers are as follows : #4 is #7, #5 is #9, #6 is # 10, #10 is #11.

Answer to Question 25:

See the detailed response to Question 26.

image1.png image2.emf

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .