Attachment_5_-_Questions_&_Answers.pdf

FA4427-17-R-0015 Attachment 5

XDAT 15-1071 Repair Shoulders Spots 604-607

Questions & Answers

7 June 2017

1. Ref SOW sect 2.3.3. Appears the over excavation of existing subgrade should be 8” not 6”.

Otherwise new AC will be 2” higher.

A: Correct, see SOW addendum #1

2. Reference SOW sect 2.2.8. Can the duties of Project Manager, Project Superintendent, and

QC Manager be combined?

A: No, see Spec 01 45 00.00 40.

3. Are project manager and QC manager required to be on-site at all times?

A: PM no, Super and QC yes

4. Ref SOW sect 2.3.10. Is the scope of the new AC striping to only re-establish what currently exists?

A: Yes

5. Reference SOW section 3. Where can we find the specifications that tell us exactly what type of asphalt, base rock, geotextile, tack and prime coat, striping, and crack sealing is required?

The UFGS seems inadequate.

A: See specifications incorporated as Attachment 6.

6. Ref SOW sect 2.3.8. Are drainage inlets (DIs) to remain at existing elevations?

A: yes

7. Ref SOW sect 2.3.5. Is spec section 23 11 23 supposed to 32 11 23?

A: yes, see addendum #1

8. Ref SOW sect 2.3.1. Is it a requirement that the existing AC be milled or are other removal methods acceptable?

A: Asphalt must be recycled off base. Methods and means to recycle is ktr decision.

9. Ref SOW sect 2.3.9. Is the requirement to crack seal entirely around each of the paving perimeters? (approx. 2,890 linear feet x 2 inch (min))

A: Yes

10. RFP page 42 of 48, Section L 3.2, paragraph a requests quality and satisfaction rating for contracts “completed within the past three years”. Paragraph b of the same section requests contracts “performed for Federal agencies and/or commercial customers within the last three years”. This section also states that evaluation for Part II - Past Performance will be based on the

“past and present efforts”. Please confirm that contracts submitted to satisfy requirements under paragraph a and b do not have to be 100% complete. We respectfully request that the language in paragraph a be revised to reflect contracts performed in the past three years as opposed to contracts completed in the past three years, for ease of evaluation.

A: Past performance efforts need not be 100% complete, however, an effort that is not substantially complete may be determined Not Relevant if the offeror’s performance cannot reasonably be evaluated due to minimal performance.

11. The contract documents refer to the Unified Facility Guide Specifications. I looked them up on-line using the following link (http://www.wbdg.org/ffc/dod/unified-facilities-guide-specifications-ufgs) and found the specifications listed in the SOW. But it appears to me that these specs are template guides that need to be supplemented with specific information for use in a contract. For example, SOW section 2.3.9 says to use Type 1 crack sealant per Spec 32 01

17.16. Yet, I don’t see anything referring to types in the specification at the above website.

A: In both documents Paragraph 2.1 identifies Type I and Type II sealants.

12. RFP page 42 of 48, Section L 3.2, paragraph a. Quality and Satisfaction Rating for Contracts

Completed in the Past Three Years states “Past Performance Questionnaires are also requested.

These should be forwarded by the offeror to previous customers for completion and submission to the 60th Contracting Squadron.” In the interest of reducing the workload and saving time for our previous Government clients, will the Government accept recently completed past performance questionnaires that answer similar and/or same past performance questions in lieu of Section L Attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire?

A: Previously completed questionnaires will be accepted.

13. If previously completed past performance questionnaires are acceptable in lieu of Section L

Attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire, please confirm that Offerors can submit them to the 60th Contracting Squadron as part of the proposal submission (rather than emailing them separately).

A: Previously completed questionnaires may be submitted as part of an offeror’s proposal.

14. In the interest of reducing the workload and saving time for our previous Government clients, please consider accepting CPARS past performance evaluation records to be submitted with

Offeror’s proposal in lieu requesting Government clients to complete and submit a new Section

L Attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire. The CPARS evaluation answers similar/same past performance questions.

A: Do not submit CPARS evaluations with proposals. CPARS evaluations will be retrieved from the Past Performance Information Retrieval System.

15. RFP page 42 of 48, Section L 3.2 states that the Past Performance section is limited to 4 pages per contract listed. Please confirm that items listed in paragraph a. Quality and Satisfaction

Rating for Contracts Completed in the Past Three years (e.g. letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, explanation of corrective actions, Past Performance Questionnaires) are excluded from the 4-page limit for each contract listed. This will allow Offerors to adequately respond to the requirements of paragraph b. Performance Surveys within the 4 pages for each contract.

A: The PPQs will not count towards the page limit.

16. Please clarify whether the items requested in RFP page 42 of 48, Section L 3.2, paragraph a, are to be directly related to the 10 contracts requested in paragraph b of the same section.

A: The items requested in RFP page 42 of 48, Section L 3.2, paragraph a must be directly related to the ten past performance efforts submitted to be considered for evaluation.

17. RFP page 41 of 48, Section L 2.0, paragraph g states "The response shall consist of two (2) separate parts, Part I - Price Proposal and Part II - Past Performance. Page 44 of 48, paragraph d states: "(d) Format for proposal Parts I, II & III shall be as follows:..." We were unable to locate

Part III in the solicitation. Please confirm there is NO Part III to this proposal.

A: There is no Part III.

18. RFP page 48 of 48, Section M 9.0 states "(b) A Pre-Award Survey (PAS) may be conducted as part of this evaluation according to FAR Subpart 9.106. Results of the PAS (if conducted) will be evaluated to determine each offeror’s capability to meet the requirements of the solicitation."

Please confirm the Air Force is NOT requesting any Pre-Award information to be submitted with the proposal for evaluation.

A: No pre-award information is requested with the proposal.

19. Please confirm where Offerors shall include Attachment 3 - Financial Institution Reference

Sheet.

A: Include Attachment 3 - Financial Institution Reference Sheet in Part II.

20. The solicitation included Specification Section 01000 and it contains two sub-sections; 1.25

Lead Based Paint Removal, Containment and Disposal and 1.26 Asbestos Containing Material, Containment and Disposal. Does this work expect to include the removal of lead based paint and asbestos material? If so, to what extent do these material exist and where are they located on the project?

Thanks.

A: No LBP or Asbestos is included.