20R0003 Atch 15 Q and A 200520.pdf

Whiteman AFB MATOC Solicitation Q&A

FA462520R0003

5/20/2020

Q1: Will the government please provide access to download the Whiteman AFB Installation Facility Standard and the Whiteman AFB Design Compatibility Standards prior the RFP deadline so Offerors and A/E team members can consult these documents to ensure the proper design is proposed?

A1: These documents have been uploaded, see Attachments 16 and 17.

Q2: The project "Statement of Objectives Paragraph 11) Design Criteria" notes to design to latest codes and latest Whiteman Design Compatibility Standards. Can we get a copy of those Standards and a clarification on the ‘latest codes’ referenced. Are we to design to 2018 ICC, or the latest adopted by the AFB or by the City of Knob Knaster? Please confirm.

A2: See Attachments 16 and 17. Furthermore, use the latest edition of all applicable codes.

Q3: What is the means for showing energy code compliance? Is COMcheck accepted to the AHJ, or will energy modeling be required?

A3: Energy modeling is not required. Designer certifies compliance with energy code via professional engineer stamp.

Q4: What level of OSHA certification is required for the Safety Manager? (e.g OSHA 30-hour safety certification?)

A4: Safety Manager requires OSHA 30-hr safety certification. The SOW, Section 2, Paragraph 7.3, and 1442 Section M, Paragraph 2.1 have been updated accordingly.

Q5: Does Building 3008 have a mass notification system? If so, please provide the manufacturer and model number of the control unit for the system.

A5: There is no Mass Notification System in Building 3008.

Q6: Will the government consider projects submitted in Vol. B, Factor 2, Past Experience from the Designer Of Record? If so, will this experience be given the same consideration as past experience submitted for the prime offeror?

A6: Projects submitted in Vol. B, Factor 2, Past Experience may be from the Designer Of Record if the Designer of Record is the prime Offeror or part of the Joint Venture, Mentor Protégé, or Teaming Arrangement submitting the proposal. All Joint Venture, Mentor Protégé, and Teaming Arrangements must meet the requirements of the solicitation. If the Designer of Record is the prime Offeror or part of the Joint Venture, Mentor Protégé, or Teaming Arrangement submitting the proposal, their experience will be given the same consideration.

Q7: Sec. L, Para. 6.0 – Factor 4; para. 6.1.b - States: “Complete design calculations in accordance with (IAW) the Representative Project SSO.” Since design will not take place until after project award, can the design calculations be provided once the project is awarded and design and review has occurred?

A7: No, calculations should be provided with the Offeror's proposal IAW Section L, Paragraph 6.1.b.

Refer to Section L, Paragraph 6.1 – “a conceptual design proposal” is required. The Government is not requiring a specific percentage of completion for the Factor 4 design submission. Offerors are expected to put forth the level of effort necessary to demonstrate their proposed technical solution at a conceptual level. The proposal/submission must meet the requirements listed in Section L Paragraph 6.1, adequately correspond with the submissions for Section L, Paragraphs 6.2-6.3, and support the Factor 5, Price Proposal. Section L Paragraph 6.1.b has been changed to read: "Design calculations for each discipline, as appropriate, in accordance with the Representative Project SOO".

Q8: Clarification to Q&A dated 5/7/2020, Q&A #55 -I understand your reply as follows:

List TWO POC’s for each project shown under the Factor 3- Past Performance Section 5.4 Contact information, (requiring one of those projects listed be the same as one shown in the Factor 2 -Past Experience section).

The list of PPQ recipients should include at least ONE individual from those listed in the Factor 3- Past Performance Section 5.4 Contract Information table who was sent a PPQ.

A8: Section L Paragraph 5.5.b. states "Provide a list of questionnaire recipients, to include two current POCs and phone numbers for each contract reference provided". If there is only one current POC available for a given contract; providing only one POC for that project is acceptable.

Q9: Section L, 1.0 - Magnitude of Construction: It is stated that the subsequent task orders will be in the ranges of $ 250,000-$500,000; $500,000-$1,000,000; $1,000,000-$5,000,000; $5,000,000- $10,000,000. Section M, 2.2 Factor 2 - Past Experience states that for a project to be considered relevant, it has to have a value between $1 M - $ 7.5 M. We request relevancy of past experience to be modified by (1) eliminating the top ceiling of $ 7.5 M, and (2) reducing the bottom range ceiling to $ 250,000. This change will reflect the proposed task order ranges on the proposed contract.

A9: The ranges were provided IAW FAR 36.204. The relevancy of Factor 2 - Past Experience will not be modified at this time.

Q10: We have two contracts from the same Federal Agency at the same location/building for construction work at the same time. Can both these contracts be combined as one project?

A10: No.

Q11: Can multiple task orders under an ID/IQ be combined as one project to meet the $1 M-$7.5 M relevancy requirement?

A11: No.