Response to Questions 6.docx

Question: Will as built drawings of the current building be released?

Answer: As built drawings have been posted on FBO.

Question: To provide the required fire sprinkler 35% design, hydraulic calculations will be necessary. Please provide a site plan with hydrant locations and water flow information, needed for design.

Answer: The government has posted all as built drawing that will be required to submit a proposal as part of this solicitation.

Question: How many contractors do you expect to issue awards to under this contract?

Answer: The government intends to award 3 to 5 contracts under this solicitation.

Question: Please provide a scan of the sign-in sheets for pre-bid meeting attendees.

Answer: Sign in sheets for the pre-proposal conference and site visit have been posted on FBO.

Question: Reference amendment no. 0001 Section J - List of Documents. This section lists attachment no. 2 as DBA and it show it to be 53 pages long. There is no attachment 2. Please provide a copy of Attachment 2 DBA.

Answer: Attachment two, DBA Wage determinations are posted on FBO.

Question: Please provide a copy of Attachment 2 DBA.

Answer: Attachment two, DBA Wage determinations are posted on FBO.

Question: Reference amendment no. 0001 Section J - List of Documents. This section lists attachment no. 4 as Past Performance Questionnaire and it shows it to be 10 pages long. The document included with the June 30, 2011 FedBiz update is a Past Performance Questionnaire, but it only has 8 pages. Is the document provided missing two pages? If so, please provide additional 2 pages.

Answer: The past performance questionaire is only 8 total pages.

Question: Reference amendment no. 0001, Block 14 indicates a change in paragraph (c) on page 62 of 67. Is 67 a typo? The approved RFP issued on June 30, 2011 is 68 pages not 67. Please clarify.

Answer: The approved RFP issued on 30 June, 2011 is a total of 67 pages.

Question: Reference amendment no. 0001, Block 14 indicates a change in paragraph (c) on page 62 of 67. Change noted, but amendment also included the entire section L. Was there any other changes to section L other than the one noted on page 62?

Answer: No.

Question: Reference amendment no. 0001 - Summary of Changes/Section A. This description indicates "The required performance has changed from Multiple Award Construction Contact (MACC)MACC is a......". It does not indicate what it was changed to. Please clarify.

Answer: Nothing was changed in Section A.

Question: Reference amendment no. 0001, Block 14 indicates to remove paragraph 3 of the pre-design requirments on the seed project statement of work. It appears paragraph 3 was not deleted, but modified. Furthermore, paragraph 1 and 2 remained unchanged, but items 3-24 were modified and items 25 and 26 deleted. Please confirm.

Answer: Paragraphs 3 and 4 were deleted from the statement of work. It is the responsibility of the offeror to make sure all proposals meet the requirements in the most recent update to the statement of work.

Question: Reference amendment no. 0001, attachment no.1 "Pre-Design Requirements". Paragraph 3 "Official Site Visit" indicates "....to allow contractors to clarify their questions with the users and the government engineers..." It is not typical for the government to provide answers to verbal questions. If this is going to be the case, is the government intending to document questions and answers and provide them as part of an amendment? Please clarify.

Answer: The government did not answer any questions during the site visit or pre-proposal conference. All questions regarding this solicitation were required to be in writing and all responses have been or will be posted on FBO.