Attachment 7. GC-MATOC Solicitation RFI Government Responses 0002.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 30 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA468624R0011
About this file
This document appears to be a set of government responses to requests for information (RFI) related to a solicitation for a General Construction Multiple Award Task Order Contract (GC-MATOC) at Beale Air Force Base.
Key details:
- The GC-MATOC is a competitive small business set-aside indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) construction contract with an estimated value of $500M over 10 years.
- Eligible offerors must have offices located within the San Francisco, Fresno, or Sacramento SBA regional office territories.
- Offerors may submit up to 24 total project work samples across their NAICS codes, with a maximum of 4 projects per NAICS group and 8 total projects for design-build and design-bid-build each.
- Offerors can use the same project work samples for multiple sections of the proposal.
- The solicitation has been amended multiple times, with the most recent clarifying requirements around the number of projects, permitting documentation, and bonding.
- The proposal due date has been extended to 18 June 2024.
View the file
Other files
Show all 17
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
Sheet1
| GC-MATOC RFI Responses (0002) | |
| RFI | Government Response |
| On Attachment 1 please clarify the total number of projects to be submitted per NAICS. The current Attachment 1 currently shows 16 projects are required per NAICS. | Offerors may submit a maximum of 4 total project work samples for "Prime Contractor Over $5M" and an additional 4 project work samples for "Prime Contractor Under $5M". This totals eight project work samples per NAICS group as detailed on the Self-Score Sheet. Offerors must specify subcontractors managed for each project work sample provided. The total number of project work samples provided for all NAICS groups should not exceed 24 projects. Offerors are permitted to use identical project work samples for both the NAICS groups and the Design-Build, Bid-Build, and Environmental Permitting sections of Volume 2 on the Self-Score Sheet. The maximum number of project work samples an Offeror may provide for the NAICS groups, Design-Build, and Bid-Build sections of Volume 2 is 40 project work samples. |
| On Attachmet 1 uder the subcontracts managed category, are these required to be the same projects highlighted in the above section (Prime Contractor over $5M and under $5M)? | Yes, the "subcontracts managed" sections are directly related to the project work samples provided for each NAICS group. | |
| Please confirm what is to be inputed in Column E on Attachment 1. It is unclear. | The file name of the supporting documentation will be added to column E on the Self-Score Sheet. | |
| As it stands, to maximize our score, we are required to submit a total of 41 work samples and the corresponding back up to demonstrate our Relevant Experience. This is excessive and an insurmountable level of effort to achienve by the current due date. Please confirm total number of projects required for this effort. | Refer to response for row 3. | |
| Would the Government please consider expanding the Attach 1 to allow for project titles and contract numbers to be listed under each NAICS category (i.e. add 4 rows under Prime Contractor over $5M, add 4 rows under Prime Contract under $5M, add 4 rows under suncontracts managed >5, add 4 rows under subcontracts managed < 5. | Upon further review, the Government has decided against implementing this request. | |
| 1. | Attachment 1, cell 51 A says, "Environmental Permitting up to 4 total projects pick only one." Please explain: | |
| a. | What criteria the bidder uses to select the four total projects | |
| b. | What pick only one means in this case | |
| c. | If what is stated in cell 51A relates at all to cells 52A-54A. | Please refer to the most current solicitation amendment. The verbiage "up to 4 total projects" was removed for the benefit of clarity. |
| I feel like “JV” and “Partnership Agreement” and “Contract Team Arrangement” are being used interchangeably when they are all completely different types of entities. JVs and Partnerships are recognized entities in SAM whereas a Teaming Arrangement is a Prime utilizing subcontractor performance. Section L.C.1.c references “Contractor Team Arrangement” (CTA) which can be an Agreement for subcontractors to work with a Prime on a contract. The solicitation then lists requirements for the entity to be listed in SAM with it’s own CAGE/UEID, have an accounting system, etc. (items 1-5) If a CTA is used then the Prime and subs would remain separate entities. I am having a hard time wording this question but what I’m really trying to figure out Is it acceptable to submit a CTA between the Prime and Subcontractors and use the subs’ experience/qualifications? | The Government acknolwdges the differnce between the entities. Please review Section M of the Solicitation Amendment 0004 for further explanation. | |
| What documentation is required to demonstrate our compliance with the bonafide office requirement? | Please refer to Solicitation Amendment 0004. The requirement for a bonafide office location within the SBA San Francisco, Sacramento, and Fresno Office regions has been removed. | |
| We respectfully request an extension of the proposal due date beyond the current Amend 01, June 4th deadline to June 28th, due to 1) waiting for clarification on what constitutes a bonafide office for a Small Business offeror; 2) waiting on clarification for what proof is acceptable for non-govt work examples; 3) registration delays in SAM for new offices. | Please see Amendment 0003. The proposal due date is now 18 June 2024. | |
| For commercial or public agency projects, that do not use the SF 1413 Statement of Acknowledgement form, what is an alternative documentation that the govt would like to be submitted? | Offerors shall furnish a SF 1413 Statement of Acknowledgement form or an equivalent document. | |
| Do contractors have to submit their proposal under the UEI/CAGE Code of the office located in the Fresno/San Francisco/Sacramento area? Or is having an office location in those regions sufficient? For example, we have to register a new office in Fresno. This office will NOT have any projects completed under that UEI/CAGE Code (since it’s new), nor will it have any of the SB designations (i.e. HUBZone, WOSB, SDVOSB) that the Head office has. How should we represent ourselves? | Refer to response for row 10. | |
| Question – there are multiple conflicting guidance statements between the original solicitation, Amendment 0002, and the responses to the RFI. All of them involve the maximum number of projects that can be provided for each NAICs Group, the DB category, and the DBB category. The conflicting language is as follows: |
Amendment 0002, Page 9, Paragraph 2.(b) says “…furnish up to four (4) work sample projects for each NAICS falling in the range of over $5 million and/or between $1 million and $5 million.” and “Furthermore, Offerors are instructed to indicate their experience as the primary contractor on both Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build projects, adhering to the same criteria outlined above (meaning paragraph 2.(b))”.
| Our conclusion based on this language: maximum of 4 projects per NAICs Group and maximum of 4 for DB and maximum of 4 for DBB | Refer to response for row 3 and Solicitation Amendment 0004. |
| The RFI response language in Row 20 says, “If this section is applicable to the Offeror, the entity will provide up to 4 Design/Build projects exceeding $5M and up to 4 Design/Build projects under $5M, all falling within the NAICS codes specified on the Self-Score Sheet” | |
| Our conclusion based on this language: still 4 maximum projects per NAICS Group, but maximum of 8 for DB and maximum of 8 for DBB. | Refer to response for row 3 and Solicitation Amendment 0004. |
| Amendment 0002, Section M, page 11, Factor 1 has the following listing of each NAICs Group: |
Subfactor 1: NAICS Group 2362
| a. | Up to four Contracts greater than $5M |
| b. | Up to four Contracts between $1M-$5M |
| c. | Subcontracts managed greater than 5 |
| d. | Subcontracts managed less than or equal to 5. |
| Our conclusion from this language: maximum of 8 projects for each NAICS Group (as opposed to the Section L language which indicates max of 4 per NAICs Group) | Refer to response for row 3 and Solicitation Amendment 0004. |
| Amendment 0002, Section M, page 11, Factor 1 has the following listing of DB and DBB: |
Subfactor 4: Design-Build
| a. | Prime Contractor greater than $5M |
| b. | Prime Contractor less than $5M |
Subfactor 5: Bid-Build
| a. | Prime Contractor > $5M | |
| b. | Prime Contractor < $5 | |
| Our conclusion from this language: We do not know how many DB and DBB projects we are allowed. | Refer to response for row 3 and Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| Please confirm, once and for all, the maximum number of projects per NAICS Group offerors can submit and the maximum number of projects for DB and the maximum number of projects for DBB that can be submitted. | Refer to response for row 3 and Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| Are offerors allowed to use the same project for the primary NAICS group category and one of the DB or DBB projects? | Yes. | |
| For the environmental permitting projects, typically, this work would be done by a subcontractor versus the prime construction contractor (or DB or DBB contractor). Therefore, we will not have stand-alone contracts for this work typically. What, if any, then backup documentation does the government want to see to “prove” our self-score is accurate? | Please refer to Section M of Solicitation Amendment 0004. If you were the Prime and subed out the permitting then you have experience as long as you have a Formal Teaming Agrement with that same sub. | |
| RFP states minimum bonds required. Please advise if a bonding capacity letter is required. | Yes, bonding capacity letter is required. | |
| Section H Paragraph 2(c) States Task order projects will range from $2,000 to $25,000,000 yet minimum bonding capacity per Volume I – General paragraph is (g) is $10M. Recommend changing minimum to $25,000,000 so all contract holders can bid TO’s that exceed $10M. | Upon further review, the Government has decided against implementing this request. | |
| Lines 18, 21, 25, 28, 32, 35, 40, 45, column B all state 0-4 Projects yet the Example max points show 8 projects under each heading. Reading the Q & A it appears the intent is to have a max of 4 projects distributed between two sub-categories for each topic. If this is the case then the max scoring before bonus points would be 11,900 instead of 14,700. See Q&A response lines 19, 20, and 21. | Refer to response for row 3 and Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| Q&A Line 31 states “Offerors can further demonstrate applicable scope items through a narrative format.” Paragraph 2. Volume II – Relevant Experience sub-paragraph (c) of the solicitation Amendment (2) states “The Offeror shall not create any new documentation, such as project narratives, or project descriptions.” Please clarify | Refer to response for row 3 and Section L of Solicitation Amendment 0004. Narratives are authorized. | |
| what documentation is required to demonstrate our compliance with the bonafide office requirement? | Refer to response for row 10. | |
| We respectfully request an extension of the proposal due date beyond the current Amend 01, June 4th deadline to June 28th, due to 1) waiting for clarification on what constitutes a bonafide office for a Small Business offeror; 2) waiting on clarification for what proof is acceptable for non-govt work examples; 3) registration delays in SAM for new offices. | Refer to response for row 10 and 11. | |
| For commercial or public agency projects, that do not use the SF 1413 Statement of Acknowledgement form, what is an alternative documentation that the govt would like to be submitted? | Refer to response for row 12. Please review Section M of Solicitation Amendment 0004 for acceptable work samples. | |
| If we do not have a Professional Employee Compensation Plan in place. Please confirm this will not disqualify proposal. | No, this will not disqualify offerors. | |
| Please confirm 2nd tier subcontractors can be counted towards number of subcontractors on project. | No, first tier sub contractors only. A second tier sub is managed by the first tier sub. | |
| Please confirm SWPPP is an acceptable form of proof of Environmental Permitting. | No. A SWPPP is a plan, not a permit. | |
| Please confirm projects under $5Mil are required to be in $1-5Mil range. | Under $5M equals anything less than $5M. Please see Section M Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| Please confirm that in order to receive max points we are to submit up to 8 total projects under EACH NAICS (4 projects over $5M AND 4 projects between $1-5M). For a combined total of 24 Total projects for the 3 NAICS codes. | Refer to response for row 3 and Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| Please confirm that in order to receive max points we are to submit up to 8 total Design/Build Projects (4 projects over $5M AND 4 projects between $1-5M) | Refer to response for row 3 and Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| Please confirm that in order to receive max points we are to submit up to 8 total Design/Bid/Build Projects (4 projects over $5M AND 4 projects between $1-5M) | Refer to response for row 3 and Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| Please confirm that in order to receive max points for subcontractors for EACH NAICS we will have to provide 8 projects, 4 projects that had >5 subcontractors AND 4 projects that had <5 subcontractors | Refer to response for row 3 and Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| Per RFI response #11, state & local municipality projects are applicable. Will the government view or score federal projects with NAICS codes more favorably than non-federal projects? If non-federal projects without NAICS are scored the same, that provides an advantage to bidders who are not beholden to the NAICS listed in the RFP by allowing them to fit projects into the RFP NAICS categories. | Refer to response for row 3 and Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| Concerning Bonus Points in Volume 2: Construction work in California has many special aspects. Recommend adding bonus points for projects constructed in California and bordering states. | Upon further review, the Government has decided against implementing this request. | |
| Fire Protection QC Specialist | ||
| Will the Gov’t accept a P.E. in fire protection which has a lot more stringent requirement, as well? Or does it HAVE to be CFPS? | Yes, a FPE certification will suffice. | |
| RFP Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award, page 67 of 69, Subfactor 6 requirements states: “Measure of Merit: This requirement is met when the offeror’s proposal provides contracts that clearly support A and B above.” |
However, “A and B above” are not possible to achieve jointly.
On page 65 of 69, proposal submission requirements state:
“Subfactor 6: Environmental Permitting Required (Choose only one) ≤5 Contracts as a Prime 6<10 Contracts as a Prime >10 Contracts as a Prime” Subfactor 6, on page 67 of 69 states:
“The Prime contracts being provided must reflect:
Permitting on <5 contracts where permitting was required.
Permitting on 5<10 contracts where permitting was required.
Permitting on >10 contracts where permitting was required.”
| Question: It’s impossible to achieve A and B. Is the wording meant to be “The requirement is met when the offeror’s proposal provides contracts in either A, B, or C above.”? | Please refer to Solicitation Amendment 0004. |
| On page 65 of 69, proposal submission requirements state: |
“Subfactor 6: Environmental Permitting Required (Choose only one)
| a. | ≤5 Contracts as a Prime |
| b. | 6<10 Contracts as a Prime |
| c. | >10 Contracts as a Prime” |
Subfactor 6, on page 67 of 69 states:
“The Prime contracts being provided must reflect:
| A. | Permitting on <5 contracts where permitting was required. |
| B. | Permitting on 5<10 contracts where permitting was required. |
| C. | Permitting on >10 contracts where permitting was required.” |
The two sets of requirements are not aligned. To meet the requirements of Subfactor 6, are the projects required to be prime and environmental permitting required on the same work sample?
| Please refer to Solicitation Amendment 0004. |
| Subfactor 6, on page 67 of 69 states: |
“The Prime contracts being provided must reflect:
| A. | Permitting on ≤5 contracts where permitting was required. |
| B. | Permitting on 5<10 contracts where permitting was required. |
| C. | Permitting on >10 contracts where permitting was required.” |
However, the self scoring worksheet scores differently.
The self scoring worksheet scores according to these quantities:
<5 Projects as a Prime Note: Only one Yes which = 100pts max /No = 0pts.
6<10 Projects as a Prime: Note: Only one Yes, which = 200pts. Max/No = 0pts >10 Projects as a Prime: Note Only one Yes which = 300pts. Max/No = 0pts
| Question: is the middle scoring (B), supposed to represent 6<10 or 5<10? | Please refer to Solicitation Amendment 0004. |
| Subfactor 6, on page 67 of 69 states: |
“The Prime contracts being provided must reflect:
| A. | Permitting on ≤5 contracts where permitting was required. |
| B. | Permitting on 5<10 contracts where permitting was required. |
| C. | Permitting on >10 contracts where permitting was required.” |
However, the self scoring worksheet scores differently.
The self scoring worksheet scores according to these quantities:
<5 Projects as a Prime Note: Only one Yes which = 100pts max /No = 0pts.
6<10 Projects as a Prime: Note: Only one Yes, which = 200pts. Max/No = 0pts >10 Projects as a Prime: Note Only one Yes which = 300pts. Max/No = 0pts
| Question: How will exactly 10 relevant work samples be scored? | Providing 10 samples equates to 300pts. | |
| Regarding Subfactors 1, 2, and 3 requirements for “subcontracts managed >5”, do we have to submit subcontractor payrolls (backup documentation) for 6 to achieve credit, or must we submit all subcontractors that were on the project? | Offerors will submit the SF1413, or equivalent, as detailed in Section M of the Solicitation. | |
| RFP page 55 of 69, FAR Clause 52.204-8 lists the NAICS applicable to this contract. The NAICS listed include: 2362, 2382, and 2371. |
From sba.gov, Table of Small Business Size Standards dated March 17, 2023, The size standards associated with this contracts’ proposed NAICS include:
2362 = $45 million 2382 has multiple associated size standards as follows:
238210 – Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Installation Contractors = $19 million 238220 – Plumbing, Heating, and Air Conditioning Contractors = $19 million 238290 – Other Building Equipment Contractors = $22 million 2371 = $45 million
| Question: If an offeror is small under NAICS 2362 and 2371, but not under 2382, will the offeror be permitted to propose on task orders under 2382? | For example, if the lead NAICS if $19M, and under the NAICS you are not considered a SB, then you will be excluded from competeing on the particular project. Every project solicited under this MATOC will be for SB set-aside. |
| RFP page 55 of 69, FAR Clause 52.204-8 lists the NAICS applicable to this contract. The NAICS listed include: 2362, 2382, and 2371. |
From sba.gov, Table of Small Business Size Standards dated March 17, 2023, The size standards associated with this contract’s proposed NAICS include:
2362 = $45 million 2382 has multiple associated size standards as follows:
238210 – Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Installation Contractors = $19 million 238220 – Plumbing, Heating, and Air Conditioning Contractors = $19 million 238290 – Other Building Equipment Contractors = $22 million 2371 = $45 million
| Question: Which size standard will be applied to this small business set-aside contract? | Size standards are identified for each NAICS. If there is a project such as 238220, an Offeror must be considered a SB at $19M or less to to be considered a SB. |
| RFP page 55 of 69, FAR Clause 52.204-8 lists the NAICS applicable to this contract. The NAICS listed include: 2362, 2382, and 2371. |
From sba.gov, Table of Small Business Size Standards dated March 17, 2023, The size standards associated with this contract’s proposed NAICS include:
2362 = $45 million 2382 has multiple associated size standards as follows:
238210 – Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Installation Contractors = $19 million 238220 – Plumbing, Heating, and Air Conditioning Contractors = $19 million 238290 – Other Building Equipment Contractors = $22 million 2371 = $45 million
| Question: Work under NAICS 2382 typically falls under 2382 contract awards. Considering the size standards are so much smaller than other NAICS, would the Government consider removing NAICS 2382 from the submission/eval criteria, or roll the scope up under 2362 NAICS for scoring purposes? | Upon further review, the Government has decided against implementing this request. |
| RFP page 55 of 69, FAR Clause 52.204-8 lists the NAICS applicable to this contract. The NAICS listed include: 2362, 2382, and 2371. |
From sba.gov, Table of Small Business Size Standards dated March 17, 2023, The size standards associated with this contract’s proposed NAICS include:
2362 = $45 million 2382 has multiple associated size standards as follows:
238210 – Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Installation Contractors = $19 million 238220 – Plumbing, Heating, and Air Conditioning Contractors = $19 million 238290 – Other Building Equipment Contractors = $22 million 2371 = $45 million
| Question: If task orders will be awarded under NAICS 2382, will these task orders only be awardable to small businesses who meet the $19 million and $22 million size limit? | Yes. |
| RFP page 55 of 69, FAR Clause 52.204-8 lists the NAICS applicable to this contract. The NAICS listed include: 2362, 2382, and 2371. |
From sba.gov, Table of Small Business Size Standards dated March 17, 2023, The size standards associated with this contract’s proposed NAICS include:
2362 = $45 million 2382 has multiple associated size standards as follows:
238210 – Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Installation Contractors = $19 million 238220 – Plumbing, Heating, and Air Conditioning Contractors = $19 million 238290 – Other Building Equipment Contractors = $22 million 2371 = $45 million Question: how will the Government determine which size standard applies to the overall contract award? As well as task order awards.
If a business is not considered Small under any one of these NAICS, then the business is not Small. If a business is Large under certain NAICS such as 238220, then they will not be able to score in this section of the Self-Score sheet. To further explain: NAICS 2382’s highest is $22M, then consider it as Small for that 2382 category. However, at the Task Order level, if a NAICS is 238220, the SB ceiling is $19M, and if the business is not a SB under that NAICS, then it will be ineligible for proposing on that Order.
| For Subfactors 1, 2, and 3, what is the purpose of scoring the management of “under 5 subcontractors? | Scoring the management of "under 5 subcontracts" allows Offerors to showcase expereince managing subcontractors. This means 1-5 subcontractors. | |
| Work under NAICS 2382 and 2371 are highly specialized and often do not involve the management of more than five subcontractors unless the work was performed under the 2362 NAICS. Would the government permit work samples under Subfactors 2 and 3 to have been awarded under NAICS 2362, so long as the work samples align with the work scope of NAICS 2371 and 2382? | Please refer to Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| Work under NAICS 2382 and 2371 are typically subcontracted. Is it permissible to use subcontractor work samples for these Subfactors? | Please refer to Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| The NAICS under this IDIQ vary in small business size standards, from $19-M to $45-M. This vast difference causes concern for companies larger than $19-M. Does the government intend to issue task orders under different NAICS? If so, would an offeror need to be small under the issued NAICS? | Yes. | |
| Historically, when contracts involve various work that could fall under multiple construction NAICS, the contract is issued under NAICS 236220 (which encompasses work scopes of 238 and 237). We suggest updating the NAICS to solely 236220. | Upon further review, the Government has decided against implementing this request. | |
| Work under NAICS 2382 and 2371 is highly specialized and often does not involve the management of more than five subcontractors unless the work was performed under the 2362 NAICS. Maximizing scores with these criteria will be virtually impossible. Has the government considered this impact on the scoring? | Yes. | |
| Some projects may be awarded at $4.9 million, and then receive modifications that increase beyond the $5 million. In order to score fairly, how will the government confirm a project actually finished under the $5 million value to receive scoring credit for the under $5 million category? In other words, if modification documents are omitted from submission, scoring appears to be on an ‘honor system’. How will the government ensure proper scoring of omitted documents? | For federal contracts the Government will use FAPIS to verify finished contract cost. After review the Government may reduce an Offeror's score for the section. | |
| Subcontractors near Beale AFB are generally smaller and do not prime contract work associated with any of the NAICs under this contract. Requesting prime experience under NAICS 237 and 238 specifically may preclude contractors from submitting local subcontractors. We respectfully request that it is permissible to partner with local subcontractors and submit their experience as subcontractors for NAICs 237 and 238. | Only if you have a Formal Teaming Agreement, signed by both parties, that states that subcontractor will partner with you on this endeavor. | |
| Regarding backup documentation for proof of subcontractors, we use Purchase Orders (POs), not SF 1413s, for some subcontractors. If an SF1413 was not used, can we submit executed POs instead of SF1413s? | Please refer to Section M of Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| In response to the government’s RFI response that states, “Offerors must have a registered office within the San Francisco, Fresno, or Sacramento SBA regional office territories by the proposal due date.”, please confirm “registered.” Does this mean registered in sam.gov? | Refer to response for row 10. | |
| In response to the government’s RFI response that states “Offerors must have a registered office within the San Francisco, Fresno, or Sacramento SBA regional office territories by the proposal due date.” To the best of our knowledge, small businesses are not required to register their offices with the SBA, nor is there a process to do so. Please clarify what you mean by “registered.” | Refer to response for row 10. | |
| Page 58 of 69 states: (c) Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letters (MRCL) e.g. A&Es, if applicable. If an Offeror is sharing resources by way of a meaningful relationship within a corporate structure in order to meet minimum requirements and/or obtain scored evaluation criteria from a parent company affiliate, division, and/or subsidiary within a corporate structure, a meaningful relations commitment letter(s) is required to be submitted with the proposal. | ||
| This statement implies AE team partnerships are permissible team partners. AE firms do not serve as prime contractors. Their role is typically Designer of Record or Architect of Record, even if they are contracted directly by the government for design on a bid-build project. To better align with their assigned role in design-build projects, if offerors use AE team partner experience, is it permissible to use projects where they served as the DOR versus prime? | Please refer to Section M of Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| Pursuant to FAR 19.101, “When placing orders under multiple award contracts with more than one NAICS code, the contracting officer shall assign the order the NAIC code and corresponding size standard designated in the contract for the distinct category against which it is placed.” Which NAICS code applies to this contract for the determination of size standard? | All NAICS have a size standard. Some categories are at $45M where other NAICS very, such as 2382. In this case use the $22M. However, at the Task Order level the size standard will apply as identified for each requirement. If not a SB under those NAICS, then you will be excluded from being able to propose on those individual Task Orders. | |
| Following up on one of the RFI responses that states “Offerors must have a registered office within the San Francisco, Fresno, or Sacramento SBA regional office territories by the proposal due date.” | ||
| What do offeror’s have to submit in our proposal to demonstrate “registered” office? What do we, the offeror, have to provide to demonstrate we meet this requirement? | Refer to response for row 10. | |
| Companies that perform work under NAICS 237 and 238 do not typically prime contract. None of these scopes are typically issued as prime contracts. |
231210- Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Contractors; airport runway lighting contractors; fiber optic cable contractors; alarm system, electric, installation; highway, street, and bridge lighting and electrical signal installation; audio equipment installation contractors; home automation system installation; lighting system installation; cable television hookup contractors; telecommunications equipment and wiring installation; computer and network cable installation; traffic signal installation; environmental control system installation; cable splicing, electrical, or fiber optic 238220 - plumbing, heating, and air-conditioning contractors; cooling tower installation; hvac contractors; duct work (e.g., cooling, dust collection, exhaust, heating, ventilation) installation; lawn sprinkler system installation; fire sprinkler installation; mechanical contractors; fireplace, natural gas, installation; refrigeration system (e.g., commercial, industrial, scientific) installation; furnace installation; sewer hookup and connection, building 238290 - other building equipment contractors; automated and revolving door installation; lightning protection equipment (e.g., lightning rod) installation; boiler and pipe insulation installation; machine rigging; commercial type door installation; millwrights; conveyor system installation; overhead door, commercial- or industrial type installation; dismantling large-scale machinery and equipment; revolving door installation; elevator installation; satellite dish, household type, installation; escalator installation; vacuum cleaning system, built-in installation; gasoline pump, service station, installation
| Most of these scopes are issued as part of larger projects under NAICS 236220. We respectfully request that projects submitted under Subfactors 2 and 3 be permitted to submit projects where the offeror or its team were subcontractors versus prime contractors. | Please refer to Section M of Solicitation Amendment 0004. | |
| To meet the $5 million project size, is the government evaluating the awarded or the total contract value? If the government evaluates the total contract value, including all modifications, will modifications be required to be submitted as part of the backup documentation? | A conformed copy of the contract will show the total contract value with all modifications included. | |
| To meet the $5 million project size, is the government evaluating the awarded or the total contract value? If evaluating the total contract value, how will the government confirm modifications were or were not part of a project? In other words, how will the government identify if documents are omitted from the work samples? | A conformed copy of the contract will show the total contract value with all modifications included. | |
| Regarding the bonus criteria – in order to score, do the personnel have to be in house or can they be provided by teaming partners, affiliates, or subcontractors? | Certifications must be provided by name. Those named MUST perform on each requirement. Just having one in the company and not performing during the Task Orders is not acceptable. | |
| Best value awards typically require a pricing component. Will there be an evaluation of pricing? | No pricing is being evaluated. Pricing evaluation will occur at the Task Order level. Anyone can low ball a seed or sample project just to get on the MATOC. | |
| Is this a follow-on contract? If so, who are the incumbents? | This is not a follow-on contract. | |
| Many agencies issue task orders with the wrong NAICS just to get them issued on a specific contract. We strongly urge the government to consider projects for 237 and 238 that were issued under 236 NAICS. | Please refer to Section M of Solicitation Amendment 0004. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .