Responses_to_Questions.pdf

Questions for Project FTQW 03-1069

Romeo and Sierra Row Aprons

Q1. SOW, Page 1, para 1.03, A. Does the term “fuel pits” refer to the large six sided PCC pads between the Romeo and Sierra parking rows?

A1. Yes, see additional information in the response to Q2 below.

Q2. Is there hydrant fueling equipment in the “fuel pit” parking spots and under the R and S parking rows?

A2. There are four underground fuel pits in between the two aprons, with one in the taxi lane between R/S and Tanker Row (this one not included in this prpject).

Q3. SOW Page 2, para 1.03, D. Last sentence starts with “There are currently know contaminants ……” Should this say, “There are currently known contaminants….”? Or “There are currently no known contaminants…”?

A3. Should be ‘known’.

Q4. Has PFAS impacted soil and groundwater been fully characterized (i.e., nature and extent in 3-dimensions) in and around the proposed project construction area?

A4. Active screening during construction/design and a geotech during design will be required.

(confirm with environmental)

Q5. What is the planned FY for construction?

A5. Construction is estimated to begin in FY19

Q6. Attachment 1, Instructions to Offerors, Paragraph ii. Please address request to be specific to the “Repair Pump House Supports” requirement. This seems to be an editing error for this document.

A6. Agreed, this is an error that should state “Please address request to be specific to the Repair Reomeo and Sierra Row Aprons requirement”.

Q7. Attachment 2, FTQW_03-1069_Repair_Romeo_and_Sierra_Row_Aprons_-_A- E_Evaluation_Factors., Page 1 of 7, Paragraph 2, sub paragraph b reads: “Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required, including where appropriate, experience, in energy conservation. Is there any airfield lighting repair or modification work anticipated for the project for which energy conservation would be a factor? The SOW appears to focus on airfield pavement design and earthwork.

A7. Energy conservation is not a factor and was an error. Sentence should read “Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required”.

Q8. As part of this request, the Air Force is asking offerors to provide PPQs for submitted example projects. We request that the Air Force consider the use of CPARS in place and or in addition to the PPQ. The CPARS evaluation is a timely and more indicative measure of the contractor’s performance on a task as it is developed during and finalized shortly after the project is complete. PPQs rely upon memory and are generally impacted by government staff turnover and those who remain with memory of the project. Additionally, many clients (to include those in the government) find PPQs redundant assessments and get very frustrated being asked to repeatedly provide them to the government for multiple solicitation responses by contractors every time we include a project in a solicitation response.

Additionally, the PPQ format provided is not the standard PPQ format developed by USACE/NAVFAC and generally adopted by the Air Force in order to prevent and reduce the volume of requests for PPQ evaluation requests sent to government staff.

May we include CPARS evaluations in place of PPQs for projects included in Section F? May we also include previously provided PPQs which may differ in format or content from the one provided in the synopsis?

A8. Paragraph 3(d) of the Evaluation Factors also states “In addition to past performance information provided, the evaluation will include information available within the DoD, Federal, state, private industry or other sources”. The Contracting Officer will pull CPARS evaluations for all companies submitting qualification packages to be used in addition to any of the PPQ’s submitted.

Previously completed PPQs in a different format may be submitted as long as the same information is provided.

Q9. Given that the holidays occurred in the middle of the response schedule for this request for a SF330, will the Air Force consider extending the due date of the response to Friday 19 January 2017, and/or at least two weeks after posting response to questions/clarification modifications to the solicitation?

A9. Due date for responses will NOT be extended.