Questions_and_Answers-Round_2.docx

SABER Q &A Round 2 28 June 13

Q1. With regards to the above referenced solicitation, I have a question about bonding. The SF 1442 states that an offer guarantee is not required. My question is do we need to include anything along the lines of a bondability letter that states our capacity to bond a project? Your help will be much appreciated. Thank you in advance and have a great afternoon.

A1: No proof of ability or letter will be required with the proposal, however, please see FAR 52.228-15 – Performance and Payment Bonds – Construction (Oct 2010). The successful offeror will be required to obtain bonding on the performance of the Seed Project and each additional delivery order.

Q2. During the slide presentation at the site visit today it stated that all teaming agreements have to be approved by the SBA. However the SBA does not approve teaming agreements. They do however approve Joint Ventures, which is what is stated in Section L as the only form of partnership that you will allow to participate. Does contracting intend to allow teaming agreements or joint ventures only? Your help would be much appreciated. Thank you in advance.

A2: Joint ventures should be approved by the SBA consistent with Section L. The offerors are encouraged to consult the SBA about the acceptibility of teaming arrangmenents as they apply to the 8(a) Participation Agreement.

Q3. Table 2.2, “Proposal Organization Table,” on page 81 of the RFP has a footnote that states that the Quality Control Plan shall be labeled and separated from the rest of the Technical Proposal. Is it acceptable for the QC Plan to be provided by itself under a separate tab, following the Safety Plan section and before Subfactor 2, or should the QC Plan be placed in a completely separate binder?

A3: Either method is acceptable, but if the QC Plan is placed in a completely separate binder, the binder should clearly identify it as the QC plan.

Q4. On page 84 of the RFP, the last paragraph of “Subfactor 2: Project Development/Execution of Seed Project” states that the offeror’s proposal shall include a signed copy of the “Model Contract for the Seed Project”. It references RFP section 5.1.1, which provides requirements for completion and submittal of Sections A, B, I, and K. But these proposal sections are required to be included in the Cost/Price Proposal, not the Technical Proposal. Please provide clarification as to what the “Model Contract for the Seed Project” is, and the volume in which the document should be included.

A4: The “Project Development/Execution of Seed Project” must be included in the technical volume. New attachment entitled “Seed Project Bid Sheet” should be filled out and included in the pricing volume in place of “Seed Contract Section 5.1.1”. Note: The offerors should clearly identify how the total proposed price for the seed contract is calculated in order to be determined technically acceptable IAW RS Means.

Q5. Where in Volume II, Past Performance, does the government wish to see the Proposed Partnering/Subcontracting Arrangement List? (it is not listed in Table 2.2, Proposal Organization Table).

A5: Under “Team List”.

Q6. The delivery order proposal format requirements - located in Section 16.2 of the SABER SOW -do not include an AF Form 3064, Progress Schedule. Section 18.2.3 of the SABER SOW indicates that the AF Form 3064, when required, is to be submitted after receipt of the NTP.

However, Section M Evaluation Criteria, on page 95 of the RFP, lists the AF Form 3064 as one of the items that will be evaluated in the offeror’s seed project proposal.

Please clarify: Is a completed AF Form 3064 required to be included in the offeror’s seed project proposal?

A6: Please include an AF Form 3064 – Progress Schedule, specific to the Seed Project, with the proposal.

Q7. Section L, paragraph 2.1.9, Electronic Offers, states: “Do not submit files in PDF format.”

Question 1: Some sections of the Price Proposal are not available in MS Word and may require use of a PDF, such as Section A (SF1442), Section B (Price Schedule), and Sections I and K (reps and certs). May offeror’s submit these files in PDF format?

Question 2: Is it acceptable for the detailed cost estimate, drawings, and submittals (parts of Subfactor 2/Seed Project Proposal) to be in PDF format?

A7: Q1: PDF files are acceptable fore these documents. Q2: Drawings and submittals should not be submitted in PDF format.

Q8. The solicitation requires offeror’s to complete all representations, certification, and other statements as required in Section K (refer to page 87 of the solicitation, under paragraph 5.1.1, subparagraph “Sections I and K”). However, the Section K that was provided in the solicitation only contains five clauses that are included by reference. There appears to be no representations and certifications to fill out.

Please clarify: Are there representations and certifications that offeror’s must complete for Section K? If yes, please provide Section K in its entirety.

A8: Representations and Certifications should be filled out in the On-line System for Award Management (SAM) website, located at https://www.acquisition.gov and they must must be accurate, complete, and up-to-date.

Q9. Section J-List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments lists a “Seed Project AF Form 66” Question: Was the AF 66 for the Seed Project inadvertently left out of the attachments or is the Contractor to prepare the AF66 for inclusion in their response package?

A9: An AF Form 66 has been included and posted on FBO.

Q10. SABER SOW Para 16.2(6) lists “Catalog/product technical information” to be submitted in the Contractors RFP response package. This seems to be in conflict with Para 18.2.1 which states that “The Contractor shall within 10 calendar days after issue of the NTP …. Submit for approval to the CO all proposed all proposed materials……” Question: Is the contractor to include material submittals in the RFP response package for the Seed Project ?

A10: The AF Form 66 for each project identifies submittal requirements and submission times. Submittal information will be required for SEED project as part of the Contractor’s response package.

Q11. Per the attached as-built drawing, an Attachment 2 of the Asbuilts should be provided on a CD with the solicitation package. Please advise if we are to request a CD to include this information.

A11: Drawings have been posted to FBO as DWG files in lieu of the government providing CDs. The contractor shall include these As-builts on a CD with their proposal.

Q12. WRT Joint Ventures, do they have to be approved by the SBA prior to proposal, or prior to award? SBA Noted that sometimes they can take a while to approve and she believes FAR and solicitation refer to them being approved prior to award. She wanted to confirm that wasn't contradicted at the pre-solicitation conference.

A12: IAW 13 CFR 124.513, Joint Ventures must be approved prior to the award of the contract.

Q13. The SF1442, Block 13, requires sealed offers in original and 4 copies. However, Table 2.2, Proposal Organization Table (page 81 of the RFP), requires 4 hardcopies - one of which is to be marked as the original - and 1 CD copy.

a. Please clarify: Is the hardcopy requirement 1 original plus 4 copies (as indicated on the SF1442), or 1 original plus 3 copies (as indicated on Table 2.2)?

A13: 1 Original plus 3 copies and a cd copy are satisfactory.

Q14. If bidding entity is a Joint Venture and has 3 ‘shared’ contracts for past performance, how many additional past performance contracts are each of the two JV partners allowed to ‘individually’ submit?

A14: Offer may submit up to 5 PPIS for the prime contractor/joint venture (total) and up to 5 per significant subcontractor.

Q15. Reference to Sol. page 81 of 99, Table 2.2 Proposal Organization Table; Volume 1, 2.1.3 Team List (see Attach 2.0) (not included in 65 page limit)… does that mean that Volume 1 Technical has a 65 page limit? I find no other place in the solicitation talking about to a 65 page limit.

A15: Disregard reference to 65 page limit. Please use page limits identified in the page limit column.

Q16. The RFP states in Volume 1 Subfactor 2 the following; The Offeror's proposal shall include a signed copy of the Model Contract for the Seed Project, and Sections A through K completed as mentioned previously. (See 5.1.1.) In Section 2.1.3 Volume Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits the table list NA for 5.1.1 Seed Contract (Sections A-J) N/A 5.1.1 Representations and Certifications (Section K) N/A We can not locate a Model Contract for the Seed Project. Will the GOV provide one? Are there Model Sections A through K for the Seed Project? Will the GOV provide?

A16: Please refer to A4.

Q17. Table 2.2 Proposal Organization Table (page 81), Volume 1, Subfactor 1 shows Safety Plan, Management Plan, then Quality Control Plan; Section L, paragraph 3.2.2 Technical Criteria (page 83), shows Management Plan, Safety Plan, then Quality Control Plan; Section M, paragraph 2.2 Factor 1 – Technical (page 93), shows Management Plan, Quality Control Plan, then Safety Plan.

In addition, on page 83, under paragraph 3.2.1, the RFP states, “The Technical Capability Volume shall be organized to follow the outline of the Seed Project SOW…” Can you please confirm the proper organization for Volume 1, Subfactor 1?

A17: Please use format described in Table 2.2.

Q18.Can proposals be hand delivered to the address requested?

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AFSC/PZIOC

ATTN: Andrew Lucas 7858 5TH Street Suite 1 Tinker AFB OK 73145-5320

A18: Yes.

Q19. Please clarify as the table formatting appears to be mis-aligned – In Table 2.2 Subfactor 1,the Safety Plan page limitation is 15 pages, the Management Plan is 15 pages, and the Quality Control Plan is unlimited pages?

A19: Correct as stated in the question.

Q20. Section 2.1.1 states “Teaming Arrangements will not be considered”. Please clarify the intent of this statement since the past performance section requests past performance information for subcontractors and typically construction firms will team with A/E firms to complete the design portion of delivery orders.

A20: Please refer to A2.

Q21. Subfactor 1 requests that we submit a Quality Control Plan. Please clarify – is this a Quality Control Plan for the overall basic SABER contract (will not have specific delivery order information), or shall this QC Plan be for the Seed Project?

A21: The quality Control Plan is for the basic SABER contract.

Q22. Subfactor 1 Quality Control Plan submission requirements state to submit separately from the rest of the proposal and section. Please confirm there is not a narrative being requested directly behind the Safety Plan and Management Plan.

A22: Please refer to A3.

Q23. Subfactor 1 Quality Control Plan submission requirements state to submit separately from the rest of the proposal and section. Please confirm where and how the government would like to see the Quality Control Plan. Shall it be separately bound? Or submitted under a separate tab within the volume?

A23: Please refer to A3.

Q24. Subfactor 2, Project Development/Execution of Seed project submission requirements states “Provide a delivery order proposal based upon the specifications and SOW provided for the seed project. The delivery order proposal format is located in Section 16.2-16.2.5 of the SABER SOW.” Section 16.2 – 16.2.5 has requirements such as RS Means® and CPB-based proposal, NPI Quotations, take-off calculations, cost proposal information and more related to costing information. Please clarify what shall be submitted with Subfactor 2, Project Development/Execution of Seed Project as much of the requested information is related to price, whereas price information is not typically requested as part of the technical proposal.

A24: The seed project, including correct pricing methodology is being evaluated as technical subfactor.

Q25. The proposal is requesting 35% drawings and calculations for the seed project. Would the government consider removing these requirements from the submission?

A25: No. These are required to measure contractor’s performance in this area.

Q26. If submitting as a joint venture, is the government requesting 5 project examples (PPIS – Attachment 1.1) from each JV member (10 total) or 5 total from the JV combined?

A26: Please see A14. 5 total for the prime/joint venture and up to 5 per signifcant subcontractor.

Q27. In light of the extensive RFIs and clarifications needed, as well as the extent of the requirements such as drawings, catalog and technical information, etc. would the government consider a two-week extension?

A27: An extension will be provided as determined to be necessary.

Q28. Section L, Paragraph 2.1.7, “Page Size and Format”, states that page line spacing shall be

1.5 lines. However, the line spacing in the PPIS form provided by the government is single spaced. Are Offeror’s required to change the line spacing in the PPIS to 1.5, or is it acceptable to enter the required information in the PPIS form, leaving the line spacing as it is (single spaced)?

A28: Single spacing and 1.5 spacing are both acceptable for the PPIS.

Q29. Is there a requirement for a temporary restroom while the work is being done?

A29. No, a temporary restroom is not a requirement.

Q30. Will night work be required for the demolition? Is night work an option if the contractor wants to work nights? What would the hours be?

A30: Standard work hours are identified with the exception being outages.

Q31. are we reusing existing electrical circuits? Will we be required to run new wire back to an existing panel? If so where is this panel located?

A31: Refer to Response Provided in Round 1, A3, “Panel is at C87, circuits 2, 4, 6, 19, 21.”

Q32. Is the fire alarm system Class A? If so who will be responsible for programming the panel for the new devices?

A32: Refer to Response Provided in Round 1, A13, “Match the existing F/A System Class “A” Wiring.”

Q33. Are we to install the conduit and pull the wire for he FA devices and will the base be responsible for the device terminations?

A33: Refer to SEED SOW Para. 1.4.13.

Q34. Drawings call for new sprinkler pipe and heads. How much pipe is to be replaced? At what point does the new pipe begin? Is the existing system a wet or dry system?

A34: Existing system is wet pipe as is typically required by UFC 3-600-01. In addition, the Contractor shall be responsible for identifying the necessary logistical, architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical work elements required to perform this project. Also the contractor is expected to perform a site visit to verify existing conditions including verification of dimensions of the required work. It is recommended that the contractor consult with the qualified personnel they will be using in order to meet the requirements of UFC 3-600-01 for a detailed analysis of the required modification to the existing system. In this particular case, the drawing note instructs contractor to adjust sprinkler head location. This typically indicates a NICET Level III technician will be providing a sprinkler layout drawing for the new restroom layout including any new sprinkler head locations and any other required calculation or verification including exactly what the required modifications of the existing system will entail.

Q35. On Page 81of 99 under

2.1.3 Volume Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits

Where can we find Team List it's under 2.1.3 it say (SEE ATTACH 2.0)

A35: Please see attachment entitled Proposed Partnering/Subcontracting Arrangement.

Q36. When will the photographs of the Seed Project be posted?

A36: Photographs are currently on FBO and were posted in Amendment 1.

Q37. When will the sign-in sheet from the site visit be posted?

A37: Sign-in sheet is currently on FBO and was posted in Amendment 1.

Q38. In Table 2.2, page 81, the ITO Paragraph Number shown for several items under Volume II appear to be out of sequence:

“Present/Past Performance Information Sheets (PPIS)” shows 4.2, but it should be 4.1.1 “Consent Letters” and “Client Authorization Letters” show 4.1.1, but should be 4.3 “Present/Past Performance Questionnaires” shows 4.2.2 but should be 4.2 “Relevant Contract Narrative” shows 4.5 but should be 4.4 or 4.6 “Roadmap” shows 4.7 but should be 4.8

A38: Table 2.2. will be corrected via amendement 5

Q39. Can you please confirm the correct ITO Paragraph Number references in Table 2.2?

A39: Table 2.2. will be corrected via amendement 5

Q40. For Volume III Cost/Price & Contract Documentation, how many Tabs should there be? Table 2.2 and ITO section 5.1.1 differ in how they break the sections down.

A40: 9 tabs.

Q41. Where does the government want ITO section 5.1.4, 5.1.6 (TEP), and 5.2.2 to go in Volume III?

A41: 5.1.4 Pricing Assumptions should be identified in list of Tables and Figures. 5.1.6 TEP will be provided on the attachment entitled “Pricing Schedule” (Amendment 4) and tabbed with the List of Tables and Figures. 5.2.2 Other Documentation should be tabbed with List of Tables and Figures.

Q42. The SOW dimensions indicate the inside clear dimension of the bathrooms is 22' -2" clear. Sheet 14 of 139 in Atch. 2 indicates the overall outside of wall to outside of wall is 22' -0". This will greatly affect the interior remodel design of adding additional toilets within each Men's and Women's Restrooms. Can the Government clarify or provide as-built field dimensions of all spaces.

A42: It is the Contractor’s responsibility to field verify the existing dimensions.

Q43. It was indicated during the walk-thru that photos would be provided of the existing area to be modified. Will these be provided? If so, please provide these as soon as possible so we may develop our seed project proposal.

A43: Photos are available on FBO and were posted in Amendment 1.

Q44. We noticed that there is a note on Atch_2_-_Seed_Project_Asbuilts_portion file that indicates that the entire attachment 2 of As builts will be provided on CD to be issued with the solicitation. How can we obtain this CD?

A44: Asbuilt drawings are posted on FBO (Amendment 4).

Q45. Structural Requirements - 1.2.2.4.3.3 – Please confirm that a structural engineer will be required to design and detail the beam for the support of the overhead-mounted toilet partitions, and that this design data will be required for the seed project proposal? (i.e. would this type of detail be submitted at the proposal stage or as a preconstruction submittal)

A45: Depending on the weight of the partitions and framing plan, calculations may or may not be required but details are required to show how the components are attached. Details (and calculations if required) shall be provided for approval before installation starts.

Q46. AF66 - Can government provide the AF66 for this project?

A46: AF Form 66 is available on FBO (Amendment 4).

Q47. Subfloors - 1.4.5.2 - SOW states that the contractor is to ensure that the subfloors are properly leveled and prepared for new tile and sloped to drain. Are we to assume that the subfloor is not currently sloped properly and will require an overlay?

A47: The Contractor should not make assumptions and perform site investigation. The Contractor needs to verify that the current subfloors are properly leveled and prepared for tile and slope to drain.

Q48. Contaminated Soils – Are all removed soils to be disposed at East Oak Landfill regardless of testing results? Can the removed soil be re-used if tests come back negative?

A48: Yes, all soil being disposed of shall be taken to East Oak Landfill as stated in 1.2.9 of the SOW.

Q49. Plumbing Carriers - 1.4.7.3 - Will the new lavatories be re-using existing carriers or will new carriers be required?

A49: The Contractor shall be responsible for identifying the necessary logistical, architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical work elements required to perform this project. . Also the contractor is expected to perform a site visit to verify existing conditions including verification of dimensions of the required work. Since the very old existing fixtures are to be removed and replaced with new modern ADA compliant fixtures, therefore new carriers will be required. Recommend estimating that this scenario would require new carriers and all other supporting items to be included.

Q50. Toilet Accessories - Confirm that toilet accessories that are returned to government will not be re-installed as part of this project?

A50: The existing restroom accessories will not be re-installed as part of the project. New restroom accessories will be installed in this project as identified in 1.4.5.14 of the SOW.

Q51. Toilet Accessories - Are there any requirements for full-length mirrors?

A51: The only requirement for mirrors is included in 1.4.5.10 of the SOW. These mirrors are to be installed above the sinks and therefore will not be full length.

Q52. Toilet Accessories - What size for the steel corner guards and what corners?

A52: Size shall be 2”x2”x5’. All outside corners on the exterior and interior of the restroom shall receive corner guards.

Q53. Floor Tile – Please confirm that the entire restroom area is assumed to be “wet area”.

A53: The “wet area” floor tile is intended for the area in front of the sinks, paper towel dispensers, and trash cans.

Q54. Mechanical Demo – 1.4.6.4 - Is it the intent of the Government to replace all above ground, and below ground piping within the construction limits with new?

A54: Yes, it is the intent of the government for the contractor to replace with new all above ground, and below ground piping within the construction limits.

Q55. The PPIS forms provided in the RFP have font Times New Roman and are single spaced. However the proposal submission requirements state that the font shall be Arial 12 and 1.5 spacing. Shall we reformat the PPIs forms to match the proposal submission requirements of Arial 12 and 1.5 spacing?

A55: Please see A28.

Q56. Volume II, Past Performance, Factor 2 submission requirements states “Also, include information on up to five (5) recent contracts performed by your joint venture (if applicable) and each subcontractor, that you consider most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed SABER construction contract effort. Please submit only subcontractors performing key or critical portions of the said effort.” Given the nature of this contract, where delivery orders will have varying scopes, what scopes are the government considering key or critical for this effort? Critical or key scopes will vary from delivery order to delivery order. To submit 5 PPIs for each scope could result in up to 20 PPIs. Please confirm which scopes the government considers key and critical to this SABER for which you would like to see past performance information for.

A56: The SABER is for simplified construction projects. We do foresee the need for more than 5 PPIS for the prime/joint venture and more than 1 or 2 signicant subcontractors.

Q57. Proposal Submission requirements states “The Offeror is required to provide a detailed Cost Estimate, Work Plan, Associated Drawings and other documentation as required...” It also states “The seed project proposal must utilize R.S. Means Facilities Construction Cost Unit Book (UPB) with the item cost indexed to the Oklahoma City, OK area.” Shall we submit this detailed cost information in the technical proposal where it’s requested? Typically the price and technical proposals are required to be submitted separately.

A57: The entire proposal for the seed project will be provided in the technical volume. A new attachment (Amendment 5) entitled “Seed Project Bid Sheet” should be included in the Pricing Volume 5.1.1.

Q58. The pricing information for the Seed project is only requested within the technical proposal submission requirements portion. Will the government please confirm that this is where the seed project pricing information shall be submitted?

A58: Please see A57.

Q59. Will the government please confirm the format, requirements and location within our proposal we are supposed to submit the seed project pricing information?

A59: Please see A57.

Q60. In reference to: Solicitation, Section L – Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders references on page 87 of 99, Sections I & K, “The Offeror is cautioned to review Section I carefully and complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications. In Section K, the Offer shall complete ALL representations, certifications, and other statements as required. Your attention is directed to Clause 52.204-8 in Section K for requirements of electronic Annual Certifications and Representations (Note: be sure to sign and date where required.)” Question: Since Section K in the solicitation (page 78 of 99), only references clauses, are we to go to the FAR/DFAR website to download these referenced clauses and insert them into the proposal, or is there another format the government intends for use? Our firm is registered on the SAM database website, so I’m not sure if that satisfies the Section K requirement entirely.

A60: SAM entry fulfills the requirement to complete Section K Representations and Certifications. Please ensure the offeror’s SAM data is current and complete.

Q61. Can the Quality Control Manager act as the Quality Control Inspector?

A61: The Quality Control Manager shall not act as the Quality Control Inspector.

Q62. Can the Quality Control Inspector be a subcontractor working under the direction of the Quality Control Manager?

A62: Yes, the Quality Control Inspector can be a subcontractor.

Q63. Section 1.4.11.9 indicates the Contractor shall connect the new exhaust fans to the existing ATFP shut-off switch. Is there an existing master building control center, if so where is this located within B3001, please provide post number.

A63: There is an existing master building control center but due to the size and extent of B3001, relays have been located in the overhead fan decks throughout the building in order to provide multiple tie-in points distributed throughout the building. The nearest tie-in location is typically located at the nearest fan deck. For A85, the nearest fan deck is AHU 22 located overhead at approximately Column K80.

Q64. RE: Section L, para 4.7 page 86 of 99- What is ITO Attachment 2? If this refers to the PARTNERING_agmt file, then do the percentages requested for Subfactor 2 pertain only to the seed file proposal or is it your intent for us to submit a percentage for the entire project, including the project performance?

A64: The Partnering_agmt file is the document referenced as Attachment 2. The percentages requested refer to the entire contract (all delivery orders, not just the seed project).

Q65. Please clarify the page count. Is there really a 65 page limit and if so please explain since the majority of the sections are listed as Unlimited. It appears to be left over from a previous solicitation.

A65: Please disregard reference to a 65 page limit.

Q66. Can you please provide the as built drawings that are mentioned in the RFP?

A66: As built drawings are available on FBO and were posted with Amendment 4.

Q67. Section 11.1.7.2 (Page 9) of the SABER SOW states, in part, “.....Coefficient should also include cost for design,......” What level of design is supposed to be part of the coefficient? i.e. 35%, 65%, 95% or 100%. In addition, if the requirement is for 35% design and the actual project SOW requests a 100% design, will the additional design cost be shown as a NPI (Non-Pre-Priced Item)?

A67: The Contractor shall complete the design and drawings to a point where the architectural, civil, structural, mechanical, and electrical drawings clearly indicate the proposed method of accomplishing the work, and annotate the description, size, and location of each item listed in the detailed cost proposal.

Q68. In reference to: Solicitation, SF 1442 form Question: I am not familiar with how to complete Block 14 ‘Code’ and ‘Facility Code’. What information is inserted in these two blocks?

A68: Block 14 “Code” refers to your cage code as provided in CCR. Most firms will not have a facility code, but they are essentially a subordinate cage code for a particular facility.

Q69. In reference to: Solicitation, Section L – Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders references on page 86 of 99, Section 5.4.3 Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes and Applicable Designations Question: It specifies to provide company/division’s COUNTY and FACILITY CODE. For the County – is that the county the company/division is located? For Facility Code – I do not know what Facility Code is referring. Where can I find these codes?

A69: County refers to the company’s principal address. Most firms will not have a facility code, but they are essentially a subordinate cage code for a particular facility.

Q70. Reference Page 81 of 99 – ITO Paragraph Number 2.1.3, “A Team List of the Offeror’s primary POC shall be submitted in each volume using the format shown in Attachment 2 of the ITO.” Question: where is Attachment 2?

A70: Please refer to attachment entitled PARTNERING_Agmt.doc posted with the solicitation on FBO.

Q71. Reference Page 81 of 99, Table 2.2 – ITO Paragraph Number 2.1.3, “Team List (see Attach 2.0)”

A71: Please see A70.

Q72. The RFP clearly states 4 hardcopies plus 1 electronic copy for Volumes 1, 2 and 3 are required. At the site visit conference, it was stated by contracting personnel that 5 copies plus 1 electronic copy was required for Volumes 1 & 2 and 2 hardcopies plus 1 electronic for Volume 3. Please clarify which is correct.

A72: Please see A13.

Q73. The time for the due date in the RFP states 1400 hours. At the site visit, we were told the proposal due date time should be changed to 1600. Which is correct?

A73: The RFP due date has been extended multiple times, but see due date/time for most current amendment.

Q74. At the site visit conference, we were told Clause H would be allowed. Clause H is not found in the RFP documents. Where can we find the documentation that pertains to this clause?

A74: “H Clauses” are special clauses that are no longer utilized. Please see bid notes in Section A.

Q75. In the Attachment named “Proposed Partnering/Subcontractor Arrangement,” one of the designation codes is IJV (Informal Joint Venture). What is the government’s definition of IJV? Is this form of partnering allowed for this proposal?

A75: Offerors are encouraged to discuss JV requirements with the SBA. All JVs must be approved by the SBA prior to contract award.

Q76. Do we pay taxes on material and labor for Tinker AFB?

A76: The government is exempt from Oklahoma sales tax.

Q77. What is the approximate distance from restrooms to source of HVAC for demo and reinstall of duct work?

A77: The Contractor shall be responsible for identifying the necessary logistical, architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical work elements required to perform this project. Also the contractor is expected to perform a site visit to verify existing conditions including verification of dimensions of the required work.

Q78. What is the size of the water heater and is it gas or electric?

A 78: The Contractor shall be responsible for identifying the necessary logistical, architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical work elements required to perform this project. Also the contractor is expected to perform a site visit to verify existing conditions including verification of dimensions of the required work.

Q79. What are the specs for restroom fixtures, HVAC grills, and exhaust fans?

A79: A set of specifications for typical items used for construction including typical mechanical and plumbing items are included in the basic SABER contract. In addition, contractor shall as a minimum consult architectural sections of the contract documents, comply with applicable UFCs and codes, and also reference and follow the Tinker Air Force Base Facility Standards and guidelines.

Q80. The urinal is located in a confined space off the ‘accessible route’ - the SOW indicates this urinal is to be “accessible”. There is not sufficient width for a wheelchair bound person to turn around in this space and exit, thus forcing them to negotiate turns while backing out - this is not ADA/ABA compliant. The ADA/ABA does not require this urinal to be “accessible”. Does the Government intend for this urinal to be ADA/ABA compliant regardless? If so, will the base issue a revised drawing or should this be addressed in the proposers design?

A80: Floor plan was amended to remove urinal in order to meet code. Drawings A03 & M01 will be amended to reflect this change.

Q81. In reference to: Solicitation - Bid Bond, Bonding Capability Letter, or Financial Resources Letter Question: Will a Bid Bond, Bonding Capability Letter or Financial Resources Letter be required for this proposal?

A81: Please see A1.

Q82. Mechanical Demo – 1.4.6.4 – SOW states to demo piping back to the source unless directed otherwise, are we to remove this piping only within the construction limits or to the source even if it is located beyond the limits of construction?

A82: As stated, the default is to demo back to source and provide new from the source. If contractor has a specific question or recommendation regarding a particular service or utility, a more specific RFI or recommendation can be processed for that particular situation. Contractor is expected to demonstrate and be able to intelligently discuss existing conditions, recommend an alternative, and discuss why the alternative would be advantageous to the government or user.