06.9.1 FCS Q A.pdf

Amendment 01 Federal Center South B12021 Redevelopment Solicitation GS-10P-09-LT-C-0112

Questions and Answers

Q1: On the first page of the SF 1442 for each project, box 13 indicates that you need an offer guarantee (i.e. a Bid Bond), but on page 12 of the RFQ, you state you want proof of bonding capacity of up to $50 million for each project. Are you asking for a bonding letter or a bid bond?

A1: See Changes to RFQ which clarifies a Bonding Letter is sufficient to satisfy this requirement. Note: A SF1442 was not issued with this RFQ it will be issued with Phase

2 RFP

Q2: And re: CCR Registration (again, page 12 of both RFQs), our CFO went to the CCR Website and cannot find anywhere to print out “proof” of being current in the CCR system. When we submitted for a Corps project a few months back, they included paperwork in their RFQ to fill out showing that we were current with our CCR Registration. Do you have a form that needs to be completed? Or are you simply looking for a statement that our information is current?

A2. See Changes to RFQ which clarifies a self-certification or on-line printout as a result of a search is sufficient to satisfy this requirement.

Q3: Please provide clear instructions on labeling conventions for Past Performance Surveys being submitted via emails so they do not get lost or improperly filtered out.

Should they put the solicitation # in the Subject field and the name of the Design Builder on our team? Is there any other information you would like?

A3: See Changes in RFQ which add labeling instructions for Past Performance Survey submissions. Subject line to include the following: The Solicitation No/Project Title, Past Performance Survey for XXX (Name of the firm for which the Survey was completed) with XXX (Name of Prime Contractor/Design Builder)

Q4: Can you clarify the number and for whom Customer Satisfaction Surveys need to be completed in the phase I submittal?

A4: The number of Customer Satisfaction Surveys (Past Performance Evaluations at Exhibit 2a &2b) to be submitted depends on the Evaluation Factor. There is a requirement to submit PP Surveys for the Design Builder, Lead Designer and Design Team. The quantity is different for each Factor. As explained at the Pre-proposal conference, it had been brought to my attention that there may be some ambiguities in the RFQ between the number of PP Surveys and number of Project Experience submissions for a particular Evaluation Factor. Each Evaluation Factor will be reviewed and submission requirements corrected (as necessary) in the upcoming Amendment. Past Performance may be submitted on any projects; however, (in the RFQ) GSA has recommended that Past Performance Surveys be submitted on the projects that are also submitted as Project Experience because these will likely represent the most relevant work that has been performed by the company. The Customer Satisfactory Surveys (PP) must be completed by the project owner and sent directly to GSA as prescribed in the solicitation. In addition, Past Performance will be collected from the PPIPRS data base which is a repository of a firm's past performance on Federal Projects. Other sources may be consulted as well. As stated at the Pre-proposal Conference I will be Amending the Solicitation to change the Past Performance and Project Experience to 6 years.

Q5: Per page 6 of the RFQ, Factor 1, it states that the Design Builder must demonstrate experience and references for 4 projects completed within the past 3 years from the design builder, but on page 8 of the RFQ – it states a minimum of 3 projects completed or substantially completed within the past 5 years…(they need to be at least 75% complete).

A similar conflict occurs in Factor 3 for the Design Team..it says on page 11 asks for 2 projects completed within the last 3 years from the Design/Engineer/Consultant, but on page 13 it states at least 3 projects completed or substantially completed within the past 5 years…(they need to be at least 75% complete). Please clarify which of these requirements will work best for your evaluation of these two factors.

A5: See Changes to RFQ which clarifies the number of Past Performance Surveys to be submitted (4) and corrects the number of Project Experience submissions to a quantity of

5. The number of years for both past performance and project experience allowed has been increased to 6 years vs 3 years.

Q6: Sub-factor 1 – Design Builder Past Performance states: “The requirements for this factor are met when the Offeror demonstrates itself as a construction business providing verifiable information and references for four (4) projects completed over the last three (3) years …” (emphasis added).

Sub-factor 1 further states: “NO MORE THAN FOUR (4) CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION SURVEYS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED FOR THE PROPOSED

BUILDER.

Surveys should be submitted for each of the projects identified in Factor 1, Sub-factor 3.”

Sub-factor 3 – Design Builder Project Experience on Similar Projects states: “Offeror shall submit the following for the proposed design-builder

1) A list of at least three (3) similar projects completed or substantially underway.

Offerors shall submit projects that are at least 75% complete and performed within the past five (5) years from the date proposals are due. (emphasis added)

Questions:

a) How many projects are required as a minimum under Sub-factor 3 in order to meet the requirements of 4 projects under Sub-factor 1?

b) Is 4 the maximum number of projects allowed since Sub-factor 1 requires that surveys be submitted for each of the projects identified in Sub-factor 3 and no more than 4 should be submitted?

c) Can the projects under Sub-factor 1 be 5 years old to align with the requirements of Sub-factor 3?

A6: See Changes to RFQ which clarifies the number of Past Performance Surveys to be submitted (4) and corrects the number of Project Experience submissions to a quantity of

5. The number of years for both past performance and project experience allowed has been increased to 6 years vs 3 years.

Q7: Page 7 of the RFQ Construction Project manager experience requirements state that the PM is required to have a baccalaureate degree in a relevant field and at least 10 years experience. Past RFQ’s on projects of similar size, scope and complexity have allowed additional years of experience to replace the need for the PM to have a degree, we would request that the PM experience criteria be changed to allow additional years of experience to take the place of having a baccalaureate degree.

A7: This requirement will not be changed.

Q8: Page 5 of the RFQ lists Factor 2 as the “Lead Architect”. Page 8 of the RFQ calls Factor 2 “Lead Designer”. The Standard of Evaluation on the top of page 9 states “The requirements for this factor are met when the Lead Designer demonstrates itself as an Architectural-Engineering firm (A-E firm)…” Based on this, it is our understanding that the Lead Designer can be an Architectural design firm and not just a specific individual designer and Customer Satisfaction Surveys can be sent that apply to the Architectural firm and not just a single individual designer.

Please confirm

A8: See Changes in RFQ which corrects Factor 2 to read Lead Designer and defines Lead Architect for Sub-factor 1 – Past Performance Surveys as the Design Firm

Q9: Based on our interpretation that the Lead Designer can be an Architectural design firm and not just a specific individual designer, Factor 2: Sub-factor 2-Lead Designer Philosophy and Design Intent can reflect the views of the Architectural design firm and not just a specific individual designer. Also, Factor 2: Sub-factor 3-Lead designer Profile and Portfolio can reflect the Architectural firm’s project experience as Lead Designer and not just a specific individual designer. Please confirm.

A9: See Changes in RFQ which defines Lead Designer for Sub-factor 2 and Sub-factor 3.

Q10: Regarding FACTOR 2 - LEAD DESIGNER

• From the RFQ, we are interpreting Sub-factor 1 to refer to the lead designer firm as page 9 refers to "A-E firm" in multiple cases. Is our interpretation correct?

• From the RFQ, we are interpreting Sub-factor 2 to refer to the lead design individual (within the firm) as page 10 refers to "his/her approach to the challenge...". Is our interpretation correct?

• From the RFQ, we are interpreting Sub-factor 3 to again be referring to the lead design individual (within the firm) as page 10 refers to credentials ("education, work history"), "personal commitment" and "biographical sketch". Is our interpretation correct?

A10: See Changes in RFQ which define Lead Designer for all sub-factors.

Q11: Factor 2- Lead Designer, Sub-Factor 3- Lead Designer Profile and Portfolio, Submittal Requirements, 2).

In this paragraph it states that a maximum of two (2) pages of photographs may be included for each project. Is this in addition to the maximum five (5) pages per project? Is a total of seven (7) pages, including photographs, allowed per project?

A11: See Changes in RFQ which has increased the submission to 10 pages including all attachments.

Q12: Factor 3/Sub-factor 1 – Design Team Past Performance states: “The requirements for this factor are met when the Design/Engineering/Consulting Firm demonstrates provides verifiable information and references for two (2) projects completed over the last three (3) years …” (emphasis added).

Sub-factor 1 further states: “NO MORE THAN FOUR (2) CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION SURVEYS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED FOR THE PROPOSED

BUILDER.

Surveys should be submitted for each of the projects identified in Factor 3, Sub-factor 3.”

Sub-factor 3 – Design Team Project Experience on Similar Projects states: “Offeror shall submit the following for the design team members:

1) A list of at least three (3) similar projects completed or substantially underway.

Offerors shall submit projects that are at least 75% complete and performed within the past five (5) years from the date proposals are due. (emphasis added)

Questions:

d) How many projects are required as a minimum under Sub-factor 3 in order to meet the requirements of 2 projects under Sub-factor 1?

e) Is 2 the maximum number of projects allowed since Sub-factor 1 requires that surveys be submitted for each of the projects identified in Sub-factor 3 and no more than 2 should be submitted?

f) Can the projects under Sub-factor 1 be 5 years old to align with the requirements of Sub-factor 3? Or, per the site visit, will GSA consider changing both subfactors to allow projects up to 6 years old?

A12: See Changes to RFQ which clarifies the number of Past Performance Surveys to be submitted (2) and corrects the number of Project Experience submissions to a quantity of

3. The number of years for both past performance and project experience allowed has been increased to 6 years vs 3 years.

Q13: Regarding Factor 3 –Design team Sub-factor 1, design team past performance. It is our understanding that customer satisfaction surveys need to be submitted for the Lead Engineering firms (mechanical, structural, electrical, geotechnical) listed on page 12. Do Customer Satisfaction Surveys need to be submitted for all team member firms, including Historic Design Consultant and High Performance Green Building Consultant?

A13: See Changes in RFQ which clarifies the design team members to which Past Performance surveys must be submitted (Mechanical, Electrical, Structural and Geo-technical)

Q14: Regarding Factor 3 –Design team Sub-factor 2, Design Team Qualifications and Experience. On page 12 lead Engineers are listed as mechanical, structural, electrical, geotechnical. We assume that a civil engineer is also required as a lead engineer. Please confirm.

A14: The design team shall include all disciplines necessary to complete the project.

However, it is our intent to only evaluate those consultants as having a key role in the project. Qualifications and experience should be submitted on only those personnel specifically identified in the RFQ.

Q15: A landscape architect is not mentioned in Factor 3. Is a landscape architect required to be a member of the design team?

A15: The design team shall include all disciplines necessary to complete the project.

However, it is our intent to only evaluate those consultants as having a key role in the project. Qualifications and experience should be submitted on only those personnel specifically identified in the RFQ.

Q16: In Factor 3, Sub-Factor 3 under Submittal Requirements we are to provide a list of

(3) similar projects for the Design Team to demonstrate project experience.

Our question is:

Are we to provide (3) projects for each of the key Design Team members or (3) total?

A16: See RFQ Clarification: Offerors shall submit 3 projects for each of the key Design Team members to include the following Engineering Sub-consultants: Mechanical, Electrical, Structural, and Geotechnical.

Q17. Factor 3, Sub-factor 3, Item D notes a $40,000,000 threshold for projects of "similar size, scope, and complexity." This project value appear to limit opportunities for small businesses to take a lead role in this project, which may be contrary to the GSA's stated goals of small business involvement. Can the threshold in Item D be reduced to $20,000,000? This value would be similar in scale, while being more inclusive for small businesses.

A17. The ability of a small business to take a lead role in the project will primarily be limited to the firm’s bonding capacity which is a minimum of $70.0 million. The $40.0 million dollar construction price is what GSA considers represents relevant project experience. The scope and complexity of a $20.0 million construction project is not the same. Offerors are not prohibited from submitting project experience that is less than $40.0 million, but may not receive as high a rating.

Q18: Factor 3, Sub-factor 3, Items 1 and 2 refer to a three (3) item list of project, and a three (3) item narrative summary of project. Are these intended to be the same three (3) projects, or is this intended to allow a total of (6) projects to be featured noted?

A18: The list is actually the 3 projects (per key design team member) that the offeror intends to submit; not a list of 3 and 3 on the exhibit for a total of six.

Q19: Will you be including the site master plan, shown in the pre proposal meeting, when you post the presentation material?

A19: The site master plan will not be included in the FBO posting of the presentation.

This information will be released with the Phase 2 RFP.