Responses to RFIs.doc

1. In section B p.3, what is the maximum amount in regards to priced clins?

Response: See section I: 52.216-19

2. In regards to page 36, anything over 150k will be bonded, is that true?

Response: Task orders valued more than $150,000 require performance and payment bonds in accordance with FAR 52.228-15. Task orders valued less than $150,000 will also require performance and payment bonds under the terms and conditions of this proposed contract. During the performance of the contract, the contractor may satisfy this requirement either through submission of a separate bond for each task order or submit a “blanket” bond that provides payment and performance protection for all task orders performed under the contract.

3. In regards to scheduling requirements on page 43-please reviewfor clarification. Also, on page 12 item 8, what format should we submit in?

Response: All schedules shall be submitted as a Gantt-chart using Microsoft Project software. For task orders valued greater than $100,000, schedules must also indicate the critical path.

4. Will the contractors have to take their tools with them at the end of the work day, or is there an area where we can leave them on site?

Response: The contractor will be provided space for staging and laying-down of material s and equipment at the worksite or at AWG facilities.

5. Does the coeffecient cover wage increase, markup, etc. ?

Response: Please see section C: Statement of Work – Section 5.7 Coefficients

6. How big will the office space be to accommodate the work force?

Response: The government will provide office space to accommodate two personnel and accompanying computers, printers, and telecommunication equipment.

7. In regards to the program manager responding to a situation within 24 hours, are they required to be on site or just show up?

Response: The program manager is required to respond either in person or using telecommunication methods.

8. What kind of utility services will be provided-internet, water, electricity etc.

Response: Network capabilities for government-provide computers as well as utilities will be provided for completion of work under the contract.

9. Are the site management costs allowable costs within the bare costs under R.S. Means? Or should it be included in the coefficient?

Response: Site management costs are not allowable as part of the bare costs under R.S. Means. These costs must be included in the offeror’s coefficient.

10. Is the Pentagon 8(a) SABER (HQ0034-11-R-0043) is limited to 8(a) companies in a certain geographic area?

Response: No

11. In regard to the Solicitation listed above and on FBO, is this a new requirement or has work previously been performed on this effort?

Response: This is a new requirement

12. Am I to understand in the bid documents that it is ok to send past performance prior to the bid date?

Response: Past performance questionnaires may be submitted to the government prior to the deadline for receipt of proposals.

13. For the PM position, Would a PMP-CCC/CCE (Certified Cost Consultant/Certified Cost Engineer) accredited individual be acceptable? (CCC/CCE in lieu of the CCM certification)

Response: No

14. Reference: Page 8 of 67, 4.2.3: “The Contractor shall have technical staff, design facilities, and multi-discipline experience, either in-house or in conjunction with an A/E firm, to complete designs and drawings to support all work under this SOW.”

Reference: Page 11 of 67, 6.2 DESIGN ENGINEER: “The Contractor shall designate a Design Engineer that has overall responsibility for all architecture-engineering functions required for task order execution.” Table defines minimum qualifications.

Question: Must the required/designated Design Engineer be an employee of the Contractor or can he be a designee, who meets the minimum qualifications, of an A/E firm with whom an exclusive arrangement exists?

Response: the Design Engineer is not required to be an employee of the prime contractor.

15. Question: Will a letter stating the A/E firm’s exclusivity to the offeror meet the Letter of Commitment requirement?

Response: Yes

16. Reference: Page 8 of 67, 5.2: “The Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining this software and maintaining the most current version or update of RS MEANS Cost Works, Facilities Construction Cost Data Estimating Program.” There is no indication that we are to provide licensed copies of the program to the Government.

Question: Are we correct in assuming that the program is not to be provided to the Government and that we will purchase it for our own estimating use only?

Response: Yes

17. Reference: Page 8 of 67, 5.2: “The Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining this software and maintaining the most current version or update of RS MEANS Cost Works, Facilities Construction Cost Data Estimating Program.”

Question: Due to the significant cost involved in the program and printed manuals, how often are updates to be provided?

Response: Updates do not need to be provided to the government as a deliverable under the contract requirements.

18. Reference: Page 9 of 67, 5.6 EXCLUDED ITEMS: From the sub items listed, it is unclear whether the superintendents (specified on page 39 – 52.236-6) are to be priced from the Means database or whether the cost is to be included in our proposed coefficients.

Question: Is the cost for Superintendents to be priced from Division 1 as a line item on individual task orders or should the cost be factored into the bid coefficients?

Response: Cost for superintendents should be included in the offeror’s coefficients.

19. Reference: Page 11 of 67, 6.1 PROGRAM MANAGER and page 11/12 of 67, Minimum Qualification Table.

Question: Are we correct in assuming the Program Manager identified in 6.1 and Project Manager identified in the Table are the same position?

Response: References to Program Manager and the Project Manager was intended to be a singular key-personnel position. Amendment 1 has replaced all references to “project manager” with “program manager”.

20. Reference: Page 11 & 12 of 67, Minimum Qualification Table: The Project Manager must be currently certified CCM or PMP with 10 years of design-build/bid-build experience.

Reference: Page 7 of 67, 4.1.3: “All staff members designated as key personnel shall meet or exceed the minimum required qualification and experience that corresponds with the position.”

Reference: Page 63 of 67, 2. EVALUATION FACTORS: “Prospective offerors are required to provide resumes and letters of commitment of personnel that meets or exceeds the following certifications and work experience:”

Question: Would we be correct to assume that a Program Manager with a Bachelors or Masters Degree in Construction Management or an Engineering discipline and who possesses the minimum 10 years experience would meet or exceed the CCM or PMP certifications?

Response: Substitutions for required qualifications/experience are not allowed.

21. Reference: Page 48 of 67, 252.219-7009, Section 8(a) Direct Award

Question: Is it correct to assume that this 8(a) competitive solicitation is not limited to SBA Region III businesses?

Response: Yes

22. Reference: Page 56 of 67, Section L, Paragraph 2.4, Page Size and Format

Question: The RFP states that “Pages shall be single-spaced…”. Will you consider allowing small spaces (of less than 12-point) between paragraph titles and body text to enhance the readability of the document?

Response: No

23. Reference: Page 56 of 67, Section L, Paragraph 2.3, Page Limitations and Number of Copies

Question: Is it correct to assume the following - One (1) original and one (1) hard copy are required for Volume I; One (1) original and four (4) hard copies are required for Volume II; and one (1) original and one (1) hard copy are required for Volume III?

Response: This section has been updated in amendment 1 of the solicitation.

24. Reference: Page 65 of 67, Paragraph 3, Evaluation Rating

Question: Will past performance references be evaluated IAW FAR 15.305 (iii) allowing the offeror to use past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition?

Response: Predecessor company and subcontractor experience will be considered for evaluation of past performance, but it will not subsitute for experience as a prime contractor when evaluating the relevance of the past performance information.

25. Reference: Page 65 of 67, Paragraph 3.1.1, Relevance Rating

Question: Should the reference to Volume II/Section A be Volume I/Section A?

Response: Yes. Correction will be incorporated in amendment 2

26. Reference: Page 58, section L.3.1 of the RFP and Attachment J-3, Past/Present Performance Questionnaire, Section 1, C both require that the offeror list the “contract number” of each past performance reference cited. This seems to suggest that the offeror should cite major contracts in our Past Performance Volume. Page 65, section M.3.1.1, (3) of the RFP states that, in order for a cited project to be considered “very relevant”, the contract must be a “task order under an Indefinite-Quantity construction contract”.

Question: Are we correct in assuming that you are looking for 3-5 major construction contracts to be cited which all have numerous task orders meeting the criteria stated in section M?

Response: In order to meet the referenced relevancy criteria, the referenced contract must be a task order under an indefinite-quantity construction contract. In order words, an indefinite quantity contract on its own without a definitized task order will not meet the relevancy criteria.

27. We are, as the Prime Contractor and Construction Team Member, providing 3-5 references and Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs). For the Design Team member, are you requiring 3-5 references and 3-5 PPQs as well? Also are Teaming Agreements required for team members in the proposal?

Response: The Design Team member is not required to submit a separate set of 3-5 references. Teaming agreements are not required, however, it may be submitted.

28. Is the Sources Sought (WHS01062011) tied to this Combined Synopsis/Solicitation (HQ0034-11-R-0043) Response: Sources sought (WHS01062011) provided market research data in preparing the acquisition strategy for this solicitation.

29. Page 12 of the RFP states that a Project Manager must have both the CCM and PMP certifications. It is very difficult to find anyone that has one of these certifications, let alone both of them. Can the solicitation be modified to instead read either one of the following two:

a. In lieu of CCM and PMP certifications, at least 10 years of hands on experience with managing SABER contracts is acceptable as a substitute.

b. The project Manager must have either a CCM or a PMP certification. If contractor does not have the qualified staff on hand, the certifications must be achieved by contractors staff within 30 days of award of SABER contract.

Response: The qualification and experience requirements for the program manager will not be modified.

30. Regarding minimum qualifications for the Program Manager, will the Government consider a degreed engineer in lieu of CCM certification? Alternately, will the Government consider additional years of experience in trade off?

Response: No, to both questions.

31. Section C, sub-section 6, table – The minimum requirements state that the Project/Program Manager must have an active CCM certification, PMP certification and 10-years management experience. Are these “either-or” criteria? Will a certification for a Certified Professional Constructor from the American Institute of Constructors be considered equivalent?

Response: No

32. Volume #3 Tab A requires Sections B, E, F, G, H & I to be included in this section. We want to confirm that there is nothing that the Offeror needs to fill out in these sections, just include them in this volume?

Response: Yes, nothing needs to be filled out in these sections. Just include them in this volume.

33. Was Section D intentionally omitted?

Response: The government’s contract writing software did not include section D because there was no information included for this section.

34. Payment terms are not listed in the solicitation. Will the payment terms for this contract be in accordance with FAR 52.232-27?

Response: Contract clauses 52.232-27 and 52.232-33 are incorporated by reference in section I of the solicitation.

35. Please clarify the proposal delivery address and Zip Code.

The SF1442 indicates: 100 Boundary Channel Drive, STE D104

Arlington, Virginia 22202

Page 53/54 of 65, Section 2.1 indicates: 100 Boundary Channel Drive

Pentagon – MOC

Arlington, Virginia 22201

Which is correct?

Response: 100 Boundary Channel Drive, STE D104

Arlington, Virginia 22202

36. Please clarify the address to use for the Letter of Bondability and verify that it should be made out to the attention of Mr. James Kim, Contract Specialist.

Response: Letter of bondability can be made out to the attention of either Mr. James Kim or Mr. Michael Schuman. It may not be submitted separately from Volume 3 of the proposal package.

37. Is the “Design Team Manager” (20 of 67) the same person as the “Design Engineer” (63 of 67) Response: Yes. Correction will be included in amendment 2

38. Please clarify “Hand Delivery” instructions. At what point should coordination for hand delivery and receipt be made with James Kim? Can you provide a standard place of drop off where Offeror can leave bid package and receive a receipt of proposal in the event the Offeror is unable to reach Mr. Kim? (56 of 67)

Response: In the event that Mr. Kim is unable to be reached, offerors may contact Mr. Michael Schuman. Mr. Schuman’s contact information is incorporated in section L: Instructions to Offerors – section 2.2 in amendment 2.

39. Please provide the expected amount and size of Projects per location. What are the anticipated locations?

Response: See attachment J-1. The Pentagon reservation is expected to be the primary location for performance of task orders.

40. Is a full-time CQC Mgr required for all projects? If not, please clarity the requirements.

Response: If CQC is an abbreviation for “Construction Quality Control”, the details related to the assignment of a CQC manager for projects will be unique to the Quality Control Plan of each offeror.

41. FAR 52.217-8 included in page 31, states that rates can be adjusted per application of the labor rates. Please explain what rates will be modified per this application.

Response: Wage rates will be adjusted in accordance with the example as set forth in FAR 22.404-12 (c)(2)

42. Please explain how new labor rates can modify RS Means prices, if every optional year will include an updated RS Means version.

Response: The contractor will utilize the most current version of RS Means

43. Is a full-time Safety Mgr required for all projects? If not, please clarity the requirements.

Response: Details related to the assignment of a safety manager for projects will be unique to each offeror.

44. Does the past experience have to be from the Prime only to count?

Response: No, however, past performance information in a role other than a prime contractor will affect evaluation of relevancy.

45. The solicitation references both “design-build” and “design-bid-build project” types, please describe what percentage of work is anticipated to be design build, what the drivers or thresholds will be for designating a project design build and please indicate if stamped drawings will be required in all instances a project is designated design-build?

Response: Approximately 30% of task orders will be design-build and 70% will be bid-build task orders. Design-build work will not be subject to any limitations regarding the project’s size or its monetary value. Projects will be designated as design-build in accordance with the government’s need. The request for proposal for task orders will indicate the level of design required. Stamped drawings will be a required deliverable for all design-build task orders.

46. Page 9, Item 4.2.6 makes reference to a TO POC and a SOW POC. Would you please elaborate on these positions? IE: Are they contractor positions that should be included in our project organization? What are the defined roles of each position?

Response: References to SOW POC and TO POC are typographical errors. The government will replace these references with “Program Manager” in amendment 2.

47. Please confirm that the NPP factor is to apply to those individual and specific “ITEMS” of work that may not be found, in the RS MEANS book and that it is not WHS’s intention to apply the NPP factor to an entire “PROJECT”. It has been our experience that SABER contracts often times provide a directive that NPP shall not exceed 5-10% of any individual delivery order or the program to ensure entire projects are not being Non Pre Priced versus utilizing the RS Means book at the basis of the contract pricing; is this in fact what WHS intention is with the NPP factor

Response: WHS expects that the use of non-prepriced items will generally not exceed 10% of total task order expenditure throughout the duration of the contract based on the nature of the government’s requirement, however, this 10% threshold is not a contract requirement. The government will evaluate the reasonableness of the contractor’s rationale and use of non-prepriced items in every task order proposal.

48. Will you please provide the average size and number of projects anticipated under each of the adjustment coefficient categories referenced in Item 5.7.2 beginning on Page 9 of the solicitation?

Response: Approximately 30% of task orders will utilize the design-build coefficient. The government cannot estimate the number of task orders that will utilize non-standard hours and the special security coefficients. The use of those coefficients will vary with unique customer requirements during contract performance, which cannot be reliably estimated at the moment.

49. Would the Government please clarify the requirement for a Design Manager with a P.E. License in VA/PA/DC. Please verify you are requesting one team member who holds an active license for any one of these states & not all three states? Usually multiple team members and/or AE partners can be exhibited to meet a requirement such as this; is that WHS intention? With the limited amount of work to take place at sites outside of the Pentagon reservation, is there benefit government by restricting the personnel available with all 3 State PEs to such a small pool of people from which to pull from, thereby potentially limiting the pool of contractors eligible to provide a proposal on this solicitation when the need could be serviced through multiple people within the team as opposed to one person?

Response: The qualification requirement for the design engineer has been changed and incorporated in amendment 1.

50. Page 23 of 67, Step 9, references unilaterally issuing task orders if agreements cannot be reached. How often has this occurred? Please describe under what conditions this action would be necessary.

Response: The government expects unilateral issuance of task orders to be a rare circumstance during the effective period of the contract. The government will likely issue a task order unilaterally when discussions have failed to achieve consensus between the government and the contractor, but expedient performance of the requirement is in the best interest of the government.

51. The Evaluation Rating discussed on pages 65 and 66 of 67 indicate that in order for a project to be considered very relevant it must include the offeror as the prime contractor. Please confirm that in the event that the offeror is an SBA-approved joint venture under the mentor-protégé program, any and all projects performed as the prime contractor by the member firms of the joint venture will be accepted as very relevant .

Response: If the offeror submits its proposal as a joint-venture entity, the the joint-venture entity must be the prime contractor in order to satisfy the relevancy criteria as a prime contractor. Prime contractor experience of the member firm of a joint-venture entity will not satisfy the relevancy criteria as a prime contractor.

52. Page 3 of the Project Standards Manual, Item 2, provides an extensive list of possible permits required for work under this contract. Can you provide insight into which permits are internal to the managing organization and which may be required by local municipalities? Which facilities may require local permits in addition to internal permits?

Response: All permits listed in the referenced section are permits internal to the Washington Headquarters Services. These permits are required for work for all facilities within the scope of this contract.

53. Please clarify the requirement for commissioning and indicate when, based on the list of anticipated projects included in Attachment 1, may require commissioning. Will you be requiring the use of an independent commissioning agent?

Response: Commissioning services are not included within the scope of this contract.

54. Will you allow the use of estimating programs other than Cost Works (for example, JOCWorks?)

Response: No

55. Item 5.6 of page 9 of 67 indicates the exclude sections from the R.S. Means estimating book. It appears to our estimating team that these are not aligned with the current numbering system within the R.S. Means Books. Would you please provide additional clarification regarding included and excluded items?

Response: The government will verify and incorporate needed changes in amendment 2.

56. Item 5.6 of page 9 of 67 indicates the exclude sections from the R.S. Means estimating book. It appears to our estimating team that these sections intend to incorporate the rubbish handling section of Means into the coefficient. Without understanding the scope of work of projects intended to be directed to the SABER over this 5 year contract, contractors bidding on this effort will have to make conservative assumptions that will drive up the coefficient to account for potential rubbish handling costs that will be incurred over the life of the contract. This will unnecessarily inflate the cost of this contract to the government because a conservative assumption will be made by the contractors to account for these costs in their coefficients. A pure demolition project will incur much more rubbish handling cost than a typical small renovation effort would. Under the model currently included in the solicitation, every project will account for rubbish handling charges through the coefficient, regardless of their existence or not, rather than allowing each project to carry the appropriate cost through the line items that would be incorporated as needed based on the scope of work. Please remove the rubbish handling section of Means from the coefficient so that the coefficients offered in response to the solicitation can be lowered and provide a better price to the government.

Response: The use of RS Means items for rubbish handling will be allowed in developing the bare costs. Therefore, rubbish handling charges should not be included in the coefficients. Section C/Statement of Work – section 5.6.2 has been amended to incorporate this change in amendment 2.

57. We note that the sample calculations provided on Page 11 of 67 do not include the City Cost Index. Please confirm that the appropriate CCI will be applied to projects under this SABER.

Response: City index cost adjustments are assumed to be included in the “Subtotal: R.S. Means line items” in the sample calculations.

58. Paragraph 5.2 on page 8 states that the Contractor will be responsible for obtaining and maintaining the most current version or update of RS Means Facilities Construction Cost Data estimating program. Please confirm that this contract will be using the most recent version of R.S. Means available at any given moment.

Response: The contract will be using the most recent version of R.S. Means available at any given moment.

59. Please clarify the project size and complexity of projects based on the table provided in Attachment I that will require the use of BIM as discussed in Item 10 on Page 8 of the Project Standards Manual. Also, please confirm that when BIM is required, it must be the Bentley’s Micro Station Design format.

Response: Use of BIM is not required during the performance of this contract.

60. Please clarify the reference error in Item 11, Closeout on Page 8 of the Project Standards Manual.

Response: The government is currently working to incorporate changes and corrections into the project standards manual. The version of the manual as incorporated into the solicitation is in draft format. The final version of the project standards manual is NOT expected to incorporate changes that will substantively change the requirements as set forth in the current draft format.

61. Please confirm that no coefficient or pricing information should be entered in Section B.

Response: No coefficient or pricing information should be entered in Section B.

62. Please confirm that the cost of payment and performance bonds is to be included in the contractor’s coefficient.

Response: Cost of payment and performance bonds should be included in the contractor’s coefficient.

63. Pg 9/67, section 5.5.1 says if you can’t find an item in the Means FCD book you should reference the following list of books before considering it a NPP item. There is no list of additional books, what other books within the Means suite of cost data books should be referenced? Should all Means cost data books be referenced for the appropriate items, with the Facility Cost Data book being the primary book, prior to applying the NPP factor within a proposal

Response: The word “following” in the referenced section has been deleted and incorporated in amendment 2. Other RS Means costs data volumes should be referenced to identify appropriate items if the Facilities Construction Cost Data volume does not contain the line items .