HSBP1017R0022_Amendment_A006.pdf

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

A006

The purpose of this Amendment is to incorporate the attached Questions and Answers.

The Government will issue another amendment to revise the soliciation to reflect any changes as a result of answers to questions.

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW National Place, Suite 1355 Washington DC 20229

Offerors

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

HSBP1017R0022

03/31/2017

03/17/2017

HSBP1017R0022

Amendment A006

1. The Section mentions a "Government-approved design standard." Will the Government have a single design standard for the entire wall or will there be separate standards, for example, in those locations where the border divides a highly developed urban area such as the Otay border crossing in California?

Answer: Upon completion of the prototypes, the Government will conduct an analysis of the available designs and CBP’s requirements. The exact number of designs that will be selected for the greater wall project is to be determined.

2. Since some wall designs will be more sensitive to economies of scale in regard to material costs, construction time, etc., can the Government provide a preliminary estimate of the overall length(s) of eventual wall segment contracts and their anticipated period(s) of performance?

Answer: No, the Government is in the process of finalizing project alignments along the Southwest Border. The overall length of wall segments will be defined in future Task Order RFP’s.

3. Please, define which "enhancements," other than those described in the Objective Requirements, the government desires?

Answer: The Government’s requirements for this solicitation are outlined in the Statement of Work. Anything provided beyond the stated objectives would be at the offeror’s discretion and unique to its solution.

4. In Section L, "Written Proposal Submission Format," on page 38, we are instructed: "PDF pages should be formatted to print on 8 ½ by 11 inch paper, unless another paper size is specifically authorized elsewhere in this section for a particular submission." In "3) Prototype Concept Approach," on page 39, "The Offeror shall discuss and present the Offeror’s proposed design and construction concept for the “Other Border Wall Prototype”, consisting of technical approach narratives and information regarding the material and system quality. This may include conceptual level presentation drawings." We believe it would be in the best interests of the Government to see a complete conceptual level approach in a drawing/graphic best depicted on a tabloid sized page (11x 17 inches).

For the purpose of receiving the best available conceptual approach, will the Government allow for a conceptual-level graphic on a Tabloid size page? Would the Government please exempt this drawing from the already minimal 10-page count to permit the illustration and concise discussion / presentation of the concept approach?

Answer: If an offeror chooses to submit conceptual drawings during Phase I formatted to an 11 x 17 page size, each 11 x 17 page will count as two pages and will be included in the 10-page limit. This change will be reflected in the RFP.

5. Can the soft copy sent via email be a combined PDF of the complete Concept Papers/Qualification Statements submission?

Answer: Yes, if the submission is being submitted in .PDF, a combined .PDF is acceptable.

6. In 2008, plants and facilities dedicated strictly to the production of materials for the Border Fence in 2008 were granted a waiver from the necessity of obtaining state air quality and other permits required for the operation of such facilities and plants under state law. Is it anticipated that a similar waiver will granted for this project?

Answer: With respect to the current action, CBP will be responsible for all environmental planning and compliance, including any environmental compliance that would be required for construction site batch plants or other temporary material production plants or facilities that are in or adjacent to the construction site. The contractor will be solely responsible for any environmental compliance required to produce materials at an off-site, contractor-owned plant or facility.

7. Must firms be registered in all border states to provide engineering services?

Answer: The initial task order (prototype) is required to be performed in California. Accordingly, the contractor needs to be able to satisfy the requirements necessary to design and construct in California. See item (d) of Section C: “The Contractor shall furnish all labor, material, equipment, supervision, etc. necessary to complete the requirements of this contract in accordance with this solicitation/contract, and all applicable Federal, State, and Local laws, regulations, specifications, codes, certifications, etc., to whichever is most stringent.” Future task orders may require construction to be performed in other states, and offerors unable to secure licensing in such states will be ineligible to bid on such solicitations.

8. Soil characteristics and parameters along the entire length of the border are needed in order to provide design concepts for the wall foundations. What initial, not final, soil information can be provided to responders so that these foundation design concepts can be included in response to the RFP?

Answer: The Government will not be providing a geophysical analysis pertaining to the Prototype project site specifically. However, the Government will provide a contour map of the area, a geotechnical engineering site reconnaissance report from 2003 of the adjacent area, as well as a geophysical summary of the 2003 report, and other analyses completed in the area to the down-selected offerors for their use in Phase II.

9. Are there existing soil boring logs along the US/ Mexico border that the can be supplied to the responders?

Answer: No, the requested information is not available to provide to offerors.

10. What soil bearing capacity should be used for the prototype wall design?

Answer: The Government will not be providing a geophysical analysis pertaining to the Prototype project site specifically. However, the government is providing a contour map of the area, a geotechnical engineering site reconnaissance report from 2003 of the adjacent area, as well as a geophysical summary of the 2003 report and other analyses completed in the area, to the down-selected offerors for their use in Phase II.

11. Threshold Requirement 6): What method will be used to verify this criteria is met for each wall design?

Answer: See “Objective Requirements” and “Threshold Requirements” under C.3.1 Border Wall Design Considerations” of the

SOW.

12. Is the project Environmental approved? Will the contractor be required to perform any environmental services?

Answer: The Government will be responsible for any legally required environmental impact studies or other environmental compliance. The Government is not expecting bidders to conduct independent environmental impact studies. Appropriate information as to best management practice or other environmental measures that must be carried out as a part of construction will be provided on a task order-by-task order basis. Information relevant to the construction of the prototypes will be provided to Phase II offerors.

13. Question/Comment: Since failure to provide a questionnaire would render a bidder's proposal "incomplete," and since the timely submission of the survey is not under a bidder's direct control, the Government may be unnecessarily restricting competition by disqualifying otherwise competent bidders on grounds other than the merit of their proposal. Request that this requirement be changed to the following, per FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv), which states: "In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance."?

Answer: The Government’s requirement to submit a completed Project Performance Survey (Attachment #8) in response to Phase I will remain unchanged. For those offerors who either do not submit a timely Project Performance Survey or whose performance survey is determined not relevant, the Government will assign a neutral rating. The RFP will be changed to incorporate the neutral rating.

14. The title of the RFP refers to a "solid concrete wall", Threshold Requirement 1) states "the design shall be reinforced concrete." Does this mean a 'poured-in-place' reinforced concrete wall? If so, has the Gov't considered the "cure time" required to ensure full strength concrete when planning for testing of mock-ups and prototypes.

Answer: Yes, means and method are part of the design concept. The Government has considered the cure time required for full strength concrete. Prototype and mock-up construction is expected to be completed within 30 calendar days.

15. Threshold Requirement 3) states "it should not be possible for a human to climb to the top of the wall….from either side unassisted.

(e.g. via the use of a ladder, etc.)" Is this saying that is should not be possible to reach the top with a ladder? Or is this saying that a ladder is a form of assistance that the wall must not protect against?

Answer: Anti-Climb means: A person, using only their hands and feet cannot climb the wall on either side. Further, Unassisted means: a person is not helped by anyone or anything to aid in climbing a wall.

16. Objective Requirements state the wall must be "adaptable to prevent/deter for a period of time (30 min for other, 1.5 hours for concrete) the creation of a physical breach…" What method will be used to verify this criteria is met for each wall design?

Answer: CBP will use internal CBP resources to test the mock-ups for a physical breach and to test the breach requirements found in Article C.3.4.2. The tools identified in SOW C.3.1 will be used for mock-up testing.

17. Who will determine the location of the wall structures relative to existing levees along the Rio Grande? If the wall/ wall foundation locations impact the integrity of the existing levees, will additional services be provided for repairs or wall relocation?

Answer: Coordination for structures with levees will be made by the Government on future task order RFPs, as needed.

18. What width of right of way will the Contractors be provided for the design and construction of the wall?

Answer: Contractors will be provided approximately 200 feet (in width) of right of way for the construction of the prototype.

19. The RFP requires Contractors to be responsible for their own security in the event of a "hostile attack." Will the government allow for Contractors to be fully armed in State/Local jurisdictions that have strict gun control laws? Will the Government provide legal indemnifications for the use of deadly force in such situations?

Answer: The Government’s response to both of these questions is “no”.

20. The RFP requires Contractors to be responsible for their own security in the event of a "hostile attack." Will the government have any Quick Reaction Forces (QRF) on standby?

Answer: No QRFs will be on standby. The U.S. Border Patrol and local law enforcement will respond as needed, but this does not absolve the contractors of their independent responsibility to provide for their own security per the SOW.

21. The Phase I Concept Papers/Qualification Statements: 1) Demonstrated Experience section (pg. 38) requests a description of the Prime Offeror’s and/or Major Subcontractors’ experience leading and successfully completing "several" large projects; the specific number of projects is open to interpretation. However, under the Joint Ventures and Subcontractors – Proposal Requirements section (pg. 36), the instructions give an “i.e.” scenario for the Demonstrated Experience submission: “page and project form limits apply to the proposal submission as a whole, i.e., a submission limitation of three (3) projects under the experience factor..."?

Answer: There is no minimum or maximum number of prior projects established under this factor. The offeror should include in its concept paper the number of projects that it believes best responds to this factor.

22. To ensure the uniformity of each Offeror’s submission, please provide a total number of projects to be included in the Phase I, Demonstrated Experience section?

Answer: It is up to the offeror to make a determination as to how many projects it will include in response to this section.

23. To mirror the Phase II formatting requirements (pg. 42, para. 1), will the USG alleviate the 12 point font size restriction for tables, graphics, graphs, charts, etc. in the Phase I submission?

Answer: The offeror’s entire Phase I submission shall be in 12-point font.

24. Please confirm that the letters of commitment for joint venture and/or subcontractor partners are excluded from the page count.

Answer: Letters of commitment and joint venture agreements are not required until Phase II submissions are due. All letters of commitment and joint venture agreements shall be representative of the team proposed in its Phase I submission, if applicable. Any proposed team shall remain the same throughout the duration of the procurement process, from Phase I submission through project completion. The Letters of Commitment are excluded from the page limitation of the Phase II proposal.

25. Does the Government require the SF1442 to be included in the Phase I submission?

Answer: The SF 1442 is not required for the Phase I submission. All offerors submitting a concept paper in response to Phase I shall however submit a signed SF 30 for each amendment issued prior to the Phase I response date. The SF 1442 is required for the Phase II submission.

26. The prescription clause for 52.232-16 is 32.502-4(a). FAR Subpart 32.5 Progress Payments Based on Costs, under which the prescription clause falls, states: "This subpart does not apply to - ....(b) Contracts for construction or for shipbuilding or ship conversion, alteration, or repair, when the contracts provide for progress payments based on a percentage or stage of completion."

Will the Government remove FAR 52.232-16 from the solicitation as it is not applicable to the scope of work performed under this contract? Note that the Solicitation does contain the appropriate payment clause, FAR 52.232-5?

Answer: The inclusion of Clause 52.232-16 will remain unchanged.

27. Please confirm that the wall does not have to be designed for vehicle impact- an additional Threshold requirement??

Answer: The wall does not have to be designed for vehicle impact. Offerors shall comply with the requirements as described in the

RFP.

28. Requirement #7- Can you provide more details on the surrounding environment for the prototype wall?

Answer: Additional information regarding the surrounding environment will be provided in Phase II to the down-selected offerors.

Additionally, the Government will hold a site visit at the prototype location after the release of the Phase II solicitation.

29. Threshold requirement #4- anti climb topping features. Does this include anti perch?

Answer: The requirements for the wall are defined in the Statement of Work.

30. Please confirm that there is no requirement for technology descriptions to be included with the RFP response- Phase I- eg Lighting, CCTV, other electronic monitoring devices?

Answer: No technology descriptions are required to be included in the Phase I response.

31. Please clarify this statement-- "Demonstrated ability to provide enhancements and increased performance without excessive impact to overall cost."

Answer: The Offeror should provide a design that they determine to be cost effective to construct, maintain and repair. Cost effective means a solution that provides optimum results for the expenditure.

32. Please identify the specific test procedure (Physical breach punching through the wall) for the mock up.

Answer: CBP will use internal CBP resources to test the mock-ups for a physical breach and to test the breach requirements found in Article C.3.4.2. The tools identified in SOW C.3.1 will be used for mock-up testing.

33. What seismic criteria is to be used for the prototype? Confirm the building code to be applied.

Answer: It is the offeror’s responsibility to determine the seismic criteria for the location of the prototype, and it is also the offeror’s responsibility to ensure that its construction meets the applicable building codes. Please refer to Article C.6 of the Statement of Work.

34. "The modified above ground foundation shall not affect the criteria outlined in the specifications below…" Does this mean the foundation for the Mock Up can be above ground?

Answer: The intent for the mock up is for the foundation to be above ground. See SOW C.3.4.2 Mock-up Construction.

35. Please confirm that we do not need to take any environmental considerations into the prototype for the Phase I response. (Eg., migrating animals, drainage, etc.)?

Answer: The Government will be responsible for any legally required environmental impact studies or other environmental compliance. The Government is not expecting bidders to conduct independent environmental impact studies. Appropriate information as to best management practice or other environmental measures that must be carried out as a part of construction will be provided on a task order-by-task order basis. Information relevant to the construction of the prototypes will be provided to Phase II offerors.

36. Page 39 indicates 45 degrees but the SOW page 2 item #10 says 45 percent. Which is correct?

Answer: The SOW should state 45 degrees and will be amended accordingly.

37. There are two different requirements for the proposed Project Manager. One sentence states: "The credentials of the proposed Project Manager will be reviewed to ensure they have a technical degree and/or equivalent experience,....." The next sentence states: "The credentials of the proposed Project Manager will be reviewed to ensure they have a bachelor's degree in engineering or related technical field or business/management. Please confirm if the proposed Project Manager needs to have a technical degree and/or equivalent experience OR if the proposed Project Manager needs to have a bachelor's degree in engineering or related technical field or business/management.

Answer: The credentials of the proposed Project Manager will be reviewed to ensure they have a technical degree or related technical field, such as business/management, and/or equivalent experience, and at least five (5) years of experience on construction projects.

38. Section H- Contract Clauses (General). Has CBP requested a SAFETY Act pre-qualification designation notice from DHS and will CBP include FAR 50.205-2 in the solicitation?

CBP has not requested a pre-qualification designation notice, nor will CBP be including FAR 50.250-2 in the solicitation.

39. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s signed letter of mentor-protégé agreement approval from the DHS Office of Small Business and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU), which is applicable only to large businesses.

Is an existing mentor-protégé agreement a requirement for this contract?

A: No, it is not.

If so, how will a contractor receive favorable credit under the source selection sub-factor and ratings compared to a contractor that does not have an agreement?

A: The confidence rating is determined by the combination of factors listed in the Small Business Subcontracting plan of which the mentor-protégé agreement is one. A contractor without the agreement still can receive a favorable rating for this factor though not necessarily as high as an offeror with an agreement in place.

The following response to Question 24 in Amendment A003 is revised as follows:

24. Are the goals provided cumulative (54%) for SB/SDB/SDVB/WO or is the Small Business goal (38%) with subcategories that comprise 16% of the total 38%?

Answer: The total small business subcontracting goal is 38%. The other socio-economic group goals comprise sub-group goals within that 38%.

The following response to Question 38 in Amendment A003 is revised as follows:

38. Solicitation - HSBP1017R0022, Section B, p. 4 Will prototype designs be evaluated for providing support for technology insertion?

Answer: No, technology insertion is not a requirement for the prototype RFPs. Future TO RFPs may, however, include requirements for technology and will be evaluated at that time.

The following response to Question 52 in Amendment A004 is revised as follows:

52. Are there any non-Government personnel involved with the Source Selection process?

Answer: Non-Government personnel will be involved in the Source Selection process; however, they will only serve as advisors and will be non-voting members within the evaluation team.