MHU_Solictation_QA_Comment_Matrix_18_Jul_14.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 18 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Manufactured Housing Units Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- HSFE70-14-R-0005
About this file
Comments and Responses from vendors
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 49
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1 Comment Matrix
| Document Name (Solicitation, Attachment # 1, Attachment # 2, etc.) | Comment | Response | Government Response |
| Solicitation | Definition of "Fit & Finish" and "Fit and Finish Evaluation" state the FEMA will use "The Residential Construction Performance Guidelines, version 4" published by the National Association of Home Builders as the basis for parameters to conduct evaluations for Fit & Finish Inspections | FEMA MHUs are built to HUD Code 24 CFR 3280. The HUD Code is not addressed by the National Association of Home Builders Residential Construction Performance. Is the solicitation stating that "The Residential Construction Performance Guidelines, version 4" the authoritative document for the "Fit and Finish" inspections? Is this the authoritative document that will drive issues arising from questions 166 -169 of the MHU Inspection Checklist? | The "The Residential Construction Performance Guidelines, version 4" is the authoritative document for the "Fit and Finish" inspection evaluation for items covered in the Guidelines. |
Solicitation Contractor will have four (4) weeks to ramp up to full minimum production rate. Production begins 4 weeks after a delivery order is issued. Four weeks from order to full minimum production rate (150 houses / week) is unreasonably short due to time required to complete existing order commitments and drain the production line; order longer lead times materials not used in regular commercial production (HVACs, roll-in showers, etc.), line change over and start up of FEMA units to full production. In past four weeks was given to commence production with a reasonable additional ramp up period. Solicitations states the requirement is now 4 weeks to full minimum production level of 150 houses/week. This will be very difficult for a large manufacturer to achieve. See Revised Solicitation Language
Solicitation MHUs will have warranty of five years from FEMA acceptance or RFO, whichever comes first, for all items that are contained on the Warranty Repairs in the Field List 5 year warranty with limited or no Manufacturer control over warranty cost will be very difficult to estimate the cost actuarially and accordingly will require an expensive warranty assessment. Please refer to I.10 52.246-18 -- Warranty of Supplies of a Complex Nature (Line 1546), I.11 52.246-19 – Warranty of Systems and Equipment Under 1608 Performance Specifications or Design Criteria (Line 1608), C.10 Warranty Repairs in the Field (Line 405), as well as Attachment 12- Warranty Repairs in the Field. Line 424 refers to the term of warranty applicable to the field warranty repair process, Warranty Repairs in the Field as described further in C.10 and applicable to Attachment 12 Items. The field warranty repair process is a discrete process from other applicable warranties.
Solicitation MHUs will have warranty of five years from FEMA acceptance or RFO, whichever comes first, for all items that are contained on the Warranty Repairs in the Field List How does FEMA plan to protect the Manufacturer from improper setup and storage on the staging yard that may create damage to the unit or excessive deterioration that FEMA would expect the manufacturer to compensate for under the Warranty Repairs in the Field FEMA plans to store all MHUs in accordance with manufacturer's instructions.
Solicitation The contractor warrants that for one (1) year all supplies furnished under this contract will be free from defects in materials and workmanship and will conform to all requirements of this contract; Furniture and Appliance's are supplied with one year manufacturer's warranties. None of the manufacturers offer extended warranties. Under this section of contract which states supplies are to be warranted for one year, is the MHU manufacturer required to provide extended warranty (5 years) on furniture and appliances beyond that offered by the appliance or furniture manufacturer's warranty? Please refer to I.10 52.246-18 -- Warranty of Supplies of a Complex Nature (Line 1546), I.11 52.246-19 – Warranty of Systems and Equipment Under 1608 Performance Specifications or Design Criteria (Line 1608), C.10 Warranty Repairs in the Field (Line 405), as well as Attachment 12- Warranty Repairs in the Field. Line 424 refers to the term of warranty applicable to the field warranty repair process, Warranty Repairs in the Field as described further in C.10 and applicable to Attachment 12 Items. The field warranty repair process is a discrete process from other applicable warranties.
| Solicitation | Inspection at Delivery Location: If deficiencies are found during the first inspection, the contractor shall remove the unit from the FEMA site to make necessary repairs. The contractor will be allotted one business day from the time of notification to repair deficiencies and deliver the same unit to FEMA for 2nd inspection or FEMA may elect to reject the unit. If the unit delivered for the 2nd inspection fails (presumably for any reason), FEMA will reject the unit and require contractor to provide a new unit with a different serial number. | Of particular concern are: (1) The 24 hour correction period is unreasonable due to the time to receive parts required for repair may take over 24 hours to be delivered at the delivery site; (2) The solicitations and answers to questions provided in Amendment A states that rather than inspecting the unit and accepting it with exceptions or contingencies, FEMA will perform a full reinspection of the entire unit. If the unit fails for any reason on the second inspection, FEMA will reject the unit. Previously the solicitation stated that manufacturer would receive 2 reinspections prior to rejection. This permits different inspectors with differing experience to view and judge differently and apply standards inconsistently. The government is binding the manufacturer to quickly ramp up to high levels of production of ordered MHUs without a corresponding commitment by the government to accept and pay for the MHUs ordered. This places severe financial risk on the manufacturer without assurance of a consistent application of standards in the inspection process, particularly when the manufacturer is providing a full five year warranty. Erratic and inconsistent inspectors and inspections in the past have scrutinized units well beyond industry standards and placed the burden of risk on the manufacturer. This fact potentially places the manufacturer at great financial risk at the hands of inspectors with limited or no potential cure or avenue of appeal. | See revised Solicitation Language |
| If "The Residential Construction Performance Guidelines, version 4" is the authoritative definition of "Fit and Finish Standard", and all MHU inspectors are following the standards outlined therein, then the risk to the manufacturer is lessened by a written authoritative document. This limits the concern that a very expensive home may be rejected for very minor items at the whim of an inspector having a bad day. The manufacturer should be given a reasonable cure period for each standard found deficient and/or an avenue of appeal for each deficiency particularly when the manufacturer warrants labor and materials for 5 years. (3) How will FEMA protect the large financial investment of the manufacturers in the units produced pursuant to a task delivery order from erratic and inconsistent inspections beyond the industry standard that could result in rejection? Each unit will go through manufacturer QC inspections, HUD inspections, DOT inspections, and FEMA First Article Inspections prior to on-site staging yard inspections after having traveled many miles. The units will have undergone many quality inspections prior to arrival at the staging yard and FEMA acceptance. Further the warranty is in place to address all deficiencies. (4) The manufacturer will have to actuarially value and budget for the warranty and rejection risk in its price proposal due to the significant financial risk associated with the potential for rejection. This may cause unnecessary costs to be imposed on the government than would occur with a more reasonable approach to the inspection standard. | The "The Residential Construction Performance Guidelines, version 4" is the authoritative document for the "Fit and Finish" inspection evaluation for items covered in the Guidelines. |
Attachment 2: Rugged Based Performance Requirements MHUS 2014 Shall (370) be constructed using moisture / mold resistant materials…All joints, except when using molding strips, shall (375) have a level 3 finish, as specified in Gypsum Association GA-214 "Recommended Levels of Gypsum Board Finish", prior to priming. Is Vinyl Covered Gypsum board acceptable wall board installed in lieu of tape and texture Gypsum Board Finish? Vinyl Covered Gypsum board is acceptable, However, the manufacturer will need to submit a change request and provide adequate documentation to show that the material proposed will perform equal or better than the material being substituted. Also, It will need to meet HUD code. Refer to Section C for change request process.
| Attachment 2 | 1. Section 14.7: It was stated that Floor Joists shall be SPF #2 or better or equivalent. However, in Amendment A00001 Comment Matrix Item #107, when asked if SYP floor joists were acceptable, FEMA replied “No.” In our opinion, SYP, when of the same grade or better, is a much stronger more suitable joist for this application, especially considering availability when dealing with contracts of this magnitude. Would the government reconsider the original response to this question? | FEMA will not accept SYP as a substitute for SPF |
| Attachment 2 | 1. Section 22.3: Is the transponder to be left in place after the unit is considered occupied? If not, then, would it be acceptable to install the transponder mount on the cover for the exterior air handling unit so that no damage at all could befall on the THU itself? | Transponders are located on the exterior of the MHU. FEMA requires that all transponders are located in the same general area. See Revised Attachment 2 and 3 |
| Attachment 2 | We noticed that the Roof Load zone for FEMA Southern units is also Northern Zone (40 PSF). Is this in error? | See revised Attachment 2 and Attachment 3 . |
| Attachment 2 | Windows should include an opaque shade or other means to provide privacy. Do the Window Blinds require in Section 22.2 satisfy this requirement? | Yes |
| Attachment 2 | (EXPRESS UNIT ONLY) Assuming that FEMA is interested in maintaining an easily transportable weight for the Express units, would 2x6 Floor Joists be an acceptable alternative for this requirement? Considering the width of this unit, this configuration would be more than enough to eliminate any deflection issues between the I-Beams, etc. | 2 X 6 Floor Joist is Acceptable as long as they meet HUD Code and the requirements of the solicitation. Change request (Section C) should be included as justification. |
| Attachment 2 | (EXPRESS UNIT ONLY) On a unit this small, constructing the chassis with a 12” I-beam would not be a necessity, by any means and would add unneeded weight to the unit. Would 8: I-beam be an acceptable alternative? | 8” I Beams are acceptable as long as they meet HUD Code and the requirements of the solicitation. Change request (Section C) should be included as justification. |
| Attachment 2 | (EXPRESS UNIT ONLY) Considering that this unit would only have approximately 12” cantilever from the I-beam to the perimeter joists, outriggers would not be necessary in that deflection could not be an issue. Would it be acceptable to omit the outriggers on this particular unit? | This change is acceptable as long as it is justified with a change request. |
| Attachment 2 | (EXPRESS UNIT ONLY)Due to limitations in available space on the Express models, particularly where UFAS standards are applicable, we believe that we could provide a much more cost effective solution to the government if the following requirements were reconsidered and would allow for the use of smaller alternatives. a. A stackable W/D unit in lieu of side-by-side appliances. | No. For express units, the washer and dryer designated area has to be for side by side Washer and Dryer unless the Offeror can demonstrate that there is a significant commercial market that produces stackable washer/dryer combinations that are UFAS/ADA compliant; however they can be (24” to 25” wide) unit to be placed under or not under the counter. |
| Attachment 2 | (EXPRESS UNIT ONLY)Due to limitations in available space on the Express models, particularly where UFAS standards are applicable, we believe that we could provide a much more cost effective solution to the government if the following requirements were reconsidered and would allow for the use of smaller alternatives. b. A smaller UFAS compliant shower in lieu of 36x60 | Yes, as per UFAS and ADA you can use a 36” x 36” transfer shower and still be compliant with UFAS. Also, A 36" x 36" transfer shower could be used for the non-UFAS(std. unit). |
| Attachment 2 | (EXPRESS UNIT ONLY)Due to limitations in available space on the Express models, particularly where UFAS standards are applicable, we believe that we could provide a much more cost effective solution to the government if the following requirements were reconsidered and would allow for the use of smaller alternatives. c. In instant-on (tankless) water heater in lieu of 40 gallon | Yes a tankless water heater can be used ; however, the total amperage for the MHU cannot exceed 200 AMPs |
| Attachment 2 | (EXPRESS UNIT ONLY)Due to limitations in available space on the Express models, particularly where UFAS standards are applicable, we believe that we could provide a much more cost effective solution to the government if the following requirements were reconsidered and would allow for the use of smaller alternatives. d. A smaller (maybe even an under-the-counter) refrigerator | An under-the counter refrigerator cannot be used; however, a 12 to 14 cubic foot refrigerator/freezer can be used instead of a 18 cubic foot ref. |
| Attachment 2 | (EXPRESS UNIT ONLY)Due to limitations in available space on the Express models, particularly where UFAS standards are applicable, we believe that we could provide a much more cost effective solution to the government if the following requirements were reconsidered and would allow for the use of smaller alternatives. e. A smaller stove (2-burners) | Commercially available alternatives no smaller than 24" stove can be used and with 3 burners or more. Other designs will be considered; however, at this time FEMA is skeptical about the acceptance of alternatives. |
| Attachment 2 | (EXPRESS UNIT ONLY)Due to limitations in available space on the Express models, particularly where UFAS standards are applicable, we believe that we could provide a much more cost effective solution to the government if the following requirements were reconsidered and would allow for the use of smaller alternatives. f. A smaller kitchen sink (single basin) | Yes an industry standard size (for kitchens) single bowl (approximately 25”x22”) is acceptable |
| Attachment 2 | (EXPRESS UNIT ONLY)Due to limitations in available space on the Express models, particularly where UFAS standards are applicable, we believe that we could provide a much more cost effective solution to the government if the following requirements were reconsidered and would allow for the use of smaller alternatives. g. Exterior Walls in lieu of 2x6 | No issues with thinner walls; however, the walls must meet the HUD insulation requirements for the R value based on where the MHU will be installed (check insulation type) |
| Solicitation | For the 60 units per week level of production, is that only for companies that qualify as “Small Business” by the true definitions? | Please see revised requirements in the solicitation |
| Solicitation | There are two set of product descriptions with one called Rugged Based Performance Requirements and the other as Minimum Essential Requirements. Why are there 2 sets of descriptions? | There minimum essential requirements are absolute minimums that the government set. If an offeror does not meet one or more of the minimum requirements, the proposal will be “not technically sufficient.” Items in attachment 2 other than those in the Minimum Essential Requirements may have alternatives proposed. |
| Minimum Essential requirements | This is a new document, it appears that if we meet the requirements of attachment 18, we do not have to meet the requirements of attachment 2. Is this correct? Yes or No? | There minimum essential requirements are absolute minimums that the government set. If an offeror does not meet one or more of the minimum requirements, the proposal will be “not technically sufficient.” Items in attachment 2 other than those in the Minimum Essential Requirements may have alternatives proposed. |
| Minimum Essential requirements | The express unit appears to create significant shipping concerns, this unit will potentially have a height of 14' 10". We are concerned that these dimensions are going to cause extreme transportation problems. | See the revised requirements in the solicitation limiting the Express MHU's height to 13'6" |
| Solicitation | "The contractor warrants for 1 year"….. Line 424 states a 5 year warranty. Can the government clarify the term of the warranty? Commercial Warranty is usually 1 year. | Please refer to I.10 52.246-18 -- Warranty of Supplies of a Complex Nature (Line 1546), I.11 52.246-19 – Warranty of Systems and Equipment Under 1608 Performance Specifications or Design Criteria (Line 1608), C.10 Warranty Repairs in the Field (Line 405), as well as Attachment 12- Warranty Repairs in the Field. Line 424 refers to the term of warranty applicable to the field warranty repair process, Warranty Repairs in the Field as described further in C.10 and applicable to Attachment 12 Items. The field warranty repair process is a discrete process from other applicable warranties. |
| Solicitation | This section calls "Small Business" to produce 60 unit per week level. Is the definition of "Small Business" as defined by "less than 500 employee's" and the other true requirements for "Small Business" all applicable? | Please see revised solicitation |
| Attachment 2 and 18 | Attachment #2 and Attachment 18 are similar, but confusing as to why each are published attachments. Will you accept bids based on Attachment #18 compliance in lieu of #2? | There minimum essential requirements are absolute minimums that the government set. If an offeror does not meet one or more of the minimum requirements, the proposal will be “not technically sufficient.” Items in attachment 2 other than those in the Minimum Essential Requirements may have alternatives proposed. |
| Attachment 2 | Is the transponder mounted inside or outside of the home | Outside (Please see the revised rugged base requirements in attachment 2) |
| Attachment 2 | Does the transponder location require an electrical outlet for recharging? | No |
| Attachment 2 | Floor joist call out SPF #2 or equivalent, SYP is equal in the structural values and approved for use in our homes. In the questions and answers section of the previously, it stated SYP could not be used. In the south, lumber of 2" x6" and larger are SYP and SPF needs to be imported from Canada. | FEMA will not accept SYP as a substitute for SPF |
Sheet2
Sheet3
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .