24R1025_SOL_0001_ATT1.pdf

N0016424R1025 - Synopsis A/E IDIQ Contract at NSWC Crane and LGTF Industry Questions and Government Responses

N0016424R1025

# QUESTION ANSWER SYNOPSIS REFERENCE

001 Will it be acceptable for the offerors to submit previously prepared

PPQs? We have formerly obtained PPQs for our projects and would prefer that our contacts not repeat the process if possible.

Offerors may utilize previously completed PPQs.

However, the previously completed PPQ must be emailed to the Government directly from the Customer/Agency responsible for completing the evaluation. Previously completed PPQs may not be submitted by the Offeror. Additionally, previously completed PPQs, which do not contain A-E specific evaluation criteria included within the provided PPQ form, may limit the Government's ability to accurately review past performance. Please see provided PPQ form page 5 of 5 for reference.

Attachment 3 - PPQ Form, pg 5 of 5.

Is there a page limit for project sheets?

There is no page limit for project descriptions under Criterion 1.

003 SF330 packages are typically organized by PART 1 (sections A-H), followed by PART 2 but the RFQ states that “proposals shall be organized and titled so that each section of the proposal follows the order and format of the criterion.” In this case, Section F would be first. Please advise.

SF 330 Sections A,B, and C may be presented as introductory information before addressing criterion and subsequent sections. The remainder of the offeror’s SF 330 submission shall be organized in accordance with the instructions contained within the synopsis posting.

004 Please clarify what is meant by “narrative format”. An SF 330 form is not narrative format, except for project descriptions and Section H.

"Narrative format” refers to the detailed explanations to be included with various sections of the SF 330 response. For example, provide a narrative description of Criterion 1 Specialized Experience projects, provide a narrative description of the quality control program within Criterion 4, etc. In short, use detailed written descriptions to effectively convey your qualifications.

005 Does the SF330 form itself need to be converted to 12 pt, New Times Roman or does this directive apply to only the information entered by the submitting firm?

The SF 330 form itself does not need to be converted to 12 pt, Times New Roman font. Typed information within the form may remain in the standard form font and size. Please ensure all SF 330 attachment information is presented in 12 pt, Times New Roman font.

006 Our firm is interested in submitting an SF330 proposal in response to your currently advertised solicitation entitled “SINGLE-AWARD

INDEFINITE DELIVERY/INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) CONTRACT FOR

MULTI- DISCIPLINE ARCHITECT-ENGINEER (A-E) SERVICES IN SUPPORT

OF NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER CRANE DIVISION (NSWC

CRANE) FACILITIES PROJECTS AT NAVAL SUPPORT ACTIVITY CRANE

(NSA CRANE), Solicitation N00164-24-R-1025. However, the fact that the solicitation attachment is a controlled access document causes firms that do not currently hold a JCP certification to be unable to pursue this opportunity due to the time it would take to apply for and receive a JCP certification, thus severely limiting small business competition from otherwise qualified firms.

The synopsis work description does not suggest that there is any sensitive or classified work associated with this A/E IDIQ contract opportunity, so we are requesting that the Government please provide clarification as to why the statement of work document is “controlled access”, and if justifiable, consider removing the controlled access restrictions to the linked document in the synopsis entitled 24R1025_SYN_ATT1.zip. Thank you in advance for any update/explanation you can provide.

We have forwarded the controlled access rejections for Small Businesses to Kaylee Diamond, our Deputy for Small Business.

The JCP was established in 1985 to allow United States (U.S.)/Canadian contractors to apply for access to Department of Defense/Department of National Defence (DOD/DND) unclassified export controlled technical data/critical technology on an equally favorable basis in accordance with DODD 5230.25, “Withholding of Unclassified Technical Data and Technology from Public Disclosure.”

Work under the contract resulting from this procurement will likely include unclassified export controlled technical data in various forms. As a result, the Government will not review proposals received from any firm who does not possess JCP certification.

Please reach out to Kaylee Diamond (kaylee.r.diamond.civ@us.navy.mil) and determine a best path forward in relation to this procurement.

Amendment 1

N0016424R1025 - Synopsis A/E IDIQ Contract at NSWC Crane and LGTF Industry Questions and Government Responses

007 We have a question regarding the Indiana licensing requirement.

Under Criterion 2 Submission Requirements, it states:

“The firm must hold a current and active license in the state of Indiana as well as currently employ at least two (2) state of Indiana registered A- E professionals.”

If an offer has applied for an Indiana business license and can provide proof of submittal, will that meet the licensing requirement for submission?

No. The firm must hold a current and active license in the state of Indiana as well as currently employ at least two (2) state of Indiana registered A-E professionals at the time of proposal receipt.

008 We have a question regarding the Indiana licensing requirement.

Under Criterion 2 Submission Requirements, it states:

“The firm must hold a current and active license in the state of Indiana as well as currently employ at least two (2) state of Indiana registered A- E professionals.”

If individual architects and engineers have applied for reciprocity in the state of Indiana through NCARB or NCEES and can provide proof of submittal, will that meet the submission requirements?

No. The firm must hold a current and active license in the state of Indiana as well as currently employ at least two (2) state of Indiana registered A-E professionals at the time of proposal receipt.

009 There are two separate postings on SAM.gov for this opportunity. One is dated 15 May with an SF330 due date of 18 June; the other is dated 21 May with an SF330 due date of 21 June. Which of these postings is the correct one to reference for SF330 preparation and submittal?

Offeror responses are due on 21 June 2024.

010 The RFQ states that the “firm must hold a current and active license in the state of Indiana as well as currently employ at least two (2) state of Indiana registered A-E professionals. A-E firms shall provide proof that the firm is permitted by law to practice the professions of architecture and engineering, (e.g., state registration number, or a brief explanation of the firm’s licensing in jurisdictions that do not register firms, etc.).

Failure to submit the required proof will result in a firm’s elimination from consideration.” Typically, DoD projects that are located on federal installations do not require firms to be licensed in the state in which the installation is located. To ensure an adequate level of competition, will the Government accept firms that are licensed in A/E services in other US States, so long as personnel are licensed in Indiana? If firm licensure in Indiana is required, will proof of licensure count as part of the 100-page overall limit?

No, the firm must hold a current and active license in the state of Indiana as well as currently employ at least two (2) state of Indiana registered A-E professionals. No, proof of licensure does not count as part of the 100-page overall limit.

011 The RFQ states that “Information for each past performance submission shall not exceed five single-sided pages in total.” Will CPARS or PPQ documentation greater than five pages be accepted?

The five single-sided page limit is intended for Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) submissions. PPQ submissions over five single-sided pages will not be accepted. CPARS/ACASS entries over five single-sided pages will be accepted.

012 For projects without a CPARS rating, will the Government accept PPQs previously filled out by our clients and submitted as part of the SF330 package? In our experience, asking our clients to fill out multiple PPQ documents for the same project presents a burden on their time.

Offerors may utilize previously completed PPQs.

However, the previously completed PPQ must be emailed to the Government directly from the Customer/Agency responsible for completing the evaluation. Previously completed PPQs may not be submitted by the Offeror. Additionally, previously completed PPQs, which do not contain A-E specific evaluation criteria included within the provided PPQ form, may limit the Government's ability to accurately review past performance. Please see provided PPQ form page 5 of 5 for reference.

013 The RFQ states that “Offeror shall mark proposal documents as CUI in accordance with NIST SP 800-171.” Does the SF330 document need to be marked as CUI/CTI?

Yes, please mark proposal documents as CUI in accordance with NIST SP 800-171.