SF 30 P3005- Child Development Center Amendment 0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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.

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

N40080-21-R-9575 P3005, DB Child Development Center, JBA

SEE SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 5

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 25-Jan-2022

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N4008021R9575

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11-Jan-2022

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offer 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 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram 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 telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, 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)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

25-Jan-2022

CODE

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYS COMMAND

1314 HARWOOD STREET SE

WASHINGTON DC 20374

N40080 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N4008021R9575

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE (SF 30)

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0001

THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING:

1. REVISE EVALUATION CRITERA

2. PROVIDE RFI RESPONSES

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged

1. REVISE EVLAUATION CRITERA

FACTOR 2 – EXPERIENCE:

The scope and complexity relevancy requirements for Construction Experience have been to the following:

Scope: New construction of a child development center (CDC) facility for daycare, early education (pre-kindergarten), elementary school or facility with the same functional relationship like a CDC.

Complexity: Each of the following shall be demonstrated in the aggregate of projects submitted.

a. Experience with executing Design-Build contracts.

b. Acquiring jurisdictional approval from state and/or local agencies for the construction of stormwater management and erosion controls, e.g. Maryland

Department of Environment.

c. Demolition of existing facilities.

The scope relevancy requirements for Design Experience has been to the following:

Scope: New construction of a child development center (CDC) facility for daycare, early

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

The relevancy criteria defined in the Basis of Evaluation for Factor 3 has been revised to the following:

b. Relevancy: A 15,000 square feet or larger, child development center (CDC) facility for daycare, early

2. RFI RESPONSES

FACTOR 2 - EXPERIENCE – (1) Construction Experience on page 13 of 60 states: “at least one of the projects must meet the size requirement, at least one of the projects must meet the scope requirement, and the aggregate of projects must meet the complexity requirements.” Will offerors be considered if they do not have experience with executing Department of Defense

Design-Build contracts but their Design Build Partner does?

Government Response: Please refer to revised tech factor under factor#2, Construction experience.

2. In NAVFAC’s solicitation for P3005, DB CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER, JOINT BASE

ANDREWS, CAMP SPRINGS, MD page 15 of 60 has the following requirement: Projects submitted shall be completed within the past ten (10) years prior to the date of issuance of this

RFP. For design-build projects, the design portion of the contract shall have been completed within the past ten (10) years prior to the date of issuance of this RFP.

The design partner we would like to team with for responding to this solicitation was the lead architect for a child development center design build project at MCB Lejeune. The construction of this project completed on March 23, 2012, and post construction services continued through

August of 2012. This project would be an ideal representation of the experience and services that our design partner could provide with whom we have a long-standing relationship with along with.

We respectfully request that the time period for relevancy be extended to the entire length of the design-build contract rather than when the design portion was complete, because enhanced participation of the designer is a benefit of design-build contracts. Our proposed designer was responsible for making adjustments to their design during the course of construction as differing conditions became apparent. Therefore, it would seem reasonable that the 10-year requirement should extend for designers through the completion of the design-build contract (to include the construction portion).

Government Response: No change will be made for this requirement. Please propose in accordance with solicitation requirements.

3. Reference Factor 2 – Experience. Scope is defined as “new construction of a child development center (CDC) facility for daycare, early education (pre-kindergarten), or a facility with the same functional relationship like a CDC”. Would the construction of a new Elementary

School meet this requirement?

Government Response: Yes, elementary school construction would meet this requirement.

4. Reference Factor 2 – Experience. Scope is defined as “new construction of a child development center (CDC) facility for daycare, early education (pre-kindergarten), or a facility with the same functional relationship like a CDC”. Please clarify what constitutes functional relationship like a CDC.

Government Response: It has same functional relationship (classrooms, playground, kitchen etc.) for early childhood education as CDC.

5. Request that the time period for relevant projects be extended to 12 years from completion of construction for design and construction projects to allow for best demonstration of relevant

Government Response: Please propose in accordance with solicitation requirements.

6. Please confirm that past performance questionnaires that are in a different format than

Attachment B may be utilized to demonstrate past performance as long as they address the same questions as in Attachment B.

Government Response: Please refer to solicitation submittal requirements under past performance factor in paragraph 3.

7. Please confirm that it is acceptable to use 11x17 landscape format for the organizational chart in Factor 1.

Government Response: It is acceptable to use 11x17 landscape format for the organizational chart in Factor 1.

8. Request that the phase 1 submission date be extended by 1 week.

Government Response: Phase 1 submission date remains unchanged.

9. Page 13 of SF1442 Solicitation.pdf, “3. Complexity: Each of the following shall be demonstrated in the aggregate of projects submitted. Experience with executing Department of Defense Design-Build contracts.” Can the contractor submit a project that demonstrates experience with executing Department of Defense Design-Build contracts if the contractor was not a prime, but a sub on that project?

Government Response: Please refer to revised tech factor under factor#2, Construction

10. Not many CDC were built after the Base reallocation in 2005 . In this region there were only two or three CDC’s built by NAVFAC around 2010 -2012 . Will the government relax the ten year requirement for past projects

Government Response: The project completion timeframe remains unchanged for Factor 2

Experience for both design and construction and Factor 3 Past Performance. However, the scope and complexity requirements have been revised in these two factors. Please see revised Factor 2 and Factor 3 criteria.

(End of Summary of Changes)