Amendment 5_N4008023R2185 NAVFAC Washington IDIQ JOC_02292024.pdf

N4008023R2185

1731579_1789591

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

The purpose of this Solicitation Amendment 5, in accordance w ith the Summary of Changes, is to:

1. Provide PPI Responses, #76-#189

All other Solicitation Instructions remain unchanged

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 24

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 05-Mar-2024

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 N4008023R2185

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

13-Feb-2024

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, 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

05-Mar-2024

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:

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 5

PPI #76 - #189

Response Solicitation

N4008023R2185

NAVFAC Washington IDIQ

JOC

Question No.

Date Submitted

Reference

GOV

RESPONSE

Posted on

Amend No.

Page

Sect

Par

2/27/2024

Factor 4 - Past

Performance

(1) c.

If we are submitting the same project for Design and Construction Past Performance (Factor 4), is it acceptable to submit the same Past Performance Questionnaire for each (Design Past Performance and Construction Past Performance) instead of requesting project owners to complete two Past

Performance Questionnaires for the same project, provided that the owner evaluates both the design and construction of that project on one Past Performance Questionnaire?

Yes

Amend 5

2/29/2024

1.5

The solicitation states there is Base Ordering Period of 2 years and an Option Ordering Period of 3 years for a total of 5 years. The Price Proposal Schedule that was provided has a total of 8 Ordering Periods.

Please clarify what the additional 3 Ordering Periods are for.

See PPI #63 Response

Amend 4

5.1.1.d

Is the intent of the ELIN's 0003, 0004, 0007 and

0008 to be additive to the ELIN's 0001, 0002, 0005 and 0006? For example the task order calls for

Escorts during Normal Working Hours. Should the appropriate coefficients to be used are ELIN 0001 plus ELIN 0004?

See Amendment 3 - Spreadsheet for calculations

Amend 3

3.1.1

Section 01 00 00 Item 3.1.1 states "No other R.S.

MEANS Coefficients shall be used in addition to the contractor proposed Coefficient." Section 01 00 00 Item 1.1 (page 59) states "applying the most current

…. R.S. MEANS Location Factor adjustment…" This Location Factor is assumed to be the City Cost

Index. Please clarify if the City Cost Index it to used in addition to the proposed coefficient as these two sections conflict with each other.

See PPI#28 Response

5.2.1

Section 01 00 00 Item 5.2.1, as amended in Amendment 3 states "The 2024 R.S. Means Cost

Data Book shall be used throughout the contract." Is the 2024 R.S. Means Data to be used for the entire duration of the contract? If so, would the government consider changing this to using the most current R.S. Means Data as during the last couple of years the inflation rate was not a normal inflation rate, could not be predicted and could occur again.

By using the most current Cost Data, the actual inflation rate will be taken into account as the Cost

Data is updated yearly.

See PPI#28 Amendment 4

Section 01 00 00 Item 5.2.1, as amended in

Amendment 3 states "The 2024 R.S. Means Cost Data Book shall be used..." Are there any exclusions to the Cost Data or can all of the line items in the Cost Data be used?

Clarification -exclusions as specified in the 2024 R.S.

Means

5.2.3

Section 01 00 00 Item 5.2.3 states " The unit price (pre-priced bare cost items) …." but Section 01 00

00 Item 1.1 states "…applying the most current R.S.

Means "total incl O&P" unit pricing…" Please clarify it the Bare Cost or O&P Cost is to be used.

Change and

Clarification to #29 and #82 PPI response, respectively - " the O&P Cost is to be used"

5.2.2

Section 01 00 00 Item 5.2.2 states "MEANS

CostWorks softare is an acceptable estimating tool for use on this contract." Are other software packages such as e4Clicks or R.S. Means Online acceptable also as R.S. Means is phasing out the

CostWorks software for their other software packages.

Only RS Means & RS

Means Online are acceptable.

Are there any contractor supplied software or hardware requirement for this contract?

No

Will the contractor be provided a location on site to put an office trailer?

Coordination of the requirement should be conferred with the Contracting Officer for a specific ordering office.

11.1-11.4

Please clarify if the Pre-Award Survey documentation will be required on a task-order basis only or if it will be required for the award of this

JOC.

The pre-award survey to determine contractor responsibility shall be conducted by the

Contracting Officer for the base contract and a task order.

7 - 8 of 71

3 & 4

3.2 & 4

Paragraph 3.2 states that all questions are due on

Feb. 29. Please confirm if questions are due 2/29 or 10 calendar days before the proposal close date.

Clarification - "10 Calendar days before proposal due date and time"

5(a) Price

(1)b

Please define the different periods (Base, Option

Period 1, Option Period 2) and the different ordering periods (1-8) on the pricing sheet. In the solicitation document, only one base period and one option period are defined.

See PPI#63 Response

How many task orders are anticipated per year under this JOC?

Task Order quantity is

TBD. However the EVW for Pre-Priced and Non Pre-Priced Line indicates the planned estimated value of work.

What is the average dollar value of task orders under this JOC?

TO Minimum $2K -

Maximim $4M

01 00 00

5.5

Please clarify expectations regarding proposal turnaround times. How much time will be allotted for preparation of proposals?

Proposals are due 18 March 2024

Solicitatio n page 17 of 71

Factor 1 - Technical Approach

(1) n Submittal Requirem ents

Factor 1 - Technical Approach notes a page limit of one single-sided page. Does this page limit include the organizational chart, or does this page limit only apply to the brief description of the role and responsibility of each entity?

Clarification - The one single-sided page limit includes the organizational chart and brief description of the role and responsibility of each entity.

Approach n Submittal ents, a.

Factor 1 - Technical Approach notes a page limit of one single-sided page. Please confirm that a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, approved mentor protégé agreement, and letters of commitment are not included in that page limit.

Clarification - Yes, joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, approved mentor protégé agreement, and letters of commitment are not included in the page limit.

Approach

(1) Solicitatio n Submittal ents, b.

If the Offeror is a joint venture, are letters of commitment required for each joint venture partner company in addition to the signed joint venture agreement?

Clairification - No n pages 18, 19 &

Factor 2 - Experience

(1) Solicitatio n Submittal Requirem ents, (1)

Constructi on

Experienc e & (2) Design

Experienc e

Factor 2 - Experience limits Project Data Sheets (Attachment 1) to "one (1) double-sided page or two

(2) single-sided pages. The requirements also state that project descriptions should address any sustainable features and that Offerors should

"Provide applicable documentation on projects that were validated and/or certified through a Sustainable

Third Party Certification program." Is this documentation included in the one (1) double-sided page or two (2) single-sided pages?

Clarification - The Offeror can meet this requirement by submitting a copy of the certification document issued by a

Third Party Certification program as a separate page.

n pages 19 & 20 of 71

(1) Solicitatio n Submittal Requirem ents, (1)

Constructi on

Experienc e & (2) Design

Factor 2 - Experience states that project descriptions should address any sustainable features and that Offerors should "Provide applicable documentation on projects that were validated and/or certified through a Sustainable Third Party Certification program." Are Offerors required to submit a complete copy of the third party certification document, or will a certification number suffice to meet this requirement?

Offeror can meet this requirement by submitting a copy of the certification document issued by a

Third Party Certification program as a separate page n page 19 n

Submittal

Will the Government allow a short narrative introduction to the Factor 2 - Experience section (<1page)?

Clarification - Not as an additional page. A narrative introduction can be included in the

Construction & Design Experience Project

Data Sheet n page 25

Performance

(1) Solicitatio n Submittal

Will the Government allow a short narrative introduction to the Factor 4 - Past Performance section (<1page)?

No. Submit in accordance with the solicitation

01 30 00

01 30 00:

1.4

General Requireme nts pdf pages 22, 88-89, 121

01 35 26

01 45 00.10

01 35 26:

1.6.1.b,d

01 45 00:

1.5.1.b,d

Please confirm staffing requirements are based on construction value only, not design.

Yes - Confirmed

Would the Navy consider allowing contractors to use an RSMeans Field Personnel line item when personnel are required per task order, since offerors can’t know in advance how many task orders will be of the size that require a full-time Superintendent, QC Manager, or SSHO?

Coordination of the requirement should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

1.6.1.d

Requireme

100 2/29/2024 nts pdf Amend 5 pages 22, 88-89, 121 01 45 00.10 01 45 00:

20 1.5.1.d nts pdf

The General Requirements state that one Superintendent shall be provided for every $500,000 of awarded task orders, and one QC Manager and one SSHO shall be provided for every $1,000,000 of awarded task orders in an ordering office. For the purposes of determining minimum Superintendent, QC Manager, and SSHO staffing, please confirm that individual Task Orders that have their own full-time staff as required by the General Requirements will not be included in the calculation of the total value of active work at the ordering office.

nts pdf

Section 01 30 00 states that contractors are to

"provide one (1) Superintendent for every $500,000 of awarded task orders." Please confirm that this requirement applies only to active awarded task orders.

conferred with the Contracting Officer for

Requireme 01 35 26

1.6.1.d

Please confirm that on a $3.9 million project, only

103 2/29/2024 nts pdf one Superintendent, one QC Manager, and one Amend 5 pages 22, SSHO are required to be assigned to that project.

88-89, 121 01 45 00.10 01 45 00:

20 1.5.1.d

(2)

Design

Please confirm that the limitation of $100,000 to

$4,000,000 for submitted design experience applies to the anticipated construction value of the project and not the total cost of work inclusive of any design fees.

n page 9

00 21 00

11.4

The solicitation indicates that offerors will be required to identify the personnel and management to be used on this contract as part of the pre-award process. Given the severity of the personnel requirements, please provide the staffing requirements to be requested (e.g. 1 Superintendent per ordering office, etc.) to allow offerors to elect to begin planning, if they so choose, in order to meet a potential three-day response requirement.

conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

(2) Design

Because designers may not have access to final construction values, please confirm designer may use the budget value for the project.

n page 25

Performance n

Submittal

In a design-build scenario, the designer may be a subcontractor to the prime construction contractor and may not have access to the project client in order to obtain a PPQ. May designers obtain a PPQ from the contractor for whom they worked rather than the project owner?

Requireme

1.4.1

Please confirm that the offeror's Project Manager may perform their same function across multiple ordering offices.

Requireme page 1 & n page 56

00 73 00

SUPERIN

TENDEN

CE

Please confirm that the offeror's Superintendent may perform their same function across multiple ordering offices.

A superintendent assigned to a specific task order shall not concurrently peform the function on active task orders at multiple

1.6.1

Please confirm that the offeror's SSHO may perform their same function across multiple ordering offices.

An SSHO assigned to a specific task order shall not concurrently peform the function on active task orders at multiple ordering offices.

01 45 00

1.5.2

Please confirm offeror QC Manager may perform their same function across multiple ordering offices.

A QC Manager assigned to a specific task order shall not concurrently peform the function on active task orders at multiple n/a

Please confirm there are no specifications for contract level management (e.g. Contract Manager, Safety Manager, etc.), and that the inclusion of any such personnel, and their qualifications, is at the contractor’s discretion.

Requireme nts pdf

The various staffing level specifications reference “awarded” task orders, described as prior to BOD.

Please clarify how this affects design-build task orders. Will the requirement for construction personnel only apply to work that is post-NTP for construction?

requirement for construction personnel apply to post-award work in active construction.

Requireme nts pdf

Offerors may have a number of awarded projects that are not yet actively in construction (e.g.

awaiting delivery of long-lead items and materials.)

How will the value of this work impact the levels of required staffing? Will the Government consider changing “awarded” to “actively in construction”?

Clarification - The requirement for construction personnel apply to post-award work in active construction.

Requireme nts, multiple requireme nts &

Solicitatio n page 56

Please confirm that all volume levels governing the number(s) of specified personnel is per ordering

See PPI#23 Response

Amendme nt 0003, Attachmen t Price

Schedule

Please clarify the inclusions of ordering periods 6-8.

What are offerors to insert into these sections?

See PPI #63 Response

1.1

Page 59 Section 1.1 2nd paragraph states that “Pricing of each Task Order is determined by applying the most current R.S. MEANS “total incl O&P” unit pricing, the R.S. MEANS Location

Factor adjustment, and the appropriate Contractor’s Coefficient factor and Multipliers.” Please confirm that the R.S. Means Location Factor adjustment is NOT to be utilized for this contract and that we are to utilize the National Average Total Including O&P unit pricing.

Clarification - Use R.S. Means for Pre-

Priced line items

1.5, 1.6

Page 6 Section 1 paragraphs 1.5 and 1.6 indicate that the term of the contract will be a 2yr Base period and a 3yr Option period, however, the attachment title “Price Proposal Schedule” has (8) different ordering periods. Can you please clarify what these "Ordering Periods" shown on the price schedule are intended to represent?

See PPI #63 Response

3.1.4

Paragraph 3.1.4 indicates that the coefficient for the Escort line item shall be LESS than zero. However, the example coefficients in paragraphs 3.1.5 and

3.1.6 both have coefficients greater than zero. Please clarify minimum and/ or maximum value for the Escort coefficient.

Clarification - "3.1.4.

The Coefficient for the Escort line item shall be less than zero (<

0.00)"

2.7

Please confirm required "Tab" pages do not count against any page limitations

Yes. Confirmed

Please confirm if Cover Pages, Table of Contents, Glossary of Acronyms, etc. are desired as they are not listed in the Solicitation as written.

Additionally, Please confirm whether any possible

Cover Pages, Table of Contents, Glossary of Acronyms, etc. would be excluded from any page limitations.

Confirmed - Cover Pages, Table of

Contents, Glossary of Acronyms, etc. will be excluded from page limitations.

5.2(b) Factor 1

Please clarify if the requested Organizational Chart is to be a separate attachment from the (1) Single

Sided page of brief descriptions or roles and responsbilities or each entity

OR

is the requested Organizational Chart included in the

(1) single-sided page limitation

Clarification - The one single-sided page limit includes the organizational chart and brief description of the role and responsibility of each entity.

After Government responses to any pre-proposal inquires are released, will the Government allow an additional (3) calendar days for Offerors to submit any follow-up questions relative to the Government's responses?

See PPI #41 Response

Factor 4 "If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 2 for construction experience." Please confirm this requirement is only for a FINAL CPARS evaluation and not an

INTERIM evaluation.

Additionally - often, though a project is completed and a BOD Letter has been provided, the CPARS evaluations sometimes are completed as a final, but are still labeled as "INTERIM". Please confirm whether it is acceptable to submit a completed

CPARS for a completed project if the CPARS is listed as "INTERIM"

Clarification - Yes, it is acceptable to submit a completed CPARS for a completed project if listed as

INTERIM.

3.2

N/A

Under the solicitation the coefficient is to include:

Trash containers, dumpsters, roll-offs – including delivery, pick-up and disposal fees (does not include handling and disposal of hazardous wastes) which are utilized for general waste disposal. Can this be clarified that dumpsters can be added for demolition specific tasks such as: Roof demolition, paving demolition, building demolition and/or other specific works that would require more than one (1) dumpster per task order?

Coefficient development, which includes "dumpsters" are at the discretion of the Offeror. And shall take into consideration all understood scenerios.

63+66

3.2 +5.3.2

Under the solicitation in 3.2 states that coefficient includes: Daily and final cleaning of the work site.

Under 5.3.2 it states that the RS MEANS Line items are to include: Final Clean-up costs. Can this be clarified that daily and final clean up costs are included in the coefficient except on construction projects where a seperate cleaning task is required such as in bathroom renovations, flooring installations, and other building construction and renovation projects. If a seperate final cleaning task is needed beyond the contractor expected site cleaning then this cost can be added to the task order

Coefficient development, which includes "Daily and

Final cleaning" are at the discretion of the Offeror. And shall take into consideration all understood scenerios.

3.1.3 and

If we assume we're successful in winning one or both of the JOC's and receive task order RFP's (an actual project to price), we're trying to determine what the Govt's intent is regarding the OTR and Escort modifiers are to be treated as "coefficients" or "multipliers".

Normally, the cost to do work that OTR works hours or that involve working under the supervision of an Escort is MORE expensive than work being performed during Normal hours and without an escort. So if the Govt intends for these to be actual coefficients then it wouldn't make sense that they be less than 1.00 as shown in the examples. However, if the Govt intends these to be

"multipliers" then a number less than 1.00 would make sense b/c the calculation would be to apply the Pre-Priced Coefficient to the Pre- Priced Line Item total then apply the OTR or Escort MULTIPLIER to the Pre-Priced Line Item total and then add the two products together. For example, if you had a Pre-Priced Line Item total of

$100,000, a Pre-Priced Coefficient of 1.500, and an OTR or Escort MULTIPLIER of 0.500 the calculation would be $100,000 x 1.500 = $150,000 ; $100,000 x 0.500 = $50,000 ; then to get the proposed task order total you would add the $150,000 pre-priced total to the $50,000 OTR/Escort multiplier total for a proposed task order total of $200,000. That's how a MULTIPLIER works, but if the OTR and Escort modifiers are to be treated as true COEFFICIENTS then it would simply be multiplying the Pre-Priced Line Item total to the OTR or Escort COEFFICIENT. To get to the same $200,000 total in the example above you would need an OTR or Escort COEFFICENT of 2.0 an the calculation would look like this

$100,000 x 2.0 = $200,000. It is extremely critical for the Govt to clarify how the OTR and Escort modifiers are going to be used during the performance of this contract as it will drastically affect the Total Evaluated Price in the Price Proposal form that is to be submitted in response to this solicitation.

Coefficients shall be developed in accordance with solicitation and shall apply to the Spread Sheet provided in

Amendment 3

3.1.3 and

These paragraphs for the OTR and Escort coefficients mention "combining" costs. Given the uncertainty of how the Govt intends these coefficients to be applied, it is our recommendation to remove the word "MULTIPLIER" from the Price

Proposal Forms, treat them as traditional COEFFICIENTS that must be greater than the

Offeror's Pre-Priced Coefficient as this work would be more costly to perform. Also, revise paragraphs

3.1.3 and 3.1.1 to state "The OTR and ESCORT line item price is calculated by combining the RS Means total cost and then multiplying that result by the appropriated Coefficient factor.", which is how it's calculated on the current NAVFAC Washington

JOC and typical for most all JOC-type IDIQ contracts.

Please develop coefficients in accordance with solicitation and apply the Spread Sheet provided in

Amendment 3

7.8

For task orders that have an awarded value b/w $35K and $150K, will Payment Bonds be required per task order or will an overall Blanket Payment bond be required?

PPI#38 Amendment 4.

Coordination of the requirement of the required field personnel should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

For task orders that have an awarded value b/w greater than $150K, will Payment and Performance Bonds be required per task order or will an overall

Blanket Payment bond be required?

PPI#38 Amendment 4.

Coordination of the requirement of the required field personnel should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

1.5, 1.6

Page 6 Section 1 paragraphs 1.5 and 1.6 indicate that the term of the contract will be a 2yr Base period and a 3yr Option period. Please confirm that there is only (1) BASE period with a duration of 2-years and only (1) OPTION period with a duration of 3-years.

Clarification - The Base Period includes two (2) "Ordering Periods", and The

Option period includes three (3) "Ordering

Periods

SF1442

12A

Block 12A indicates that NO Payment and

Performance bonds are required. Please confirm Payment and Performance bonds will be required during the performance of this contract.

See PPI#38 Response

B

There is no requirement in the solicitation for Offerors to provide evidence of their ability to provide adequate bonding for this contract. Given the 2yr Base Period with a value of $100M per JOC contract, would the Govt consider requiring Offerors to provide a letter from their bonding company that demonstrates the Offerors ability to provide the required bonding for this contract (e.g. minimum

$5M single project and $50M aggregate)?

Please confirm that Offerors are required to have a "Basic" confidence level registered in the SPRS system and no other documentation is required to be submitted within the proposal.

Confirmed

The response to PPI #2 in Amendment 0003 states that the 2024 RS Means Cost Data book shall be used for the duration of the contract including option years. Section 3.2 of the solicitation states that the offerors coefficient is to include “escalation costs”.

It is unfair to require the offeror to anticipate costs escalation over a five-year period. Typically, the escalation in cost, typically due to inflation, or other market fluctuations, is captured in the ANNUAL RS

Means update. Using RS Means to capture this inflation is fairer to the government and the contractor over such an extended period of time.

Please reconsider revising the requirement so that it states "The contractor shall use the most current RS Means Cost Data books and the annual updates will apply to account escalation costs due to inflation.

No - Submit proposal in accordance with the

If the Offeror is proposing as unpopulated Joint Venture, please confirm that as long as both members of the Joint Venture have a minimum Confidence Level assessment of "Basic" for their

NIST SP 800-171 Assessments within their respective SPRS registrations then the requirement has been met and that no assessment needs to be done for the Joint Venture

"the offeror is required to implement

NIST SP 800-171"

….Offerors are encouraged to seek guidance from their own legal or cyber-security compliance advisors for advice concerning the NIST SP 800-171 DoD

Assessment requirements."

5(1)

The Solicitation Number "N4008023R0037" appears on page 14 of 71 of the Solicitation. Please clarify how or if the Government plans to utilize this Solicitation Number. Additionally, please confirm if

Offerors are to note that Solicitation number anywhere in their proposals.

The single solicitation number

N4008023R2185 shall be used for both Blue

(SF1442)and Gold (SF1442) contracts.

In the Pre Proposal Conference slides, it is stated that PPIs are due 10 calendar days prior to the Proposal Due Date. However, Page 8, 3.2 states

"The cut-off date for all final PPI Comments, Suggestions, and Concerns is close of business 29

February 2024 at 2:00PM, EST"

See PPI#41 Response

Page 8, 3.2 states "The cut-off date for all final PPI Comments, Suggestions, and Concerns is close of business 29 February 2024 at 2:00PM, EST" - Please confirm whether PPIs are due at 2PM 2/29 or "close of business" 2/29

During the Pre Proposal Conference, it was stated that "Coefficient is synonymous with Multiplier" However, page 62 of the solicitation states in part that "line item price is calculated by COMBINING the Escort cost, then multiplying that result by the appropriate coefficient factor" This appears to conflict with the statement that "Coefficient is synonymous with Multiplier" - Please clarify

See, Amendment 3 and use the spreadsheet accordingly

2(d)

The Government requests a "letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement for the Design Subcontractor" Please clarify if Offerors may provide a narrative addressing the meaningful involvement of their selected Designer of Record (DoR) in addition to a Letter of

Commitment from their selected DoR. Additionally, please confirm if there are page limitations to the

Letter of Comittment and the narrative of meaningful involvment.

Clarification - No, joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, approved mentor protégé agreement, and letters of commitment are not included in the page limit under Factor 1.

Factor 2

2(2)

Will Offerors whose proposals demonstrate

Construction Experience projects with a final construction cost of at least $1M - $4M be considered more favorably than Offerors whose proposals demonstrate Construction Experience projects with only the minimum of at least $1M.

No. The Basis of Evaluation under

Factor 2 explains the conditions in where demonstrated experience may be considered more favorably.

JV Offerors

If the Government intends to determine 8(a) elibaility of an Offeror that is a Joint Venture and utilizes SAM.gov/DSBS/SBA Certify they may find that the Joint Venture itself is not listed with an 8(a) JV Entrance Date, etc. that is likely due to the SBA no longer approving 8(a) Joint Ventures UNLESS the JV itself is awarded an 8(a) contract. However, if the Government searches the Majority Member, 8(a) participant of the JV, the Gov't will then find the 8(a) Case Number, Entrance Date, etc. Please confirm the Government will be checking the 8(a) participant of the JV's information to confirm eligability.

Clarification - USG's vetting process includes, however is not limited to using the

Offeror's Unique Entity ID as populated by SAM and Requesting SBA to confirm 8(a) eligibility for award. "The

Offeror shall also submit a SIGNED copy of the JV agreement"

JV Offerors

Page 8 - 7 JOINT VENTURE OFFERORS states that "Joint Venture Agreements must be received by the SBA prior to proposal due date and approved before award of a resulting contract" The SBA no longer approves 8(a) Joint Ventures on Competitive contracts so this requirement isn’t possible. Can you please confirm this is no longer required?

See PPI#144 Response

Question 2

Will RS Means Cost Data Book Annual Updates be incorporated and used under this contract?

5.2.2

The latest edition of a RS Means Cost Data Book (in order of precedence specified in the statement of work) published at the time of pricing a task order may be used. Is this a correct statement?

The offeror shall inform the Government, the specific RSMeans it is using to develop its proposal.

3.1.1

The city cost index markup is not listed in Section

3.1.1. The city cost index for each location of work

will be applied to unit price cost estimate. Is this a correct statement?

See PPI#28 Response

If a proposal has been submitted to the Government and it is older than 90 days at the time of anticipated award, may it be repriced and resubmitted if a new

RS Means Cost Data Book has been published during this period?

See PPI #146 Response.

Is there estimated wokload data for redline drawings to accurately capture the cost in our coefficient?

No

1.5

Section 1.5 (page 6 of 71) indicates contract has two periods consisting of 5 total years with an NTE of $100 million ($20 million per year), however the

Price Schedule workbook has three periods consisting of 8 total years which would exceed $100 million, is this correct?

A figure for annual estimated number of task orders exceeding

$250,000 is not available. Please follow the requirements of the solicitation.

(a) 1 &

(a) 2

In regards to Superintedence, what is the annual estimated number of task orders exceeding $250,000 that would require a full time Superintendent?

Clarification - Coordination of the requirement of the required field personnel should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

Is it the government's expectation for the coefficient to include for the cost of one full time dedicated Superintendent for each task order that exceeds

$250,000 (i.e. 1 coefficient based FTE per $250,000 project)?

No. Followow tthe requirements of 01 35 26, paragraph 1.6.1.

Can 1 full time Superintendent run multiple projects that individually exceed $250,000 if they are dedicated to the overall contract?

Ref. to Page 56 paragraph 7 (a).

10-Sep

Requirements Sec 01 35 26

1.6.1 a. -d.

In regards to SSHO, what is the annual estimated number of task orders exceeding $500,000 that would require a full time SSHO?

Coordination of the requirement of the required field personnel should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

Is it the government's expectation for the coefficient to include for the cost of one full time dedicated SSHO for each task order that exceeds $500,000 (i.e.

1 coefficient based FTE per $500,000 project)?

Clarification - Refer to Solicitation Sect 3 for coefficient development

Is it the government's expectation for the coefficient to include for the cost of one full time dedicated

SSHO for each $1,000,000 in active task orders (i.e.

1 coefficient based FTE per $1,000,000 of active project awards)?

Clarification - Refer to Solicitation Sect 3 for development

If the contractor is awarded a single $4,000,000 task order, is the contractor required to hire 4 SSHO's (1 per $1,000,000 in active task orders)?

requirement of the required field personnel should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

Can 1 full time SSHO run multiple projects that individually exceed $500,000 if they are dedicated to the overall contract?

No. Follow the requirements of 01 35 26, paragraph 1.6.1.

Sec 01 45

00.10 20

1.5.1 a. -

In regards to QCM, what is the annual estimated number of task orders exceeding $500,000 that would require a full time QCM?

required field personnel should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

QCM for each task order that exceeds $500,000 (i.e.

1 coefficient based FTE per $500,000 project)?

Yes.

QCM for each $1,000,000 in active task orders (i.e.

1 coefficient based FTE per $1,000,000 of active project awards)?

Yes.

If the contractor is awarded a single $4,000,000 task order, is the contractor required to hire 4 QCM's (1 per $1,000,000 in active task orders)?

Coordination of the requirement of the required field personnel should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

Can 1 full time QCM run multiple projects that individually exceed $500,000 if they are dedicated to the overall contract?

No. Please follow the requirements of 01 45 00.10, paragraph 1.5.1.

70-71

8.5

The contractor is required to provide a field office with telephone, fax and email access that is manned during normal working hours at each site where workload is at least $1,000,000 annually. Will the government provide historical work load data that would indicate the amount of occurrences of the seperate field office requirement at the various locations.

No. Historical data may not be available.

70-71

8.5

The contractor is required to provide a field office with telephone, fax and email access that is manned during normal working hours at each site where workload is at least $1,000,000 annually. Will the costs of additional Job trailers be direct charged to the task orders?

Clarification - A field office trailer is to be provided at each Ordering Office location where workload is at least $1M annually. No additional field office trailers are required above this requirement.

69-71

What is the estimated value of the aggregate bonding needed for this contract?

3 and 4

Section 00 21 00, Instructions to Offerors, paragraph

3. Pre-Proposal Conference notes, “The cut-off date for all final PPI Comments, Suggestions, and Concerns is close of business 29 February 2024 at 2:00PM, EST. Paragraph 4. Pre-Proposal Inquiries state, “ The Government does not intend to respond to inquiries submitted less than 10 calendar days before the proposal closing date and time.” which would be 8 March 2024. Can you please clarify the deadline for submitting PPIs?

Amendment

Question #12 issued in Amendment 0003, inquired about a specific font and size requirement; however, a specific font requirements does not appear to be listed in the solicitation. Please confirm that offerors are not required to use a specific font or size.

See PPI#22 Response

Amendment

The clarification to Question #8 issued in

Amendment 0003 states “The Offeror is Not required to demonstrate DBB "design project" experience in their proposal for Factor 2 (b).” Does this mean that item b will be removed from the

Factor 2 requirements and the design team will no longer be required to satisfy this criteria?

Clarification - Yes

Construction & Design

Experience Project Data

Sheet

Block 1

Attachment A, block 1. references a “DUNS Number.” Please confirm offerors can include our

SAM UEID rather than DUNS number since DUNS are no longer used in SAM.

Yes, use the Unique Entity ID number in lieu of DUNS

What is the anticipated use of Task Orders for the secondary Locations?

Task Order use is

TBD. The intent is to procure an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite

Quantity (IDIQ)

01 00 00

1.1

Will eCMS be based on total contract or for each Task Order?

Utilization of eCMS is on a Task Order basis.

Please see specification 01 31

23.13 20 for additional requirements regarding the use of eCMS.

Will Task Orders be jointed scoped and then issued as a Work Order?

The use of joint scoping should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

2.1

Will the R.S. Means cost book for each calendar year be used for the calendar year of the work?

The specifications attached to this solicitation are

General Requirements. What material specifications will be used or will they be issued with each work order?

Material specifications will be issued with individual task orders.

3/1/2024

. page 14 of

5. Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor

Section a.1.a.i-ii

This opportunity is posted under a single solicitation number, N4008023R2185. However, within the Solicitation it references the two contracts in this manner: Blue-N4008023R2185 and Gold- N4008023R0037. Please clarify the use of the separate solicitation numbers for Gold and Blue contracts. If each opportunity has its own number, will a new SF1442 be issued for the Gold contract?

single solicitation number N4008023R2185 shall be used for both Blue

(SF1442)and Gold (SF1442) contracts.

. page 12 of

4.1a

Section 4.1a states “Offerors submitting only one price proposal (i.e. for either location) will be considered non-responsive and will not be considered for award.” However, it was stated in the PPC and appears to be addressed further through answers to RFI 20 and 25, that it is possible to submit a bid only for one of the two potential awards

(Primary Blue locations with secondary Gold locations OR Primary Gold locations with secondary Blue locations). Please confirm bidders are permitted to bid on only one of the two potential awards.

Confirmed - Bidders are permitted to bid on only one of the two potential awards.

Sol. page and Amendme nt 4

4.1 and

PPI #25

The Government’s clarification to RFI # 25 states “Provide a separate proposal for the JOC that you are competing on.” However Section 4.1 of the Evaluation discussion in the solicitation instructs offerors to submit “two (2) clearly marked price proposals. Price Proposal 1 – Consisting of Blue

Locations, and Price Proposal 2 – Consisting of Gold Locations” and only one (1) non-price/cost proposal.

Please confirm all offerors are to submit two clearly marked price proposals (one for Blue and one for Gold) and one non-price/cost proposal (for Blue and

Gold, combined).

Clarification - Provide a complete (Price and

Non-price/cost) proposal for the JOC that you are competing on.

There are a number of PPI responses that conflict with, change, or add to the solicitation requirements.

Will the Government be issuing a conformed solicitation and attachments reflecting these changes or are offerors to consider any clarification or PPI response as intended to serve as a formal change and that PPI responses should govern in the event of any conflict or change?

No - The solicitation amendments serve as formal changes and clarification to the

PPIs 2, 30, Please confirm that starting in January of each year, contractors are to use the new year's RS Means Data to price estimates, such that that contractors are using the updated data each calendar year.

Clarification - "the most current"

RSMeans used

PPI # 69

& 70

The PPI responses seem to indicate there will be flexibility in the staffing requirements per ordering office. Is this limited to determnations regarding dual-hat allowance for SSHO/QCM, or will the ordering offices also be allowed to raise the requirements for Superintendents per task order and per overall volume?

required field personnel should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for a specific ordering office. However the Government is open to dual hatting QCM and SSHO roles at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer.

The PPI responses seem to indicate there will be flexibility in the staffing requirements per ordering office. Is this limited to determnations regarding dual-hat allowance for SSHO/QCM, or will the ordering offices also be allowed to raise the requirements for QCM and/or SSHO per task order and per overall volume?

required field personnel should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for a specific ordering office. However the Government is open to dual hatting QCM and SSHO roles at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer.

NA

Staffing

According to the Government's published volume of work performed on the current JOC for the Blue locations on March 1, 2023, there was $38.6 M in active projects. If we apply the staffing requirements for this new contract to that date, the contractor would need 120 team members. Please confirm this is the Government's intent.

No. The Government's intent is to utilize the Amendment 3 EVW clarifications. The

EVW amounts are to be utilized in the calculations, which includes aggregate staffing and other direct cost items.

Within the Federal JOC industry, competitive coefficients are typically based on an estimated range of revenue per person of $750,000 to $1.25 Million per person. For this contract, with the stringent requirements specified by the Government, the range of revenue is approximately $250,000 to $350,000 per person and will signficantly increase the coefficient values. Please confirm that the IGE against which proposed coefficients will be evaluated is in line with this requirement.

No. Price (which includes coefficients) was developed from historical NAVFAC JOC contracts, and shall be evaluated

IAW FAR 15.404-1

Proposal analysis techniques.

Sol. page and

Section 01 00

Sol.

3.1.1 and

PPI #29

The soliciation states "the Pre-Priced line items price is calculated by combining the R.S. MEANS total cost (which already includes the installing contractor’s Overhead and Profit), applicable material taxes, and then multiplying that result by the appropriate Coefficient factor. However PPI response #29 conficts with the solicitation and indicates offerors are to use the Bare Cost column, not Total with Overhead and Profit. Please clarify which column should be used.

Clarification for both #29 Response and

#185. Refer to 01 00 00 Par 3.1.1 and

3.1.2.: "R.S. MEANS

total cost (which already includes the installing contractor’s Overhead and Profit)"

Through the PPI responses, the Governement has seemed to indicate that individual ordering offices may disregard the specified staffing levels and establish their own levels at their discretion. This has introduced a significant lack of clarity in the staffing expectations for the contract and will make it very difficult to create a competitive coefficient because each offeror is being asked to make assumptions across an extreme range of requirements. This would seem to give the incumbent contractor a significant advantage in understanding how to staff this contract. Would the Government please clarify how much leeway each ordering office has to adjust the staffing levels for their site to allow offerors bid on equal footing?

conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

Given the extreme staffing requirements the general conditions portion of each coefficient may be as high as 60%. Once a reasonable profit is applied, this leaves a very limited portion of each dollar available to pay for actual construction. This equates, potentially, to the Government having only about

$1.75 million in actual construction work for every $5 million paid on this contract. Please confirm the

Government values the staffing levels within the IGE similarly.

The Government's IGE for staffing is included in the EVWs and is included in the development list.

The lack of clarity introduced through the potential for individual ordering offices to downgrade the staffing requirements may result in the Government paying significantly higher coefficients than needed or else contractors may need to absorb a unacceptable level of risk. Would the Government be more specific regarding the staffing thresholds and requirements anticipated at each ordering office to allow offerors to develop a realistic coefficient that appropriately addresses the needs of the Government, stewardship of taxpayer dollars, and corporate viability?

The Government's IGE for staffing is included in the EVWs and is included in the coefficient development list.

Coordination of the requirement of the required field personnel should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for

Amen

3/4/2024

Design

Under Design Experience, it states relevant projects shall demonstrate the following: “a. Experience as the Prime Contractor on all of the submitted design for construction projects", however, a Design Team cannot be the Prime Contractor on a construction project. Is this a typographical error? If not, can the government please clarify?

Clarification - Design Experience shall be demonstrated by the Prime Contractor's Designer of Record

(DOR)

Amen

(End of Summary of Changes)