Amendment 0002 Q&A.pdf

C – Indefinite Delivery / Indefinite Quantity Contract for Architect Engineer Services for Civil / Structural Engineering Projects at Various Locations in Japan

Solicitation Number: N40084-20-R-0061

Agency: Department of Navy

Office: Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Far East

Location: NAVFAC Far East, Core Execution Team (CET), Japan

General Information Document Type: Synopsis - Amendment

Solicitation Number: N40084-20-R-0061, AMENDMENT 0002

Original Posted Date of Synopsis: 28 OCTOBER 2019

Response Date: 03 December 2019 @ 1430 Japan Standard Time Archiving Policy: N/A Original Archiving Date: 03 January 2020 Original Set Aside: N/A Set Aside: N/A Classification Code: C -- Architect and Engineering Services NAICS Code: 541330 -- Engineering Services

1. The purpose of this amendment is to provide questions / answers as follows:

QUESTION ANSWER

Synopsis, Selection Criteria, Criteria #2: Specialized Recent Experience:

'On page 5 of the revised synopsis it says, "For submittal purposes, a task order on an IDIQ contract is considered a project, as is a stand-alone contract award."

We have two (2) "work orders" that each have their own unique work order numbers, project titles, locations, schedules and they required separate submittal packages. Everything about them is separate and one does not depend on the other to be completed so we think that they are actually two distinct projects.

However, they were awarded under the same "task order". Can they be considered as two projects?

As described in the synopsis, a task order on an IDIQ contract is considered a project, as is a stand-alone contract award. The task order in its entirety is considered as a single project. A task order will not be considered as two separate projects.

Synopsis, Selection Criteria, Criteria #4: Past Performance:

On page 6, it states in part 'Firms may submit a Performance Survey previously submitted under a different Notice/ RFP (legible copies are acceptable) as long as it is on the same form as posted with this Synopsis.' We are unable to locate the Performance Survey posted/attached on this synopsis. To date, we see a total of five (5) attachments to this Synopsis, but none of them seems to contain the Performance Survey. Please advise.

The Performance Survey is the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). This attachment was accidentally omitted from the original synopsis posting.

Please see attach 4_PPQ.

Synopsis, Description:

'On page 1 of the revised synopsis it says, "Provide proof that the firm is permitted by law to practice the professions of architecture or engineering."

Would a Certificate of All Present Matters (現在事項全部証明書) alone be sufficient? This is issued by the Legal Affairs Bureau of the Ministry of Justice, and contains a record of all current matters of the company such as business matters (e.g. civil and architectural investigation, design, planning), executives, branch addresses, etc.

Or, do you also need photocopies of individual registrations such as those for First Class Architectural Office (一級建築士事務所) and Construction Consultant Business (建設コンサルタント業), in addition to the above?

Yes, the Kaisha Tokibo Tohon and/or the certificate of all present matters component of the Tokibo Tohon is acceptable proof to meet this requirement.

2. All inquiries of this announcement should be made, in writing, to Mr. Kyle Monma at e-mail kyle.monma@fe.navy.mil. Inquiries concerning this procurement shall include synopsis number and title.

Inquiries received after 19 November 2019 will not be considered.

3. All other synopsis provisions remain unchanged.