HFRM Pkg 7 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

See Continuation.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 5

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 06-Dec-2019

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 N4008519R9257

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

15-Nov-2019

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

06-Dec-2019

CODE

NAVFAC MID ATLANTIC

ACQUISITION CORE

9324 VIRGINIA AVENUE

NORFOLK VA 23511-3095

N40085 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N4008519R9257

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

1. Provides PPI Responses

REFERENCE QUESTION GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

Page Section Paragraph

The final RFP's for MILCON HFRM Packages 1 and 2 both contained PPI Responses that clarified some of the general program proposal submission requirements. Will those responses be applicable to Package 7 and other forthcoming packages? Specifically, will the 12 pt font size for Package 3 be amended to 10 pt as in Packages 1 & 2?

PPIs should be submitted for each MILCON HFRM package. PPI responses to other packages are not applicable to this package. However, minimum Font size of 10pt font is allowable for proposal submission as long as font is legible.

1 SF1442 Block 13 Due to the Thanksgiving Holidays, we request an extension of two weeks to accommodate the downtime during the week of November 25th- 29th when offices are closed and personnel are away.

Bid per RFP.

To ensure top design/build firms participate in the response to this procurement, we highly recommend that you modify the RFP to include a significant stipend for (at a minimum) the non-shortlisted teams (Phase II).

The market is extremely busy, and we received feedback from multiple design partners that a lack of a stipend would prohibit their participation.

Also, (if applicable) could you tell us how much the stipend would be for this project?

At this time, stipends will not be provided.

9 of

00 21 16 Evaluation Factors for

Award (Phase I Proposals)

The second paragraph on RFP page 9 of 56 (Section 00 21 16) indicates, "In accordance with FAR 36.303-1(a)(4), the solicitation states that the Government shall select a maximum of three offerors to submit Phase II proposals, unless the Government determines it is in its best interest to include up to a maximum of the five most highly qualified offerors." It is our understanding that NAVFAC will limit the number of offerors shortlisted to phase II to a maximum of three according to recent

Hurricane Florence Recovery Industry Day events. Please confirm that the maximum number of offerors to be selected to participate

Bid per the RFP.

in Phase II is three.

11 of

00 21 16 (1) Solicitation

Submittal Requirements

In other recent NAVFAC solicitations we have responded to, we have seen either no minimum font requirements, or minimum font sizes below 12 point. The Factor 2 Construction &

Design Experience Project Data Sheets (Attachment C) require us to provide detailed descriptions of our projects. We respectfully request that the minimum font size requirement for this Phase 1 proposal response to be reduced to 10 point, to allow for more detailed content.

The minimum font size requirement for the Phase 1 proposal is reduced to

10 point.

14 of

00 21 16 Solicitation Submittal

Requirements

The last paragraph of Factor 2, (2) Design Experience on page 14 of 56 indicates that "The

Offer must provide a supporting joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement for the design subcontractor." Please confirm that the necessary teaming agreement information and any related teaming explanation narrative is to be included in Factor 1 and not in Factor 2.

The supporting joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement for the design subcontractor should be included in Factor 1.

12 and 13 of

00 21 16 Factor 2 - Experience,

(1) Construction Experience, Aircraft Hangar and (2)

Design Experience, Aircraft Hangar

In the Factor 2 – Experience section of the RFP, the definition of Complexity, for Aircraft

Hangars, indicates that “At least one project demonstrating experience meeting the above

Size/Scope requirements must include aircraft parking apron and taxiways construction.” In our experience, a facility of any size that is adjacent to airfield operations can also include highly relevant aircraft parking apron and taxiway construction. We respectfully request that the RFP Aircraft Hangar Complexity criteria be revised to read as follows:

“Complexity: At least one project, of any size, must demonstrate experience with aircraft parking apron and taxiways construction.”

Bid per the RFP.

12 and 13 of

00 21 16 Factor 2 - Experience,

(1) Construction Experience, Aircraft Hangar and (2)

Design Experience, Aircraft Hangar

In the Factor 2 – Experience section of the RFP, offerors are to submit project experience that has been “completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.”

Aircraft hangar projects, especially those involving the construction of large hangars, are not as common as other types of facilities due to sequestration and other economic events. In order for the government to have the most competitive selection of project experience to evaluate, we respectfully request that the RFP requirements be revised to allow offerors to submit aircraft hangar projects that have been completed within the past 12 years in lieu of 10 years.

Bid per the RFP.

12 of

00 21 16 Factor 2 - Experience, (1) Construction Experience

In the Factor 2 – Experience section of the RFP, offerors are to submit project experience that has been “completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.”. In order to simplify completion date determination of highly relevant construction projects, please allow projects completed within or after the calendar year of 2009 (i.e., construction completion after January 1, 2009) rather than tying it to an arbitrary RFP issuance date.

14 of

00 21 16 Factor 2 - Experience, (2)

Design Experience

In the Factor 2 – Experience section of the RFP, offerors are to submit project experience that has been “completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.”. In order to simplify completion date determination of highly relevant design projects, please allow projects completed within or after the calendar year of 2009 (i.e., design complete after January 1, 2009) rather than tying it to an arbitrary RFP issuance date.

Bid per the RFP.

15 of

00 21 16 Factor 3 - Past Performance,

(2) Design Past Performance

In a government design-build project where the prime construction contractor holds the design-build contract, government clients are frequently not in a position to fill out PPQs for the contractor’s AE design-partner, since there is no direct contractual relationship between that government client and the AE firm. Since an ACASS or design firm CPAR is not available for government design-build contracts, please confirm if it is acceptable for a design-build prime contractor (as the offeror) to submit the design-build prime contractor’s CPAR or CCASS evaluation as evidence of past performance of the design partner, if the design partner of the featured project is the same as the proposed design partner.

This is acceptable.

15 of

00 21 16 Factor 3 - Past Performance,

(2) Design Past Performance

In a government design-build project where the prime construction contractor holds the design-build contract, government clients are frequently not willing to fill out PPQs for the contractor’s AE design-partner, since there is no direct contractual relationship between that government client and the AE firm. And, of course, there is no ACASS/CPAR provided to the design partner, for the same reason. Please clarify if a PPQ, filled out by the design-build contractor (offeror), is an acceptable evaluation for the AE partner’s design past performance, since the design-build contractor is a client of that AE firm.

If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation specific to the proposed

Designer of Record for design-build projects, then the Offeror may submit

Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment F) for each project included in Factor 2 for both Construction Experience and

Design Experience.

12 of

00 21 16 Factor 2 - Experience, (1) Construction Experience

The RFP indicates that "Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. " Other NAVFAC RFPs have defined project completion as follows, "For construction projects: The facility is completely constructed and ready for the intended use." To establish the time-frame for project completion, please confirm that for Construction

Confirmed.

Experience, projects must be completely constructed and ready for the intended use.

38 of

SECTION 00 70

00 -

CONDITIONS OF

THE CONTRACT

52.211-12

LIQUIDATED

DAMAGES--

CONSTRUCTION

N/A The LD rates per project were issued in RFP Section 00 70 00, Clause 52.211-12. Please advise if the start of these LDs is: 1) for each project that is not completed before the 1826 calendar day total project allowance or 2) for each project that is not completed by it's individual completion date as stated (in the

Phase 2 submission) in Attachment H?

In accordance with the RFP, Factor 5 - Project Management Approach, (a)

Solicitation Submittal Requirements,

(4) Schedule, "The awardee’s proposed project duration from award for each Project will be incorporated into the contract. Upon award, each project will have a separate completion date." Liquidated Damages will be assessed on a per Project basis based on the awardee's proposed completion date for each Project.

8 Factor 1 Technical Approach: Is the required letter from the Surety included in the 4 page limit for the Technical Approach? The Government clarified that Teaming

Agreements, JV Agreements or teaming letters of commitment are not a part of the page limit, but the RFP is slient on whether the Surety letter is or not.

The letter from the Surety is not included in the Technical Approach page limit.

9 Factor 2 Experience for Aircraft Hangars requires a relevant project to be in 100,000SF or greater. We have completed many hangars -including hangars with office space attached -would the Government consider reducing this to 70,000SF.

(End of Summary of Changes)