N4019220R2700 RFI Notice 2.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND MARIANAS

PSC 455, BOX 195

FPO AP 96540-2937

Page 1 of 5 Amendment 0001 N40192-20-R-2700 Phase One Notice 2 Enclosure (1)

29 July 2020

PHASE ONE NOTICE 2

PRE-PROPOSAL REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION AND RESPONSES

SOLICITATION N40192-20-R-2700

HUBZONE DESIGN BUILD MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

VARIOUS LOCATIONS, GUAM

QUESTION 9: Please confirm offerors can provide PPQs, previously utilized, so as the PPQ form contains the same or exact information as that contained in Exhibit B of this solicitation.

Answer 9: Confirmed. Offerors may include in their proposal previously utilized PPQs in the format of Exhibit B of this solicitation.

QUESTION 10: Due to COVID and ongoing delays with SAM and Cage Code updates we would like to kindly request a 4 week extension for submission of proposal from August 11, 2020 to September 08, 2020.

Answer 10: The proposal due date is extended from August 11, 2020 to August 25, 2020. Refer to Amendment 0001.

QUESTION 11: We recently completed work as a subcontractor on a NAVFAC project. Is it possible to request a PPQ direct from NAVFAC instead of the Prime?

Answer 11: No. The Prime contractor should complete the PPQ as the client for this project. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact.

QUESTION 12: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 22 16 Factor 3 Past Performance. Paragraph 3(a)(i)(B) states: “Offerors must resubmit and shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS evaluations previously submitted for other RFPs.” Please confirm whether is it acceptable to submit PPQs and CPARS that have been previously submitted and whether we can use PPQs that were completed 4 years ago.

Answer 12: Confirmed. Refer to Question 9. To further clarify the RFP statement referenced in this question, the following situation is explained. An Offeror that would like to use a PPQ or CPARS evaluation that they submitted in a past proposal for another RFP shall not refer the Government to see that PPQ or CPARS evaluation in their previously submitted proposal. The PPQ or CPARS evaluation, although previously submitted, MUST be included in their proposal for this solicitation and not be incorporated by reference.

QUESTION 13: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Item 13.a. Can consideration for an extension to the deadline for a proposal in order to submit a more competitive response?

Answer 13: The proposal due date is extended from August 11, 2020 to August 25, 2020. Refer to Amendment 0001.

N40192-20-R-2700 Phase One Notice 2

QUESTION 14: Reference RFP Part 1 Section 00 22 16 Factor 1 Technical Approach. As there is a limited number of firms on-island, can the Offeror identify the Lead Design Firm as a Firm based in a location stateside, or would the Lead Design Firm have to be based on-island locally? If either/or, would there be any favorable or unfavorable consideration if the lead design firm is based off-island?

Answer 14: Business location of a design firm will not be used to rate a proposal higher or lower in the evaluation for Factor 1 Technical Approach. Factor 1 will be rated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis.

QUESTION 15: Reference RFP Part 1 Section 00 22 16 Factor 3 Past Performance. If the Offeror provides information on problems encountered and corrective actions on project submitted under Factor 2, please clarify on which part of the Exhibit B form we would provide our explanation.

Answer 15: Do not use Exhibit B in Factor 3 Past Performance to provide information on problems encountered and corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 2, Experience. Explanations shall be submitted separately from Exhibit B and shall not exceed four (4) pages total in Factor 3 Past Performance.

QUESTION 16: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 22 16 Factor 3 Past Performance. Paragraph 3(a)(i)(B) states: “Offerors must resubmit and shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS evaluations previously submitted for other RFPs.” As CPARS are not issued on an individual basis, will the Government please confirm only PPQs are subject to this requirement? In consideration of the busy schedules of Contracting Officers, to avoid antagonizing and overburdening those who have already completed PPQs for the projects included, would the Government please allow previously submitted, recent PPQs provided they are the NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire format

(PPQ-0)?

Answer 16: Refer to Questions 9 and 12. The RFP statement referenced in this question applies to both PPQs and CPARS evaluations.

QUESTION 17: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 21 16 Paragraph 3.1 Proposal Format. How should the pages in this solicitation response be numbered?

Answer 17: Number each page containing information required by evaluation Factors 1, 2, and 3. Do not exceed maximum number of pages allowed in the respective evaluation factors.

QUESTION 18: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 21 16 Paragraph 3.1 Proposal Format. Is there a page limit for the cover letter?

Answer 18: There is no page limitation for the Cover Letter. Offerors are asked to submit only the information required for the Cover Letter. Please do not submit any additional information such as brochures or other pre-printed materials.

QUESTION 19: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 21 16 Paragraph 3.2 Proposal Parts. Do the cover letter, SF1442, and reps and certs go in Volume 1? Or, should each be submitted as separate documents?

Answer 19: For Phase One, each of these proposal parts shall be submitted together with the information required by evaluation factors 1, 2, and 3 using a three ring binder (or bound) with tabs or separators. Do not submit the proposal parts in separate binders.

QUESTION 20: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 21 16 FAR Clause 52.215-1. Should items (c)(2)(i) through (v) be included in the offeror’s cover letter or on the cover page of the proposal?

Answer 20: The cover letter is considered the first page of the proposal and must show the items listed on FAR Clause 52.215-1(c)(2)(i) through (v) in addition to the DUNS Number, CAGE Code, and Tax Identification Number (TIN) of the Offeror as required in RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 21 16 Paragraph

3.1 Proposal Format.

QUESTION 21: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 22 16 Factor 1 Technical Approach. Do both teaming agreements and letters of commitment need to be submitted with the proposal?

Answer 21: Teaming agreements OR letters of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team identified in Factor 1 Technical Approach must be submitted in the proposal for this factor.

QUESTION 22: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 22 16 Factor 2 Experience. Must Construction and Design Experience projects be 100% complete within the past 5 years, or may they be in progress?

Answer 22: Refer to Question 1 in Notice 1. Do not submit experience information for projects in progress.

QUESTION 23: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 21 16 Paragraph 3.1 Proposal Format. Can tables and graphics use smaller than 10-pitch font?

Answer 23: Yes.

QUESTION 24: Does the contractor require a minimum aggregate bonding capacity?

Answer 24: There is no minimum required bonding capacity, but Offerors must have adequate bonding capacity. Sureties will calculate the required bonding capacity based on the value of the contract, number of years, and number of contractors. Also refer to bid bond requirements in Factor 6 Price if selected to submit a Phase Two proposal.

QUESTION 25: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 22 16 Factor 2 Experience. Does the construction project scope include the additional specialty construction scopes of work? For example, would specialty construction, such as demolition and landscaping, and civil construction, such as clearing and grubbing, be included in such scope (and corresponding contract value)?

Answer 25: The scope of a project submitted for evaluation of experience must be new construction, renovation, or repair work. If the primary intent of a project was demolition, for example, and not new construction, renovation, or repair work, it may not be considered relevant.

QUESTION 26: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 22 16 Factor 2 Experience. The requirements state that a relevant project requires “total construction costs of at least $1 million.” For a subcontract for construction, does “total construction cost” refer to the subcontract value or the total value of the entire project?

Answer 26: For projects submitted where the Offeror performed work as a subcontractor, the value of the subcontract shall be at least $1 million and shall be specified on Block 6 of the Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet in Exhibit A.

QUESTION 27: It is stated on the SF1442 and elsewhere in the RFP that a Bid Guarantee will be required, but it is not listed on the Phase 1 Proposal documents. Does this mean that a Bid Guarantee will be required if our firm is selected for Phase 2, or should we have our surety provide one for the Phase 1 response?

Answer 27: A bid guarantee or surety letter is not required in Phase One. Offerors selected to submit Phase Two proposals will be required to submit a seed project bid bond and a bonding capacity letter.

QUESTION 28: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 22 16 Factor 2 Experience. Is the offeror able to submit construction experience and past performance with a design firm that is different from the one we are proposing on this RFP? The project is relevant, costs at least $1 million, and completed within the past 5 years of issuance of this RFP.

Answer 28: Yes. Construction projects submitted for evaluation of construction experience do not need to be with the design firm(s) identified in the proposal. However, design projects submitted for evaluation of design experience must have been performed by design firm(s) identified in the proposal.

Relevant projects where the Offeror and the proposed design firm(s) have previously worked together may be considered more favorably than those that have not worked together.

QUESTION 29: We would like to submit our experience and past performance for the completed and accepted portion of the project. A subsequent modification to add an accessory that is not essential in itself but adds convenience to the end users was requested by the Government two months after the project had been completed and accepted. After Government review, the Government now plans to de-scope this modification. Can the offeror submit construction experience and past performance for the completed and accepted portion of the project, while the Government processes the change order to de-scope said modification?

Answer 29: Yes, provided no work ordered in the modification is ongoing and the Government specifies in the final CPARS evaluation that the actual final completion date is within the past 5 years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

QUESTION 30: We have an interim CPARS evaluation for a completed relevant project that was evaluated mid-project but do not have a CPARS evaluation for final project completion. Are interim CPARS for completed projects accepted? Or should we submit PPQs for completed projects that do not have final CPARS evaluation?

Answer 30: Offerors may include interim CPARS evaluations for completed relevant projects in the proposal. Do not submit a PPQ for a project that has a completed CPAR evaluation available. If the completed CPAR is an interim evaluation, and a final evaluation reflecting 100% completion does not exist, then the Offeror may provide additional information under Factor 3 Past Performance to explain any problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 2 Experience. Explanations shall not exceed four (4) pages total.

QUESTION 31: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 21 16 Paragraph 7 Federal Contractor Program. RFP states in the referenced section/paragraph that “companies must file an annual VETS-4212 report...” and “A contract cannot be awarded to a contractor that has not submitted a required annual form VETS-4212, Federal Contractor Veterans’ Employment Report (VETS-4212 Report) if subject to the reporting requirements of 38 U.S.C. 4212(d) for that fiscal year.” Does NAVFAC require offerors to submit confirmation of the annual VETS-4212 report with proposals? If so, where is it to be included in the organization of the proposal?

Answer 31: The VETS-4212 form is not required to be submitted with the Phase One proposal.

However, it is the Contractor’s responsibility to file an annual VETS-4212 report, which will be verified by the Contracting Officer in accordance with FAR 22.1304.

QUESTION 32: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 21 16 Paragraph 5 Joint Venture, Limited Liability Companies and Limited Partnership. RFP states Joint Venture entities need to “complete the online representations and certifications for the each joint venture member, as well as for the joint venture itself.” Does NAVFAC require offerors to submit the full SAM.gov FAR/DFAR report showing completed representations and certifications in full detail, or is it acceptable to provide a single page or screen capture showing verification of online completion by the entity?

Answer 32: Evidence showing completion of the Online Representations and Certifications via the SAM website is acceptable and will be verified by the Contracting Officer.

QUESTION 33: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 22 16 Factor 2 Experience. Is it acceptable for offerors to provide an introductory summary page (1 page) in Volume I, Tab 2 immediately preceding Exhibit A project data sheets, that will not be included in the page count?

Answer 33: No. An introductory summary page for Factor 2 Experience is not required or desired.

Only information required on the Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet in Exhibit A will be used in the evaluation of Factor 2 Experience.

QUESTION 34: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 21 16 Paragraph 3.3 Proposal Submission.

Please confirm that hand delivery of proposals is acceptable at the address identified in the RFP (Section 3.3, p. 6 of 67). For offerors that are hand delivering proposals, does NAVFAC require prior notification or information in order to access the location designated for delivery?

Answer 34: Yes. Please contact the Point of Contact (POC), Teresa Aguon, at (671) 333-3171 to submit hand-delivered proposals at the address in the referenced RFP section.

QUESTION 35: Reference RFP Part 1 SF1442 Section 00 22 16 Factor 3 Past Performance. Will the Government reconsider allowing the use of PPQs previously completed for other submissions? A lot of our POCs out of the office/not working or working very limited hours due to COVID-19 and we are struggling to get responses.

Answer 35: Refer to Questions 9 and 12. The solicitation allows use of PPQs previously utilized.