24R0051 Amendment 0002.pdf

N62470-24-R-0051

Amendment 0002 is issued to provide the following:

1) To provide revised synopsis.

2) To provide responses to pre-proposal inquiries.

Inquiries and Responses:

1) Question: Because the submission period includes a holiday week, we respectfully request a 1-week extension to the response date.

Response: Refer to Amendment 0001, which extended the response date to 15 August 2024.

2) Question: RFQ states: Page 2, Paragraph 2, “All contractors are advised that a Unique Entity

Identifier is required prior to award.” and Page 10, Paragraph 1, “Please include your Unique

Entity Identifier and CAGE numbers in Block 30 of the SF-330.” For Offerors submitting as a

JV who are not required to be registered in SAM prior to submission, may Offerors provide only the UEI and CAGE for each of the JV partners in Block 30?

Response: Refer to revision 1 of the synopsis attached herein. All contractors are advised that a

Unique Entity Identifier is required prior to submission of your SF330.

3) Question: RFQ states: Page 2, Selection Criteria, “Criterion 7 is of the least importance and will be used as a tie-breaker among technically equal firms.” Will NAVFAC confirm weighting of criteria 8 and 9 in relation to the other 7 criteria?

Response: Refer to revision 1 of the synopsis attached herein. Criterion 4-8 will be equal among themselves and Criterion 9 will be least important and a tie-breaker.

4) Question: RFQ states: Page 5, Criterion 2 Submission Requirements, “Cite recent (within the past seven (7) years) project-specific experience in work relevant to the services required under this contract.” Section F allows Offerors to provide projects completed within the past 10 years.

Will NAVFAC consider expanding the Section E recency definition to 10 years, so that projects in

Section F may also be included in Section E resumes?

Response: Refer to revision 1 of the synopsis attached herein. Synopsis has been revised from seven (7) years to ten (10) years to align with projects being submitted.

5) Question: RFQ states: Page 5, Criterion 2 Submission Requirements, “Provide a list of key personnel for three (3) design teams that shall be limited to the following: Principal-In-Charge

(PIC) of the Prime AE firm, Project Manager (PM), Architect, Civil Engineer, Structural

Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, Electrical Engineer, Fire Protection Engineer, Environmental

Engineer, Geotechnical Engineer, Land Surveyor, Interior Designer (practicing registered or certified) and Cost Engineer. The PIC of the Prime AE firm may be the same person on multiple teams. Specialized Experience: Provide a list of key personnel with specialized experience and technical competence in relevant projects that involved the execution of DD1391 or similar project programming documents, 1391/Design Charrettes, DB RFP solicitation documents, DBB design contract documents, and structural engineering studies.” QUESTION 5A: Will NAVFAC confirm that Offerors are only required to submit a “list” of names and a “list” of the types of experience indicated to meet this requirement? QUESTION 5B: Will NAVFAC confirm the names listed for the three teams do not require Section E resumes? QUESTION 5C: May

Offerors provide the lists as an introductory page at the beginning of Section E? QUESTION 5D:

If not in Section E, where would NAVFAC prefer Offerors provide the required lists?

Response: 5A - Correct. A list of names is required. These will be pages in Part I, Section H, and will count toward the total page count of Part I as described in paragraph SF-330 Submission

Requirements. Solicitation revised.

5B - We see these team members as key personnel, and will look for their resumes in Section E.

5C -Please include these teams in Section H, Additional Information.

5D - Section H is our preference.

6) Question: RFQ states: Page 5, Criterion 2 Submission Requirements, “More favorable consideration may be given for: 1) PM experience in (1), (2), and (3) of Criterion 1” Will

NAVFAC confirm whether Offerors should refer to Criterion 1 items 1 – 3 on page 2, items 1 – 3 at the top of page 3 in the more favorable section, or items 1 – 3 on page 3 in relevant projects under submission requirements?

Response: Refer to revision 1 of the synopsis attached herein. Synopsis has been revised to remove redundant numbering. The following list from Criterion 1 may be considered more favorably for PMs under Section H:

A. Execution of DD1391 or similar project programming documents

B. Facilitating DD1391/design charrettes

C. Development of DB Request for Proposal solicitation documentation

7) Question: RFQ states: Page 5, Criterion 2 Specialized Experience, “Each project listed for specialized experience shall include project title and location, year “professional services” (not including PCAS) completed, details of specialized experience, point-of-contact name, e-mail address, phone number, contract number or project identification number, contract period of performance, contract award amount, estimated construction cost and the role and experience the

PM had in performing the project.” QUESTION 7A: Will NAVFAC confirm this requirement applies only to the PM resume? QUESTION 7B: If no, the additional information required on each resume project (POC name, email, phone, POP, award amount and estimated construction cost) would cause resumes to exceed the 1-page limit, will NAVFAC allow Offerors to exceed the

1-page limit on all resumes? If yes, will NAVFAC consider increasing the overall page limit for the SF330, Part I? QUESTION 7C: If yes—the additional information required only applies to

PM resume, and understanding the additional information required on each resume project would cause the resume to exceed the 1-page limit, will NAVFAC allow Offerors to exceed the 1-page limit on the PM resume?

Response: Refer to revision 1 of the synopsis attached herein. The requirement for "Specialized

Project Management Experience" has been moved to Criterion 5 to avoid confusion with the experience provided by projects in Section F under Criterion 1. This experience and the referenced projects will be provided under Section H of Criterion 5, Additional Information. The additional PM experience will be included in the page count.

8) Question: Will NAVFAC confirm that Section D organizational charts submitted on an 11 x 17 page will count as one page?

Response: The 11 x 17 org chart counts as one page.

9) Question: Will NAVFAC confirm that Criterion 2 may be discussed in Section H?

Response: Refer to revision 1 of the synopsis attached herein. The requirements for listing three primary design teams and the "Specialized Project Management Experience" has been moved to

Criterion 5, and is to be provided in Section H.

10) Question: RFQ states: Page 3, Submission Requirements, “For the purpose of this Criterion, a complete design is one for which design drawings and specifications have been signed and sealed by the Registered Architect(s) and Professional Engineer(s).” Will NAVFAC confirm the definition for completion of projects presented in Section F that demonstrate experience in item

“5. Waterfront and Shipyard engineering studies.”?

Response: At least one project associated with the waterfront or shipyard in general for which design drawings and specifications have been signed and sealed should include an engineering study as a deliverable.

11) Question: QUESTION 11A: Will NAVFAC allow Offerors to provide an introduction at the beginning of Section E? QUESTION 11B: Will NAVFAC allow Offerors to provide an introduction at the beginning of Section F? QUESTION 11C: If Offerors provide introductions to sections E and F, will NAVFAC consider the information in the evaluation of their respective criteria?

Response: 11A) Yes. Offerors may also include summary tables linking personnel to Section F projects. Introductions count toward total page count.

11B) Yes. Introductions count toward total page count.

11C) Yes.

12) Question: RFQ states: Page 5, Criterion 2 Specialized Experience, Paragraph 1, “Other disciplines such as Planning and Scheduler Professional (PSP or equal) and Value Engineer (CVS or equivalent) are desired but not necessarily required.” Will NAVFAC rate Offerors less favorably in their evaluation of Criterion 2 Specialized Experience who provide PSP and/or VE resumes that don’t have Xs in Section G?

Response: No, offerors will not be rated less favorably for PSP and/or VE resumes that don’t have Xs in Section G.

13) Question: Page 10, Paragraph 2, “**In accordance with FAR 36.601-4(b) contracts for architect-engineer services may only be awarded to firms permitted by law to practice the professions of architecture or engineering. Firms must submit proof that they are permitted by law as required by FAR 36.601-4(b). If a firm is in a jurisdiction that requires AE firm registration, the firm must provide proof of registration. If a firm is in a jurisdiction that does not require AE firm registration, the firm must provide proof of eligibility to practice (e.g., a summary explaining eligibility under the laws of that jurisdiction). Failure to submit the required proof may result in a firm’s elimination from consideration.” Page 10, Paragraph 6, “As required above, provide verifiable evidence that your firm is permitted by law to practice the professions of architecture or engineering (e.g., state registration number). Will NAVFAC confirm that because this contract is for work primarily at Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Offerors who provide an explanation for eligibility under the law for the state of Maine will meet this requirement?

Response: In accordance with the synopsis, if a firm is in a jurisdiction that does not require AE firm registration, the firm must provide proof of eligibility to practice (e.g., a summary explaining eligibility under the laws of that jurisdiction).

14) Question: Due to the requirement for Offerors to submit printed versus digital responses, and the deadline set for just over a week from now, will NAVFAC provide Offerors an estimated timeline for answers to questions submitted in the past three weeks?

Response: All questions to date have been answered and no additional questions will be accepted after today, August 07, 2024. Responses and revised Synopsis hereby provided 07 AUG 2024.

Refer to Amendment 0001, which extended the response date to 15 August 2024.