P919 Amendment 0002.pdf

N6247026R0006

P919 Amendment 0002

The purpose of this amendment is to provide the following:

1. Pre-Proposal Inquiries (PPIs) Responses

2. Provide site visit log (Attachment O) and revise Solicitation accordingly.

3. The due date for proposal submission is extended to January 30, 2026.

1. Pre-proposal Inquiries (PPIs): Responses to Inquiries 2-6

2. Inquiry: Page 9 of the RFP states the following: Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit one (1) electronic copy of their non-price proposal via the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE)

Solicitation Module in accordance with the solicitation submittal requirements identified below. When searching for this solicitation in PIEE, it does not appear. Please provide a link to the solicitation and confirm the solicitation number.

Response: The solicitation number remains unchanged and PIEE posting has been corrected. Login at https://piee.eb.mil and search for "N6247026R0006" to obtain more details.

3. Inquiry: The current proposal due date of January 14, 2026, falls immediately after the scheduled site visit on

December 16 and the final question deadline on December 23, a period that coincides with the Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year holidays, as well as additional holidays in Spain, where the project is located. During this time, many subcontractors, suppliers, and key technical specialists operate with limited availability or are closed entirely, making it challenging to obtain necessary pricing and information for a complete and accurate proposal.

In light of these constraints, would the Government consider extending the proposal due date to January 30, 2026, to ensure Offerors can fully incorporate site visit findings, receive critical inputs, and submit high-quality, compliant proposals?

Response: See amendment detail extending the proposal submission date to 30 January 2026.

4. Inquiry: On the solicitation file N6247026R0006.pdf, on page 3/43, there is the description of Items 0001 (Base

Price), 0002 (Option 01),p and 0003 (Option 02). On age 7/43, the text in paragraph 2.1.5the page 7/43, the text in paragraph 2.1.5 mentions states:" 2.1.5 Award will be made on the total sum of CLINS 0001 through 0004. The

Government intends to award a contract to a single contractor for CLIN 0001, with CLINs 0002 through 0004 as priced options. items up to 0004" . Please confirm if this is a typi.ng mistake or the 0004 item is missing from the page 3/43.

Response: See Solicitation revisions and revised bid schedule provided via Amendment 0001.

5. Inquiry: The solicitation states that relevant projects should have a construction value "of approximately $10 million or greater". We would appreciate clarification on how this requirement will be applied during the evaluation.

Specifically: - Is the USD 10 million value an eliminatory requirement for a project to be considered "relevant" under Factor 1 (Construction Experience) and Factor 4 (Past Performance)? - If a project meets the technical definition of relevance (fuel systems, POL facilities, piping networks, hazardous area installations, vaults, mechanical/electrical integration, etc.) but has a construction value below USD 10 million, will it still be evaluated as relevant, or will it be excluded from consideration? - Does the USD 10 million threshold refer to the total contract value, the portion of work executed by the Offeror, or the portion of work specifically associated with fuel-system scopes? - For subcontractor experience (when clearly demonstrating significant involvement in the same scope they will execute under this contract), must the subcontractor's portion of work individually meet the USD 10 million threshold, or is this requirement only applicable to prime contractor experience? - If the threshold is not eliminatory, and projects below USD 10 million are admissible, will such projects be simply scored lower, or will they still be considered fully relevant as long as scope similarity is demonstrated? Understanding how NAVFAC intends to apply this threshold is essential for selecting the most appropriate projects for our submission. Thanks

Response: The definition of relevant project is the same for all projects submitted under Factor 1, including projects where Offeror utilizes experience of a subcontractor. Projects with a construction value that does not meet the relevancy definition of “a minimum total value of ten (10) million United States Dollars (USD) at the time of project completion” will not be considered relevant. Ten (10) million United States Dollars (USD) refers to the total contract value of the project. Offerors should clearly demonstrate what portion of the work was performed by the offeror.

6. Inquiry: In reviewing the RFP N62470-26-R-0006, we note that on page 7 of 42 a “performance guarantee” of

50% of the contract value is indicated as a requirement. Based on our prior experience performing multiple

NAVFAC construction projects at Naval Station Rota, the performance guarantee historically required has consistently been 10%, in line with previous solicitations and contract awards issued for projects at this installation.

Given this apparent discrepancy, we kindly request confirmation as to whether:

· The 50% performance guarantee stated in the RFP is intentional and applicable to this solicitation, or

· The stated percentage is an administrative error, and the intended performance guarantee requirement is

10%, consistent with prior NAVFAC Rota projects.

Clarification on this matter is important for proposal compliance and for coordination with our financial institutions and bonding capacity during proposal preparation.

Response: The 50% performance guarantee referenced is intentional and applicable to this solicitation. Please bid accordingly.

2. Solicitation Revisions and Provision of Attachment O

Current:

5.1 PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY FORM (ATTACHMENT A)

5.2 SCHEDULE B PRICE PROPOSAL FORM (ATTACHMENT B)

5.3 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (ATTACHMENT C)

5.4 CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET (ATTACHMENT D)

5.5 P919 SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACHMENT E)

5.6 P919 DRAWINGS (ATTACHMENT F) (15 TOTAL)

5.7 OFFEROR CERTIFICATION REGARDING REGISTRATION AND CLASSIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

(ATTACHMENT G)

5.8 REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (ATTACHMENT H)

5.9 WORK PASS FORMAT (ATTACHMENT I)

5.10 EMPLOYEE CERTIFICATION FORM (ATTACHMENT J)

5.11 TEMPORARY PASS FORM (ATTACHMENT K)

5.12 CERTIFICATE INSURANCE FORM (ATTACHMENT L)

5.13 F74 DRAWINGS (ATTACHMENT M) (6 TOTAL)

5.14 F74 SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACHMENT N)

Revised:

5.1 PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY FORM (ATTACHMENT A)

5.2 SCHEDULE B PRICE PROPOSAL FORM (ATTACHMENT B)

5.3 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (ATTACHMENT C)

5.4 CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET (ATTACHMENT D)

5.5 P919 SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACHMENT E)

5.6 P919 DRAWINGS (ATTACHMENT F) (15 TOTAL)

5.7 OFFEROR CERTIFICATION REGARDING REGISTRATION AND CLASSIFICATION

REQUIREMENTS (ATTACHMENT G)

5.8 REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (ATTACHMENT H)

5.9 WORK PASS FORMAT (ATTACHMENT I)

5.10 EMPLOYEE CERTIFICATION FORM (ATTACHMENT J)

5.11 TEMPORARY PASS FORM (ATTACHMENT K)

5.12 CERTIFICATE INSURANCE FORM (ATTACHMENT L)

5.13 F74 DRAWINGS (ATTACHMENT M) (6 TOTAL)

5.14 F74 SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACHMENT N)

5.15 SITE VISIT LOG (ATTACHMENT O)