RFI_Fuels_MACC_2022-08-11.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 29 KB Posted Aug 11, 2022

Attached to: IDIQ MACC FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, RENOVATION, AND REPAIR OF NATURAL GAS AND PETROLEUM, OILS, AND LUBRICANTS (POL) FUEL SYSTEMS PROJECTS AT VARIOUS GOVERNMENT INSTALLATIONS LOCATED IN CA, AZ, NV, UT, CO, AND NM
Solicitation number: N6247322R1201
Issued by: Department of the Navy Naval Facilities Engineering Command

About this file

Written by GovTribe AI · Dec 30, 2023

This document contains a request for information (RFI) form and responses related to a solicitation for an indefinite delivery indefinite quantity multiple award construction contract. The solicitation seeks proposals for new construction, renovation, and repair work for natural gas and petroleum, oils, and lubricants fuel systems projects at various government installations located in California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, and New Mexico. The North American Industry Classification System code for this opportunity is 237120. The contract type is IDIQ with task orders ranging from $50,000 to $10,000,000 issued on a firm fixed price basis. The period of performance is eight years consisting of a two-year base and two three-year options. The total maximum value for all contracts awarded is $150,000,000. Proposals were due by August 29, 2022 and the solicitation was issued by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command.

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
SF30 Amendment 0006 dated 28 October 2022.pdf	PDF	Oct 28, 2022
Revised SF1442 28 Oct 2022.pdf	PDF	Oct 28, 2022
Exhibit F - Small Business Participation.docx	DOCX document	Aug 23, 2022
SF30 Amendment 0005 dated 23 August 2022.pdf	PDF	Aug 23, 2022
Exhibit E - Past Performance Small Business.docx	DOCX document	Aug 23, 2022
SF1442 11 August 2022.pdf	PDF	Aug 15, 2022
SF30 Amendment 0004 dated 11 August 2022.pdf	PDF	Aug 11, 2022
SF1442 11 August 2022.pdf	PDF	Aug 11, 2022
Amendment 0003.pdf	PDF	Jul 28, 2022

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

RFI (pre-award) Form_For KTR

SOLICITATION: N62473-22-R-1201

INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, RENOVATION, AND REPAIR OF NATURAL GAS AND PETROLEUM, OILS, AND LUBRICANTS (POL) FUEL SYSTEMS PROJECTS AT VARIOUS GOVERNMENT INSTALLATIONS LOCATED IN CALIFORNIA, ARIZONA, NEVADA, UTAH, COLORADO, AND NEW MEXICO DOCUMENT DATE: 11 August 2022

TO BE FILLED OUT BY THE BIDDING KTR								TO BE FILLED OUT BY THE GOV'T
RFI #	RFP Part #	Chapter or Section	Sub-Section #	CLARIFICATION REQUEST	RFI reason from KTR's Perspective	Comment [fill out if "Other" was chosen, specify reason(s)]	RFI Topic most closely relevant to:	Government Response	DATE RECEIVED	DATE TO KTR	Amendment Number
1	Part 1	Chapter-1	Factor 1.a.(2)	Contractor respectfully requests that the requirement for the LDF to exclusively partner with the Offeror be dropped. This unnecessarily limits competition, particularly since DoD fuels contractors outnumber available DoD fuels design firms. We could provide letters of commitment if the “exclusivity” language was ommitted from the RFP, allowing for a more competitive playing field.	Other; Please specify in the next column	Limitation of Lead Design Firm	Contracting	Please see amendment 1, exclusivity language has been removed.	4/26/22	5/4/22	1
2	If "Others" - include info under Column E Clarification Request	if Others include info under Column E	00 21 16	Factor 1 - Technical Approach states that "the Lead Design Firm (LDF) will exclusively partner partner with the Offeror on this procurement and will not participate with any other Offeror in competing for or performing on a contract to be awarded under this solicitation." We respectfully suggest this language is removed from the solicitation to allow designers to team with more than one Offeror.	Other; Please specify in the next column	There are a limited number of qualified design firms that meet the requirements of the RFP. By not allowing designers to team with more than one Offeror is overly restrictive and will limit the number of qualified construction Offerors.		Please refer to RFI #1 and the Government’s response thereto.	4/28/22	5/4/22	1
3	Part 1	Chapter-2		If NG work is performed by separate division than POL work (that has different CAGE code, but under same ownership), can we include past experience from both entities?		Instruction to Offerors	Contracting	Offerors are to submit construction projects that best demonstrate self-performed construction experience (see "self-performed" definition on page 39 of the solicitation). If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD

member companies (name and address is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of this contract. Regarding any such submitted project, if the Offeror fails to demonstrate the

affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD firm’s meaningful involvement in the performance o fthis contract, the project will not be considered relevant and will not be evaluated .For those construction projects submitted, Offerors are to submit Past Performance Questionnaires and CCASS/ACASS/CPARS evaluations to which they pertain.		5/18/22
	4	Part 1	Chapter-2	Factor 2, a. (1) Construction Experience RFP definitions allows for, with signed teaming agreement, inclusion of team partner as part of offeror. RFP also states that offeror (in other than Small Business pool) may not use experience of subcontractors to demonstrate construction experience, which appears to conflict. Please confirm that Offerors that are not Small Business can utilize experience of team partners provided teaming agreement in place and submitted with proposal.	Instruction to Offerors	Contracting	Per the solicitation, “Contractor Teaming Arrangement” is defined as “An arrangement in which two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor, or a potential prime contractor agrees with one or more companies to have them act as its subcontractor(s), under a specified Government contract or acquisition program. A proposed contractor teaming arrangement will be recognized by the Government provided the Offeror identifies, in its proposal, the type of arrangement, fully discloses company relationships, and provides a copy of the partnership, joint venture agreement, or teaming agreement with the proposal package.” In addition, with respect to Factor 2, Experience, “[i]f an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name and address is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of this contract. Regarding any such submitted project, if the Offeror fails to demonstrate the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD firm’s meaningful involvement in the performance of this contract, the project will not be considered relevant and will not be evaluated.”

Accordingly, Offerors that are not Small Business (i.e. that are large business) may utilize experience of team partner(s), provided a teaming agreement is in place and submitted with the proposal, and the Offeror demonstrates that the team partner(s) will have meaningful involvement in the performance of this contract. A large business Offeror may not utilize the experience of a subcontractor to demonstrate construction experience. Therefore, if a proposed team partner previously performed as a construction subcontractor under a Contractor Teaming Arrangement with the Offeror/prime, its previous construction experience (as a subcontractor) may not be utilized.

		5/18/22
	5	Part 1	Chapter-2		Factor 2 Experience, on projects where offeror retained design firm for a DB project, and intends to use the same design firm for this MACC, can we use the same project description in Factor 2, a.(1) Construction experience and in Factor 2.a.(2) for design experience.		Instruction to Offerors	Contracting	If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design.	5/18/22
	6	Part 1			Confirm Exhibit E is not required until Phase Two.		Top of Exhibit References Factor 4	Contracting	Confirming, Exhibit E is not required until Phase Two.	5/18/22
	7	Part 1	if Others include info under Column E	Section 00 21 16
(pg 5 of 117)	Section 00 21 16 Part 2. Proposal Submittal Requirements under Phase One Tab 1 states that Factor 1 requires Exhibit A, Org Chart, and Teaming documents. However under Part 4 Factor 1 Proposal Submission Requirements it states that under tab 1 we include (1) Exhibit A and (2) Teaming Document. There is no reference to an Org Chart. It is unclear if an org is to be included and if so how it fits within the page limitations. Please provide clarification.	Conflicting Information		Other/Unsure	Factor 1, Proposal Submission Requirements paragraph revised to include Org Chart requirement. Refer to Amendment 0002.		5/18/22	2
	8	If "Others" - include info under Column E Clarification Request	if Others include info under Column E	Factor 3: Past Performance	(Section 00 21 16, Factor 3: Past Performance, Proposal Submission Requirements, Page 16)
CPARS for Construction projects -- Are we allowed to use 98% or 99% CPARS, as long as the construction phase is completed? Sometimes it takes government awhile to issue a "Final 100%" CPARS.	Intent needs clarification		Contracting	CPARS for Construction Projects shall be submitted for construction projects that are 100% complete. ‘100% complete’ for construction projects means a facility that is ‘completely constructed and ready for the intended use.’ See page 38 of the solicitation.		5/18/22
	9	If "Others" - include info under Column E Clarification Request	if Others include info under Column E	Factor 3: Past Performance	(Section 00 21 16, Factor 3: Past Performance, Proposal Submission Requirements, Page 16)
CPARS for Design Projects -- Are we allowed to use interim CPARS, as long as the 100% Issued for Construction (IFC) designs are submitted and approved by government? We ask this because the CPARS % complete is based on construction progress, and design phase may be well over 100% completed.	Intent needs clarification		Contracting	Interim CPARS for Design Projects may be submitted for design projects as long as the design projects are 100% complete. ‘100% complete’ for design projects means ‘100% plans and specifications signed off by an Architect-Engineer and ready for construction with final cost estimate. Does not include any Post Construction Award Support (PCAS).’ See page 38 of the solicitation.		5/18/22
	10	If Other - provide info in Column E			We are pretty sure we won’t need a revision, but if so what is the date? “submit a revised proposal no later than the due date specified on the SF1442” We did not see a 1442, the end of the amendment specifies, “The required response date/time has changed from 24-May-2022 02:00 PM to 28-Aug-2022 02:00 PM.” The SAM updated due date is 29AUG 2PM. We’re assuming 28AUG to be safe. The original 1442 has a 120 day validity period from 24MAY. Do we need to do some kind of mechanism to extend the validity of our offer? Do we need to acknowledge the amendment by resubmitting the 1442? Would this email be considered sufficient acknowledgement? Bottom line: if we have no changes do we need to do anything?	Intent needs clarification			1. Revised SF1442 is provided with a proposal due date of Aug 29, 2022 at 2PM PDT.

2. For previously submitted proposals: If there are no changes to your proposal, resubmission of your technical proposal is not required however you must return a signed SF1442 with all Amendments acknowledged no later than the proposal due date.

3. All responses shall be submitted via PIEE. Emailed reponses will not be accepted.		8/11/22	4
	11	If Other - provide info in Column E		There are several years for which Safety DART and TCR has a “0.0”. We want to make sure that this will be considered by the board as a zero and not a “no rate” or lack of data for which an explanation would be required.	Intent needs clarification	The Safety DART and TCR rates will be evaluated per Factor 4: Safety. If an Offeror has no DART or TCR rate, for any year, an explanation shall be provided.	8/11/22
	12	If Other - provide info in Column E		Do we need to indicate where the revisions/changes are in the proposal (e.g. revised text in bold, underline, red) or do we just resubmit the proposal in its entirety with no indicators?	Intent needs clarification	For previously submitted proposals, indicate revisions/changes in red highlights.

DeCuba, Eley A CIV NAVFAC SW: DeCuba, Eley A CIV NAVFAC SW:

Red highlights would be difficult to read. Do you want yellow highlights or red text?		8/11/22
	13	If "Others" - include info under Column E Clarification Request	Regarding the proposal due date SAM.GOV says 29.Aug.2022 but the Amendment 3 list 28.Aug.2022 as the due date. Would you please confirm the correct due date and due time?	Contracting	Revised SF1442 is provided with a proposal due date of Aug 29, 2022 at 2PM PDT.	8/11/22	4
	14	If "Others" - include info under Column E Clarification Request	Would you please provide the RFI responses for the Solicitation?	Contracting	Refer to the RFI responses posted with Amendment 0004.	8/11/22
	15
	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
	22
	23
	24
	25
	26
	27
	28
	29
	30
	31
	32
	33
	34
	35
	36
	37
	38
	39
	40
	41
	42
	43
	44
	45
	46
	47
	48
	49
	50
	51
	52
	53
	54
	55
	56
	57
	58
	59
	60
	61
	62
	63
	64
	65
	66
	67
	68
	69
	70
	71
	72
	73
	74
	75
	76
	77
	78
	79
	80
	81
	82
	83
	84
	85
	86
	87
	88
	89
	90
	91
	92
	93
	94
	95
	96
	97
	98
	99
	100

Drop Down List

RFI Topic Relevant to:	RFP Part #	RFI Reason (for QA) - from KTR perspecrive
Architectural-related	Part 1	Outdated Reference
Civil Engineering	Part 2	Conflicting Information
Contracting	Part 3	Attachments are referenced but missing/not provided
Electrical Engineering	Part 4	Intent needs clarification
Environmental	Part 5	Typo
Fire Protection	Part 6	Other; Please specify in the next column
Geotechnical Engineering	If "Others" - include info under Column E Clarification Request
Interior Design
Landscape
Mechanical Engineering
Structural Engineering
Other/Unsure
SCIF/SAPF
Crane
Elevators
ATFP

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Aug 11, 2022.