141309-Note2.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND, PACIFIC

258 MAKALAPA DR., STE. 100

PEARL HARBOR, HI 96860-3134

RFP N62742-14-R-1309

Notice No. 2

25 November 2013

PRE-PROPOSAL QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

RFP NO. N62742-14-R-1309

FY14 MCON P-778

ARMORY ADDITION AND RENOVATION

AT

MARINE CORPS BASE HAWAII, KANEOHE BAY, HAWAII

NOTE: The following questions and answers are provided for INFORMATION ONLY. The RFP remains unchanged unless it is amended in writing on a Standard Form 30.

2. QUESTION: We are an FF&E provider. We have a GSA Package Furniture Contract and also NAVFAC BPA holder for CONUS and OCONUS. [Name deleted] has representation in Hawaii very near Kaneohe Bay and has completed many successful FF&E projects in Hawaii.

We do have a few questions related to the FF&E requirements for this project.

a. Will the FF&E requirements be part of the Phase 1 or Phase 2 bid or will it be addressed post award?

b. Will the awarded General Contractor be involved in the FF&E process or will the FF&E provider be selected via a separate selection process that would then be subcontracted to the awarded General Contractor?

c. Will NAVFAC be providing an FF&E Comprehensive Interior Design (CID) package for the MCON bidders to incorporate into their or will the bidders be required to compile their FF&E solutions for the MCON bid?

d. In particular, will NAVFAC be sending out FF&E invitations to bid to FF&E Vendors on the NAVFAC FF&E BPA list? Or should we be contacting the bidding General Contractors to offer our bids for FF&E?

ANSWER:

a. The FF&E will be a planned modification to the construction contract.

b. Yes, the general contractor will be responsible for the design, purchase and installation of the

FF&E.

c. No.

d. NAVFAC will not be soliciting the FF&E.

3. QUESTION: In order to appropriately respond to and provide the information required by Paragraph 1.7 of Document 00100, please advise if a “Teaming” includes a subcontractor agreement between a Prime Contractor and their proposed major subcontractor(s).

ANSWER: Yes, if your proposed major subcontractor will perform major or critical aspects of the requirements to demonstrate construction experience under Factor 2. It is recommended that you refer to the definition of “an ostensible subcontractor” under the Small Business Size Regulations since it may affect your size status.

4. In order to appropriately respond to and provide the information required by Paragraph 1.7 of Document 00100, please advise if a “Teaming” includes a teaming agreement between a Prime Contractor and their proposed Lead Designer.

ANSWER: Yes, if a teaming agreement is executed between the prime and lead designer.

5. Under Factor 3 - Past Performance, the Lead Designer is required to provide a DD Form 2631 Performance Evaluation (Architect-Engineer) if available for each project included under Factor 2 - Experience. On Design-build contracts, the Prime Contractor is the primary awardee/point of contact for the project owner and is the entity that receives an evaluation (i.e.

CCASS); as a result, the design team – including the Lead Designer – is not directly evaluated for its work under design-build contracts. Because it has been our experience that design team members are unable to obtain a completed Past Performance Questionnaire for design-build projects, please clarify if a designer is able to rely on the Prime Contractor’s DD Form 2626, Performance Evaluation (Construction) in lieu of obtaining a completed RFP Attachment B.

ANSWER: The Lead Designer may rely upon the Construction Contractor’s DD2626 or PPQ as long as the DD2626/PPQ specifically evaluated the Lead Designer’s performance.

6. The solicitation allows the same project to be used to demonstrate both construction and design experience in response to Factor 2 - Experience; however, a separate Project Data Sheet must be submitted for construction and design. This would be the case should an Offeror and its Design Team submit the same relevant projects for projects which they recently performed as a design-build team. Therefore, if a Contractor’s DD Form 2626 or Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) is provided under the Construction Experience subsection, please clarify that the designer is able to refer to that Contractor’s DD Form 2626 or PPQ.

ANSWER: See answer to question no. 6.

7. Our firm has submitted proposals for NAVFAC’s P-852 and P-864 Request for Proposals (RFP) and plans on submitting a proposal for NAVFAC Pacific’s P-778 RFP. P-852 and P-864 appear to have the same NAVFAC Pacific PPQ form used for Factor 3 – Past Performance in lieu of an ACASS or CCASS and in most cases for non Federal clients. Our clients are happy to provide feedback to the Government on our firm’s past performance via NAVFAC PPQ’s form on an intermittent basis. Making requests for the similar PPQ’s in continuous weeks is appearing to be a challenge for our clients. If a PPQ has recently been used (within 90 days) on similar NAVFAC Pacific solicitations such as P-852 and P-864, would NAVFAC allow us to submit a previously recently completed PPQ for this P-778 competition?

ANSWER: Yes. As stated on Attachment B, Past Performance Questionnaire, “the offeror…and may duplicate this questionnaire for future submission on NAVFAC Solicitations.”

8. In reference to the subject project. Amendment 0001, Document 00202, Page 3, in the "Notes" section it states:

"Relevant projects that included hardened concrete spaces of similar size (approximately 5,000 square feet or more) may be considered more favorably than smaller hardened concrete spaces"

Additionally, on the same page, in the "Offeror's Experience" section it states:

RELEVANT PROJECT: New construction or renovation of a building that included hardened concrete secured spaces (e.g. munitions storage, bunkers, vaults, etc). Each project shall be approximately $10M or more or approximately 25,000 square feet.

Please clarify the square footage amount that the Government is considering to be relevant.

ANSWER: The building construction or renovation with hardened concrete secured spaces must have been $10M or more or approximately 25,000 SF. The hardened concrete secured space within the building does not need to be a minimum size/value. For example, a relevant project may be the construction a 26,000SF bank that included a 500 SF vault. However, the project may receive a more favorable rating if the bank was constructed with a vault that was approximately 5,000 SF or more.