24R1321 Note 2.pdf

RFP N62742-24-R-1321

Notice No. 1

Notice No. 2 26 July 2024

PRE-PROPOSAL QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

PACIFIC DETERRENCE INITIATIVE MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION

CONTRACT, VARIOUS LOCATIONS, INDO-PACIFIC

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.

17. Would the Government consider extending the time to notify the Government of intent to no-bid on a Task Order to be longer than 3 days? It often takes longer than this for contractors to review a solicitation to make a bid decision. (Paragraph 1.33g, PDF Page 110)

ANSWER: The RFP remains unchanged.

22. Since task orders may be performed outside of US territories, will “Buy American” provisions apply to such task orders? (Document 00 21 16 Paragraph 1.21, PDF Page 20-21).

ANSWER: Please see Amendment 0001, which revises RFP, Document 00 21 16 Table of Contents to include note that clause is applicable to task orders for work performed in the United States.

23. RFPN6274224R1321_PH1.pdf, SF Form 1442. The solicitation description only states that this project’s task order will be in various locations in the Indo-Pacific and no specific country is mentioned anywhere in the RFP. The Indo-Pacific is a huge region, can you please identify which countries you anticipate issuing task order and by what percentage.

ANSWER: Please see Amendment 0001, which adds the Description of Work in the SF1442, Section 00 10 00, Block 10 Continued.

27. In the Presolicitation released on SAM.gov 02 May 24 7.37am HST it stated in the Description that the PDI MACC anticipated projects to occur in the following geographic regions:

a. Australia – Cocos Islands, Australia - Papua New Guinea, Australia - Timor Leste, Australia – Bandiana, Micronesia – Palau, Micronesia – Federated States of Micronesia, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND, PACIFIC

258 MAKALAPA DRIVE, SUITE 100

JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR HICKAM, HAWAII 96860-3134

Micronesia – Rota, CNMI – Tinian, Philippines, U.S. Pacific – Midway, U.S. Pacific – Wake Island, and other areas under NAVFAC Pacific cognizance.

b. In RFP N62742-24-R-1321 there is no mention of geographic locations for projects to occur.

c. Can NAVFAC PAC please clarify if the intent for projects is to occur in the regions mentioned in the Presolicitation, or that there is no specific region, just the general Pacific Ocean region?

ANSWER: See response to Question 23.

39. The following question, #35 was posted on Note 1, July 23, 2024. 35. Document 00 22 00, Factor 3 - Experience [Part II, 2.2 (2), (b)]: Regarding the Basis of Evaluation for Designs, the RFP states more favorable consideration will be given to “structures containing long spans and column-free areas, approximately 90 meters or more in width.” Does the structure need to be 90 meters in width, or the open span 90 meters in clear space? If it is the open span that must be 90 meters, and as a long span is considered to be over 50 meters, would the Government consider changing the width to 55 meters?

NAVFAC’s response to question 35 was deferred. NAVFAC has broadcast and sought industry input on the types of projects as early as the May 25, 2023, Sources Sought Questionnaire, which was due June 28, 2023, (>30-Day response time) with no page limitations, so industry can make their concerns know about any aspect of the scope and magnitude of the upcoming PDI MACC.

Nearly one year later from the Sources Sought, NAVFAC on May 2, 2024, published a Presolicitation with the identical criteria that appeared in the final RFP “Included structures containing long spans and column-free areas, approximately 90 meters or more in width”. On June 25, 2024, NAVFAC released the final RFP also with identical language in the Presolicitation. We are now three months after the published May 2 Presolicitation. There was ample time for industry to comment on these technical criteria. In the meantime, industry have been focused on meeting NAVFAC criteria. Possibly reducing the requirement to 55 meters from 90 meters, is concerning for firms who prepared, planned and are ready to submit qualifying projects.

We request that NAVFAC continue to use “More favorable consideration may be given to relevant DESIGN projects:” which states, “Included structures containing long spans and column-free areas, approximately 90 meters or more in width,” as detailed in the RFP pdf page 34 of 110.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

40. The instructions tell us to use 10 point or larger font but does not specifically address graphics. Please confirm that offerors may use any type of font style as long as it is 10 point including 10 Point Narrow typically used in graphics to reduce unnecessary wrapping.

ANSWER: Any legible font style is acceptable.

End of Notice