AMD4_N6274225R6508_Released.pdf

R

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of theoffer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

J 1 2

0004 08 Sep 2025 See Continuation Sheet ACQR 6100603 N62742

NAVFACSYSCOM PACIFIC

258 MAKALAPA DR STE 100, JBPHH HI 96860-3134

JBPHH, HI 96860-3134

UNITED STATES

NITIWATE DISSANONT, Email: nitiwate@state.gov Telephone: 6622811036 SCD: PAS:

N6274225R6508

13 Jul 2025

See Section G - Contract Administration Data

See Schedule

Rondel Williams

08 Sep 2025

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Block 14 (Description of Amendment/Modification):

Amendment 0004 N6274225R6508 D/B UFC Construct Admin and Communication Building, Camp Aguinaldo, Quezon City, Philippines

a. The purpose of this amendment is to provide responses to additional PPIs received. Responses are included in Attachment 01 of this amendment.

b. Additionally, this amendment extends the proposal due date to allow submission of offers from all interested parties.

CHANGES:

1. The proposal due date identified in Block 13 of the SF 1442 is hereby revised as follows:

- From: August 29, 2025 at 11:00 a.m. (Thailand Time)

- To: September 12, 2025 at 11:00 a.m. (Thailand Time)

2. Contractors who previously submitted proposals by the original due date may either resubmit revised proposals or provide written confirmation that their original submission remains valid.

All other terms and conditions of the solicitation remain unchanged. The offeror must acknowledge receipt of this amendment.

Section 00 00 00 - Procurement and Contracting Requirements

The following changes have been made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Response Due Date 29 Aug 2025 12 Sep 2025

Section 00 70 00 - Conditions of the Contract

Additional Information/Notes

The following clauses were modified:

52.232-5Payments under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts.Apr 2014 Date Changed From: May 2014 To: Apr 2014

N6274225R65080004

Amendment 0004 N6274225R6508 Attachment 01-Responses to PPIs

QUESTION 1: All CLINs are structured as 1 Project. Is that mean the contract will paid in lump sum once the performance is completed? No. The RFP establishes a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) structure and includes FAR 52.232-5 Payments under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts.

QUESTION 2: Is BOQ Enclosure 4 intended solely for price analysis, or will it become part of the final contract upon award? If it is contractual, why is the CLIN structured as a single project rather than being broken down by individual scopes of work? BOQ Enclosure 4 is included for proposal evaluation and price analysis purposes only, will not be incorporated in the awarded contract, and does not override the CLIN structure.

QUESTION 3: Is NPGI and DFARS means the same? No. Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command Procedures, Guidance, & Information (NPGI) provides internal agency instructions as allowed by Federal Acquisition Regulation 1.301(a)(2). The Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) provides DoD-wide acquisition regulations issued under the authority of FAR 1.301(a)(1) and 48 C.F.R. Chapter 2.

QUESTION 4: If the offeror has no relevant past performance regarding D/B of admin building and communication tower, the offeror will be rated neutral or acceptable, correct? Yes. Please refer to RFP Section 2.3 Evaluation Factors and Proposal Submission Requirements, Volume 2,

2.2 Non-Cost Factor 2 – Past Performance, paragraph (b)(i) that states in part, “In the case of an Offeror without a record of recent and relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have "unknown" past performance.

In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, "unknown" shall be considered "acceptable."

QUESTION 5: If the successful offeror was selected without listing any subcontractors, are they permitted to engage subcontractors after the award? Would doing so constitute a violation of the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA)? The RFP does not prohibit offerors from engaging subcontractors after award. NAVFAC will not provide legal guidance to offerors.

QUESTION 6: If the successful offeror was selected based on the past performance of a specific subcontractor, are they permitted to replace that subcontractor after award? Could such a change constitute a violation of the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA)? The potential replacement of subcontractors upon whose experience was relied upon in determining the award is a post-award consideration for the Contracting Officer and will depend on the circumstances. The Contracting Officer will comply with CICA.

QUESTION 7: Since experience and past performance are evaluated as distinct factors, can an offeror submit different projects for each? No. Please refer to RFP Section 2.3 Evaluation Factors and Proposal Submission Requirements, Volume 2, 2.2 Non-Cost Factor 2 – Past Performance, paragraph (b)(i) that states in part, “The Offeror has satisfactory or better ratings in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or on Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) (Enclosure 3) for at least three (3) projects rated acceptable in Factor 1.

In the case of an Offeror without a record of recent and relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have "unknown" past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, "unknown" shall be considered "acceptable."

QUESTION 8: Is there a page limitation on conceptual drawings? No Page limit for conceptual drawings was identified in the RFP.

QUESTION 9: The instructions state that no minutes from the PPSV will be issued. However, is it permissible to share the sign-in roster? No, the sign-in roster will not be shared. The RFP does not require that the sign-in roster to be shared with offerors.

QUESTION 10: If an offeror has already completed their annual representations and certifications in SAM.gov, are they still required to submit them with their proposal? Please refer to RFP Section 2.1 Proposal Format a. Volume 1: Price Proposal v. which states, “Provide Completed Representations and Certifications, to include a copy of the electronic annual representations and certifications thru System for Awards Management (SAM) at www.sam.gov....”

QUESTION 11: Will NAVFAC accept: (1) a PCAB license of a lower category than required, or

(2) a PCAB license held by an entity other than the offeror listed in Block 14 of SF 1442?

Philippine Contractors Accreditation Board (PCAB) licensing is a host nation statutory requirement under Republic Act 4566. NAVFAC cannot waive or alter host-nation law. FAR 52.236-7 makes contractors responsible for permits and licenses. The RFP clearly states “Proof of the Offeror's ability to legitimately conduct business in the Country where the project is located. This requirement may be satisfied by an Offeror (or one of a firm's Joint Venture partners) having the appropriate registration.”

QUESTION 12: Please confirm the PCAB license required before or after award? Per the RFP, “the Contracting Officer may request Offerors submit the following information for review and determination prior to award… Proof of the Offeror's ability to legitimately conduct business in the Country where the project is located. This requirement may be satisfied by an Offeror (or one of a firm's Joint Venture partners) having the appropriate registration.” (emphasis added).

QUESTION 13: Please confirm that Certified Cost and Pricing Data only applies for modification over the TINA threshold. Certified Cost and Pricing Data will be required in accordance with FAR 15.403-4.

QUESTION 14: Is this project under the U.S. Navy? If not, which military branch's standards will govern the design requirements in terms of Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) and Unified Facilities Guide Specifications (UFGS)? The project should be performed in accordance with the specifications provided in the Request for Proposals.

QUESTION 15: IAW FAR 52.232-5(a), if there is no mod issued, is the USG will pay the offeror the amount of the contract price regardless if the actual quantity does not match the submitted and approved BOQ? Yes. The solicitation establishes a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) structure. The Bill of Quantities (BOQ) is included for proposal evaluation and price analysis and does not override the CLIN structure.

QUESTION 17: According to the order of precedence, the SF 1442 price schedule takes precedence over the BOQ attachments. Does this mean the U.S. Government will compensate the contractor based on the SF 1442 price schedule unless a formal modification is issued? See Response to Question 15 above.

QUESTION 18: Are engineering and architecture licenses issued in the Philippines acceptable for this contract? Yes, if they meet all RFP requirements. Per the RFP, “the contractor and their design consultants shall be competent and knowledgeable in the type of engineering disciplines required by this project and shall be fully licensed to practice design and construction in the location of the project” and “[a]ll design work shall be completed under the supervision of professional architects and engineers licensed for practice in the location of the project.”

QUESTION 20: Under FAR 52.211-10, the contractor is responsible for managing its schedule to complete the work within the specified timeframe. Given this responsibility, is it permissible for the U.S. Government to waive the requirement that no more than 20% of activities on the baseline schedule be classified as critical or near-critical? No, this requirement will not be waived. Please comply with stated requirements.

QUESTION 21: Why is the U.S. Government requiring that no single construction activity exceed 20 working days in duration? The contractor should have the flexibility to develop and manage their schedule in a manner that ensures timely project completion. Imposing such a constraint may be considered unduly restrictive. See Response to Question 20 above.

QUESTION 23: Per FAR 52.246-21, construction materials naturally deteriorate over time due to normal wear and tear. In the event of damage, how will the U.S. Government determine whether the issue is attributable to normal wear and tear or to defective materials or workmanship? The Government will handle any warranty issues in accordance with the terms of the contract and the attendant circumstances.

QUESTION 24: The U.S. Government has stated that the FF&E must be valued at $100,000.

Does this mean that proposals with a different valuation will not be accepted? Yes. Per the RFP, the work includes design of a FF&E package valued at $100,000.

QUESTION 26: If a standard is already available in the IBC or local design codes, does that mean the codes and standards listed in Part 3 are not applicable? Per RFP Part 3, Paragraph 2.1 Applicable Codes and Standards, the solicitation clearly states, “The more stringent of the requirements will apply in the case of a conflict in guidance between the various standards (Host Nation and US).”

QUESTION 27: If host nation standards are deemed acceptable as the minimum, why does the U.S. Government require its own standards to take precedence when they are more stringent?

See Response to Question 26 above.

QUESTION 28 How is it feasible to begin the 15% design phase 14 days after contract award if work cannot commence until 10 days after award? Does this effectively give the contractor only 4 days to complete the 15% design? There is no requirement for the contractor to delay commencement of work for 10 days after award. The RFP is clear that performance must start within 10 calendar days. Box 11 on page one indicates “shall begin performance within 10 calendar days...after receiving award.” Part 2 General Requirements, Section 11, “The Contractor shall be required to commence work under this contract immediately following receipt of the Award.” Per FAR 52.211-10, “ The Contractor shall be required to (a) commence work under this contract within 10 calendar days after the date the Contractor receives the notice to proceed, (b) prosecute the work diligently, and (c) complete the entire work ready for use not later than four hundred fifty (450) calendar days. after contract Award.”

QUESTION 29: Based on my preliminary assessment, the contractor effectively has zero days to begin the 35% design if the 14-day U.S. Government review period is included. Similarly, only 14 days remain to start the 50% design and FF&E after accounting for the Government’s review.

The schedule allows just 10 days for the 100% pre-final design and FF&E, and only 6 days for the 100% final design, once the review period is factored in. Given these constraints, would the U.S. Government consider revisiting the project timeline to ensure it is realistic and achievable?

The solicitation establishes the required design submittal schedule and review periods, and will not be changed.

QUESTION 30: Most of the work referenced IBC, NSCP, IPC, and local HN code. Is [sic] that mean local code takes precedence over US standard even if there is a conflict? See Response to Question 26 above.

QUESTION 31: If U.S. codes and standards are more stringent, is the U.S. Government willing to deviate from host nation law in the execution of this contract? No. See Response to Question 26 above.

QUESTION 33: The weather forecast data provided is difficult to interpret. Based on the information given, how many days per month does the U.S. Government anticipate rain and thunderstorms? The Government included weather data in the RFP is for informational purposes only..