AMENDMENT_0019.pdf

ACQR2259544

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

N69450-11-R-0778 SOUTH TEXAS MACC

SEE PAGE TWO CONTINUATION

OFFEROR'S MUST ACKNOWLEDGE THIS AMENDMENT IN WRITING.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 2

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 11-Mar-2014

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N69450-11-R-0778

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

30-Sep-2011

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offer 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 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram 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 telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter 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 NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, 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.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

11-Mar-2014

CODE

NAVFAC SOUTHEAST

IPT GULFCOAST

BLDG 903, PO BOX 30

NAS JACKSONVILLE

JACKSONVILLE FL 32212-0030

N69450 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N69450-11-R-0778

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0019

a. The purpose for this Amendment is to provide answers to PPI’s. See attachment to this Amendment.

b. Offerors must acknowledge this amendment in writing.

c. All other terms and conditions of the solicitation remain unchanged.

(End of Summary of Changes)

PPI # SECTION OF

RFP

PARAGRAPH REFERENCE DRAWING

NUMBER (IF

APPLICABLE)

QUESTION ANSWER ATTACHMENT

Yes or No

RESPONSE DATE/

AMENDMENT #

Block 10 of the 1442 & Section

002010 N/A N/A

On the 1442 for the above noted solicitation, an aggregate bonding capacity of 20 million is required, however in Section 00210-Basis of Award, there is a requirement for a letter from our Bonding Company noting an aggregate bonding capacity of 95 million. Please clarify.

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/24/11

00100 page 8 &

Pre-Proposal Conference / Site Visit (a)

I see a reference to the pre-bid conference, but no date and time has been posted yet. Is that correct?

As stated in the solicitation, please see FAR clause 52.236-27 ALT I for information on the pre-proposal conference/site visit. The clause currently notes, "to be cited per individual task order". If any changes are made, they will be issued via an amendment to the solicitation.

No 10/04/11

00100 page 8 &

Pre-Proposal Conference / Site Visit (a)

Is there a Pre-Proposal Conference? FAR 52.236-27 on page 37 does not give a date, time or place.

As stated in the solicitation, please see FAR clause 52.236-27 ALT I for information on the pre-proposal conference/site visit. The clause currently notes, "to be cited per individual task order". If any changes are made, they will be issued via an amendment to the solicitation.

No 10/04/11

Non-cost/Price Factors (Phase- One) Factor 2-

Past Performance

2) Factor 2 –Past Performance (a) Solicitation Submittal – PPQ forms In Factor 2 Past Performance, would the government accept a CCASS evaluation in lieu of the provided PPQ form to reduce the administrative burden on our federal government clients?

No, PPQ forms must be submitted in accordance with Factor 2, Past Performance. No 10/11/11

Non-cost/Price Factors (Phase- One) Factor 1-

Corporate Experience and Key Personnel

(1) Factor 1 –Corporate Experience and Key Personnel

In the submittal requirements, the government states that “Corporate Experience Narratives from any contractors who are part of the partnership or joint venture will be considered as the offeror.”

Would the government allow exclusive teaming partner “corporate experience narratives” to be considered a part of the offeror submittal?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/24/11

6 SF 1442 Page Text Please clarify bonding requirements. The SF1442 states total aggregate capacity of $20MM but further within the RFP states per project capacity of $4MM - $20MM

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/24/11

00210 - Basis of

Award Top of 3rd page in this section

Indicates relevant past performance projects of approximately $4MM. Will completed projects with value below $4MM be considered? Or, if the Small Business is teamed with a large business and provides a signed teaming agreement between the large and small business, will the projects of the large business also be considered?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/24/11

Phase-One Non-

Cost/Price Factors

00210 Basis of Award For clarification purposes, Paragraph B 1., of the “Paragraph Reference”, describes only Factors 1, 2 & 3 be submitted with Phase-One. Paragraph B. 3., a. (1), (i) list “Executed SF 1442” excluding Block 17. Is that correct?

Yes, that is correct. As seen in the RFP, solicitation submimttal requirements for phase-one are contained in paragraph B.3.a for phase-one price factors and B.3.b for phase-one non-cost/price factors (Factors 1-3).

No 10/11/11

SOLICITATION

, PAGE 1 OF 75

B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD, 3.a.(1)(ii)

On page 1 of 75, it states "offerors must have an aggregate bonding capacity of $20M", however on page 15 of 75 it states "offerors must have a single award bonding capacity between $4M and $20M and aggregate bonding capacity of $95M. There is a clear discrepancy between those two requirements. What is NAVFAC actually requiring? Since this is solicited as a small business set-aside, the aggregate bonding requirement of $95M seems quite high for most small businesses to meet. Also, if two companies plan to team up, is there any requirement for a joint venture agreement, or is some other type of teaming agreement acceptable to meet the aggregate bonding requirement?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/24/11

00210-Basis of

Award Section B.b. Key Personnel N/A

Are there educational/registration requirements for the Project Construction Manager and the Project Superintendent.

No, only the experience requirement as indicated. No 10/06/11

Section 10, first page and Section

B para 3 (ii) N/A

In section 10, it states that Bonding is required in the aggregate of $20M in Section B, para 3 (ii) it states that Bonding is required for single award $4M - $20M, and aggregate capacity of $95M.

Can you clarify the requirement.

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/24/11

SF1442 - 00210

“Basis of

Award”, Section B “Evaluation

Factors for Award”

Subsection a, Paragraph 1.ii The 1442 shows a requirement for an aggregate bonding capacity of $20 million. However, Section 00210, Section B, Paragraph a.1.ii states a requirement for an aggregate bonding capacity of $95 million. Please clarify.

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/24/11

N69450-11-R-0778 SOUTH TEXAS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

PPI Log

PARAGRAPH REFERENCE DRAWING

NUMBER (IF

APPLICABLE)

QUESTION ANSWER ATTACHMENT

Yes or No

RESPONSE DATE/

AMENDMENT #

N69450-11-R-0778 SOUTH TEXAS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

PPI Log

00210 “Basis of Award”, Section

B “Evaluation Factors for

Award”

Subsection a, “Price,(phase One” Paragraph 1 - “Note” The note under the referenced section refers to a “bid bond letter”. A letter of bondability and a bid bond are two different requirements. Please confirm that in Phase One, only a letter of bondability is required.

Yes, for Phase-One, provide a letter from your bonding company as stated in B.

Evaluation Factors for Award 3.a.(1)(ii).

No 10/12/11

00210 “Basis of Award”, Section

B “Evaluation Factors for

Award”

Subsection b “Non-cost/Price Factors (Phase One) Relevant projects are defined as projects which “must have been completed within approximately the last seven years.” Will projects that are substantially complete (80% or greater) be considered?

No, the projects must be complete. No 10/12/11

00210 “Basis of Award”, Section

B “Evaluation Factors for

Award”

Subsection b “Basis of Evaluation”, Factor 2 – Past Performance Paragraph a “Submittal

Requirements”

May CCASS evaluations be given in place of a PPQ? We have found that government personnel are becoming irritated at being asked to complete PPQ’s regularly when they have already completed a final CCASS.

No, PPQ forms must be submitted in accordance with Factor 2, Past Performance. No. 10/11/11

00210-Basis of

Award

(2) Factor 2 – Past Performance Can we submit final CCASS in lieu of a questionnaire? No, PPQ forms must be submitted in accordance with Factor 2, Past Performance. No. 10/11/11

00210 Basis for Award, B3.b.(1)

Factor 1 (a) Submittal Requirements: Offeror Corporate Experience Paragraph discusses “partnerships” with regard to Corporate Experience. Can two firms that create a mutual teaming agreement letter constitute a “partnership” and submit corporate experience on projects completed as individual firms?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/24/11

18 150 Pre-Proposal Conference/Site Visit The RFP makes reference to Section 0100 for Site Visit information but this section cannot be found in the RFP. Please advise.

As stated in the solicitation, please see FAR clause 52.236-27 ALT I for information on the pre-proposal conference/site visit. The clause currently notes, "to be cited per individual task order". If any changes are made, they will be issued via an amendment to the solicitation. Also note: Block 10 of the SF 1442 states, "No site visit will be scheduled during phase one"

No 10/11/11

(1) Factor 1 - Corporate

Experience and Key Personnel:

(1) Factor 1 - Corporate Experience and Key Personnel: N/A If the offeror intends to use relevant experience and past performance for team members should the offeror also submit the formal teaming agreement with the proposal response?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification regarding teaming agreements that the Government will recognize.

10/25/11

(1) Factor 1 - Corporate

Experience and Key Personnel:

(1) Factor 1 - Corporate Experience and Key Personnel: N/A If the offeror intends to use projects that have not been fully completed, what percentage of completion must be achieved?

Projects must be fully complete at the time the proposal is submitted No 10/12/11

(1) Factor 1 - Corporate

Experience and Key Personnel:

(1) Factor 1 - Corporate Experience and Key Personnel: N/A For establishing relevant experience and past performance, will non-NAVFAC projects be considered less relevant than NAVFAC projects?

No, NAVFAC and Non-NAVFAC projects are considered equally (ensure Non-NAVFAC projects are adequately described)

No 10/12/11

(1) Factor 1 - Corporate

Experience and Key Personnel:

(1) Factor 1 - Corporate Experience and Key Personnel: N/A For establishing relevant experience and past performance, will non-design-build projects be considered less relevant than design-build?

Projects are either relevant or non-relevant based on the definition of relevancy in Section 00210 - BASIS OF AWARD, B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD. 3. b. Non- Cost/Price Factors (Phase-One).

No 10/12/11

Section 00150- Instructions to

Offerors Proposal Submittal Requirements

It is requesting a VETS 100 Registration. From what I read, this is a 100% small business set-aside. What is a VETS 100 Registration and is it necessary for this project?

Yes, per the Evaluation Factors for award, the "offeror shall ensure current VETS-100 report on the Department of Labor website https://vets100.vets.dol.gov/login.aspx, is complete and updated for this procurement." Refer to the Federal Contractor Program Paragraph under Section 00150, Instructions to Offerors for instructions on VETS 100.

No 10/12/11

PARAGRAPH REFERENCE DRAWING

NUMBER (IF

APPLICABLE)

QUESTION ANSWER ATTACHMENT

Yes or No

RESPONSE DATE/

AMENDMENT #

N69450-11-R-0778 SOUTH TEXAS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

PPI Log

Section 00150- Instructions to

Offerors Pre-Proposal Conference/ Site Visit

It states that there will be a Pre-Proposal conference/Site Visit but it does not list a date and time. Please advise on this Site Visit schedule.

As stated in the solicitation, please see FAR clause 52.236-27 ALT I for information on the pre-proposal conference/site visit. The clause currently notes, "to be cited per individual task order". If any changes are made, they will be issued via an amendment to the solicitation. Also note: Block 10 of the SF 1442 states, "No site visit will be scheduled during phase one"

No 10/12/11

Non-cost/Price Factors (Phase- One) Factor 2-

Past Performance

Non-cost/Price Factors (Phase-One) Factor 2-Past Performance

We would like to respectfully request for NAVFAC SE to allow the Offerors to submit PPQs used on other recent (within the last 6 months) NAVFAC proposals which used the NAVFAC PPQ form and format. We believe this reduces the burden on our NAVFAC customers and we understand from the latest Society of American military Engineer (SAME) meetings that NAVFAC and USACE have agreed on a form and process which allows the reuse of these PPQs to reduce the burden to the federal government and the Offerors.

PPQs which have been used in recent proposals that follow the form and format in the RFP and are in accordance with the solicitation submittal requirements of Factor 2 are acceptable to be submitted.

No 10/12/11

26 210 Factor 2 – Past Performance In lieu of submitting a PPQ to our client for a project, can a CCASS report be substituted instead?

No, PPQ forms must be submitted in accordance with Factor 2, Past Performance. No 10/12/11

00210 – Basis for Award

b. non-cost factors, 2)Past Performance Will the government accept completed CCASS evaluations in lieu of PPQs from clients? No, PPQ forms must be submitted in accordance with Factor 2, Past Performance. No 10/12/11

00210 – Basis for Award

B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The 50 page limit for the technical volume includes the award copies, PPQs and other documents. If a firm has many awards, they will be precluded from including them or may be penalized because of the page limit. Will the government consider removing the past performance – Tab B from the page limit requirement so that we may include all relevant past-performance information for the projects?

No - the page limit remains. No 10/12/11

00210 – Basis for Award B. EVALUATION FACTORS – Past Performance Questionnaires

The PPQs given in the RFP to include in proposals are in a 10 point serif font (possibly Times), but the RFP requires 12 point Arial (Sans Serif) font. Will the government accept as conforming with RFP requirements these PPQs even though they don’t meet the size standards as per the

RFP?

Yes, since the PPQs are a Standard Form, they will be accepted in their original format. No 10/12/11

00210 – Basis of

Award Factor 1 – Corporate Experience and Key Personnel:

Please verify only the prime construction firm is required to submit corporate experience narratives and PPQ’s . The Design team need not submit?

Both the design and construction capabilities of the Offeror will be evaluated to select the firms that move forward to Phase Two of the solicitation. How the Offeror presents these capabilities is the Offeror's discretion.

No 10/13/11

31 100 Navy Electronic Commerce Online (NECO) Checked NECO website on 10/11/2011 and the drawing and specification are not posted yet.

When will they be posted to the NECO website?

This is a two phase procurement. The seed project, along with drawings and specifications will be posted to NECO at the commencement of phase-two. Only selected phase-one offerors will proceed to phase-two.

No 10/12/11

Solicitation, Offer for Award 13.A

Is the solicitation still due on November 1, 2011, due to the drawings and specifications not being posted as of today?

The due date remains November 1, 2011 unless extended with an amendment to the solicitation.

No 10/12/11

00210 Basis of

Award B. 3. b. and B. 3. b. (2) (a)

The third sub-para. under B.3.b. indicates that Factor 2 Past Performance for Corporate Experience must be for same projects as indentified for Factor 1. (Key Personnel is not included in this requirement.) The first sub-para. under B.3.b.(2)(a) indicates to submit PPQ’s for each project identified in Factor 1 for both Corporate Experience and Key Personnel. Please clarify if PPQ’s are to be provided for both Corporate Experience projects and Key Personnel projects.

PPQ's are to only be provided for evaluation of Corporate Experience and not Key personnel.

No 10/24/11

34 210 B.3.b(1)a Will a Teaming Agreement between a Large Business and Small Business constitute a “partnership”?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/24/11

35 210 B, 3(a)(ii)

The 1st page of the SF1442 states that: OFFERORS MUST HAVE AN AGGREGATE BONDING CAPACITY OF $20M. Later in the solicitation, on page 15, the instructions indicate an aggregate requirement of $95mm. Please advise on the aggregate bonding capacity required for participation in the MATOC.

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/25/11

PARAGRAPH REFERENCE DRAWING

NUMBER (IF

APPLICABLE)

QUESTION ANSWER ATTACHMENT

Yes or No

RESPONSE DATE/

AMENDMENT #

N69450-11-R-0778 SOUTH TEXAS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

PPI Log

36 210 B, 3, b(1) (a)

The solicitation states that: “Corporate Experience Narratives from any contractors who are part of the partnership or joint venture will be considered as the offeror”; does this include teaming agreements iaw FAR subpart 9.6 (https://www.acquisition.gov/far/html/Subpart%209_6.html) which defines a contractor teaming arrangement as: (1) Two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor; or (2) A potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program. Please advise.

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/25/11

37 210 B, 3, b (2) (a)

Past Performance (submittal requirements) states that: “Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs.” Respectfully request reevaluation of this requirement. Many times small business contractors are required to request PPQs from the same customer multiple times within a short period. This can overburden the busy evaluators over time in filling out what they view as ‘redundant’ feedback. Request consideration of allowing recently completed PPQ forms in lieu of the new forms required by the solicitation.

PPQs which have been used in recent proposals that follow the form and format in the RFP and are in accordance with the solicitation submittal requirements of Factor 2 are acceptable to be submitted.

No 10/17/11

38 210 B.3.b.(2).a May we submit final CCASS forms in lieu of Past Performance Questionnaires? Some of our Government clients have been advised not to provide a PPQ if a final CCASS rating has been issued.

No, PPQ forms must be submitted in accordance with Factor 2, Past Performance. No 10/17/11

39 210 B.3.b.(3).a.(1) The RFP requires we provide EMR & DART rates, in addition to a Technical Approach narrative (not to exceed two pages). Can information related to EMR and DART rates be provided on a separate page and not count towards the two page limit?

Yes, the EMR and DART rate tables will not count toward the 2 page limit No 10/24/11

00210 Basis of award. Factor 2

(a)

2) Factor 2 Past Performance (a) solicitation Submittal Requirements May we substitute a CCASS report for the project PPQ? No, PPQ forms must be submitted in accordance with Factor 2, Past Performance. No 10/19/11

00210 Basis of award. Factor 2

(a)

(2) Factor 2 Past Performance (a) solicitation Submittal Requirements

Paragraph 2 of this section pertains to submitting awards and any other forms of performance recognitions. Do we submit award only for the projects highlighted in Factor 1 or can we submit awards we have received in the past 7 years?

Awards to relevant projects will be only be considered No 10/24/11

00210 Basis of Award, Factor 1

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience and Key Personnel Are you asking for 2 to 5 projects to the contractor and designer combined or each? 2 to 5 for the contractor and 2 to 5 for the designer per the solicitation, B.3.b.1 (a) Factor 1 - Corporate Experience and Key Personnel, 2 - 5 relevant projects are required to be be submitted for this Factor. In addition, per the Key Personnel definition, each key person to be evaluated must provide experience on at least two relevant projects as described in the Relevancy definition. These projects do not need to be the same projects.

No 10/24/11

02100 – Basis for Award B: Evaluation Factors: Offeror Corporate Experience

The RFP does not define a partnership. Will the Government accept a teaming partnership between two firms, as long as the teaming relationship is formally defined and provided in the Price Volume as required by the RFP?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/25/11

02100 – Basis for Award Factor 3 – Technical Approach to Safety (a) (1) EMR (a) (2) DART

Is it the intention that we submit copies of our EMR forms and OSHA Form 300A for the years 2008-2010 as part of the Non-Cost/Price Factors Volume? Or will a summary chart be all that is needed?

Refer to the solicitation. The information should be presented such that EMR and DART rates can be determined and evaluated for the specified years.

No 10/24/11

Section B (Evaluation Factors for

Award) Paragraph 3a (1) ii

The bonding capacity of $95M is not consistent with the small business standards; will you reconsider this aggregate bonding capacity and reduce it to within the Small Business norms?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/25/11

b. Non- Cost/Price

Factors (phase one) and Factor

2 – Past Performance

3 and 1, respectively

Section b. Non-Cost/Price Factors (phase-one) states “Past Performance information requested in Factor 2 must be for the construction projects that the offeror submits for Corporate Experience in Factor 1. Factor 2 – Past Performance states “The NAVFAC Past Performance Questionnaire included in this solicitation is provided for the offeror to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1, Corporate Experience and Key Personnel” Are we to submit PPQ’s only for projects in Factor 1 or are we to submit PPQ’s for projects in Factor 1 and Key Personnel which will include the projects we list for our Design Manager, Mechanical Engineer, Project Architect, Project Manager and Superintendent?

PPQ's are to only be provided for evaluation of Corporate Experience and not Key personnel.

No 10/24/11

PARAGRAPH REFERENCE DRAWING

NUMBER (IF

APPLICABLE)

QUESTION ANSWER ATTACHMENT

Yes or No

RESPONSE DATE/

AMENDMENT #

N69450-11-R-0778 SOUTH TEXAS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

PPI Log

Please confirm address for FedEx delivery. Block 7 of the SF 1442 identifies a PO Box but FedEx cannot deliver to a PO Box. The section “Proposal Delivery, for hand or courier delivery” just states Building 903. Is there a specific Room Number our courier needs to go to? Please advise.

For hand or courier delivery such as FedEx, follow the instructions in Section 00150, Proposal Delivery. Building 903 is correct as stated and there is no room number or PO Box number included in the address.

No 10/19/11

Section 00210 and SF 1442, Block 10 B., 3, a(1), (ii)

Under Section 00210, the Submittal Factors for Price (Phase-One), (ii) says “offerors must have an aggregate bonding capacity of $95M.” However, on the SF 1442, Block 10, it says “Offerors must have an aggregate bonding capacity of $20M.” Could you please confirm which is correct?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/25/11

49 Section 00100 Proposal Delivery The address given for proposal delivery says “Building 903, P.O. Box 30.” If we are delivering the proposal via fedex, is there another address we can send to, as fedex does not deliver to P.O.

Boxes?

For hand or courier delivery such as FedEx, follow the instructions in Section 00150, Proposal Delivery. Building 903 is correct as stated and there is no PO Box number included in the address.

No 10/19/11

02100 – Basis for Award

(1) Factor 1 – Corporate Experience and Key Personnel; Offeror Corporate Experience

Raass Brothers has a Teaming Agreement with a major subcontractor. Question: Is a Teaming Agreement sufficient to satisfy the requirement as written in the Paragraph Reference Section:

“Corporate Experience Narratives from any contractors who are part of the partnership or joint venture will be considered as the offeror.”

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/25/11

02100 – Basis for Award B. Basis of Evaluation Offeror Corporate Experience

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience and Key Personnel (a) Submittal Requirements states “ A minimum of two to a maximum of five relevant construction projects will be allowed collectively for a partnership or joint venture.” Does this also apply to the construction and design teams or can each company submit up to 5 projects?

The total number of projects that will be evaluated is 5; Offeror's discretion how those five are divided.

No 10/24/11

52 150 Proposal Submittal Requirements - Phase One - VETS 100 Registration Please be advised that the website is down for VETS 100 Registration and will not be up and running until November 1st 2011. Please advise another form of registration in order to submit the VETS 100 Registration required in Phase One, Price Package. Thank you.

Please follow the instructions on the VETS 100 website for Filing for the 2010 Cycle at http://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/fcp/main.htm.

No 10/19/11

53 100 Joint Venture Agreement This section requires that a copy of any joint venture agreements that have been established for the Contract. What if a formal teaming agreement has been signed between the prime contractor and a key subcontractor? Do you want copies of the teaming agreement included?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification regarding teaming agreements that the Government will recognize.

No 10/25/11

54 00100 & 00210 Proposal Submittal Requirements Phase One and B.3.a.(1) respectively

In the Section 00100 discussion of the Price proposal, it talks about the format including CCR, Section 00600, and VETS 100. This would seem to imply that copies of these are to be included. However in Section 00210 the discussion states that the offeror is to “ensure” that these documents are up to date/ completed at the corresponding websites. This would seem to imply that these documents are not to be included with the proposal. Are the CCR, Section 00600, and the VETS 100 documents to be included with the proposal?

The subject documents are under Price (Phase-One) solicitation submittal requirements, however, the RFP does not specifically state the submission of the document is required, it states; "ensure" they are complete and updated. When proposals are received, the Government will be confirming all registrations are complete and updated in accordance with the RFP.

No 10/20/11

Past

Performance Questionnaire

Other Navy and USACE offices now allow us to submit previous PPQs. Can we submit a previously submitted PPQ or a CCASS/ACASS in the Past performance factor?

PPQ forms must be submitted in accordance with Factor 2, Past Performance. However, PPQs which have been used in recent proposals that follow the form and format in the RFP and are in accordance with the solicitation submittal requirements of Factor 2 are acceptable to be submitted.

No 10/20/11

Section L Proposal Submittal

Requirements

As the cover letter is required for both Price and Technical volumes, please confirm that it does not count in the 50 page limit.

A cover letter is a formality conveying the proposal; it should not contain information to be evaluated. If such a letter contains information to be evaluated, it will be counted against the 50 page limit.

No 10/24/11

Section L Factor

3(a) (3)

Please confirm that Factor 3 (1) (EMR) and 3 (2) (OSHA) do not count in the page count, as the 2-page limit is specifically and only mentioned in section 3 (3) Technical Approach for Safety.

Yes, the EMR and DART rate tables will not count toward the 2 page limit No 20/24/2011

Section L Factor

2(a)

Other Navy and USACE offices have adopted the policy that if a CCASS/ACCASS rating was issued they do not complete PPQs. With this in mind, will the government allow copies of our CCASS/ACASS ratings to be included in Factor 2 in lieu of a PPQ?

No, PPQ forms must be submitted in accordance with Factor 2, Past Performance. No 10/20/11

00150 -

Instruction to Offerors

Price (Phase-One) VETS -100 registration website referenced in subparagraph (v) is down until further notice. How do we ensure current VETS-100 report for this solicitation?

Since registration for the 2011 cycle is current unavailable, please follow the instructions on the VETS 100 website for Filing for the 2010 Cycle at http://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/fcp/main.htm.

No 10/20/11

PARAGRAPH REFERENCE DRAWING

NUMBER (IF

APPLICABLE)

QUESTION ANSWER ATTACHMENT

Yes or No

RESPONSE DATE/

AMENDMENT #

N69450-11-R-0778 SOUTH TEXAS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

PPI Log

00150 -

Instruction to Offerors

Pre-Proposal Conference/Site Visit Will there be a scheduled Pre-Proposal Conference for this phase 1 solicitation?

Block 10 of the SF 1442 states, "No site visit will be scheduled during phase one".

Therefore, no site visit/pre-proposal conference will be held in Phase-One

No 10/20/11

00150 -

Instruction to Offerors

Proposal Submittal Requirements and Offeror Corporate Experience

Under the “proposal submittal requirements” paragraph it gives the requirements of the cover letter. Item (b) requires the email address of the Offeror and Lead Design Firm. This is the only reference to information regarding the “Lead Design Firm” that we found except for resume section of Key Personnel. Can we provide lead design corporate experience for this firm in addition to the prime construction contractor’s narratives?

Per the solicitation, no qualifications for Lead Design Firm are indicated, however, qualifications for Key Personnel are indicated.

No 10/24/11

Reference RFP page 16/75

This page includes the following statement: “Entire Phase-One proposal shall not exceed 50 pages in length (front side only) utilizing a minimum Arial Font of 12 for Factors 1-3.”

Question: we understand the limit of 50 pages to apply to the Technical Proposal (Volume 2) rather than the entire proposal (which includes 2 volumes) for Offeror responses to Factors 1, 2, and 3. It is correct?

That is correct. The 50 pages only applies to the Technical Proposal. No 10/24/11

Reference RFP page 16/75

This page includes the following statement: “Entire Phase-One proposal shall not exceed 50 pages in length (front side only) utilizing a minimum Arial Font of 12 for Factors 1-3.”

Question: Are there any materials submitted in response to Factors 1, 2, and 3 that are excluded from the limit of 50 pages?

No - The RFP states the "Entire Phase-One proposal shall not exceed 50 pages…." No 10/24/11

Reference RFP page 16/75

This page includes the following statement: “Entire Phase-One proposal shall not exceed 50 pages in length (front side only) utilizing a minimum Arial Font of 12 for Factors 1-3.”

Question: Does the Arial 12 pitch requirement only apply to Offeror responses to Factors 1, 2 and 3 for the Technical Proposal?

That is correct. The font / pitch restriction applies only applies to the Technical Proposal.

The Phase II RFP may contain a similar restriction - to be determined.

No 10/24/11

Reference RFP page 16/75

This page includes the following statement: “Entire Phase-One proposal shall not exceed 50 pages in length (front side only) utilizing a minimum Arial Font of 12 for Factors 1-3.”

Question Does this font/pitch apply to other responses in the Technical proposal or to the Price Proposal?

No No 10/24/11

Reference RFP page 16/75

This page includes the following statement: “Entire Phase-One proposal shall not exceed 50 pages in length (front side only) utilizing a minimum Arial Font of 12 for Factors 1-3.”

Question: within the applicable responses to Factors 1, 2, and 3, we recommend that responses which are included in tables, figures and related illustration use a slightly smaller pitch such as 10 pitch. Is this acceptable to the Government?

Responses prepared by the offeror shall be in 12 pitch; previously existing documents included in the proposal (such as PPQs) shall be in their original font/pitch.

No 10/24/11

Reference RFP page 16/75

This page includes the following statement: “Relevant projects include a wide array of projects including, but not limited to, Administrative Facilities, Training Facilities, Child Development Centers, BEQs, and other similar facilities with a construction value of approximately $4M or greater. Projects must have been completed within approximately the last seven years.”

Does the Government require that Offerors’ project be completed? Can projects that are underway be included as well?

Projects submitted must be complete at the time the proposal is submitted No 10/24/11

Reference FBO Synopsis and

RFP page 16/75

The Synopsis posted 09/15 states that “Construction projects to be performed will primarily consist of general building type projects, (new construction, renovation, alteration, and repair of facilities and infrastructure, roofing, demolition, and routine renovation) including: 1) aviation and aircraft facilities,

2) marine facilities, 3) barracks and personnel housing facilities, 4) administrative facilities, 5) warehouses and supply facilities, 6) training facilities,

7) personnel support and service facilities, 8) security level facilities, 9) both vertical and horizontal construction, and 10) abatement and handling of hazardous/regulated materials (including and not limited to asbestos, lead paint, mold remediation, and Polychlorinated biphenyls”. Page 16 of the RFP states that: “This procurement is for construction projects primarily consisting of general building type projects (new construction, renovation, alteration, demolition, repair work, and any necessary design) including: industrial, airfield, aircraft hangar, aircraft traffic control, infrastructure, administrative, training, dormitory, community support facilities and both vertical and horizontal construction for Department of Defense activities in the South Texas areas managed by NAVFAC SE”

Please confirm that the scope of work defined in the RFP overrides the pre-solicitation description of work.

Yes, the RFP is the most recently issued document. No 10/24/11

00150-

Instruction to offerors

Price (Phase One) Can the bonding letter be written to just one party of a newly formed Joint Venture or is it required to be in the actual name of the proposed Joint Venture?

As stated in the note in Section 00210,B.3.a.(1), "the bid bond letter…must be in the name/CAGE/DUNS of the offeror identified on the SF1442 and DD1155 (seed project Phase-Two).

No 10/24/11

PARAGRAPH REFERENCE DRAWING

NUMBER (IF

APPLICABLE)

QUESTION ANSWER ATTACHMENT

Yes or No

RESPONSE DATE/

AMENDMENT #

N69450-11-R-0778 SOUTH TEXAS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

PPI Log

00210 - Basis of

Award B. Evaluation Factors for Award 3(2)(2)(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements

The RFP requests PPQs to be completed by the client and returned in our proposal submittal.

The RFP also states that offerors shall not incorporate by reference into proposals PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. Several of our DoD clients have provided PPQs to be included in our proposal on multiple occasions. To eliminate frustration expressed by our clients for having to complete a PPQ for each opportunity, will the Government reconsider accepting previously submitted PPQs?

PPQs which have been used in recent proposals that follow the form and format in the RFP and are in accordance with the solicitation submittal requirements of Factor 2 are acceptable to be submitted.

No 10/24/11

00210 - Basis of

Award B. Evaluation Factors for Award 3(2)(1)(a) Submittal Requirements - Offeror Corporate Experience

The RFP states that Corporate Experience Narratives for a partnership or joint venture are allowed, however, evidence of the legal documentation that describes the partnership or joint venture must be submitted for review with your proposal. Can the government please define partnership and what type of legal documentation is appropriate for a partnership?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification regarding teaming agreements that the Government will recognize.

No 10/25/11

00210 - Basis of

Award B. Evaluation Factors for Award 3(2)(1)(a) Submittal Requirements - Offeror Corporate Experience

The RFP states to submit a minimum of two to a maximum of five construction projects that the offeror completed and served as the prime construction contractor. Is the Government looking for projects that are 100 percent complete, or will projects substantially complete be considered?

Projects submitted must be complete at the time the proposal is submitted No 10/24/11

SF 1442 &

00210 Block 10 & B.3.a.(1).ii

Block 10 states that the required aggregate bonding is $20 million. However in 00210 the required aggregate bonding is stated to be $95 million. What is the requirement?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No 10/25/11

74 100 Proposal Submittal Requirements Is there a page limit for the cover letter?

A cover letter is a formality conveying the proposal; it should not contain information to be evaluated. If such a letter contains information to be evaluated, it will be counted against the 50 page limit.

No 10/25/11

75 210 B.3.b.(1)(a) It states that the experience of partners can be used if legal documentation is provided. Would this include an executed teaming agreement?

Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification. No. 10/25/11

76 210 B.3.b.(3)(a)(1 & 2) For the EMR and DART do you only want the data from the prime contractor? Or do you also want it from any key partners?

Data shall be provided for the legal entity submitting the proposal. Please see amendment 0001 to solicitation N69450-11-R-0778 for clarification on prime contractor, partnership, and joint venture.

No. 10/25/11

77 210 B.3.b.(1)(a) Do you want to see any past experience from the design team?

Per the solicitation, no qualifications for Lead Design Firm are indicated, however, qualifications for Key Personnel are indicated.

No 10/25/11

00210 – Basis of

Award B.3.a. Price (Phase 1); B.3.b. Are the documents provided under Price (Phase 1) included in the 50 page limitation? The 50 page limit applies only to the technical proposal No 10/25/11

00210 – Basis of

Award B.3.b.(1). a. Key Personnel

Does the govt define Construction Project Manager as responsible for the overall project management, including design and not limited to the construction aspects?

The Government defines the role of the Construction Project Manager as " responsible for all construction project management…."

No 10/25/11

00210 – Basis of

Award B.3.b.(1). a. Key Personnel Are resumes included in the page count? Yes No 10/25/11

00210 – Basis of

Award B.3.b.(2). Past Performance If a final CCAS rating exists, is that acceptable to submit instead of a PPQ? No, PPQ forms must be submitted in accordance with Factor 2, Past Performance. No 10/25/11

00210 – Basis of

Award B.3.b.(2). Past Performance Are the PPQ forms included in the page count? Yes No 10/25/11

00210 – Basis of

Award B.3.b.(2). Past Performance

Is the documentation provided for Performance Recognition limited to the projects provided in Factor 2: Past Performance?

No, but recognition for a submitted project may be considered more favorably. No 10/25/11

PARAGRAPH REFERENCE DRAWING

NUMBER (IF

APPLICABLE)

QUESTION ANSWER ATTACHMENT

Yes or No

RESPONSE DATE/

AMENDMENT #

N69450-11-R-0778 SOUTH TEXAS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

PPI Log

00210 – Basis of

Award B.3.b.(2). Past Performance Is the documentation provided for the Performance Recognition included in the page limitation? Yes No 10/25/11

00210 – Basis of

Award B.3.b.(2). Past Performance What percent project completion will be accepted? 100% complete at time proposal is submitted. No 10/25/11

PARAGRAPH REFERENCE DRAWING

NUMBER (IF

APPLICABLE)

QUESTION ANSWER ATTACHMENT

Yes or No

RESPONSE DATE/

AMENDMENT #

N69450-11-R-0778 SOUTH TEXAS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

PPI Log

86 Basis of Award Factor 1: Corporate Experience

Will the Navy allow USGBC Projects completed without certification or certification pending rather than “USGBC Certified” Project Experience related to the Project Architect and Project Mechanical Engineer? Very few very competent design firms with excellent past performance designing Navy Projects have staff with “USGBC Certified “ projects. Most firms are still waiting on the Certifications to come back from projects completed two years ago with the Navy started certifying their projects.

Non-DoD USGBC Certified or better projects are acceptable for evaluation. No 10/25/11

87 210 Para B; sub para b Entire Phase-One proposal is limited to 50 pages in length. Does this 50 page limit include covers and dividers?

Covers and dividers that do not contain information to be evaluated do not count against the 50 page limit

No 10/25/11

88 210 Para B;sub para b (3) Requires listing of EMR and Dart rates but does not specify form. Are these to be listed on company letterhead, or are the industry forms issued to us to be provided, or should the rates be identified within the Safety Narrative?

Documentation of the EMR and DART rates is preferred, a summary, although not required, will aid the evaluation and reduce the liklihood of missing something.

No 10/25/11

Amendment #1

Factor 1 Corporate Experience and Key Personnel: Submittal Requirements

It is stated “The Government will not evaluate corporate experience narratives from a teaming partner, if that teaming partner is a subcontractor to the prime offeror.” Does this statement include the design team? They will be a subcontractor to Marshall Company the prime offeror.For past proposals experience information has always been required for the design team.

This is way we are somewhat confused by this statement.

The requirement precluding teaming partners is in regards to the Offeror's Corporate Experience. Designer qualifications are addressed under Key Personnel

No 10/26/11

00210 Basis of

Award

(3) Factor 3 – Technical Approach to Safety (b) Basis of Evaluation

In section 00210 it states the Government will evaluate EMR, DART, Tech Approach to Safety, and ‘other ‘sources of information available to the Govt. Is this information to be included in the Safety Narrative or does the Government require the information on separate forms? If on separate form, which form is acceptable.

The reference to "other" sources means sources of documentation available to the Government through official channels; not information to be provided by Offerors.

No 10/26/11

91 600 Proposal Submittal Requirements - Phase One - Representations and

Certifications - Section 00600

Our Company is registered with the ORCA website - Representations and Certifications.

However, I cannot seem to locate Section 00600 in the RFP. Please advise if it means to attached the ORCA Certification Registration.

Section 00600 is not in the RFP, however, FAR clause 52.204-8 and DFARS 252.247- 7022, noted in the Proposal Submittal Requirements are included in the RFP. Refer to Section 00210. B. 3. a. (1). (iv). For the Annual Representations and Certifications solicitation submittal requirement.

No 10/27/11

92 PPI'S SUBMITTED BELOW ARE FOR PHASE TWO

93 N/A 00210 Basis of Award N/A

Factor 4 – Sustainable Design under the Non-Cost/Price Factor portion of the submittal states the following: “Provide a LEED Scorecard indicating proposed credits and a brief LEED summary narrative …. outlining the offeror’s approach and strategy for meeting each LEED Construction prerequisite and credit.” Is the Government asking the Offeror to describe our approach for all credits, or just those that the contractor is responsible to meet during construction that do not rely on the design of the building? For example, the Offeror can describe an approach to meet LEED Points “Materials and Resources: Credit 2 Construction Waste Management”, but the Offeror has no control or responsibility to meet LEED Points “Energy and Atmosphere: Credit 1 Optimize Energy Performance” other than building per the plans and specifications and not designing the systems needed to achieve these points.

Additionally, since the Offeror is not responsible for the design, what is the purpose of submitting a LEED Scorecard or narrative different than the one the designer provided with the RFP? Does the government expect the Offeror to hire an outside consultant to review the design and verify that the points shown in the LEED Scorecard provided are actually attainable? Please clarify the Government’s Intentions in Factor 4.

The RFP requires submittal on Construction Credits and Construction Prerequisities as described in Factor 4 on pages 19 and 20 of RFP Amendment 0002 . Revised Specification Section 01 33 29.00 25 provides the list of credits that will be submitted by the Government during the Design Phase and clarification on the LEED credit requirements. Revised LEED scorecard provides the complete list of required, potential and not allowed credits.

No YES 0003 / 0009

PARAGRAPH REFERENCE DRAWING

NUMBER (IF

APPLICABLE)

QUESTION ANSWER ATTACHMENT

Yes or No

RESPONSE DATE/

AMENDMENT #

N69450-11-R-0778 SOUTH TEXAS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

PPI Log

94 00100 00210 Basis of Award N/A

Factor 4 – Sustainable Design under the Non-Cost/Price Factor portion of the submittal states the following: “Describe the proposed high performance products by filling out the information in the table below”. Since the Offeror is not responsible for the design of the building, we will be providing products that meet the plans and specifications in the contract documents. This request seems to imply that the Offeror is responsible for the design of these systems. Please clarify.

The RFP requires the Offeror to provide requested product selections as described in Factor 4 on pages 19 and 20 of RFP Amendment 0002 .

No 0003

00210 Basis of

Award N/A N/A

Factor 4 – Sustainable Design under the Non-Cost/Price Factor portion of the submittal states the following: “Using the physical characteristics of the equipment identified in the high performance products table below and the utilities / communications systems described on Sheet A-301 item 4 Building Section, provide a coordination drawings sheet addressing the physical layout of the systems within the ceiling cavity.” A General Contractor will not develop above ceiling coordination drawings until the Ceiling, HVAC, Plumbing, Electrical, Fire Protection, and Low Voltage Subcontractors are contracted and have had time to thoroughly review the drawings and specifications. After the subcontractors are selected, the General Contractor will lead a series of coordination meetings with the appropriate parties to detail above ceiling space allocation. This is not a drawing that can realistically be produced during the bidding process.

Any Drawing produced with the proposal will not be fully vetted and will change once the parties listed above are under contract. Please consider removing this requirement from the Technical Proposal.

This is design-build contract and the coordination drawing sheets are a…