Amd 2 - Questions and Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 26 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Multiple-Award Construction Contract (MACC) Holloman AFB, NM Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- PKB-0001
About this file
This document contains questions and answers regarding solicitation number PKB-0001 for a Multiple-Award Construction Contract (MACC) at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico. The solicitation seeks indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity construction services with a total maximum value of $400 million over a potential 10-year ordering period. The incumbent contractors are LC Structural, JC Builders JV, NASCO, Veliz Construction, Mirador Enterprises, Mesa Verde, E-Corp, and R-CON. Offerors are required to submit a price for a sample demonstration project but are no longer required to submit design documents with their proposals. Questions regarding the solicitation were due by October 20, 2023 and proposals are due November 3, 2023. Award is expected by January 2024.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 49
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q&As
| MACC Questions and Answers | ||
| Question | Area | Answer |
| Please consider excluding the following from the page count: Tabs, divider sheets, Table of Contents, Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms, Financial Information Request Form, Bonding Information Request Form, and Letters from Subcontractors/Vendors, AF Form 3064, AF Form 3052, and AF Form 66. | Section L | Section L has been revised in Amendment 2 to exclude these items from page counts. Note: Form 66 is no longer required as of Amd1 1 |
| On the ‘Description’ of the SAM.gov notice, the last sentence is – ‘$400M ceiling over an up to 10-year ordering period, with on- and off-ramping potential’. It is also on the first page of the solicitation document under – ‘G. Total aggregate maximum amount expendable under all MACC contracts awarded shall not exceed $400,000,000.’ However, on Section F - (a) Overall MACC ceiling - Between $250,000,000 and $500,000,000. Which one is the correct MACC program ceiling? | SF 1442 document | The ceiling is $400,000,000 over 10 years (potential ordering period is 1, five-year base period plus 5, one-year option ordering periods). |
| Section M, Factor 3 item C states that "Joint venture partners’ past performance shall be part of the aggregate performance evaluation. Past performance of other teaming partners or subcontractors shall not be considered." Does this mean only JVs are exclusively allowed? Please expressly clarify if teaming agreements (not Joint Venture) are allowed to compete; and, if past performance from each entity will be evaluated collectively for the proposal. | Section M, Factor 3, Item C | Yes—teaming arrangements may compete. No—both entity’s past performance will not be considered for past performance—only the prime contractor’s past performance. HOWEVER, that’s not necessarily a problem for a teaming arrangement because past performance is only “pass/fail” in this source selection. If there is no recent or relevant past performance it defaults to “neutral” which = pass. Also, those words only apply to the past performance subfactor, which means that the teaming partner’s qualifications and experience may be considered under other subfactors, such as technical, depending on the language in section M pertaining to those other subfactors. |
| We would like to know if this is a brand new contract OR if there is (was) an incumbent performing these services. If not brand new, could you please provide the current / previous contract number? Appreciate any insight you can provide. | Incumbents | Current MACC info: Contract Award Date: Jan 30, 2019 |
Contract Award Number: FA4801-19-D-A001_A0003_A0004_A0005_A0006_A0007_A0008_A0009 Task/Delivery Order Number:
Contractor Awarded Unique Entity ID:
Contractor Awarded Name: LC Structural, Inc, JC Builders JV, NASCO, Veliz Construction, Mirador Enterprises LLC, Mesa Verde, E-Corp, R-CON Contractor Awarded Address: USA Base and All Options Value (Total Contract Value): $135,000,000.00
| Regarding MACC Holloman AFB, NM Solicitation No. FA480123R0001, would you please tell me when the site visit took place and if it was mandatory? | Site Visit | There is no site visit. |
| 1. Section L, Paragraph L-3, 1, states to submit proposals via DoD SAFE. Paragraph 8 states they should be submitted on CD/DVD-ROM in sealed envelopes. Please confirm the method of submission. | Section L | Use DoD Safe only. |
| 2. We didn’t see the two forms referenced in Section L, Paragraph L-6, 3.a and b in the solicitation or attachments. Please provide the Financial Information Request form and the Bonding Information Request form. | Section L financial and bonding forms | The 2 forms have been uploaded to SAM |
| 3. How many projects would the Government like offerors to cite to determine acceptable past performance? | Section L | Submit up to six projects for PP. There is no minimum. |
| 4. Section L, Paragraph L-4, 2, refers to a Section L Addendum with a responsiveness checklist, we did not see that included with the solicitation documents. | Section L | A responsiveness checklist will NOT be provided. |
| Could you please clarify when questions are due for the above referenced solicitation? On the SF1442, Item C states that all questions are due no later than 15September2023 at 2:00 p.m. In Section L, paragraph 3, all questions are due no later than 14September2023 at 2:30 p.m. | SF 1442 document | OBE |
| 1. Will an extension to the RFI deadline be considered since the submission deadline is a month away, and we anticipate questions arising as the 65% design and sample project estimate are developed? | n/a | An extension is reflected in Amendment 1, to 20 October 2023. |
| 1. In executing the demonstration project, is it acceptable to have the field superintendent cover supervision, QA/QC, and safety duties? Or do we need 1 person for each responsibility? | n/a | Staffing decisions are made and proposed by the offeror. In determining technical acceptability, the Government evaluation team will use its professional judgement in strict accordance with the evaluation criteria stated in section M and subject to the requirements of the SOW and other terms and conditions of the solicitation. |
| 2. Are these projects going to be exempt from sales tax? | n/a | Not exempt from sales tax |
| 3. The following is found on page 2 of the Demonstration Project Task Order, SOW, RFP: | n/a | |
| It is assumed these are deliverables which will need to be provided after award but not with the contractor’s proposal. Please confirm. | n/a | Confirmed. Your assumption is correct. |
| 4. No piling is required for foundation, please confirm. | DP SOW | Confirmed. |
| 5. Is a geotechnical report available for the proposed building site, or is the contractor to budget a report as part of the project? | DP SOW | A geotechnical report is not available, and for this demonstration project a report is NOT required. |
| 6. Electrical Power to the building: | n/a | |
| a. What is line voltage and phase for power which will be tapped to supply building? | DP SOW | Primary line voltage is 13.2 kv/7.6 kv. Nearest connection tapping point is at the cornner of Tabosa and Colorado Ave.. Pad mounted transformer will be located at tapping point with secondary run U/G to project location site. |
| b. Will power to building be metered? | DP SOW | No. |
| c. If power is supplied by facility DPW, where is interface between project and DPW? Assume at transformer, please confirm. | DP SOW | See answer above for 6. a.. Project requires contractor to install new pad mounted transformer. |
| d. What voltage and phase are to be supplied to building? | DP SOW | Single phase. |
| 7. Utility sketch does not identify firewater line. Is there is a firewater line, or is domestic water supply used for firewater? | DP SOW | Domestic water supply is used for firewater. |
| 8. Does firewater supply have sufficient pressure for fire suppression system or is a firewater pump required? | DP SOW | It has sufficient pressure. |
| 9. Domestic water heater is sized only for build-out, interior space. Hot water is not require for warehouse space. Please confirm. | DP SOW | Correct - hot water is not required for warehouse. |
| What gauge of steel metal roof panel and siding panel are desired? | DP SOW | 22 guage minimum for both. |
| 23 IDIQ Demonstration Project,SOW, Section B, Item 2,“Provide concrete landings and/or,ramps for all other personnel and,vehicle doors.,Please provide a brief description,of intent.,What is the width and length? | DP SOW | There is no special intent other than what is stated. |
| 24 IDIQ Demonstration Project Is ICD 705 applicable to this Demonstration Project? | DP SOW | No. This is not a SCIF. |
| 25 IDIQ Demonstration Project Will the orientation of building affect,the function of the building?,Please specify the rotation of,building. | DP SOW | See building layout for orientation. |
| DP SOW | ||
| DP SOW | ||
| DP SOW | ||
| 26 IDIQ Demonstration Project What is the estimated weight of,vehicles?,This will have an effect on the,amount of reinforced concrete. | DP SOW | 7,000 lbs |
| 27 IDIQ Demonstration Project Will landscaping be required?,If so, to what extent? | DP SOW | If its not specified in the any of the solicitation documents, then its not a requirement |
| 28 IDIQ Demonstration Project What are the limits of the project? | DP SOW | Yes, that entire area. You can place the building anywhere in that area. |
| 29 IDIQ Demonstration Project Is AT/FP applicable to this Demonstration Project? | DP SOW | Per IFS and UFC, no. |
| 30 IDIQ Demonstration Project Are all projects 100% Domestic or Buy American 51%? | DP SOW | Per terms and conditions of the solicitation |
| 31 IDIQ Demonstration Project Is Cathodic Protection required on underground water lines? | DP SOW | Per IFS, no. |
| 32 IDIQ Demonstration Project Is a PIV with a Tamper Switch | DP SOW | Per IFS, yes. |
| required on the UG Fire Line? | DP SOW | |
| 33 IDIQ Demonstration Project Is the FDC required to be remote,and a certain distance away from,the building? | DP SOW | The riser is in the mechanical room so the FDC is outside the mechanical room. |
| 34 IDIQ Demonstration Project Will the Water/Fire Line road,crossings need to be bored under,the road? | DP SOW | Bored under. |
| Can the asphalt be cut and patched? | DP SOW | No, per the IFS. |
| 35 IDIQ Demonstration Project Will a Thermostatic Mixing Valve,be required on the Domestic Hot,Water System for scald resistance? | DP SOW | If its not specified in the any of the solicitation documents, then its not a requirement |
| 36 IDIQ Demonstration Project Will an Emergency Shower /,Eyewash station be required in the,Warehouse Bay? | DP SOW | If its not specified in the any of the solicitation documents, then its not a requirement |
| 37 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A Are there any requirements for Seismic Bracing on Piping? | DP SOW | If its not specified in the any of the solicitation documents, then its not a requirement |
| 38 IDIQ Demonstration Project SOW, Section B, Item 15 “Provide electric water heater in Mechanical Room to supply sinks and lavatory.” Are tankless water heaters acceptable, or only Tank-Type water heaters? | DP SOW | Per the layout for mechincal room, a tank water heater is shown. |
| 39 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A Are floor drains required in all mechanical rooms? 40 IDIQ Demonstration Project SOW, Section B, Item 16 “Provide and install sanitary sewer system with gravity sewer(s) from building waste lines to existing sewer.” Is SDR 35 pipe acceptable or only Schedule 40 PVC pipe? | DP SOW | Per IFS, SDR 35 goes from the exterior wall to the manhole; under the building is schedule 40 |
| 41 IDIQ Demonstration Project SOW, Section B “… and Entry/Access Control space as described below:” There is no mention of Access Control after that paragraph. Is access control required? If so, please provide details. | DP SOW | It is not required. |
| 42 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A Will the requirement for access control to be "rough-in" only? | DP SOW | If its not specified in the any of the solicitation documents, then its not a requirement |
| 43 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A Will access control equipment be provided by Advantor? | DP SOW | If its not specified in the any of the solicitation documents, then its not a requirement |
| 44 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A Are cord reels required in the machine shop for convenience power? | DP SOW | If its not specified in the any of the solicitation documents, then its not a requirement |
| 45 N/A Is a ground ring required? | DP SOW | Per IFS, not required. |
| 46 IDIQ Demonstration Project SOW, Section B, Item 8 N/A Is the lightning protection required by UL Certified or is a third-party inspection adequate? | DP SOW | Per IFS, UL certified. |
| 47 IDIQ Demonstration Project SOW, Section B, Item 13 N/A Is the fire alarm system required to be a Monaco system? | DP SOW | Per IFS, Monaco. |
| 48 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A Is mass notification required? | DP SOW | Per IFS, per UFC, no. |
| 49 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A Is an electrical meter required? | DP SOW | If its not specified in the any of the solicitation documents, then its not a requirement |
| 50 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A Are data/comm outlets required? | DP SOW | Only in break room |
| 51 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A Is the requirement for data/comm “rough-in” only, or are we to include horizontal cabling and devices? | DP SOW | Rough-in only |
| 52 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A What type of smoke detection? | DP SOW | See IFS |
| DP SOW | ||
| 53 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A What room is the fire alarm panel going into? | DP SOW | Mechanical Room |
| 54 IDIQ Demonstration Project N/A Does it need a dedicated A/C Unit? | DP SOW | See scope of work provided in the solicitation package. |
| DP SOW | ||
| 55 IDIQ Demonstration Project SOW, Section B, Item 7 A Machine Shop is referenced but is not listed on the Proposal Floor Plan. Please identify where the Machine Shop is to be located? | DP SOW | There is no requirement for a machine shop |
| 56 IDIQ Demonstration Project HAFB Standards exclude using evaporative coolers in buildings. Is this an exception for this Demonstration Project? | DP SOW | Yes, it is an exception for the demonstration project. Follow the demonstration project SOW. |
| 1. What is the required floor finish in the restroom, breakroom, janitors closet and corridor? | DP SOW | Please review all of the solicitation documents, including the IFS, for this type of information. |
| 2. What is the required wall finish in the restroom and janitors closet? | DP SOW | Please review all of the solicitation documents, including the IFS, for this type of information. |
| 3. The solicitation package includes an Excel spreadsheet titled “Construction Cost Estimate spreadsheet”. Is this the form contractors should complete in lieu of AF Form 3052. If not, please provide a copy of AF Form 3052. | Solicitation Attachment Construction Cost Estimate Spreadsheet | Use the Construction Cost Estimate Spreadsheet. |
| 1. Can we get clarification on what drawings are required from the designer for this submission? | DP SOW | The requirement has been removed and 65% design is no longer required. |
| 1. Will the government consider accepting CPARS in lieu of Past Performance Questionnaires? | Section L | Neither CPARS nor questionnaires are required. |
| 2. What has been the historical volume of this MACC? | n/a | The last two MACCs averaged $30M per year over 10 years. That doesn't include work that was performed on a SABER contract during that period, or future inflation. |
| 3. Who are the incumbents on the MACC? | n/a | Contract Award Date: Jan 30, 2019; Contract Award Number: FA4801-19-D-A001_A0003_A0004_A0005_A0006_A0007_A0008_A0009; Task/Delivery Order Number: Contractor Awarded Unique Entity ID: Contractor Awarded Name: LC Structural, Inc, JC Builders JV, NASCO, Veliz Construction, Mirador Enterprises LLC, Mesa Verde, E-Corp, R-CON Contractor Awarded Address: USA Base and All Options Value (Total Contract Value): $135M via modification) |
| 4. If an Offeror has a Job Order Contract with multiple task orders, can the offeror submit the individual task orders within the contract or can we also submit the overall JOC as one past performance project? | n/a | It is fine to submit both ways |
| 5. The requirements of 252.204-7020 for flow down to subcontractors substantially limits being able to utilize a great deal of small business subcontractors. Does the government realize that it will have upward pressure on pricing for this MACC if the clause is required? | n/a | We do not have discretion to remove mandatory clauses. |
| 8. In Section M, Factor 2-Technical, Sub-Factor 1, paragraph (4), states to provide a staffing plan. Sub-Factor 2 Demonstration of Project Proposal further mentions a staffing plan. The RFP requirements are not clear in that the RFP doesn't specifically mention providing Key Personnel Resumes. Please confirm Key Personnel Resumes are not required to be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal. | n/a | Resumes are NOT required nor desired. |
| 10. As a follow up to the question above, would the government consider 35% design for the Demonstration Project? | sections L & M | Design requirement has been removed. |
| 11. Is the Demonstration Project contemplated to become an actual awarded task order? | n/a | No. |
| 12. The Solicitation is password protected and we are unable to print or extract the SF1442, Reps and Certs etc. Can the Government please provide the Solicitation which is not password protected so we can extract the SF1442, Reps and Certs etc.? | n/a | We ourselves can unlock the contract writing software in the way you are asking for. Offerors can print the form and then scan, or try ‘Print to PDF’ the file and that will flatten it and remove the password protection. |
| 13. Two Part Question: Section L-3 Proposal Preparation Instruction, paragraph 10 Page Size and Format says pages shall be single-spaced with 1.5 line spacing. Not all information in Volumes 1, 2, and 3 can be presented to show single-spaced with 1.5 line spacing (Example drawings, tables and figures, table of contents, acronym list, cover letter, binder cover etc.), adding spacing between lines reduces the information that can be presented in Volumes 1, 2, and 3, and this requirement is not clear as to what information in Volumes 1, 2, and 3 the spacing applies to (Example does this apply to the drawings, tables and figures, table of contents, acronym list, cover letter, binder cover etc.). Question 1: Will the Government please allow all pages of all volumes to be single-spaced with single line spacing? Question 2: Will the Government please allow all headers and footers to be 10-Point font. | Section L | Question 1: Yes, single spacing is allowed. Question 2: Headers and Footers may be 10 point font. |
| 14. duplicate of 13. | n/a | n/a |
| 15. Does the Sample Client Authorization Letter need to be included if Offeror is only submitting CPARS? In many cases the point of contact for the CPAR is no longer in the same position and is not reachable anymore. | n/a | There is no need for the Client Authorization Letter. |
| 16. Will there be a requirement to have a jobsite office/trailer on Holloman AFB? | n/a | No, see SOW para 7.3 |
| 17. Will there be a requirement to have project management staff located on Holloman AFB if the MACC holder does not have any task orders? | n/a | No, but see section M, Factor 2 para d. 5) regarding emergency response capability |
| 18. Section L-7. Factor 3 - Past Performance, paragraph (2) states to provide a list of recent and relevant projects, and states to include the contract number, project title, and rationale explaining why the project meets the criteria for recency and relevancy, but the instructions don't mention providing references or contact information for references relating to the project list. Are we to provide the contact information for references associated with each project in the list of projects? | n/a | Points of Contact are not required. |
| 20. Two Part : Section M Evaluation Criteria, Factor 2 - Technical, paragraph d. 2) states relationships may be demonstrated by a letter from each entity. It is unclear what is meant by letter, for example does this mean a letter of commitment or are we to provide a completed Attachment 3a or 3b. Question 1: Please confirm a letter of commitment can be provided to demonstrate a relationship with key subcontractors (A/E firm, equipment supplier, construction material supplier, and testing lab for construction materials). Question 2: Please confirm a letter of commitment doesn't need to provided for any additional trade subcontractors other than the A/E firm, equipment supplier, construction material supplier, and testing lab for construction materials. | Section L | Confirmed, both questions. |
| 21. Two Part : Section L-7. Factor 3 - Past Performance, states to provide a list of projects for the proposed prime and each joint venture member. Section L-7. Factor 3 - Past Performance, doesn't state that subcontractor past performance is to be provided. Question 1: Please confirm subcontractor past performance is not required. Question 2: Please confirm Attachment 3b doesn't need to be provided in regards to Section L-7. Factor 3 - Past Performance if subcontractor past performance is not to be provided. | Section L | Confirmed, both questions. |
| On September 14, 2023, a Clarification was issued adding Attachment+16+-+Financial+Information+Form and Attachment+17+-+Bonding+Information+Form. It is unclear if these forms are to be sent directly to the government or returned to the Offeror for inclusion in the proposal submission. Please clarify. | Section L financial and bonding forms | Include it as a pdf with electronic signature as part of volume 1. |
| Q. In Section M Factor 2 Technical, paragraph c.4 “Minimum Qualifications to be technically acceptable in this area”, the Civil Engineer and Fire Protection Engineer are shown to require NM State Certification. Due to the work being performed on a federal installation, would other state certification be acceptable besides New Mexico? | n/a | New Mexico state certification is requried for the disciplines identified in the table in section M, Factor 2, d. 4).(Civil Engineer and Fire Protection Engineer) |
| Q. Two of the four evaluation methodologies require 35% design be submitted with the proposal. In order to bid these task orders, the contractor could incur a significant amount of upfront costs without receiving award. Will there be a way for contractors to be compensated for upfront design costs? | n/a | The government will consider this for future requirements under the MACC. Individual FOPRs will contain instructions to supplement the information provided in the ordering procedures attachments. |
| Q. Section M, Factor 3 – Past Performance, paragraph g states that past performance evaluation will be rated as “acceptable” or “unacceptable”. Offerors with unknown past performance will be considered “acceptable”. Will the Government consider adding a “neutral” rating for unknown past performance to differentiate between Offerors with acceptable past performance and an Offeror with no past performance? | n/a | Unknown = acceptable. |
| Q. Clause 252.236-7001 Contract Drawing and Specifications. Aug 2000, paragraph a. states that “The Government will provide to the Contractor, without charge, one set of contract drawings and specifications…”. Will any task order resulting from the awarded contract be design-build or will drawings and specifications be provided? | n/a | The vast majority of task orders are anticipated to be "design/build," but the government reserves the right to issue a "build" task order. In the case of a "build" task order, the drawings etc will be provided. |
| 1. Does this building need to be designed as ADA compliant? | n/a | Per IFS, yes. |
| 2. Attachment 2 is for IDIQ pricing sheet. TAB A asks us to provide cost for demo project. Which we understand. But, all FOPR coming out of this MACC will be FFP. So, do we need to fill out TAB B for coefficient rate? | Coefficient (SOW Atch 4) | The Coefficient AND the SIMPLIFIED Ordering Procedure have been removed by Amd 2 from this MACC solicitation. Please see the revised documents posted with Amd 2. No, offerors are not required to fill out the coefficient rates in the (re-named) "IDIQ Coefficient Rate Schedule" but be advised that leaving this schedule blank will be considered "opting out" of further consideration for work under the "Simplified" ordering procedure, which may be used for projects under $250K per decision of the Contracting Officer. |
| 1. In previous solicitations, the Government allowed for each entity to submit our financial information directly to the contracting officer. Will this be acceptable for Joint Ventures? | Section L financial and bonding forms | Yes, JV partners can submit directly using DoD SAFE. |
| 1. On page 2, item 17 of the SF 1442: Are we expected to enter the total amount of the demonstration project there? If not, what other value are you expecting to be entered in that section? | n/a | Leave it blank. |
| Please let us know who the CO and CA are, along with their email addresses. | n/a | PCO: Anthony Overbay anthony.overbay.1@us.af.mil; CA--John Seamon john.seamon.1@us.af.mil |
| 6 Section L document, L-6. Factor 2 – Technical, Sub Factor 1, Construction Management and Capability: financial institution and surety agent Information Request forms, deliver how? Email or registered mail? | Section L financial and bonding forms | Submit with the proposal as part of Volume 1 in pdf format |
| 8 Section M document, M-4 Evaluation, Factor 1 – Price Paragraph a. states: The Government will calculate a “Total Evaluated Price” (TEP) as follows: The TEP to the Government will be calculated for each offeror by adding the design and construction price provided on the Project Bid Schedule. There is not a file named Project Bid Schedule, only IDIQ Pricing Sheet (Pricing Sheet/Bid Schedule - design is not listed in this) and Construction Cost Estimate spreadsheet. Will the government be revising the pricing sheet to include design? Is the IDIQ Pricing Sheet considered the Project Bid Schedule? | Ssolicitation Attachment pricing sheets | The Coefficient AND the SIMPLIFIED Ordering Procedure have been removed by Amd 2 from this MACC solicitation. Please see the revised documents posted with Amd 2. Names of documents have been changed. See amendment. In the amendment the terms "Project Bid Schedule" and "IDIQ Pricing Sheet" have been removed and replaced with "Demonstration Project Price Sheet" and "IDIQ Coefficient Rate Schedule". (The term "Construction Cost Estimate spreadsheet" refers to a different document in the solicitation, and remains.) The Demonstration Project Price Sheet will NOT be revised to include design, since the 65% design requirement has been removed by this amendment. The proposed price filled-in is the total firm fixed price to perform the demonstration project SOW, except for bond and NMGRT, which should be excluded from the demo project price. |
| 9 Section L document, L-6. Factor 2 – Technical, Sub Factor 2 – Demonstration Project Proposal N/A Do we include just the AF Form 66, or should we also include actual submittals with offer? | Solicitation Attachment AF Form 66 | We don't need an AF Form 66 for the demo project. No, do not include submittals. |
| 10 SF 1442 - Contract clauses for Cyber Security There are 8 contract clauses referring to cybersecurity: 252.204-7012 Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting. Jan 2023 252.246-7004 Safety of Facilities, Infrastructure, and Equipment for Military Operations. Oct 2010 252.204-7008 Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls. Oct 2016 252.204-7012 Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting. Jan 2023 252.204-7017 Prohibition on the Acquisition of Covered Defense Telecommunications Equipment or Services-Representation. May 2021 252.204-7018 Prohibition on the Acquisition of Covered Defense Telecommunications Equipment or Services. Jan 2023 252.204-7019 Notice of NIST SP 800- 171 DoD Assessment Requirements. 44621 252.204-7020 NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Requirements. Jan 2023 How does the Government want offerors to address current cybersecurity compliance? How will the Government enforce cybersecurity compliance? Will this include home offices and point systems, etc? | n/a | All are required. Contractors must self-attest to their compliance. Government may audit. |
| 11 Wage Determination The Wage Determination included in the Solicitation Documents is for Residential. However, no one will be living in this building. This project should use Heavy and Building Wage Determinations. Will the government be changing the Wage Determination from Residential to Heavy and Building? | Wage Determinations | The uploaded document included four wage determinations that had been combined into one document. That document is replaced in this amendment with three separate wage determinations. (The residential one is no longer included). Note: It is the offeror's responsibility to select the correct wage determination from SAM.gov for any construction project. |
| 12 IDIQ Pricing Sheet document The IDIQ Pricing Sheet divides price by Direct and Indirect Costs. How do you define Direct and Indirect Costs? | Solicitation Attachment Pricing Sheets | Document has been revised--now there is only a bottom line price for offerors to fill in. Note that the document is now called "Demonstration Project Price |
| 13 Construction Cost Estimate document The Construction Cost Estimate spreadsheet contains errors on the Summary sheet in the Division Total column. The total for each division is Cell H46 on the individual tabs and the cells in the Division Total column refer to this. However, some of the cells in the Division Total column refer to Cell H47 in some division tabs, which is actually a blank cell. Will the government be revising the sheet to address this issue? | Solicitation Attachment Construction Cost Estimate Spreadsheet | Yes, the Govt corrected this error in the newly uploaded file. |
| 14 Construction Cost Estimate document N/A Do we include the Construction Cost Estimate Breakdown as an excel spreadsheet or a pdf file? | Solicitation Attachment Construction Cost Estimate spreadsheet | Provide as an unlocked excel spreadsheet. |
| 15 Construction Cost Estimate document Currently the Division sheets and Summary sheet do not have a formulated line item and cell to capture the Prime Contractor’s NM Gross Receipts Tax of 6.0625%. (The Prime Contractor OH/P and Bonds are not taxed on this spreadsheet but are required to be.) Will the government be revising the file Construction Cost Estimate to correct this issue? | Solicitation Attachment Construction Cost Estimate spreadsheet | The NMGRT at 6.0625% has been inserted in the "sales tax" cell. Use the form "as is" for the Demonstration Project (DP). Since the DP is for competition purposes only, its more important that all offerors use the same formula than it is to be technically accurate. |
| 16 Construction Cost Estimate document This table is included on the Summary tab: GC Overhead 8.00% GC Profit 10.00% Sub Overhead 5.00% Sub Profit 8.00% Sales Tax 6.0625% Risk/Bonding 2.00% Are we required to use the exact percentages listed for Overhead, Profit, and Bond on the Summary tab? | Solicitation Attachment Construction Cost Estimate spreadsheet | Do not change the values that are provided in the spreadsheet. |
| 17 IDIQ Demonstration Project Will there be rack shelves for storage in Bay area? 18 IDIQ Demonstration Project Will the Warehouse Bay area be used for storage? 19 IDIQ Demonstration Project Will there be any high pile storage above 12 feet? 20 IDIQ Demonstration Project What type of commodity will be stored in the Warehouse Bay? 21 IDIQ Demonstration Project What year Design Compatibility Standards do we need to reference? | Demo Project SOW and details | Please refer to the solicitation documents. If a specific item is not called for then it is not a requirement. |
| HAFB IFS document. Does this file take the place of the “Design Compatibility Standards”? | IFS document | Yes |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .