RFIs.docx

36C26122R0011 and 36C26122R0012 Request for Information RFI 12 - Page 2 , first paragraph has a minimum of 5 contracts will be awarded. Pg 9 of 10 first paragraph lists five firms being recommended. Pg 9 of 10, 4th paragraph has “…recommending at least ten firms,…” Please clarify the number of expected awardees to these solicitations, or at least a minimum.

Response 12: It is a MINIMUM of five (5) for master planning and a MINIMUM of 8 for design.

Please see original call for 36C26122R0011. This has been updated/corrected on 2/4/2022.

RFI 13 - Page 4 of 10, first paragraph, has “…identify at least (8) of the most highly qualified SDVOSB…” This conflicts the references in the first question. Please clarify all of the references to the potential short list of firms and the potential awards.

RESPONSE 13: It is a MINIMUM of five (5) for master planning and a MINIMUM of 8 for design.

RFI 14 - Page 2, first paragraph states: “…all work under each contract shall not exceed $5 million…” Earlier editions had $10M and another place had $6.5M. Also, the estimate on the total contract was $50 to $100M. Is the total amount of contracts a shared capacity or will each contract awarded be for a not-to-exceed value?

RESPONSE 14 : It is a MINIMUM of five (5) for master planning ($10M each) and a MINIMUM of 8 for design ($6.5M). Should more than the minimum be awarded, the contract values will drop accordingly. With the SF330 process, those selected will be the judgement of the technical evaluation board only.

RFI 15 - Page 2, 4th paragraph, lists a number of disciplines required to include, but not limited to. Page 6, Criterion 2 lists 12 disciplines as key personnel and those we are to provide resumes for. Do you want to see resumes for the other disciplines listed on page 2 (e.g. security, SHPO, IT/Data and hazardous materials/environmental)? If we do not include those resumes listed on page 2 and only the 12 listed on page 6, will we be scored differently from a firm that submits more disciplines?

Response 15: See corrected information for 36C26122R0011.

RFI 16: The Q&A had a page limit of 85 pages, but the revised document had several Criterion that had specific page limits. Was it your intent to let us decide on the distribution of the page count in the different criterion, but limit overall to 85 pages?

Response 16: The original intent was no limitation, however there was a high number of inquiries about page limits, so to cease the questions, we put an 85-page limit on Section 1. Please see Supplemental Instructions SF 330.

RFI 17: Reference RFI #8 answer was confusing. It appears you are giving us different criteria, but state that some of the disciplines may have an important role, if that site involves that discipline. We need to know what exact key personnel/disciplines you want to see and not try to guess. Your last bullet includes “Optional SME’s for specialties…can be included. – please clarify, since we do not want to guess and guess wrong, where another firm may guess correctly and get selected.

Response 17: With this requirement, we are currently working with broad strokes, and have no specific requirement information until we get to the task order level. The intent of RFI 8 was to provide more details as to the possibilities that may arise in VA Master Planning, as the AICP requirements, as previously stated, are over the top for our needs.