VA101-17-R-0327-00013000.docx

5. PROJECT NUMBER (if applicable)

CODE

7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NUMBER

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED

PAGE

OF PAGES

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED

BPA NO.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

FACILITY CODE

CODE

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:

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

E. IMPORTANT:

is extended,

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning __________ copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer 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 is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(REV. 11/2016)

is required to sign this document and return ___________ copies to the issuing office.

is not, 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.

15C. DATE SIGNED

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

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.

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

D. OTHER

BY

Contractor

16C. DATE SIGNED

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

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

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

STANDARD FORM 30

PREVIOUS EDITION NOT USABLE

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.243 (Type or print) (Type or print) (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (If other than Item 6) (Specify type of modification and authority) (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

(If required)

(SEE ITEM 11)

(SEE ITEM 13)

(X)

CHECK

ONE

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

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer) 00013 04-26-2018

871CM2031

Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Construction and Facilities Management (00CFM3B) 811 Vermont AVE, NW Washington

DC

20420 101F Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Construction and Facilities Management (003C4B)

425 I STREET, NW

Washington

DC

200001 To all Offerors/Bidders

VA101-17-R-0327

05-07-2018

X The purpose of this amendment is to clarify the previous questions recieved.

The prior amendments contained 16 cost reducing measures.

The final price revision proposal date has been changed to May 7, 2018 BY 10:00 A.M. EST

THIS AMEMDMENT IS FOR THE CONTRACTORS WHO WERE REQUESTED TO SUBMIT FINAL REVISIONS

TERANCE CRAWLEY

SENIOR CONTRACTING OFFICER

CFM16L3 -2071

A.> We are of the opinion that the instructions as stated in Amendment 12 will result in a conflict in the amount of the credits to the final price when combining cost reducing measures. Note that there will be specific cost reducing elements that will be repeated on the final price revision proposal if the method is not changed. For example and specific to item #10 “RE‐DESIGN MEMORIAL WALK AREA” (MWA) which has cost reducing measures elements captured also in:

#3> RE‐DESIGN RETAINING WALL FROM REINFORCED CONCRETE TO MSE WALL: There are two MSE retaining walls inside the MWA.

#4> RE‐DESIGN STORMWATER POND LAYERING SYSTEM: One redesigned pond within MWA.

#5> REDESIGN MATERIAL FOR STORM SEWER PIPES (RCP to PVC): Length of 12” Pipe redesigned to PVC.

This means that credits for this retaining wall, the pond and the 12” pipe will be captured again in item #10 MWA. If these redesigned elements were already included in prior steps, credit for these elements should be considered with the new design changes – not based on the original design. Continuing strictly down the list, the duplicity of cost reducing elements will be more severe when reaching measure #13 RE‐DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTIONS FROM CONCRETE TO ASPHALT. Part of this credit would’ve been captured in #10. In the analysis of #13, any cost reduction captured in #10 should be left out because by the time we reach #13 there is no MWA. Similarly, credits for concrete pavement in #14 (Defer Bridge/Back Entrance) would conflict with #13 as by step #14, all roads are in asphalt.

Here is an example: Let’s assume Pond III inside the MWA had an original cost of construction of $100,000. Under cost measure #4> the layer redesign would lower the cost to $60,000 conveying $40,000 in savings to the government. Under Cost Measure #10, this pond is deleted, but addendum 12 requires cost reductions based on original design and states that CFM will follow the list in priority order.

Net savings for Pond III will appear as:

$40,000 Captured in Measure #4 + $100,000 Captured in Measure #10 $140,000 Savings presented in offer are greater than the actual cost of construction

There is no conflict and there should be no repetitive cost savings. Price reductions for #3, #4, and #5 cost-savings should be placed in those line items. Cost-savings for #10 should include all cost savings associated with eliminating the Memorial Walk Area (MVA) scope with the exception of those cost-savings already priced in line items #3, #4, and #5 that will remain. Cost-savings for line item #10 should also include eliminating any scope from line items #3, #4, and #5 based on the cost-savings achieved for those items (not original pricing) are reflected in line items #3, #4, and #5. With respect to line item #13, you are to price cost-savings from concrete to asphalt for only roadway pavements. This has no effect on line item #10. It does have an effect on line item #14. Cost-savings for line item #14 should be based on eliminating the bridge and an asphalt road since the cost-savings for concrete to asphalt are reflected in line item #13. Bottom line is that any higher-numbered priority ought to reflect the cost-savings of lower-numbered priority if there is a related impact. If the government has any questions based on the actual implementation of cost-saving measures, we will seek clarification prior to award. Bidders may also use caveats to state their assumptions.

B.> For #5> Redesign Material for Storm Sewer Pipes (RCP to PVC). Our local supplier suggest using readily available HDPE (N12), especially for the larger sized pipes The re-designed material for specified RCP sizes in Amendment 12 remains at PVC. HDPE installation on island has been problematic.

C.> Hacienda and the Municipality of Morovis have not agreed to meet with us to discuss tax options. Following a significant power outage, Hacienda is busy with filings after moving filing deadline to April 25th.

Bidders are responsible for knowing how state and local tax laws and exemptions apply to prime contractor, subcontractor, and vendors performing on projects for the Federal government. This includes gaining all information from all knowledgeable sources for your specific proposed method of execution. Exemptions are specific to means and methods.

D.> Landscape Plant and Turf grass Establishment Period> With changes to the irrigation system, satisfactory conditions for acceptance and requirements of grass plants from sod operations will need to be reevaluated.

The change from an in-ground irrigation system to the traveling reel system should have no impact on turf or landscaping establishment or acceptance requirements. Bidders should phase work activities and scheduling, or make arrangements for irrigation so that it is available for establishment. The VA’s National Cemetery at Bayamon does not have an in-ground irrigation system and this has not changed any procedures for turf or landscaping projects with respect to establishment and acceptance. The Resident Engineer on-site can be consulted through the RFI process if there are any questions or clarifications.

E.> we are not clear on the award process and what will follow after. Will the project be awarded for the total cost less the chosen cost‐saving measures? If so, is it the intention of the government to revert to the original design if additional funding is sourced at a later time? Is it correct to assume that future changes would be captured in modifications to the awarded amount?

Project will be awarded based on offerors technical and pricing proposals in accordance with the Solicitation documents. Project must be awarded within budgetary constraints. Do not assume anything post-award. This has no bearing on the award process.

F.> We ask that the deadline for submission of cost proposal be move to May 7th.

Deadline for the Final Price Revision submission will be extended to May 7, 2018 at 1000 EST.