Attachment 13 - Government Responses to Industry Questions_Updated 26 August 2024.pdf

Numb Responsi Reference Industry Question Government Response Posted with

0001 IRC

Section (4) Subfactor (3) Bonding Capacity, states: At a minimum, Offerors shall provide/address the following:The Offerors shall provide a letter from a qualified Securities or Bonding Company which states they will be providing bonding for this requirement up to the Contract Maximum Value. Offerors shall demonstrate their ability to obtain sufficient bonding of $5M per task order and aggregate of $10M for concurrent task orders with verification from the Securities or Bonding Company as well as remaining bonding capacity for concurrent contracts. The Offeror shall submit information showing minimum available bonding capacity of $30M aggregate per year with verification from the Securities or Bonding Company (to be completed by Securities or Bonding Company and submitted by Offeror). The information shall also include how long the Securities or Bonding Company has provided bonding for the Offeror and the bonding limit for a single project, aggregate amount, and current available

The requirement states $10M for concurrent task orders, and $30M aggregate per year, this statement is conflicting. Please confirm this requirement should read $10M aggregate per year, not $30M aggregate per year.

The term concurrent in this RFP is used to represent an Offerors' ability to bond multiple task orders issued against the same Base IDIQ within the specified time period in the RFP. The term aggregate is used to refer to the total amount ($30 million) of credit extended by a surety company to a particular contractor at any one time.

0002 DPW

RFP Pg. 12 Given the size and scope of JOC are we to assume that a Site

Superintendent can be assigned to multiple concurrent task orders?

Yes. The Site Superintendent can be assigned to multiple, concurrent task orders.

0003 DPW

SOW 8.2 On-Site Staff With the size and scope of JOC work (multiple smaller task orders running concurrently), is it the intent that the Site Superintendent be physically on each active task order at all times? This ties in with the other question about managing multiple Task Orders concurrently.

Having only one superintendent at the contractor's onsite trailer office meets the requirement for the "on-Site" reference. This also meets the requirement for having a superintendent assigned per task order. Since each task order is issued to the same onsite location, then having only one superintendent meets this requirement.

Assigning the same superintendent to multiple task orders is acceptable since the task orders are at the same location;

0004 DPW

SOW, Pg. 1: “The Contractor and the Government shall both have the most current version of the software and databases at all times.”

Does this mean the City Cost Index pricing will be the most current that is issued, or only adjusted once per year? Gordian publishes updates to the CCI each quarter, are we to assume those will be used when pricing?

The e4clicks software contains the latest RS Means data and the contractor will be required only to procure their own licenses. The RS Means pricing data for current City Cost Indexes (CCI) are to be updated on a quarterly basis through e4clicks.

0005 DPW

SOW: Pg. 5, 17, 18 Please clarify normal working hours as page 5 of the SOW (and page 17 of the SOW for the QCM’s duty hours) states normal working hours are 7:00 am-4:00 pm whereas page 3 of the RFP CLIN 0002 states 7:30 am-5:00 pm for normal working hours and page 4 of the RFP CLIN 0003 states after 5:00 pm for other than normal working hours. Plus page 18 of the SOW states the hours on site for the PM/Alt PM are 7:30 am-4:00 pm.

Normal working hours are 0700 to 1600 reflected in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0006 DPW

SOW: (PDF) Pg 6,13, 15 Is the Contractor responsible for paying for and providing the Government with the UPB and Estimating software (4Clicks)? If so, how many copies?

The contractor is responsible for purchasing and maintaining their own software. The Government is responsible for purchasing and maintaining their own software licenses. Refer to SOW 6.0 Proposals for further information.

0007 IRC

RFP Pg. 15 Please clarify as page 15 of the RFP states CLIN X001 Normal Working Hours (85%) CLIN X002 Other Than Normal Working Hours (5%) CLIN X003 Non-pre-priced Items (Not-To-Exceed 10%) whereas pages 3-5 of the RFP’s Section 00 10 00 identify CLINS as 0002 through 0004.

Solicitation will be updated to reflect CLIN X002 Normal Working Hours (85%);

CLIN X003 Other Than Normal working Hours (5%); CLIN X004 Non-Pre- Priced (Not to Exceed 10%) in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0008 IRC

RFP Pg. 15 Please clarify as page 15 of the RFP Vol IV under bond liability letter states the contract maximum value is $99 Million/5-year contract whereas page 64 of the RFP states the maximum value is $90M for the contract.

Pg. 15 Contract Maximum Value will be updated to reflect $90M/5-year contract in an upcoming solicitation amendment. 0003

0009 DPW SOW Pg. 7 Please clarify e4Clicks or e-Gordian cost estimating software is the required tool, as page 7 of the SOW states e-Gordian whereas all other statements of the cost estimating software in the SOW are e4Clicks. Note, they are two very different estimating tools.

The Statement of Work will update pg. 7 to reflect 'The Contractor shall use cost estimating software (e4Clicks) as prescribed by the Government in an upcoming amendment.

0010 IRC RFP, Instructions to Bidders, Volume III, Past Performance, PPQ (Attachment 4)

Vol III Past Performance – Attachment 4 is to be sent out and returned DIRECTLY to the Agency’s POCs. Is a copy of Page 2/Section 1 of Attachment 4 to be included in the Offeror’s proposal?

No. A copy of the PPQ will not be included in the Offeror's proposal. Refer to RFP, Section L, Volume III, Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 4)

0011 IRC

RFP Pg. 8: “With the exception of company logos on stationary, graphics, photographs, and color coding of spreadsheets and calculations for emphasis, proposals shall be printable as blank ink on white paper”

Are colored section headers acceptable to aid the reader in differentiating header levels?

No. Colored section headers are not acceptable. Refer to RFP pg. 8, paragraph

2. Proposal Format for specifics.

0012 IRC

SF 1442 Pg. 1 The box on the SF 1442 is checked indicating a bid guarantee is required, however a bid bond is not listed in the requirements for Volumes I - IV. Please confirm no bid bond on SF24 is required with our proposal.

The bid guarantee is to protect the Government from loss and must be at least 20 percent of the bid price, but not more than $3M (See FAR Clause 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee). The bid guarantee must be in the form of a firm commitment, such as a bid bond, postal money order, certified check or under Treasury Department Regulations. Refer to RFP, Volume I General, (4) Other documents:

Bid Guarantee paragraph for further specifics.

0013 IRC

RFP Pg. 7, 15 RFP page 7 makes reference to “Section 002113 ‘Evaluation Factors for Award,’ but RFP page 10 refers to “Section 002113 (Representations & Certifications).” Can the government please clarify which is Section 002113?

Section 002113 Evaluation Factors for Award will be updated to reflect 'Evaluation Factors for Award, A. Basis for Contract Award (Section M). Verbiage will be updated under A. Proposal submission Instructions to Offerors (Section L), B. General Instructions in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0014 IRC

RFP Pg, 10, 35: RFP page 10 instructs that “the Offeror shall ensure that Section 002113 is submitted thoroughly completed with all blocks in each certification/representation completed truthfully and completely;” however, no Representations and Certifications are provided within the solicitation. RFP page 35 asks that the Contractor make the representations required “by validating or updating all its representations in the Representations and Certifications section of the System for Award Management (SAM) and its other data in SAM.”

Please confirm that updating the Representations and Certifications in SAM is all that is required to meet the Representations and Certifications requirements of this proposal. If not, please suggest a course of action for contractors to follow.

Offerors will validate or update all representations in the Representations and Certifications section of the System for Award Management (SAM) and its other data in SAM. See RFP Pg. 35 for specifics.

0015 IRC

RFP Pg. 10: Page 10 of 65 of the Solicitation, Item a.ii(2) SF 1442: This item requires offerors to provide the name, title and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to their proposal and who can obligate it contractually, as well as identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

This information is not usually supplied on a SF 1442. Please confirm that offerors may include a separate sheet, such as a cover letter, to provide this information.

The information will not be supplied in the 1442. The information will be supplied by each Offeror within Volume I of the proposal. The solicitation will be updated where the Offeror shall provide the name, title and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding the decisions made with respect to their proposal and who can contractually obligate.' See RFP, Volume I, for specifics.

0016 RFP Pg. 11: “personnel performing in the described positions shall be direct employees of the prime contractor.”

Please confirm our understanding that in the case of an unpopulated JV, personnel directly employed by either joint venture partner will be acceptable.

Yes. In the case of an unpopulated JV, personnel directly employed by either joint venture partner is acceptable.

0017 IRC

RFP Pg. 11 Please confirm that a Joint Venture Agreement meets the requirements at the bottom of RFP page 11 and will be exempted from the technical proposal page count.

Any joint venture agreement that is allowable and sanctioned by the Small Business Administration will be included as part of Volume II - Technical Acceptability of the proposal, and will not be counted as part of the 75 page limit of Volume II. See RFP, Volume II for specifics.

0018 DPW

RFP Pg. 11, Volume II, Subfactor II; RFP Pg. 12 Instructions to Offerors

Volume II Subfactor II Evaluation Criteria (RFP Page 17) references an Estimator. An Estimator is not mentioned on the list of contractor personnel provided on RFP Page 12 in the instructions to offerors. Please clarify whether an estimator is a required position for submission and if so, provide the minimum qualifications desired to meet an acceptable rating.

The Estimator position has been removed from the solicitation.

0019 IRC

RFP Pg. 11 and 12 Please confirm that paragraphs 6-9 on RFP page 11 and 1-5 on RFP page 12 (beginning with “The Government. . .” and ending with “. . .

in the construction industry.” Belongs and will be evaluated under Subfactor 2 Proposed Staffing and not under Subfactor 3 Bonding Capacity.

Paragraphs 6-9 on pg. 11 and paragraphs 1-5 on pg. 12 are out of order. The correct order will be reflected in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0020 IRC

RFP Pg. 11 The bottom of RFP page 11 references a “QC Plan.” Is this supposed to read “Staffing Plan” (“staffing plan” is referenced above in Subfactor 2)?

Paragraphs 6-9 on pg. 11 and paragraphs 1-5 on pg. 12 are out of order. The correct order will be reflected in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0021 IRC RFP Pg. 11 Please confirm that a QC Plan in not required with this proposal submission.

The SOW 10.3 has been updated to convey the QCP is due within 30 calendar days after contract award. Please see the updated SOW, paragraph 10.3 for further details.

0022 DPW

RFP Pg. 12, 17 Instructions to Offerors on RFP Page 12 refer to a “Safety Manager” but the Evaluation Criteria on Page 17 refer to a Site Safety and Health Officer. Please confirm our understanding that these are the same position.

Both are the same position. The 'Health Officer' verbiage will be replaced with 'Safety Manager' in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0023 DPW SOW, PDF pg. 22, 8.1 Key Personnel The statement of work (PDF Page 22) identifies the Program Manager and QCM as Key Personnel with resumes to be submitted for KO approval. Please confirm our understanding that the identification of personnel in these positions and their qualifications will be required, and should be submitted, after award.

Resumes of the Program Manager and QCM will be submitted as part of the proposal. Refer to the SOW paragraph

8.1 Key Personnel for specifics.

0024 DPW

RFP pg. 12, SOW PDF pg. 22., PDF pg. 75 Acronyms and Definitions

Please confirm that any requirement for personnel other than Superintendent to be “on site” or “at the project site” refers to Fort Irwin and not each task order location (e.g. SSHO, QCM)

The contractor's onsite trailer office meets the requirement for the "on-Site" reference.

0025 DPW RFP pg. 12: “each superintendent shall possess a minimum of five (5) years documented journeyman level work experience in the construction field, with no less than two (2) years of that experience being in a supervisory position.”

Would an individual with five (5) years of relevant Superintendent experience on similar construction contracts meet this requirement?

The minimum work experience is at the journeyman level. If the experience of superintendent exceeds the journeyman level, then this is also acceptable.

0026 DPW

RFP pg. 12, SOW (PDF Pg) 23: RFP page 12 states that “The Project Manager shall possess a minimum of 10 years of experience in the Construction field, with at least five (5) of those 10 years of experience in construction management” and that “The Program Manager shall possess a minimum of 5 years of experience in the Construction field”. Typically, the Program Manager position requires more years of experience than the project manager, as they usually lead the overall contract, while the Project Manager position requires less experience, as they usually lead projects at the task order level.

Please confirm that the Project Manager is required to possess a minimum of 10 years of experience in the Construction field, with at least five (5) of those 10 years of experience in construction management and that the Program Manager shall possess a minimum of 5 years of experience in the Construction field.

The Project Manager has been updated to Site Superintendent in RFP Volume II - Technical Acceptability, (3) Subfactor (2) Proposed Staffing and in the Statement of Work (SOW). The Site Superintendent shall possess a minimum of 5 years of experience in the Construction field.

The Program Manager shall possess at least a Bachelor's degree in engineering, architecture, or construction management, with a minimum of 10 years experience in the construction field, with at least five (5) of those 10 years of experience in construction

0027 DPW

RFP Pg. 12: RFP page 12 states that “The Project Manager shall have the maturity and business acumen to manage the entire effort, successfully plan and execute all task orders, and possess extensive understanding of and familiarity with the principles, methods, and techniques of architectural, civil, mechanical, and electrical engineering.” Typically, the Program Manager is responsible for managing the overall contract and all task orders.

Is it the Government’s intention that the Project Manager be responsible for the overall contract and all task orders and not the Program Manager?

This statement will be corrected from 'Project Manager' to "Program Manager" in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0028 DPW

RFP Pg. 12, SOW Pg. 23: RFP page 12 indicates that a “separate and distinct” Superintendent shall be assigned to each awarded TO.

Would the Government consider it acceptable for a Superintendent to manage multiple projects in accordance with the size, location, scope, and complexity of the project?

Having only one superintendent at the contractor's onsite trailer office meets the requirement for the "on-Site" reference. This also meets the requirement for having a superintendent assigned per task order. Since each task order is issued to the same onsite location, then having only one superintendent meets this requirement.

Assigning the same superintendent to

0029 DPW

If Superintendents may manage multiple projects in some instances, would the government provide a range or value that they would consider acceptable for a single superintendent to simultaneously manage. (e.g. not more than $1 million, not more than 7 projects, projects not more than 15 minutes apart, etc.)

Having only one superintendent at the contractor's onsite trailer office meets the requirement for the "on-Site" reference. This also meets the requirement for having a superintendent assigned per task order. Since each task order is issued to the same onsite location, then having only one superintendent meets this requirement.

Assigning the same superintendent to

0030 DPW

RFP Pg. 12: Based on previously published contract data, our analysis suggests that a requirement of a “separate and distinct” superintendent for each TO from award through acceptance (as indicated on RFP page 12) might require as many as 35 active superintendents to staff the contract at its current volume.

Is it the government’s intent that a unique superintendent should be assigned to each project for this duration, even though active work may not be taking place at all times?

Having only one superintendent at the contractor's onsite trailer office meets the requirement for the "on-Site" reference. This also meets the requirement for having a superintendent assigned per task order. Since each task order is issued to the same onsite location, then having only one superintendent meets this requirement.

Assigning the same superintendent to

0031 IRC

RFP Pg. 18, Evaluation Factors for Award Factor 2 Past Performance

Please confirm that an offeror does not need to request a PPQ for a project that has an existing CPARS evaluation.

Offerors are not required to forward a copy of Attachment 4 (Past Performance Questionnaire) in which they do not want considered during the proposal evaluation. Offerors should not assume a CPARS record exists for each contract of their contracts. Past Performance Questionnaires that are received by the closing date of the solicitation will be evaluated as part of the proposal. See RFP Section L,

c. Technical Acceptability 'Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment

4) for specifics.

0032 IRC RFP Pg. 14 Given the timing of Federal year end workload, would the Government consider sparing contracting officers the effort of filling out repetitive PPQ information by allowing owners to submit previously completed PPQs within their proposals?

No. Previous PPQs will not be accepted.

Please refer to RFP, Section L, Volume III for PPQ requirements.

0033 DPW

RFP Pg. 12: The discussion of the qualification for the QCM on RFP page 12 asks offerors to provide licenses and/or certifications for their specialty (mechanical, electrical, plumbing, or civil).

Are QCM required to be licensed engineers? If not, please clarify the license / certification requirement.

The QC Manager must possess a minimum of 5 years construction experience. See SOW 8.3 Personnel Qualifications.

The certification requirement is in reference to UFGS 01 45 00, paragraph

1.6.2.3 "Construction Quality Management Training" which states the following: "the QC Manager and all members of the QC team must have completed the CQM for Contractors course. If the QC Manager does not have a current certification, obtain the CQM for Contractors course certification within 90 days of award. This course is periodically offered by the Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command and the Army Corps of Engineers."

0034 IRC

RFP Attachment 3, #6. Narrative Explanation Attachment 3, item 6 narrative explanation references a potential evaluation of satisfactory or substantial confidence. Please clarify these ratings as the RFP indicated past performance will be evaluated on an acceptable / unacceptable basis.

Past Performance will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. RFP Attachment 3, #6 Narrative Explanation will remove the last sentence referring to Substantial Confidence or Satisfactory Confidence to avoid confusion in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0035 IRC RFP Attachment 3 and Attachment 4 Please clarify whether a “contract” as described on Attachment 3 and Attachment 4 refers to an IDIQ effort as a whole or to an individual task order under an IDIQ contract.

The Contract is an IDIQ or Task Order that is specific and relevant to the Ft.

Irwin JOC requirement.

0036 IRC

RFP Page 9; RFP Page 13: The table on the top of page 9 of 65 states that the page limit for Volume III is “10 per reference”. Item c.(5) on

Please clarify the expectation for information submitted on the remaining 6 pages per reference.

RFP, Section L will be updated to reflect 10 pages per reference for Specific Relevant Contracts in an upcoming

0037 IRC

RFP Attachment 4:Past Performance Questionnaire; RFP Volume III Past Performance

Please confirm that PPQ forms do not count towards the page limitations for Volume III since they are being sent directly to the owner.

PPQ forms do not count towards the page limitations for Volume III. PPQs are not completed by the Offeror and will not be included in Volume III of the proposal. Per RFP Section L, Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 4), ' The Offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts.

The points of contact shall return the questionnaires directly to Andrew Graham at Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil and Caley Neel at caley.n.neel.civ@army.mil no later than the closing date of the solicitation. See RFP Section L, Volume III

- Past Performance for further

0038 IRC

RFP Attachment 4:Past Performance Questionnaire; RFP Volume III Past Performance

If PPQ are included in the 10 pages per reference, The PPQ form (Attachment 4) is 7 pages long. These two items would equal 11 pages, which is more than the 10 pages allotted per reference.

Please clarify what is included in the 10 pages per reference.

PPQ forms do not count towards the page limitations for Volume III. PPQs are not completed by the Offeror and will not be included in Volume III of the proposal. Per RFP Section L, Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 4), ' The Offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire to the points of contact responsible for i i f d h mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil mailto:Andrew.s.graham6.civ@army.mil

0039 IRC

RFP Volume III Past Performance Please confirm that Consent Letters, Client Authorization Letters, and Organization Structure Change History responses do not count toward the page limit for Volume III

Consent Letters, Client Authorization Letters, and Organization Structure Change History responses are counted toward the page limit for Volume III. See RFP Section L, Volume III for further specifics.

0040 IRC

RFP page 11, page 15 Is there a difference between the “letter from a Securities or Bonding Company” requested on page 11 of the RFP and the “Bond lability letter” requested on page 15 of the RFP? If not, in which volume would the government prefer that this letter be located?

There is no difference between the "letter from a Securities or Bonding Company" and "Bond liability letter."

'Bond liability letter' verbiage will be included in the RFP, Section L, Volume II,

(4) Subfactor (3) Bonding Capacity' in an upcoming solicitation amendment. See amended solicitation for further

0041 DPW

RFP Pg. 6: PDF Page 6 of the SOW says that contractor shall use "IMCOM enterprise cost estimating software as the cost planning software to develop the Unit Price Book (UPB)."

Please confirm our understanding that the UPB is to be provided by Gordian/RS Means.

The e4clicks software contains the "Unit Price Book" data which is the RS Means data.

0042 DPW

RFP Pg. 6: FP page 6 says “The Contractor shall purchase the most current E4clicks software to support the contract requirements within seven

(7) calendar days of contract award. The Contractor and the Government shall both have the most current version of the software and databases at all times.”

Are contractors required to provide copies of the software to the Government? If so, how many copies are required?

The requirement only applies for the contractor to procure their own software licenses. The Government is responsible for procuring their own software licenses.

0043 IRC

RFP Pg. 8, Proposal Submission Instructions, Proposal Format

For readability, may Attachments 5, 6, and 7 be provided in PDF format within Volume IV Price, so long as Excel versions of these files are also submitted with the proposal?

Yes. PDFs of Attachments 5, 6, and 7 may be provided within volume IV-Price as long as the Excel versions are submitted with the proposal.

0044 DPW

Please confirm that the most recent version of RS Means available at the time of each task order issuance is the version of RS Means used to develop the TO Line Item Estimate.

The most recent version of e4clicks estimating software available at each task order issuance will be used to develop the TO Line Item Estimate. The RS Means pricing data for current City Cost Indexes (CCI) are to be updated on a quarterly basis through e4clicks.

0045 DPW

Please confirm that the most recent version of RS Means includes the quarterly updates.

The e4clicks software contains the latest RS Means data and the contractor will be required only to procure their own licenses. The RS Means pricing data for current City Cost Indexes (CCI) are to be updated on a quarterly basis through e4clicks.

0046 DPW

Please confirm the RS Means book is to be updated as new books are issued and not on the anniversary of the contract award.

The e4clicks software contains the latest RS Means data and the contractor will be required only to procure their own licenses. The RS Means pricing data for current City Cost Indexes (CCI) are to be updated on a quarterly basis through e4clicks.

0047 DPW SOW, pg. 14: Coefficients are to include traffic signs and barriers. On the few projects where traffic control is required, items such as jersey barriers and traffic control signs are a significant task order expense.

Would the Government consider excluding traffic control from the coefficient and allowing the contractor to include these costs on task orders as needed?

No. Traffic control will not be excluded from the coefficient.

0048 DPW

SOW Section 10. Required Contractor Plan:

Within the Statement of Work, Section 10 are a number of plans that specifically address Task Order-level inclusions. However, the initial paragraph indicates all plans within that section are to be submitted on a contract-level basis.

Please clarify which plans apply to the contract, which will be developed for task orders (as applicable) and/or which may include both a contract level plan (Such as a contract- level Accident Prevention Plan with task order level site safety and health plans).

Submit plans as stated in Section 10.1 -

10.7 of the SOW.

0049 IRC RFP

Will the Government please allow two business days after the release of RFI responses for offerors to submit any additional RFI that may occur as a result of the Government’s responses?

The Government does not intend to receive additional questions or clarifications from industry after the Government responses are provided.

0050 IRC RFP

As the Government is currently in Federal year end, we’d like to allow Government contracting personnel as much time as possible to complete past performance questionnaires and return them in compliance with solicitation requirements. A number of our unanswered questions will impact the performance chosen for and the completion of past performance questionnaires. If answers to questions are provided within 14 days preceding the proposal due date (July 18th or after), will the Government extend the due date for proposals?

Proposals are due no later than 4 September 2024

0051 DPW RFP What is the expected size of task orders to be issued under this

JOC?

The Government cannot provide future anticipated work. The minimum amount of work will not be less than $2,000, and will not be more than $18M per year of the contract.

0052 DPW RFP How many task orders are anticipated per year? The government cannot provide future anticipated work. The minimum amount of work will not be less than $2,000, and will not be more than $18M per year of the contract.

0053 DPW RFP Do submitted projects need to be 100% complete? Yes. All work began by the contractor must be completed by the contractor.

The contractor is required to follow the requirements specified in the contract.

0054 IRC

RFP Page 9; RFP Page 13: The table on the top of page 9 of 65 states that the page limit for Volume III is “10 per reference”. Item c.(5) on page 13 of 65 states that the Specific Relevant Contracts Format (Attachment 3) is limited to four (4) pages per reference.

Page 9 states that 10 pages are allotted per reference; Page 13 states that Attachment 3 is limited to "4 pages per reference".

Please clarify.

RFP, Section L will be updated to reflect 10 pages per reference for Specific Relevant Contracts in an upcoming solicitation amendment. 0003

0055 IRC

RFP Pg. 11 and 12 On pg. 11 and 12 of the RFP - directly after Subfactor (3) Bonding Capacity - the text reads, "The Government considers the following key positions to be the absolute minimum acceptable level of management staffing requirements" and lists several positions (PM, Superintendent, etc.). Are these paragraphs part of Subfactor 2?

The bottom of RFP pg. 11 shall be updated in an upcoming solicitation amendment. 0003

0056 IRC RFP Pg. 11 The two paragraphs on pg. 11 after Subfactor (3) Bonding Capacity that refer to the QCP, a different topic. Is this material required and, if so, is it part of a specific subfactor?

The bottom of RFP pg. 11 shall be updated in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0057 IRC RFP page 11 At the bottom of page 11 there are instructions regarding teaming agreements, with the statement "… the Contracting Officer will validate the eligibility of those arrangements as part of this sub-

The bottom of RFP pg. 11 shall be updated in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0058 IRC

RFP Section L; RFP Section M Section L refers to Volumes (Volume I – General, Volume II- Technical Acceptability, Volume III – Past Performance, Volume IV – Price). Section M refers to factors (Factor 1: Technical Acceptability: Subfactor (1): Mission Capability, Subfactor (2):

Proposed Staffing, Subfactor (3): Bonding Capacity, Factor 2: Past Performance and Factor 3:

Price). Please clarify whether we are using "Volume" or "Factor/Subfactor" for each section.

For Proposal Submission Instructions to Offerors (Section L), Volumes I-IV refers to the organization of information that Offerors submit in their proposal.

For Basis for Contract Award (Section M), the Factors and Sub-Factors is how the proposal will be evaluated.

0059 DPW SOW page 17 The RFP states minimum Key Personnel are: "Project Manager, Site Superintendent, Quality Control Manager Safety Manager." The SOW lists only two positions: "Key personnel include the Program Manager and Quality Control Manager (QCM)." Please clarify the exact positions that are required with our submittal.

The minimum requirement is to have a designated QCM, Site Superintendent, Safety Manager, and a Program Manager"

0060 DPW

SOW 8.1 Key Personnel The SOW and RFP list different requirements for the Site Superintendent and QCM. For example, in the SOW, the Site Superintendent has same requirements as a PM. In Section L of the RFP, however, the Site Superintendent's and PM's requirements are different. Please confirm the specific requirements for each of the Key Personnel.

The QC Manager must possess a minimum of 5 years construction experience. See SOW 8.3 Personnel Qualifications.

The Site Superintendent must possess a minimum of 5 years construction experience The Program Manager shall possess at least a Bachelor's degree in engineering, architecture, or construction management, with a minimum of 10 years experience in the construction field, with at least five (5) of those 10 years of experience in construction

0061 DPW SOW 8.1 Key Personnel Are Resumes required for each key Personnel or do we just show these individuals in the Org Chart and Staffing Plan?

Resumes are required for each key personnel. Refer to SOW. 8.1 Key Personnel.

0062 DPW

SOW 8.2 On-site Staff: The SOW uses the term "PM or designated Site Superintendent".

We understand the requirement to have an on-site supervisor each day.

Is it the government's intent that this individual can be either a PM or a Site Superintendent?

The Site Superintendent and PM are different positions. Verbiage will be updated in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0063 IRC

RFP Attachment 4:Past Performance Questionnaire; RFP Volume III Past Performance;

Proposal Submission Instructions to Offerors (Section L) paragraph i., (5).

Will CPARS be evaluated in lieu of, or in addition to, Past Performance Questionnaires? If CPARS are available are PPQ’s still required?

CPARS records will be evaluated whether PPQs are received or not. Past Performance Questionnaires that are received by the closing date of the solicitation will be evaluated as part of the proposal.

0064 DPW Chillers to be purchased per the CIR (Category Intelligence Report), and to be name brand (proprietary). Please provide a copy of the CIR for our review during the proposal preparation process so that Offeror can determine what impact this might have on the UPB pricing?

Any specific proprietary items will be addressed at the Task Order level

0065 DPW

SOW 5.1 Responsiveness The Contractor shall perform a site visit with the COR. The contractor shall review the construction requirements and discuss problems, unclear items, access, etc. The COR will draft a memo outlining all of what was discussed at the Site Visit, and send it to the Contractor. The Contractor is to then respond to this memo. The site visit memo will be submitted with the Contractors Proposal.

Question: Please clarify the process:

1. Site visit with Contractor and COR – any issues, unclear items, corrections to scope will be discussed and then documented by the COR in a Site Visit Memo. This memo is sent to the Contractor for review.

2. Contractor is to then respond to the COR Site Visit Memo and either agree or make corrections?

3. The Contractors version of the Site Visit Memo gets submitted with the Contractors proposal, or the COR version?

4. At no point is the actual RTOP revised and re-issued by MICC?

There will not be a memo issued to the contractor by the COR. Disregard this requirement.

0066 DPW

How is the Contractor to apply an appropriate value to protecting and moving Government property when the JOC will include a wide range of task orders? For example, an office remodel would potentially have a lot of furniture and related to pack, move, store, move back and set up. A site work job would not. It doesn’t seem feasible to assign an arbitrary co efficient value to ALL awarded task orders, when it will vary widely based upon the individual scope of work? How is the Contractor to price this? Will it be handled via the RTOP and the Proposal process on an individual basis?

Any specific requirements for providing Moving Services will be addressed at the Task Order Level. The Government cannot specify how the contractor is to develop their own coefficients. The development of the coefficients is the responsibility of the contractor.

0067 IRC Attachment 5 Attachment 5 – Coefficient – Normal and Attachment 6 Coefficient

– Other Than Normal. Cell D66 is expressed as representing “UPB Estimate (Trades / VUPB)” : should there be a formula in this cell that divides Cell D62 Dollars left for Trades / Cell D64 VUPB?

Attachment 5 and Attachment 6 have been updated to include the UPB estimate calculation and.

Updated attachments will be included in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0068 IRC

Please clarify what the co-efficient on the NPP worksheet is intended to cover? All other programs with NPP provisions have used a simple % adder for NPP items. That is due to the fact that the cost cannot be expressed properly within the UPB, therefore it is a quote from a subcontractor / supplier. That quote is then “marked up” a certain percentage by the Contractor. Please explain the reference to “Materials and Labor” on rows 7 and 8 from Attachment 7? How can we estimate a quantity or amount on an unknown item at this proposal stage? What is the formula entered in cell D32 trying to produce? It is pointing at two cells that would otherwise always be empty? Please explain the methodology for filling out the Attachment 7 and the resulting CLIN 0004?

Attachment 7 has been updated to include a CCC/VUPB. The updated Attachment 7 will be included in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0069 DPW

SOW Key Personnel; RFP pgs. 11, 12, and 17 Please clarify as page 18 of the SOW has differing qualification requirements for the PM’s qualifications/experience: “The PM shall have at least five (5) years of experience in the PM position for a Task Order contract, Job Order Contract (JOC), or a Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirements (SABER) contract. The PM shall also have at least five (5) years of experience as a task manager for a Task Order contract, Job Order Contract (JOC), or a SABER contract in vertical and horizontal construction. The PM shall have a minimum education of a four (4) year engineering degree in mechanical, civil, electrical, engineering, or architectural engineering and shall be proficient in CADD.” ***And this continues on to differ from page 12 of the RFP’s for other key positions’ qualifications. Please clarify key personnel

The QC Manager must possess a minimum of 5 years construction experience The Site Superintendent must possess a minimum of 5 years construction experience The Program Manager shall possess at least a Bachelor's degree in engineering, architecture, or construction management, with a minimum of 10 years experience in the construction field, with at least five (5) of those 10 years of experience in construction

0070 IRC

RFP Volume III Past Performance. Vol III Past Performance – Page 6 of the RFP states “In accordance with FAR 36.204 and DFARS 236.204 the anticipated magnitude of this project is approximately between $75,000,000 and $100,000,000.” What is the magnitude range for individual past performance projects for Vol III submission? Under Vol II Subfactor

(4) (3) Bonding Capacity, the Offeror must demonstrate bonding of $5M per task order. What is the task order magnitude range for Past Performance?

There is not a required magnitude range for previous, individual Past Performance projects.

0071 IRC

RFP Page 9; RFP Page 13: The table on the top of page 9 of 65 states that the page limit for Volume III is “10 per reference”. Item c.(5) on page 13 of 65 states that the Specific Relevant Contracts Format (Attachment 3) is limited to four (4) pages per reference.

Vol III Past Performance – Page 9 of the RFP states page limit of 10 pages per reference BUT page 13 of the RFP states (Attachment 3):

page limit of 4 pages per reference? Please clarify the page limit for Past Performance?

RFP Section L will be updated to reflect 10 pages per reference for Specific Relevant Contracts in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0072 IRC

Attachment 4 Vol III Past Performance – Attachment 4’s first page is correctly identified as “Attachment 4” whereas all remaining pages of Attachment 4 are mis-identified as “Attachment 3”. Please clarify / correct?

Attachment 4 Header on each page will be corrected to reflect Attachment 4 in an upcoming solicitation amendment

0073 IRC

RFP Volume III Past Performance. Vol III Past Performance – As many Agencies will no longer complete Past Performance Questionnaires due to the requirement for CPARS completion, may a completed CPARS be included with the Offeror’s proposal, along with Page 2 / Section 1 of Attachment 4 in lieu of?

Offerors should not assume a CPARS record exists for each contract of their contracts. Offerors are not required to forward a copy of Attachment 4 (Past Performance Questionnaire) in which they do not want considered during the proposal evaluation. Past Performance Questionnaires that are received by the closing date of the solicitation will be evaluated as part of the proposal. Refer to RFP Section L, c.

Technical Acceptability 'Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment

4) for specifics.

0074 DPW Will the Contractor be able to bill the Government for properly documented stored materials? For example, materials for a specific task order stored on the post awaiting installation?

The contractor is required to follow the requirements specified in the contract.

The requirement will be determined at the time the issuance of a TO.

0075 IRC

Extension of Moratorium on 8(a) Eligibility Requirement for Small Disadvantaged Businesses

Does the limit of 8a firms to the SBA Santa Ana, CA region still apply given the SBA extended the Bona Fide Place of Business Moratorium? Or does the geographic restriction apply? Please review and advise if 8a firms who meet the parameters outlined in the Instructions to Bidders and Award criteria are eligible to submit an offer under the SBA Moratorium or if the geographic restriction

8a firms are not limited to the SBA Santa Ana region. 8a Offerors who meet the parameters outlined in RFP, Section L, Instructions to Bidders and Award criteria outlined in the solicitation are eligible to submit a proposal.

0076 IRC

1) FAR 52.216-19 Order Limitations (OCT 1995), (b) Maximum order. The Contractor is not obligated to honor – (2) Any order for a combination of items in excess of $90,000,000; or..." PEC notes that the amount referenced above conflicts with the bonding requirements outlined in Section 00 21 13 - Instructions to Bidders, C. Proposal Preparation Instructions, 3. Proposal Content,

b. Volume II – Technical Acceptability, (4) Subfactor (3) Bonding Capacity line 6, "“The offeror shall submit information showing minimum available bonding capacity of $30M aggregate per year with verification form the Securities or Boding Company (to be complete by the Securities or Bonding and s bmitted b the Offeror”

Is the amount referenced in (b)(2) of the FAR a typo; should it be revised? the current FAR clause cap of $90M exceeds the yearly bonding aggregate amount of $30M proposed for the contract. And if an 8a small business concern were to complete $90M in Task Order projects in a three-year period and have three-year revenues outside of $45M it would cause them to graduate from both the 8a program and small business size standards. Please review and advise if the contractor is able to decline Task Orders in a combined aggregate in excess of $30M per the yearly bonding requirements.

Refer to updated Clause 52.216-19 for further specifics in an upcoming solicitation amendment.

0077 IRC

SAM.gov Representations and Certifications Please clarify the required format of the representations and certifications, do they need to be in an outline format, or must proof that they are up to date in SAM.gov be shown? If they are to be in outline format, will an outline be provided since there is none in the current solicitation documents?

Refer to FAR Clause 52.219-28 for specifics.

0078 IRC

Section 00 21 13 - Instructions to Bidders, C.

Proposal Preparation Instructions, 3.

Proposal Content d. Volume IV—Price, iii.

Submission Requirements, (3) Development of Coefficients, paragraph 3

Instructs the KTR to provide a correlating narrative explaining their coefficient rationales--is there a Standard Form or format available for use to provide the requested information? If so, please provide.

There is not a standard form or format for use. The narrative explaining the coefficient rationales are up to the Offeror.

Section 00 21 13 - Instructions to Bidders will be re- named to 'A. Proposal Submission Instructions to Offerors (Section L)'

0079 DPW

SOW Page 17 section 8.1.2 Key Personnel: states 'QCM and section 8.2 Project manager or designated site superintendent shall be onsite daily. ' Solicitation Page 11: 'absolute minimum acceptable level of management staffing requirements: Project Manager, Site Superintendent, Quality Control Manager and Safety Manager.' Solicitation Page 12: 'Safety Manager: This individual will onsite visiting project sites and will be responsible for safety compliance. This individual shall have authority to act for the Contractor in all safety matters.

The Safety Manager shall have an Associates or Bachelor’s degree and five years of experience;

or ten years of experience as a safety and health professional in the construction industry.'

Confirm what are the onsite staffing requirements. The minimum requirement is to have a designated QCM, Site Superintendent, Safety Manager, and a Program Manager.

0080 DPW SOW Paragraph 8.3

Will the Government accept a Site Superintendent to also act as Safety Manager for individual task orders?

The minimum requirement is to have a designated QCM, Site Superintendent, Safety Manager, and a Program Manager.

0081 DPW

Standard Form 1442, BOX 10: “ Work is to be performed in accordance with (IAW) the Statement of Work (SOW), titled Ft. Irwin Job Order Contract (JOC) Statement of Work (SOW)_30MAY24”. Document (Fort+Irwin+Job+Order+Contract+Solicitation_9J UL2024) states “The Government has determined that adequate construction work experience is expertise in all four disciplines (mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and civil), and show current license/certification in their respective areas of expertise (whether it be mechanical, electrical, plumbing or civil).”

However, Document (Ft.+Irwin+Job+Order+Contract+(JOC)+Statement +of+Work+(SOW)_30 MAY24) States “The minimum experience for the Contractor’s QC Manager without an engineering degree is five

(5) years of experience in the construction industry and five (5) years as a QCM.”

Please confirm that the QC Manager is not required to have a license or certificate in (mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and civil) and having five (5) years of experience in the construction industry and five (5) years as a QCM meets the requirements to be a QCM for this project.

The QC Manager must possess a minimum of 5 years construction experience. See SOW 8.3 Personnel Qualifications.

The certification requirement is in reference to UFGS 01 45 00, paragraph

1.6.2.3 "Construction Quality Management Training" which states the following: "the QC Manager and all members of the QC team must have completed the CQM for Contractors course. If the QC Manager does not have a current certification, obtain the CQM for Contractors course certification within 90 days of award. This course is periodically offered by the Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command and the Army Corps of Engineers."

0082 IRC

Solicitation/Statement of Work There is conflicting information between the Scope of Work and Solicitation. Pleas confirm which document takes presidents

The question did not cite a specific instance for the Government to address.

Offerors are to submit proposals based upon information found within the RFP.

The Statement of Work is part of the RFP.

0083 DPW Attachment 5 In attachment 5 Coefficient document it states “Sealing, windows, and openings with plastic to contain construction dust and debris within the work area” Please confirm this does not cover painting or coating.

The Government cannot specify how the contractor is to develop their coefficients. It is the responsibility of the contractor to develop their own coefficients

084 IRC

RFP Volume I, Pg. 10 (3) Section 002113 (Representations & Certifications): The Offeror shall ensure that Section 002113 is submitted thoroughly completed with all blocks in each certification/representation completed truthfully and

This section will be removed from the solicitation. A separate section for reps and certs is not required.

085 IRC Section 002113 (Representations & Certifications) p. 7, p. 10

Section 002113 (Representations & Certifications) is not included with the RFP, despite several instructions that refer to it:

Page 7 of 65 says:

B. General Instructions - This procurement is being conducted under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 15, Contracting by Negotiations. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria under Section 002113, “Evaluation Factors for Award.”

Page 10 of 65 that say:

(3) Section 002113 (Representations & Certifications): The Offeror shall ensure that Section 002113 is submitted thoroughly completed with all blocks in each certification/representation completed truthfully and completely.

Also, on Page 10:

ii. The Technical Acceptability Volume shall, at a minimum, be prepared in a form consistent…