RFIs -POSTING_20231208.pdf

W912PF24R0003

DMC Construction MATOC

RFI Responses

Date Received RFI Question RFI Response Date Posted Action Results in Amendment

28‐Nov‐23

Can a USA‐based company with SOA certification participate in this solicitation? The company does not have:

1) L.5.2 Documento Unico di Regolarita’ Contributiva (DURC)

2) L.5.3 Certificate of Chamber of Commerce

3) L.5.4 Anti‐Mafia / White List

Can we submit USA‐equivalent documents? Documents outlined in Section L must be provided as requested. No substitutions. 8‐Dec‐23 NO

29‐Nov‐23

Reference to page: 41 of Solicitation: L.3 Proposal Submission

It is not clear if offerors must submit their proposal whether through PIEE/standard email transmission or other government utilization of DoD SAFE. Please clarify.

L.3.1 states Proposals shall be submitted via E‐Mail using the subject line W58D2M‐24‐R‐0003 “MATOC”.

Directions for multiple emails are provided. 8‐Dec‐23 NO

30‐Nov‐23

This RFI is intended to request an extension to the proposal submission due date as of

04JAN2024.

As you are aware the period of the proposal due date falls under Christmas Holidays and Company closures (from Monday 25DEC2023 through 5JAN2024).

This leads to the unavailability to obtain timely offers from subcontractors and to develop a clear and strong technical proposal.

Please postpone the proposal delivery due date to at least Friday 19JAN2024. At this time the government does not intend to alter any due dates 8‐Dec‐23 NO

30‐Nov‐23

Volume I ‐ Factor I – Capability ‐ Sub‐Factor One: Organizational Structure for subject solicitation.

Reference page: 42 of Solicitation:

L.4.1.1 Sub‐Factor One: Organizational Structure Should we include Resumes and Certificates of the appointed team? If yes, are resumes and Certificates excluded from page count? L.4.1.1 Does not request or require Certificates or Resumes. No page count change is required 8‐Dec‐23 NO

30‐Nov‐23

Is there an Attachment/Standard Form/Project Info Sheet to fill out the requested project information for each completed project submitted as experience?

Should we include CPARS Evaluations as well? If yes, are CPARS evaluations excluded from the page limit?

No standard form or info sheet is provided with the solicitation to support the experience Factor. CPARS should not be included. Section M.3.3.1 affords the government to the right to utilize past performance data, such as CPARS. 8‐Dec‐23 NO

7‐Dec‐23

1)VOL III – Price & Contract Documents Para. L.2.1. & L.5.1.1.

Para L.2.1. specifies a 25 page limit for this Volume which also includes Contract Documents (SF1442, DURC, CCIAA, Anit‐Mafia, Section A through K, etc) Para L.5.1.1. Last sentence states….. All documents subject to submission under L.5.1.1. are excluded for the from the page limitations…. meaning all Contract Docs.

a)Please clarify if Contract docs are included or not within Page Limita ons. Bear in mind that contract docs are quite consistent and may vary by issuance of Amend.s, CCIAA page numbers, etc. so I would suggest no page limitations for Volume III;

b)Seed project is within Vol III? If so… does it have page limita ons?

A number error occurred in the format, an amendment will correct this oversight ‐ all documents submitted in Sections L.5, are excluded from the page limitations. b) it is the intent that all documents regarding the seed projects are submitted in Vol III, the page limit remains 25 pages. 8‐Dec‐23 YES

7‐Dec‐23 DURC, CCIAA, White List are obviously certificates issued in Italian.. do you need a brief translation or they may be submitted in Italian?´ Translation not required for these documents. 8‐Dec‐23 YES

7‐Dec‐23 3)L.5.1.2. Unique En ty ID, NCAGE, SAM… do you need a proof of these registra ons?

Prior to any bid/proposal opening or review, the government will validate SAM registration, so proof is not required within the proposal. 8‐Dec‐23 NO

7‐Dec‐23

4)L.4.4. Price breakdown shall address at least the following items:

a)Since we have a Low Price Technically Acceptable evalua on and to have an overall fair comparison between Offerors it would perhaps be reasonable to have the same line items vs. at least following items

The Governments intent is to allow the vendors the flexibility to price the seed project based on each vendors unique proposed solution. The Government does not want to limit the vendors ability to provide unique solutions by providing specific line items. 8‐Dec‐23 NO