Amendment_2.pdf

MISSION & INSTALLATION CONTRACTING CMD

MAURICE L HUDSON, CPT, CCO

706-545-4943

MAURICE.L.HUDSON.MIL@MAIL.MIL

FT BENNING GA 31905

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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 (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The solicitation is amended as follow s:

a. Offerors are reminded of the requirement to acknow ledge receipt of this amendment w ith proposal submission.

b. The sign in sheet from the site visit held on October 16, 2012 is a separate attachment to this amendment.

c. This amendment is issued to answ er some of the industry's questions submitted to the contracting off ice.

d. The Record of Environmental Consideration (REC) is a separate attachment to this amendment.

e. Another amendment w ill be issued w ith the remainder of the questions, continue to monitor http://w w w .fedbizopps.gov and/or Army Single Face to Industry for updates.

f. Submission of proposals is extended from November 27, 2012 at 2:00 PM EST to December 11, 2012 at 2:00 PM EST.

See Page 2

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 6

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 14-Nov-2012

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W911SF-12-R-0020

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

30-Sep-2012

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer 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:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram 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 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 telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

14-Nov-2012

CODE

MISSION & INSTALLATION CONTRACTING CMD

MICC - FORT BENNING

6600 MELOY DRIVE

BUILDING 6, SUITE 250

FT BENNING GA 31905

W911SF 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE W911SF

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W911SF-12-R-0020

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

CONTINUATION OF MODIFICATION

1. How many contracts does the Government anticipate awarding?

ANSWER: There will be multiple contracts awarded under this solicitation.

2. Where do we go to get specification sections 1 thru 4?

ANSWER: Per the pre-solicitation issued 26 July 2012.

https://www.benning.army.mil/tenant/micc/CCT.html by clicking on W911SF-12-R-0020

3. On the first page of the Scope of Work, Line Item 4. Bid Documents, line 4.1 and 4.3 list

“Statement of Work” and “Specifications”. Is the “SEED Scope of Work” document the “Statement of Work”?

ANSWER: There are two Statement of Work within this requirement. Section C has the MATOC Statement of Work. Statement of Work for the SEED project is attachments R, Ra, Rb, Rc, Rd. For specifications, see question 2.

4. Reference paragraph H.11(d) , page 41. The paragraph states task order projects shall be non-complex, construction-oriented projects requiring minimal design. Paragraph C.1.1 on page 5 indicates work under the contract may include incidental design services. This implies that the design effort under the MATOC is not a significant aspect of the proposed contract. Request clarification and a “ball-park” estimate of the amount of work the Government anticipates will require design effort?

ANSWER: Task Orders issued from the MATOC will state the Government’s requirement for any design efforts.

5. Reference RFP paragraph L.3.c., page 84. The chart indicates “2” original hard copies are required for each of the volumes listed. Does the Government want both copies identified as “original?”

ANSWER: Yes

6. Reference RFP paragraph L.3.c., page 84. This is a 2-part RFI: (1) The chart indicates

Volume II, Experience, is to be combined with Volume II, Technical Proposal, and cites the requirement for 4 CDs of each. When combined, the total number of CDs required, per the chart, totals “20” versus “16.” Please clarify this requirement.

ANSWER: 16 total. Volume II requires a combined total of 4 copies for technical and experience.

https://www.benning.army.mil/tenant/micc/CCT.html

7. The chart in paragraph L-4.c., on page 85, indicates a 30 page limit on Volume II - Technical Proposal and a 30 page limit on the Volume II – Experience for a total of 60 pages for the two volumes combined. The asterisk following the chart in paragraph L.3.c., page 84, indicates Volume II –Technical Proposal is to be combined with Volume II – Experience. Please clarify that the allowance is 30 pages for Volume II – Technical Proposal and 30 pages for Volume II – Experience.

ANSWER: 30 Pages for technical and 30 pages for experience.

8. Please clarify that page 44 in the RFP was intentionally left blank.

ANSWER: Page 44 of the latest posted solicitation shows page 44 is section I contract clauses. Page 63 is blank on the current posting which is a system error and will be corrected when the contract is awarded.

9. Reference paragraph M.1., Basis for Contract Award and Evaluation Criteria, page 91.

Paragraph language indicates “award will be made to multiple offers who are deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposals conformsto the solicitation requirements, and whose proposals, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation, represents the Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable (LPTA) offer.” It is understood that LPTA will be used to award the first contract on the basis of the lowest priced technically acceptable offer for the seed project. Because there is only one lowest priced technically acceptable offer, please clarify the process/methodology the Government will use to determine the award of subsequent multiple contracts.

ANSWER: All subsequent awards will also use LPTA.

10. Reference paragraph C.57.1.1, Specific Requirements for Design-Build Task Orders. The

4th, 5th, and 6th sentences in this paragraph are incomplete as now reads, “May need a requirement for registration of designers (incomplete). Architects or engineers registered to practice in the particular professional field involved in a State or shall prepare or review and approve the design of architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, civil or other engineering features of the work (incomplete). Not stamped drawing by A&Es (incomplete). Please clarify the intent of these sentences.

ANSWER: If a Task Order requires Design-build, the design-build does not have to be signed off by Architect-Engineer (A&E) “Not stamped drawing by A&Es”

11. Reference Section M, paragraph M.3.(a)(3), MATOC Design-Build. In order to be considered acceptable, the offeror must thoroughly demonstrate their design-build capabilities by providing written evidence of the job qualifications and experience of their A/E design personnel proposed for the contract. Please elaborate/clarify the level and/or magnitude of design effort the Government anticipates under the contract since this may impact the level of detail provided in the proposal response.

ANSWER: Page 92, M.3.(3) Subfactor 3 – MATOC Design-Build. In order to be considered acceptable, the offeror must thoroughly demonstrate their design-build capabilities by providing written evidence of the job qualifications and experience of their architectural/engineering design personnel proposed for this Contract.

12. Volume III Past Performance Proposal – Evaluation Factor on page 89 of Solicitation list the different evaluation programs that can be used by the government for evaluation purposes. Can we submit the CCASS evaluations we have already received in lieu of the PPQs for those projects.

ANSWER: NO. PPQ’s should be submitted.

13. Reference solicitation page 88, paragraph c.(2)(c). At the end of this paragraph it says, “Offeror is to identify critical projects to be evaluated separately.” Can you please clarify what is meant by “to be evaluated separately”?

ANSWER: Those projects listed as critical and/or high-visibility projects within compressed timelines on the Experience Overview Sheet will be evaluated separately.

This will demonstrate the vendor’s ability to meet high-visibility or compressed timelines.

14. Reference Attachment_R Seed Project SOW.pdf, page 2 of 21, paragraph 5. This paragraph requires us to submit to the A/E an itemized list of material and labor cost, within 48 hours of the proposal due date/time, for review prior to award of the contract.

Paragraph 2 in the same reference says that the drawing and specs were prepared by the Fort Benning DPW. Are we required to submit the information to DPW within 48 hours of the proposal date/time?

ANSWER: An itemized list of material and labor cost will be submitted by the successful contractor within 48-hours prior to award.

15. In regards to the Seed Scope of Work, page 3, paragraph 6 “Coordination with Other

Contractors”: Please clarify if items B, C, and D are included in the scope of work for the Seed project.

ANSWER: Other contracts and work is subject to be performed at the same time as this contract and the contractor shall cooperate with all parties involved.

16. We are requesting clarification on whether the offeror would be allowed to submit a final CCASS evaluation of past performance in lieu of a completed PPQ as requested in Part D. VOLUME III – “Past Performance Proposal”, Section (3) “Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)”.

ANSWER: PPQ should be submitted.

17. For this IDIQ, will there be multiple pools for SDVOSB, 8a, Hubzone, etc. or just one pool with a mixture of these types of small businesses?

ANSWER: We cannot determine who will get the award until the proposal’s are received.

18. We have been unable to retrieve specifications from your website. When will the website be available for access?

ANSWER: The website is available.

19. Is this MATOC for a “Total Small Business” company, or is it classified further as a “Small Business with a set aside category of: 8(a), HUBZone, Woman-Owned, or Service Disabled Veteran Owned”?”

ANSWER: This acquisition is set-aside for small business, consideration for award will only be for small businesses that are: 8(a), HUBZone, Woman-Owned or Service Disabled Veteran Owned, as described in the Federal Acquisition Regulations Part 19, or as determined by the Small Business Administration.

20. I would like to seek out clarification regarding item 1.1.1 on page 5 of the referenced solicitation. It includes a statement that reads, “The Contractor shall have an office located within 150 mile radius to Fort Benning, Georgia.”.

ANSWER: After the MATOC is awarded, upon issuance of a Request for Task Order Response (RTORs) the contractor shall have an office located within 150 mile radius to Fort Benning, Georgia; this could be a job trailer located at the site.

21. Can the radius be extended to 200 miles considering some Places of Performance are on the Florida Panhandle?

Answer: No

22. On 10/02/12 an RFI was sent requesting the specifications for the seed project. A new notice was setup on FBO.gov yesterday, but there is still no specfication. Is this correct?

Answer: see question 2

23. Upon opening “Attachment U” (Past Performance Questionnaire), I noticed that in the bottom right corner of the footnote it is marked “Attachment D”. I would just like to clarify that it is in fact “Attachment U” and perhaps the “D” is a misprint.

Answer: Past Performance Questionnaire is and should read “Attachment U.”

24. Is it acceptable for our PPQ responders’ to e-mail attachment ‘U’ to you?

Answer: No, see amendment 1 for PPQs submission.

25. Federal Construction Group Inc. has been tracking this opportunity. It was our understanding that the RFP would be released the 30th of September so we wanted to inquire what the estimated release date is at this point?

Answer: The Government issued the solicitation on 30 September 2012.

26. How many IDIQ Contracts does the government anticipate awarding?

Answer: The Government intends to make multiple awards as result of this solicitation.

27. Volume II- Experience- Evaluation Factor 2- This section has a page limit of 30 Pages.

The only form mentioned within this section is Attachment T, which is a one page chart of the 10 projects. Does this section also include a detailed description of each of the ten projects? If so, what information is required within the project write-up (i.e. Contract Number, Relevancy to SOW, etc.). Will a project format be provided for this information?

Answer: Refer to 88, c. VOLUME II – Experience – Evaluation Factor 2.

28. Do you know when the correct documents will be uploaded?

Answer: See question 2, correct documents are uploaded.

29. In regards to past performance projects, what types of training facilities are you looking for?

Answer: Describe your past performance on programs or projects similar in nature, work (design-build/design bid-build) size, magnitude, complexity and scope to the work described in this solicitation.

30. The RFP says AutoCAD or Microstation. Do you foresee the use of Microstation?

Answer: Each Task Orders will identify the Governments requirement.