SB Energy MATOC.12-R-0023.RFIs Set 3.pdf

W912BV-12-R-0023, RFIs 20-32

Department of the Army Tulsa District, Corps of Engineers

SB IDIQ MATOC for Construction of Renewable

Energy, Energy Conservation & Mechanical/Electrical Projects in the SW Division of the USACE

(“SB Energy MATOC”)

SEED TO: Repair Three Flood Control Pumps at Caney Levee Pump Station on the KS Side of Copan Lake and

Install Digital Gauges on Low Flow Valves At Hulah Lake Dam, OK

Solicitation (RFI) #: W912BV-12-R-0023

Answers to RFIs Set 3

RFI 21: Just another thought to consider, the period of performance of 75 days is very, very short considering the following issues: (a) There will have to be 4 mobilization and demobilizations since only one pump can be remove at a time; (b) Heavy cranes are not always available when demanded which can cause delays; (c) Each pump will have to be transferred to a repair facility and parts will need to be ordered and the required replacement parts may be difficult to find causing delays; (d) The penalty of $1000 per day after the 75 days is pretty steep and if delays are encountered, the contractor could lose money on the project; (e) Bad weather may cause delays in getting a crane to the facility to remove or replace a pump; and (d) I know that time is critical to have all pumps repaired and replaced, but please reconsider the period of performance being extended beyond the 75 day limit.

ANSWER: The Government agrees that the performance period of 75 days should be extended as follows: 130 calendar days (30 calendar days per pump). Just as a reminder—if after award (during the 75 day performance period) other issues surface that would require extensions on the schedule, then the Contractor will work directly with the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) in the field to make necessary adjustments to the performance period. But for purposes of preparing the proposal for the Seed Task Order, Offerors should use the Period of Performance of 130 calendar days (30 calendar days per pump).

RFI 22: Once page per resumes limits our ability to demonstrate key personnel experience.

Would the government allow 2 pages per resume?

ANSWER: Limit is raised to 2 pages per resume.

RFI 23: In Revised Section 00 22 11 dated 4/9/2012, 5.1, Volume 1, Tab A: Factor 1, Sub- Factor 1 – Relevant Specialized Experience, 5.1.1.2, is this paragraph intended to read “…. Role they will play in the SDVOSB Energy SATOC and the percentage of work they will perform.”

ANSWER: You are correct. I will make the correction.

RFI 24: In Revised Section 00 22 11 dated 4/9/2012, 5.2, Volume 1, Tab B: Factor 1, Sub- Factor 2 – Management Effectiveness, 5.2.1.5 “Describe your plan and capability to respond to the Government’s ….” meant to repeat the section number again, 5.2.1.5 “Describe your plan for managing subcontractor performance, acquisition, execution and administration”.

ANSWER: You are correct. I will make the correction.

RFI 25: Where in the proposal shall the Organizational Conflicts of Interest be submitted?

ANSWER: Place it under Factor 1, Sub-factor 2, Management Effectiveness.

RFI 26: If our firm is performing as the constructor with in-house engineering for designers of record, are we to submit additional projects according to “Section 5.1.1.5 Because the task orders may be design/build project, the Prime/Offeror shall submit up to three (3) ‘Experience Information” forms for the Designer member of their team.” Or will the 5 projects we are submitting to demonstrate our design and construction experience (all in one project) suffice?

ANSWER: You do not have to submit additional projects for your engineering if it will take place in-house. Including the design work and construction work in one project form will suffice.

RFI 27: Section 3.3.1 states “All pages shall be numbered”. 1. Does this include all pages of the price proposal? A bid bond is on a sealed document. Is the intent that the bid bond have page numbers?

ANSWER: Bid bond does not need page numbers.

RFI 28: Section 5.6.2.1 Proposed Contract Duration states “During the subsequent comparison between proposals, differences between proposed contract durations of at least three weeks (differences of 21 calendar days between proposals) will be considered an advantage to the Government, with greater differences also considered, accordingly.” Section 5.6.2.2 Summary Schedule states “The length of the schedule must match the proposed contract duration. If it shorter than the proposed contract duration, it offers no advantage to the Government because it is non-binding, only representing a preliminary planned schedule. A schedule shorter than the proposed contract durations may indicate the Offeror is placing additional risk on the Government for any delays between the scheduled completion and date and the required contract completion period.” It is unclear if the government is requesting a shortened duration. Please clarify.

ANSWER: The Offeror has two options for proposing contract duration and preparation of the Summary Schedule: (1) Use the Government’s number of calendar days for completion as set forth in Section 00 77 33 00, Clause 52.211-10 of the Specs/SOW for Seed TO and create a schedule that matches that time frame (i.e. 60 calendar days for Base Bid, Council Grove Lake, KS & John Redmond Lake, KS; and 30 additional calendar days for Option 1, Canton Lake, OK; or, (2) Propose a shorter contract duration that will become the contractually binding completion period at award and then create a schedule that matches that shorter time frame.

RFI 29: Will the design and construction NTPs be provided separately?

ANSWER: With regard to the Seed TO, there will only be one NTP because no design work is required. If a task order requires design work and construction, then two NTPs can be issued. The decision is made by the COR and ACO.

RFI 30: The project duration of 75 days will be fairly tough to achieve if this time includes ordering of long lead items and complying with all of the submittal requirements and approvals in the RFP. SD-03 requires submittal of the manufacturer’s catalog data four weeks prior to the purchase or installation of a component. There are two valves and parts may not be able to ordered until after inspection, which means at least 2 months will have passed before even ordering parts. Please clarify: Is the 75-day duration intended for on-site days only? If not, will the NTP be issued after arrival of the key parts that are ordered?

ANSWER: NTP will be issued after the bonds are received. The Government has extended the period of performance (see answer to RFI 21 above). The Contractor will work with the COR and ACO in regard to performance period after award of the task order. Adjustments will be made if necessary.

RFI 31: Is it the intent that the pages be numbered continuous tab-to-tab or start at page “1” behind each new tab?

ANSWER: Please feel free to number the pages as you see fit; just ensure that the “flow” of the proposal is easy to follow and that the required information is behind the specified tab so it is easy to find.

RFI 32: For the Past Performance Questionnaire, is only one project example required from the contractor and then the client provides their evaluation of the contractor's performance?

ANSWER: The intent is that for every “Experience Information” form submitted by the Offeror in Factor 1, Sub-factor 1 for the Prime, JV Members, Sub-contractors and Designers that there be either a ACASS, CCASS or CPARS evaluation submitted or a Past Performance Questionnaire submitted by their customer/client in Factor 2.

Prepared by:

Pamela Moody Contract Specialist 918-669-7457 Pamela.s.moody@usace.army.mil Dated: 4/11/2012 mailto:Pamela.s.moody@usace.army.mil�