RFIs Set 1.pdf

W912BV‐12‐R‐0024, DRAFT RFIs 1‐18

Department of the Army Tulsa District, Corps of Engineers

USACE Tulsa District EDWOSB IDIQ MATOCs for General & Specialized Construction Related Services

SEED TO: Skiatook Generator/Slide Repair & MCKARNS Slope Protection Repair

Solicitation (RFI) #: W912BV-12-R-0024

Answers to RFIs Set 1

RFI 1: On the Combined Synopsis description it states that Each Task Order will not exceed 4M and the total sums of all TOs will not exceed 16M. On page 11 of the solicitation is states that each TO not exceed 3 M and total sum of TOs not to exceed 49.5 M. On page 16 is states that each TO not to exceed 4m and total sum of TOs not to exceed 20M. The bonding calls for a single TO of 3M and aggregate of 10M. Is this correct, if the sum of the TOs are not to exceed 16M? [NOTE: This question was asked several times in different ways; only one response is being made.]

ANSWER: Management anticipates that these MATOCs will be used for smaller projects in order to not exceed the SBA mandated thresholds for EDWOSB. Therefore, individual task orders will not exceed $500K. The goal of the Government is to award five (5) MATOCs if possible. However, in order to have a pool we must award three (3).

The individual MATOC capacity (total of all task orders on that MATOC) must not exceed $4M according to the SBA. Therefore, if we award three (3) MATOCs the total capacity for the life of the MATOCs (3 years) would be $12M; four (4) MATOCs would be $16M and five (5) MATOCs would be $20M. All references to these thresholds have been changed in the solicitation.

RFI 2: On page 20 of the solicitation section 5.1.1.4 it states to provide a short description of proposed subcontractors in the MATOC and the % of work they will perform. Section 5.1.1.6 states to provide experience information on subcontractors listed. Is this referring to the subcontractors that will be used on the proposed SEED task order or subcontractors we will use over the life of the MATOC? If so, the percentage of work will be hard to calculate due to the unknown future projects?

ANSWER: Paragraphs 5.1.1.4 & 5.1.1.6 are in regard to Performance Capacity for the MATOC (Factor 1). IAW FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting, there is a minimum requirement for the Prime to perform 15% of the “cost of the contract” (i.e. 15% of $4M) and not just administrative work (i.e. Contract Management, Quality Control, etc.). In your narrative you need to describe what actual construction activities your company will perform for the MATOC. You can state it as simply as “We intend to self-perform x% of the (describe construction tasks here) work for this MATOC. We will team with the appropriate sub-contractors to perform other tasks we cannot self-perform.” If you have already identified some specific sub-contractors for activities such as HVAC, plumbing, etc. you can identify them and include their Information Sheets in order to supplement your proposal.

RFI 3: What is the deadline for submitting questions on this proposal?

ANSWER: 3:00 pm CST 6 July 2012.

RFI 4: Is it correct that offeror should submit one (1) written original and three (3) written copies of the Volume 1, Technical Proposal, as well as one (1) CD of the Volume 1, Technical Proposal? Is it correct that offerors should submit one (1) written original of Volume 2, Factor 4, Tab C, the Seed TO Price Proposal, as well as one (1) CD of the entire Volume 2, Price Proposal? Note that Form 1442, Section 13, Additional Solicitation requirements, specifies that an original and 5 copies of the proposal should be submitted?

ANSWER: Please provide the following: An original and 3 copies of Volume 1 and an original and one copy of Volume 2 as well as a CD of Volume 1 and a CD of Volume 2.

Form 1442, Section 13, will be corrected.

RFI 5: Can an acronym list be included and not counted in the page limits? Is the proposal cover sheet also not counted and should it be included in both volumes or just Volume 2? Can title sheets within a factor (organizing the material within) not be counted as a page? For example, project title sheets introducing CCASS or PPQ info by project in Factor 2, Past Performance?

ANSWER: An acronym list would be considered like a Index and would not be counted against the page count. The proposal cover sheet would not be counted against the page count and should be included only in Volume 2 as directed by Paragraph 4.0. Title sheets within Factors 1 and 3 (for the sub-factors) would not be counted against the page count.

There is no page limit for Factor 2.

RFI 6: In order to effectively demonstrate the breadth of construction-related services identified in Section 1.0 (Overview) of the solicitation, would you consider allowing us to include up to seven, rather than five, projects in Factor 1, Sub-factor 1 and Factor 2 (Past Performance)? We want to be able to show relevant experience across all these areas.

ANSWER: Please only provide five projects for Factor 1, Sub-factor 1 and Factor 2.

RFI 7: Is it required to show more than one resume for each of the following key personnel:

Construction Project Manager, On-Site Superintendent, and Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Manager? The plural was used in the solicitation when referring to them (see page 23, Section 5.3.1.1) but, for example in Section 3.4.2, regarding the CQC System Manager, the solicitation states: “The Contractor shall identify an individual within his organization at the site of the work who shall be responsible for overall management of CQC and have the authority to act in all CQC matters.”

ANSWER: Only one resume is required for each of the key personnel. But the offeror may provide as many as they want to.

RFI 8: Factor 3, Sub-Factor 2 requires the submittal of a Proposed Contract Durations/Summary Schedule that includes a Narrative with a Proposed Phasing Plan, a Proposed Crew Assembly and Work Schedule, and a Safety Plan for the Seed Task. This Narrative is limited to 5 pages.

We do not believe a complete Safety Plan that satisfies OSHA requirements and safeguards the safety and health of site workers can be prepared under such a page limitation. We respectfully request that the Safety Plan have no page limitation.

ANSWER: There is no requirement for you to provide a “complete Safety Plan” as you describe. You will be required to submit that after award of the Task Order. The information we are looking for in regard to your “Safety Plan” is very general (i.e.

activities you feel are important to address, some examples of how you handle safety issues such as inspections, equipment, etc.). Five (5) pages should be enough space to provide the requested narratives.

RFI 9: For logical flow of information, can we place the narratives in Volume 1, Factor 1, Sub-factors 1 and Sub-factor 4, before the forms included in this section? In other words, may we place the Factor 1, Sub-factor 1 narrative before the Experience Information forms and also place the Factor 1, Sub-factor 4 narrative before the OSHA 300 or 300a forms?

ANSWER: Yes, you may place your narratives for Sub-factors 1 and 4 in front of the forms.

RFI 10: Is the correct title for Volume 2, “Price Proposal”? In the RFP, sometimes Volume 2 is referred to as the “Price Proposal” and other times it is identified as “Seed Task Order Price Proposal.” Shouldn’t only Volume 2, Factor 4, Tab C, be identified as the “Seed Task Order Price Proposal”? For example, Section 8.0 (page 28), is titled “Factor 4 – Seed TO Price Proposal” but then contains instructions for all of the elements to be included within Volume 2.

Please clarify.

ANSWER: Please title Volume 1 “Technical Proposal” and Volume 2 “Price Proposal” on both the binders and your CD. There are several elements for Volume 2 including the actual “Bid Schedule” (i.e. Section 00 01 10 of the Seed Task Order Specs/SOW), so just please label each Tab as directed in the table in Paragraph 4.0 – Seed Task Order Price Proposal Contents and Related Evaluation Factors.

RFI 11: Can you confirm that there are there no page limits for the entire Volume 2 Price Proposal, not just Factor 4, the Seed Task Order Price Proposal (see Section 2.5.2, page 19 of the solicitation)?

ANSWER: No page limits on any part of Factor 4 or Volume 2.

RFI 12: For the Seed Task Order, does the Government have a preferred manufacturer for generators (Caterpillar, Cummins, Detroit, Generac, etc.)? Or any manufacturer’s that should not be considered?

ANSWER: There are times when the Government must have an item or service from a specific manufacturer or company. When that happens the Clause 52.211-6, Brand Name or Equal, will be included in the solicitation or RFP. Regarding the Seed Task Order, no specific or “preferred” manufacturer is required by the Government so please prepare your proposal using whatever manufacturer you believe will give the Government the best product and best value.

RFI 13: The advertising calls out for a submission date of July 16th @ 3:00pm. The solicitation document (Section 13) calls out for a submission date of July 13th @ 3:00pm. Pam Moody mentioned that the bid date would be moved to July 16th, Please clarify bid date/time.

ANSWER: Proposals are due on Monday, 16 July 2012 by 3:00 pm.

RFI 14: During the pre-proposal conference, Keith Rice mentioned that the different options carry different durations (not 30 calendar days). Specification Section 00 73 00, 52.211-10 states that each option will add “30 additional calendar days for each option”. Please clarify.

ANSWER: The Government must award the Base for the Seed Task Order, but will award only the options as funding is available (either at award or later). Clause 52.211- 10 in the solicitation is incorrect. The Government’s required Period of Performance (POP) is as follows:

Base: 78 Calendar days Option 1: 30 Calendar days Option 2: 45 Calendar days Option 3: 10 Calendar days Option 4: 30 Calendar days

Below chart shows what the total POP would be for the task order at task order award depending on which options are awarded:

Base Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 TOTAL POP X X X X X 193 calendar days X X 108 calendar days X X 123 calendar days X X 88 calendar days X X 108 calendar days X X X 153 calendar days X X X X 163 calendar days X X X 133 calendar days X X X X 163 calendar days X X X 118 calendar days

NOTE: If options are awarded after Task Order award (i.e. via Modification), then the POP for that option will begin with the NTP for that option and the Task Order POP will be extended by that amount.

RFI 15: Section 01 00 00, 3.5, page 6 states that both WD Mayo L&D 14 and Port of Dunkin RM413 will utilize 6” gradation bedding and 18” rip rap. The bid schedule for both of these Options (0006b, 0006c, 0007c, and 0007d) call out for 9” Bedding and 24” Rip Rap, respectively. Please clarify.

ANSWER: The bid schedule is correct. The specs have been revised.

RFI 16: Please confirm that Design-Build projects are not anticipated under this MATOC.

There are several references to design-build including on page 15 - Section 00 22 11 - Proposal Submission Requirements, Evaluation Criteria, Basis of Award One-Step-Best Value, Design-Build (Single Award) and page 99. However on Page 93 it is stated that these MATOCs are not Design-Build and may only include incidental engineering services such as sealed Shop Drawings. There are also a few references to this being a Hubzone contract under NAICS 236220 which should be removed (Pages 11, 15).

ANSWER: This is not a Design-Build MATOC. Pages 15 & 99 will be corrected.

Pages 11 & 15 will also be corrected to reflect EDWOSB instead of HUBZone.

RFI 17: Can you confirm that Specification Section, 01 10 00, Subsection 6.1.2 on Page 99 of the RFP refers to future Task Order proposals and are not required for the seed task proposal.

For instance, Subsection 6.1.2 refers to Architect and Engineer as Key Personnel which are not required in Section 00 22 11.

ANSWER: Subsection 6.1.2 has been changed to remove Architect and Engineer as Key Personnel. This is not a Design-Build MATOC.

RFI 18: Typically, we are asked to provide CQC System Manager personnel with at least 5 years of CQC System Manager experience, however this RFP requires 10 years of construction related experience. Can we interpret that to mean that providing a CQC System Manager with 5 years of CQC System Manager experience with an additional 5 years or more of related construction experience will be acceptable?

ANSWER: The CQCSM can perform work as long as they have a combined construction experience of 10 years (no stipulation of experience as just CQCSM). To answer the last question, yes, a CQCSM who has 5 years of experience in their current position in addition to 5 years previous construction experience would be sufficient(10 combined years). This is NOT intended to be read as 10 years of experience as a

CQCSM.

Prepared on 6/28/2012 by:

Pamela Moody Contract Specialist 918-669-7457 Pamela.s.moody@usace.army.mil