12-R-0027 RFIs 1-16.pdf

W912BV‐12‐R‐0027, RFIs 1‐16

Department of the Army Tulsa District, Corps of Engineers

USACE Tulsa District SDVOSB IDIQ SATOC For General Construction Services

Seed TO: Kansaview Park Road Repairs at Council Grove Lake, KS

Solicitation (RFI) #: W912BV-12-R-0027

Answers to RFIs 1-16

RFI 1: In Section 8.0. Price Proposal for Seed TO, paragraph 8.3.1.1 states that the offeror is to complete Section 00 11 00, Pricing Schedule in its entirety. Section 00 11 00 can only be found in overall SATOC solicitation documents. The pricing schedule found there is an overall yearly CLIN schedule. The contractor would not be able to provide pricing for this schedule. The bid schedule for the seed TO is located in section 00 01 10 of the Seed TO SOW. Please confirm that only the seed TO pricing schedule is required for this section. If the overall yearly CLIN schedule provided in Section 00 11 00 of the Solicitation is required, please provide guidance on how to fill out the yearly maximums for the contract.

ANSWER: Paragraph 8.3.1.1 revised to “The Offeror shall complete Section 00 01 10 in the Seed Task Order SOW & Specifications, in its entirety.”

RFI 2: In paragraph 8.3.1.2 of the SATOC Solicitation it states that a price breakdown of information shall be included behind the pricing schedule. Beyond those already identified in the Seed TO Pricing Schedule, please clarify what elements are required in the price breakdown of information.

ANSWER: Because the Bid Schedule (Section 00 01 10) is already detailed, Paragraph 8.3.1.2 is not needed; it has been deleted in its entirety.

RFI 3: Section 5.2.2 of the SATOC Solicitation is entitled Joint Venture (JV) Offeror. However, several of the subsequent paragraphs refer to “teaming” agreements. If the project is to be completed with a teaming arrangement in place (Team will represent a “Prime” and “Sub” relationship), does this section apply? If so, please clarify if any paragraphs under section 5.1.2 would apply.

ANSWER: Section 5.2.2 only applies to formal Joint Ventures (i.e. companies that band together to form a new entity that required a separate Tax ID number, CCR, etc.).

RFI 4: Section 5.3.1.1 states that we are to provide resume data on Design Quality Managers. Per paragraph 1.7 of the solicitation, this is not a Design-Build contract and the only use of professional design services will be in the development of shop drawings. Please clarify the role of the proposed Design Quality Manager in this contract, the qualifications required, and the organizational expectations for this individual.

ANSWER: A resume for Design Quality Manager is not required for this SATOC; it has been removed from Paragraph 5.3.1.1.

RFI 5: As a follow-on to the above question, SECTION 01 01 00.00 44 of the SATOC specifications is dedicated to work plan development and refers to procedures required for the creation of plans and specifications. Per paragraph 1.7 of the solicitation, this is not a Design-Build contract and the only use of professional design services will be in the development of shop drawings. Please clarify the extent to which design services will be required for this project. Please identify if/what design services need to be provided as part of the proposal.

ANSWER: There is no Work Plan requirement for the Seed Task Order so it is not needed in the Proposal (Factor 3). However, please note as stated in Paragraph 5.0 and its sub-paragraphs of Section 01 10 00 – Statement of Work in the SF 1442 (Solicitation/RFP) that there is the potential that in the future the SATOC contractor will have to provide a Type 1 or Type 2 Work Plan (minimal design) for an individual Task Order. That will be the extent of required design services and specific instructions will be included in the RFP for the individual Task Order.

RFI 6: In addition, a Design Quality Control plan is also referred to in section 01 45 00.00 10 paragraph

3.2.2 Additional Requirements for Design Quality Control (DQC) Plan. Please clarify if it is the government’s intent to include any design-build requirements in this SATOC, and, thus, require a Design Quality Control Plan.

ANSWER: There will be no design-build requirements in this SATOC. Paragraph 3.2.2 and its sub-paragraphs have been removed from Section 01 45 00 00 10.

RFI 7: In section 5.2.1.2 of the Solicitation it states that we are to “provide a plan to interface with the Government for informational, collaborative and historical purposes regarding a wide variety of renewable energy projects for a wide variety of customers simultaneously”. This statement seems out of place in this solicitation. Please clarify if we are to address renewable energy projects specifically in the narrative.

ANSWER: Paragraph 5.2.1.2 is incorrect and has been revised as follows: “Plan to interface with the Government for informational, collaborative and historical purposes regarding a wide variety of general construction projects for a wide variety of customers simultaneously; and”

RFI 8: The TABs for VOLUME 1 of the proposal as described in the Table in Section 3.0 of the solicitation do not match up with those listed in section 5.0 beginning with TAB D. Specifically, Section

5.0 lists two TAB Ds Please confirm that we are to use the TABs as described in the Table in Section 3.0.

ANSWER: Section 5.0 has been revised to reflect the correct tabs as listed in Section 3.0.

RFI 9: In Section 01 45 00.00 10 of the SATOC Specs, the CQC System Manager is defined as follows “This CQC System Manager must be on the site at all times during construction and be employed by the prime Contractor. The CQC System Manager must be assigned no other duties.” It also states in paragraph 1.5.1.1, “The Contractor Quality Control (QC) person can be the SSHO on task orders, if identified in the task order, even though the QC has safety inspection responsibilities as part of the QC duties.” The document states that the requirements will be made on a task order by task order basis. We can find no definition of the on-site CQC and safety requirements in the SEED TO Specifications. Please clarify the requirements for on-site supervision, safety, and CQC for the Seed TO. Please define if they are to be three separate individuals, and if they are to be on-site 100% of the time.

ANSWER: Below is a clarification of the intent of the Seed Task Order:

-The CQCSM can be the SSHO on this task order if qualified to do both duties.

-The CQCSM doesn't have to be on-site 100% of the time on this task order unless he is the

SSHO.

-The CQCSM must be present to observe placement and testing requirements for each definable feature of work.

-The CQCSM can't be the Superintendent.

-The SSHO has to be onsite at all times during construction placement activities to monitor safety.

-The Superintendent (or designated alternate) also has to be on site during construction activities.

-The SSHO has qualification requirements outlined in ER 385-1-1.

-The superintendent has qualification requirements outlined in the specifications.

RFI 10: Can the GC use their specialty sub for daily CQC / Supervision responsibilities?

ANSWER: Yes.

RFI 11: Should the GC include 134 calendar days of general conditions in their Base Bid proposal even if it will not require that much time to complete?

ANSWER: See Paragraph 7.2 and its sub-paragraphs in Section 00 22 11 of the SF 1442 (Solicitation/RFP). The Offeror may propose a shorter contract duration.

RFI 12: Can you provide an electronic (excel) copy of the Bid Schedule for the Seed project. If not, can the Contractor provide his own Schedule in lieu of?

ANSWER: An electronic Excel copy is provided as Attachment A to this RFI.

RFI 13: Should the eight (8) Option work areas be shown on the Summary Schedule? And if so, should they be shown on the Schedule as all being approved?

ANSWER: Use the assumption that the Base and all Options are awarded with the Seed Task Order award and schedule accordingly.

RFI 14: Is the critical path on the Summary Schedule to run through the Base Bid only?

ANSWER: No, see answer to RFI 13 above.

RFI 15: 134 Calendar days after June 8th has a date of completion during the Winter Limitation period (Nov 1st – Mar 31st). What areas would need to be scheduled for 2013 and how do you want it reflected in the Schedule?

ANSWER: The Government has no preference. Offeror should use best judgment in the schedule. After award the schedule can be adjusted if needed.

RFI 16: Section 00 22 11, Proposal Submission Requirements, Item 5.3.1.1 requests the assignment of a Design Quality Manager as part of the proposed project team key personnel. It is our understanding that design is not required for this task order contract. Please confirm that a Design Quality Manager is not required for the proposal.

ANSWER: This requirement does not apply to the Seed Task Order. There is the potential that in the future the SATOC contractor will have to provide a Type 2 Work Plan (minimal design) for an individual Task Order.

Prepared by:

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

5/7/2012