12-R-0031 Amendment 6 Attachment 3.pdf

W912BV‐12‐R‐0031, RFIs 1‐63

Department of the Army Tulsa District, Corps of Engineers

SDVOSB IDIQ SATOC for Construction of Renewable Energy, Energy Conservation & Mechanical/Electrical

Projects in the SW Division of the USACE (“SDVOSB Energy SATOC”)

SEED TO: Wind Turbine Installation at

Council Grove Lake, KS, John Redmond Lake, KS and Canton Lake, OK (“Wind Turbine Installation at Various Lakes”)

Solicitation (RFI) #: W912BV-12-R-0031

FULL SET OF RFIs (#s 1-63) WITH ANSWERS

RFI 1: Are the wind turbines required to be manufactured in the USA under the Buy American act?

ANSWER: Yes, market research indicates there are a sufficient number of US manufacturers of all the components of wind turbines. See Provision 52.225-10 – Notice of Buy American Act Requirement—Construction Materials and Clause 52.225-9 – Buy American Act—Construction Materials.

RFI 2: Is there an agreement in place with the utilities for a Purchase Power Agreement?

ANSWER: There is no agreement in place.

RFI 3: Are the installers required to be licensed in Kansas and Oklahoma?

ANSWER: Wind Technicians are required to hold a technical certificate in wind turbine systems obtained from a wind energy training program provider. They are also required to hold the following basic safety certifications: CPR, First Aid and AED. It appears there are no requirements for the technicians/installers to be licensed in any of the US states.

RFI 4: Is Meteorological Data available for each site or does our bid have to include a survey to determine desired location and mounting height?

ANSWER: There is no other meteorological data available other than publicly available data.

RFI 5: What is meant by cost not to exceed as authorized by Congress under paragraph 7.1.2.3?

What is this limit?

ANSWER: Congress appropriates funds for all contracts awarded by Federal Agencies.

The appropriations are public information. Per FAR 32.702, “No officer or employee of the Government may create or authorize an obligation in excess of the funds available, or in advance of appropriations (Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. 1341), unless otherwise authorized by law.”

RFI 6: The RFP does not specifically mention “Energy Conservation” or “Mechanical Design”.

Will there be any task orders issued in those areas?

ANSWER: Future task orders are not known at this time, but task orders could potentially fall into these categories.

RFI 7: When will the attendance list from the site visit be available on fbo.gov?

ANSWER: The Agenda, Attendance List and answers to RFIs will be posted on www.fbo.gov as Amendment 3 on Friday, 30 March 2012.

RFI 8: What is the anticipated budget range for SEED Task Order; so we may request Bid Bond?

ANSWER: The estimated price range for the Seed Task Order is between $100,000 and $250,000.

RFI 9: Is the 60cd Base Bid duration for each Base Bid (location) or both (concurrent)?

ANSWER: Both locations in the Base Bid must be completed within 60 calendar days.

RFI 10: Option 1 – 30cd duration; will this duration be an additional 30 days = Total 90cd (if awarded)?

ANSWER: Yes. Option 1 carries its own 30 calendar day duration separate from the base bid. If it is awarded with the Base Bid then the entire task order duration will be 90 calendar days from task order award. If it is awarded separately (a modification to the task order) then 30 days starting on the modification award date will be added to the contract duration.

RFI 11: Are Offerors allowed to submit additional “Specialized Experience” forms for their subcontractors?

ANSWER: Yes, you may submit one Specialized Experience Form for each subcontractor. See revised Section 00 22 11 Paragraph 5.1.1 and its sub-paragraphs.

RFI 12: What is the total allowed number of projects that can be submitted on the “Specialized Experience” forms for both the Prime Contractor and its Subcontractors?

ANSWER: Prime – No more than three (3); Sub-contractors – One (1)

RFI 13: Will Geothermal and Solar Projects be included in this contract as well?

ANSWER: Future task orders are not known at this time, but task orders could potentially fall into these categories.

RFI 14: Is the $25-M aggregate capacity $25-M per year? In other words, is the actual contract capacity $25-M x 5 years = $125 M over the 5 years?

ANSWER: The SATOC will be a firm-fixed price (FFP) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with a base year and four option years. The total capacity for the contract (base + options) is $25M.

RFI 15: Where in the proposal shall the Organizational Conflicts of Interest be submitted?

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

b) Projects shall be 50% design complete

ANSWER: An A/E cannot be the Prime Offeror for a construction project because it cannot be bonded as required by the FAR. However, an A/E can be a Joint Venture (JV) member and as such submit their A/E projects as set forth in the revised Paragraph 6.0 and its subparagraphs as shown in RFI 18.

RFI 17: Section 5.1.2.2 states “Recent experience includes projects underway or those completed and turned over within 5 years of the proposal issue date for this RFP for construction experience.” If we are submitting as an A/E prime, could this reference to ‘construction’ also mean A/E experience?

ANSWER: As stated in RFI 16 above, an A/E cannot be the Prime for a construction contract except as a member of a JV. However, in order to provide clearer instructions Paragraph 5.1.2.2 has been revised.

RFI 18: If submitting as a Joint Venture, section 6.1.2 states “If the Offeror cannot provide a sufficient number of projects as a JV to meet the minimum requirement, the Offeror must provide those “recent”, “relevant” projects it performed as the JV, and then supplement the record with additional “recent”, “relevant” projects performed by each JV member in their individual capacities. In such instance, each JV member must satisfy the minimum requirement of three (3) projects, to include any performed as the JV.” This is a multi-part question in reference to this requirement:

RFI 16: Section 5.1.1.3 states “All projects must be at least 50% complete and completed within the last 5 years.” Please confirm that if we are submitting as an Architect/Engineer (A/E) rather than as a General Contractor (GC) that:

a) All of our projects can be A/E projects

a. If the JV has joint experience, not as a JV but a prime/sub team relationship, will the joint experience suffice for the actual JV experience?

b. If we submit 3 projects for each party, the total projects to submit is 6 and does not allow for key subcontractor experience. Will the government increase the page count in the instance of JVs and allow for 6-10 projects to allow key subcontractor experience since much of the work is highly specialized?

c. A SDVOSB company typically would not have enough of this highly specialized experience to be able to submit 3 relevant projects. Typically a JV relationship allows for combining resources and experience, requiring only 1 relevant project for each JV partner. This results in additional opportunities for the SDVOSB to gain further experience. In an effort to not limit competition and allow for more SDVOSB participation, would the government reduce this requirement to allow one relevant project per JV partner?

ANSWER

a. The proposed JV does not have to have previous experience as a JV. See Revised Paragraph 6 for instructions on how to provide experience for the JV members.

b. The page count has been increased as requested. See revised Section 00 22 11 Paragraph 3.4.3, Factor 1, Sub-factor 1 below:

Sub-factor 1, Relevant Specialized Experience – Limited to 30 pages (to include “Experience Information” forms for Prime Offerors, Prime JV Offerors and Subcontractors)

c. JVs are encouraged by the Government. In order to assist them in providing adequate information on the JV as well as the JV members and sub-contractors, Section 00 22 11 Paragraph 6.0 and its subparagraphs have been revised.

RFI 19: Are site arrangement drawings available showing boundaries of site and underground utility locations?

ANSWER: See Revised Specs for Seed TO.

RFI 20: Are any geotech reports available at each site location?

ANSWER: No

RFI 21: Will USACE provide copies of site plans if they are available showing general layout of building and perimeter of property?

ANSWER: See Additional drawings for Seed TO.

RFI 22: Is any geotech data available from each site?

RFI 23: Will USACE provide electrical one line if available for each site?

ANSWER: No, this will be the contractor’s responsibility.

RFI 24: Is there a preferred mounting height (total) for the wind turbine?

RFI 25: There will be long lead items and the 60 days seems fairly stringent and possibly unachievable for design AND construction. Please confirm the separate design and construction durations.

ANSWER: See Revised Specs for Seed TO.

RFI 26: Will the design and construction NTPs be provided separately?

ANSWER: There will not be a design NTP.

RFI 27: Is it possible for the USACE to issue site plans of existing buildings at all three locations – John Redmond, Council Grove and Canton?

ANSWER: See Additional Drawings for Seed TO.

RFI 28: Specifications say QC Manager can have duties as Superintendant. Can the Site Safety Officer also be the QC Manager?

ANSWER: Yes, for this particular task order if the individual is qualified and competent.

RFI 29: Who do we contact about the utilities’ interconnection rules and permitting?

ANSWER: Council Grove electric service provider: Westar John Redmond electric service provider: Lyon-Coffey Rural Electric, Burlington, KS

Canton: Oklahoma Gas & Electric (OGE)

RFI 30: Is there a minimum or maximum mounting height for the turbines.

RFI 31: WindTonics recommends installing an anemometer and data logger to determine if the site location is windy enough to support a turbine, prior to getting a permit. Is this part of our work?

RFI 32: Is lightning protection required?

ANSWER: Yes, an air terminal connected to a ground rod.

RFI 33: Are surge protective devices required?

RFI 34: The Windtronics WT6500 in Section 01 00 00, paragraph 1.1 is rated at 1,500W at 31 mph, vs the 2,200W capacity required in that same paragraph. The WT6500 will generate 2200W with a wind above its rated wind speed. Is this product acceptable?

ANSWER: Yes

RFI 35: What height(s) should we use as the obstruction height(s)? The turbine should be installed 20 feet above any surrounding object within a 250 foot radius for optimal performance.

ANSWER: The project office building

RFI 36: Is the contractor providing the soil tests for each site?

ANSWER: Yes, if required or needed

RFI 37: Who will decide the placement of the wind turbines?

ANSWER: The government will approve placement based on contractor recommendations.

RFI 38: If the government will decide the contractor will need to know the distance from the wind turbine to the connection.

ANSWER: The government will approve placement based on contractor recommendations.

RFI 39: Will a site map be provided showing locations of utilities etc… for each site?

ANSWER: See Additional Drawings for Seed TO.

RFI 40: What year was each building built?

ANSWER: Council Grove: 1960-61 John Redmond: 1959-60 Canton: 1953 (approx)

RFI 41: Can you give me the three addresses for the placement of the wind turbines – Council Grove Lake, KS (address = ?), John Redmond Lake, KS (address = ?) and Canton Lake, OK (address = ?)?

ANSWER: Information about each of the lakes including the addresses and phone numbers for the USACE offices are located at the Corps Lakes Gateway website:

http://corpslakes.usace.army.mil.

RFI 42: 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 43: Will the SEED project and all other subsequent SATOC projects fall under the National Environmental Policy Act?

ANSWER: This task order has been categorically excluded from NEPA. Future task orders could fall under NEPA.

RFI 44: Are Energy Conservation Investment Program (ECIP) rules applicable for this SATOC?

ANSWER: ECIP does not apply to this task order, but could apply to future task orders.

RFI 45: What are the “payback” rules for this contract- if any?

ANSWER: Not applicable to this task order.

RFI 46: Has there been a savings to investment analysis done for the areas of work?

ANSWER: Not applicable to this task order.

RFI 47: Have all environmental considerations/test been done?

ANSWER: This task order has been categorically excluded from NEPA.

RFI 48: What are the bonding requirements, if any?

ANSWER: The bonding requirements are IAW FAR 28.102, Performance and Payment bonds and alternate payment protections for construction contracts and Clause 52.228-15 will be incorporated into each individual task order. A Payment Bond and Performance Bond will be required for 100% of the contract price of each individual task order.

RFI 49: The question is in regards to the proper procedure for submitting PPQs. Section 5.4.1.2 states that “Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal”. However, section 5.4.1.3 states that “The evaluation form shall be provided to the Contract Specialist directly from the reference”. If you could, please clarify whether PPQs should be sent directly to the Contract Specialist, or included by the offeror in the submitted proposal.

ANSWER: The Questionnaires can either be submitted with the proposal or can be sent directly from the references. They can be sent to Contract Specialist Pamela Moody either by e-mail (pamela.s.moody@usace.army.mil) or by fax (918-669-7495) or by mail (Pamela Moody, USACE Tulsa District, ATTN: CECT-SWT, 1645 S 101 E Av, Suite 350, Tulsa, OK 74128-

4609. THEY MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE PROPOSAL DUE DATE.

RFI 50: I would like to know if sales tax needs to be collected on Army Corps jobs?

ANSWER: If a task order is to be performed in KS, the Tulsa District Office will apply for a Tax Exemption Certificate from the Kansas Department of Revenue on your behalf. This does not have to be done for OK or TX.

RFI 51: Section 001100 – Total Fixed Price Contract $25M with four one year extensions – Question – The annual maximum is $5M for the year, what if the work to be done at a particular site exceeds this number what is the process to deal with this issue?

ANSWER: The Government will not award a task order that exceeds $5M. There is no “annual maximum”.

RFI 52: Section 002100 – The actual destinations where the work is to be performed is not defined, how can our team quote pricing on this contract if we don’t know where and what type of work is to be done?

ANSWER: See Section 00 22 11 for details for preparing your proposal.

RFI 53: Section 52.222 – Goals for minority participation are defined here, there is no credit given if these goals are exceeded? Would it be fair to say that there should be some sort of extra credit given?

ANSWER: These goals are set by the Small Business Agency IAW their rules and regulations. They must be followed, but no extra credit will be given for exceeding them.

RFI 54: Section 52.215 Section # 8 – What does Unbalance Pricing mean and what analysis process will the Government use to determine this? If we disagree will there be a review process to discuss the contractors concerns?

ANSWER: FAR 15.404-1(g) provides an explanation of Unbalanced Pricing and the analysis process that the Government will use. As set forth in Paragraph (10) of Clause 52.215-1, the offerors may discuss their proposals with the Government after contract award is made and “[r]easonable responses to relevant questions posed by the debrief offeror as to whether source-selection procedures set forth in the solicitation…were followed by the agency.”

RFI 55: Section 52.215 Section # 9 – What is a cost realism analysis and how is determined and done? If we disagree with the outcome will there be a review process to discuss the contractors concerns?

ANSWER: An explanation of cost realism analysis is set forth in FAR 15.404-1(d).

RFI 56: Section 52.236-27 – We have been asked in this section to provide a quote for work to be done, how can we do this if we don’t the location or type of work to be done?

ANSWER: After award of the base contract and Seed TO, the Government will issue RFP letters complete with specs for each additional task order. A site visit will be scheduled for each individual task order.

RFI 57: How much of this project can be sub-contracted?

ANSWER: 75% can be sub-contracted. This SATOC is designated as “Construction by Special Trade Contractors” versus “General Contractors”. Therefore, IAW Clause 52.219-14(4), the Prime Contractor “must perform 25% of the cost of the contract, not including the cost of materials, with its own employees.”

RFI 58: The facility at Council Grove Lake has more than one electrical service. One is a 200 AMP single phase which supplies the office and one or more of the out buildings and the other is a 100 AMP single phase which serves the generator building and flood gate. Are both services to be connected to the turbine?

ANSWER: No, only the 200 Amp electric service to the project office.

RFI 59: Is it possible to get the load calculations for each facility?

ANSWER: No load calcs are available.

RFI 60: Net Metering Agreement for Westar requires a 30 day review cycle once received. Will USACE assume the risk to start the construction of the wind turbines prior to receiving formal approval from the utility to hook up the wind turbines to the utility or do we need to plan to start construction after a utility agreement is reached?

ANSWER: Yes.

RFI 61: The proposal submission in section 3 – Page 19 of 66 paragraph 3.5.1 states that 1 CD of the price proposal is to be turned in with in 24hrs. However amendment 3 – paragraph 3.5.1 – Page 6 of 14 states that a CD of the price proposal is to be turned in, but does not mention or note that 24hrs is allowed. Please clarify if it is acceptable to turn the Volume 2 price proposal CD with in 24hrs.

ANSWER: Please send the CD with the Price Proposal (at the same time).

RFI 62: Contrary to the other current SATOC solicitations the proposal submission requirements for this SATOC do not mention any reference to the Designer(s) Specialized Experience. Since this is a Design- Build contract shouldn't the Government require the Specialized Experience of the Designer(s)? If so, should we submit up to five (5) additional Specialized Experience and Past Performance Questionnaire for the Designer(s) as well? Please advise.

ANSWER: The Government agrees that the designer is an important component to the Prime’s team and as such up to three (3) Experience Information forms can be submitted for that role.

Past Performance Questionnaires for those projects should also be submitted. See new Paragraph

5.1.1.5 in Revised Section 5.

RFI 63: Is there any possibility of getting a site plan showing the government property lines at the three sites. We are trying to make sure that our wind turbine is 250' from any obstructions and 20' above the tallest and need that information to determine proper location.

ANSWER: See drawings attached to Amendment 6.

Prepared by:

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

Dated: 4/19/2012