SDVOSB Energy SATOC.12-R-0031.RFIs Set 2.pdf

W912BV‐12‐R‐0031, RFIs 41‐56

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

RFIs Set 2

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 should 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.

Prepared by:

Pamela Moody Contract Specialist

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

DATE: 3/29/2012