CMS_RFI_30_March_2018.pdf

NOTE – The last day for questions is 13 April 2018

Question 1 - The solicitation identifies seven key disciplines that you would like us to include resumes for. May we add additional disciplines so that we may more fully cover the services you have requested?

Response - Resumes for the 7 key disciplines should be provided. Only one resume (the lead for that discipline) will be evaluated for each discipline. Resumes for additional disciplines will not be evaluated.

Question 2- Under the selection criteria for specialized experience and technical competence, the solicitation restricts experience to performing “construction management services on large design-build construction projects,” yet the government desires a demonstration of the best range of experience among project portfolios. Please confirm that it is acceptable to submit CM services on a design-bid-build project and that such a project would be comparably scored.

Response - Design-bid-build projects may be submitted, but greater weight will be given to design-build projects.

RESPONSE: An Amendment will be issued to remove “design-build”.

Question - 3. In reference to Part 3. Selection Criteria b. Professional Qualifications, will the Government please add a Construction Manager, Program Manager, and/or a Commissioning Assist Manager to the Selection Criteria? If not, with the Government please allow Offerors to submit up to three additional resumes in Section E beyond the key disciplines listed to be considered as part of the Selection Criteria?

Response: Resumes for additional disciplines will not be evaluated.

Question - 4. In reference to Part 3. Selection Criteria d. Knowledge of the Locality, will the Government please clarify whether for each condition listed Offerors need to demonstrate “appropriate experience .

. . in each discipline to be counted” (each of the seven disciplines listed) or is the intent to be evaluated based on demonstrating “appropriate experience” in the key discipline listed alongside each condition?

For example, Offerors will only be evaluated based on demonstrating “appropriate experience” in the mechanical discipline for (1) climatic conditions.

Response: There are 3 sub-criteria to Knowledge of Locality. First sub-criterion is Climatic Conditions, and for this sub-criterion the Mechanical Engineer should show project experience in Missouri and Illinois and project experience in greater St. Louis area will have greater importance. Second sub-criterion is Local Construction Methods, and for this sub-criterion the Civil engineer should show project experience in Missouri and Illinois and project experience in greater St. Louis area will have greater importance. Third sub-criterion is Local Construction Climate Impact on Cost Estimating, and for this sub-criterion the Cost Engineer/Estimator should show project experience in Missouri and Illinois and project experience in greater St. Louis area will have greater importance. Evaluation will look at the specific project experience of the proposed team as stated in Section E of the SF 330.

Question - 5. In reference to Part 3. Selection Criteria c. Past Performance, the Government states that Past Performance will be evaluated based on CPARS (not PPQs), performance evaluations for team subcontractors, or other sources. Will the Government please consider addition formal means of evaluating past performance of Offerors in the instance a project in Section F does not have a CPARS?

Response: The firms may submit Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) for the projects in Section F.

3.1 c. states "The Contract Performance Assessment Reports System (CPARS) is the primary source of information on past performance. The past performance questionnaire information will NOT count towards the page limit.

Question - 6. In reference to Part 3. Selection Criteria d. Knowledge of the Locality, will the Government please look at the specific experience of the team as stated in Section F of the SF 330 to provide a rating for this evaluation criteria? Considering both Section E and Section F in the evaluation will allow Offerors to fully showcase their knowledge of the locality, and be evaluated for it.

RESPONSE: Evaluation will look at the specific project experience of the proposed team.

Question - 7. In reference to Part 3. Selection Criteria e. Capacity to initiate work and complete within the time parameters of the project, will the Government please clarify the “time parameters of the project”? It is our understanding that the contract could be as long as eight years. How will this time parameter be used to evaluate whether an Offeror has an “adequate number of personnel” per discipline?

Response: The evaluation will consider the current number of mechanical engineers; electrical engineers; civil engineers, schedulers; architects; and cost estimators. The evaluation will look at numbers listed in Part II of the SF330 to evaluate the overall capacity of the firm.

Question - 8. In reference to all of the sub-criteria listed in Part 3. Selection Criteria, will the Government please use information provided in Section H of the SF 330 to evaluate Offerors for more than just g.

Volume of DoD AE contract awards in the last 12 months? Sections E and F are often limiting to demonstrate an Offeror’s ability to satisfy some of the most heavily weighted evaluation criteria (a, b, and d). If the Government allows the information provided in Section H to be used in its rating of Offerors for any of the evaluation criteria, Offerors will be able to fully demonstrate their applicable capabilities for each evaluation criteria.

Response: The Kansas City District Corps of Engineers has found that this format helps provide a consistent and fair evaluation of the all of the SF330s, and should help lower the firms' time required to submit a SF330. USACE is not requesting additional information to be submitted in Section H.

Question - 9. Synopsis, Section 2. Project Information, paragraph 2 states “…The A-E shall possess extensive knowledge in the functional areas of civil engineering, mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, cost engineering, and construction testing and inspections…” And Synopsis, Section 3.1 Primary Selection Criteria, b. Professional Qualifications, lists the following key disciplines:

1) Mechanical engineer

2) Electrical engineer

3) Civil engineer

4) Scheduler

5) Architect

6) Cost Engineer/Estimator

7) Fire Protection Engineer

a. Fire Protection engineering is required in Section 3.1 but is not included in Section 2. Please clarify for consistency.

Response: Section 2 only identifies the functional areas of the CMS scope of work. Key disciplines for evaluation were identified in section 3.1 and may or may not cover all functional areas.

b. Construction testing and inspections is required in Section 2, but is not listed as a key discipline in Section 3.1. Please consider including both Construction Manager and Construction Inspector as key disciplines for consistency.

Response: Section 2 only identifies the functional areas of the CMS scope of work. Key disciplines for evaluation are identified in section 3.1 and may or may not cover all functional areas.

c. See Question #3. Please consider adding Structural engineer to accurately capture geotechnical/seismic requirements.

Response: A separate Structural Engineer is not required for submission and will not be evaluated.

Question - 10. Synopsis, Section 3.1 Primary Selection Criteria, b. Professional Qualifications, last paragraph states “…The lead personnel for each discipline should be clearly identified in Section E. Only one resume (the lead for that discipline) will be evaluated for each discipline.”

a. You state that only one resume will be evaluated for each discipline. Please confirm that you are limiting the submission to one resume for each key discipline listed in Section 3.1, currently a total of seven resumes.

b. Can we submit resumes for additional disciplines which we consider key in the performance of your requirement?

Response: Only the seven (7) disciplines will be evaluated for Professional Qualifications using the resumes of the Lead of each discipline. Additional disciplines will not be evaluated. The government will evaluate all Mechanical Engineers, Civil Engineers, and Cost Engineering/Estimators resumes in section E for Knowledge of Locality.

Question - 11. Synopsis, Section 3.1 Primary Selection Criteria, d. Knowledge of the locality, states “Knowledge of local conditions within Missouri and Illinois, specifically regarding: …(2) local construction methods, including geotechnical and seismic considerations (key discipline: civil)… a. Geotechnical and seismic considerations typically require a structural engineer rather than a civil engineer.

i. Please clarify.

Response: It is intended that structural engineering be a subset of the civil engineering discipline.

ii. Please consider adding a structural engineer to the Key Disciplines in Synopsys Section 3.1 Primary Selection Criteria, b. Professional Qualifications, list of key disciplines.

Response: The government will evaluate all Mechanical Engineers, Civil Engineers, and Cost Engineering/Estimators resumes in section E for Knowledge of Locality. A structural engineer is a subset of the civil engineering discipline. A separate Structural Engineer is not required for submission and will not be evaluated.

Question 12. Synopsis, Section 4. Submittal Requirements, paragraph 2 states “…A “project” is defined as work performed at one site or a single installation. An Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) will not be considered a “project”…” a. We have completed multiple Construction Management Services task orders under an IDC that were performed at one site or a single installation for the continued support of one program. These tasks for the one site/single installation do not represent all work performed on the IDC. i. The example of multiple tasks orders under an IDC to support one site and one program is similar to the N2W program described in the Synopsis in that MATOCs will be awarded and then multiple tasks will be awarded to support the site/program.

ii. Please confirm that work performed at one site or single installation under multiple task orders will be considered a “project”.

Response: A Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) or Indefinite Deliver Contract (IDC) may not be defined as a “project.” One or more task orders under a MATOC or IDC related to a single, discreet project site may be considered a “project.”