W912DR-13-R-0053_Amendment_2.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to provide responses to RFIs.

A. The time and date of proposal closing has not been extended.

B. The Wage Determination has been updated to incorporate the most current version, dated 9/20/2013.

C. The answ er to RFI Question 3 has been updated; the Solicitation has not changed.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 19

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 18-Oct-2013

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W912DR-13-R-0053

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

30-Sep-2013

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

18-Oct-2013

CODE

USACE, BALTIMORE

10 SOUTH HOWARD STREET, ROOM 7000

BALTIMORE MD 21201

W912DR 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912DR-13-R-0053

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 2 RFI Q&A

Q29: 1. 5.3 FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE OF ARCHITECT-ENGINEER (Designer of Record):

“…The Offeror shall submit three projects that demonstrate the DOR’s experience on 1) design only and 2) for design-build projects. For ongoing projects, 100% of the design and at least 75% of the major construction milestones must be completed at the time of proposal submission. For design only projects, 100% of design must be complete.” Question: Please confirm if the DOR (Architect of Record) can submit one design-only project, one design-build project and whether or not the additional project can be design-only or is it required to be design-build?

A: See Updated Answer to RFI Question 3; Please comply with the Amended Solicitation regarding Factor 3.

Q30: 2. 5.3 FACTOR 3: “…Provide past performance that demonstrates the Offeror’s Architecture- Engineer (Designer of Record) (DOR) experience.” Question: Please confirm if an MEP firm, in a JV with the DOR, can submit a project done with a different architect where they were “Engineers of Record”. Can such a project count as one of the three projects if it meets all other required criteria?

A: See Updated Answer to RFI Question 3; Please comply with the Amended Solicitation regarding Factor 3.

Q31: What is the level of the bridging design package that will be included in the Phase 2 documents?

A: Technical information will not be provided in Phase 1.

Q32: The Solicitation states on page 58 of 77 in the section entitled “ Sequence of Design-Construction” that the Design must be reviewed and deemed satisfactory by the USACE before Construction begins.

Specifically: (a) After receipt of the Contract Notice to Proceed (NTP) the Contractor shall initiate design, comply with all design submission requirements as covered under Division 01 General Requirements, and obtain Government review of each submission. No construction may be started until the Government reviews the Final Design submission and determines it satisfactory for purposes of beginning construction.

The ACO or COR will notify the Contractor when the design is cleared for construction. The Government will not grant any time extension for any design re-submittal required when, in the opinion of the ACO or COR, the initial submission failed to meet the minimum quality requirements as set forth in the Contract.

This RFI is intended to confirm approval by the USACE to allow multiple design packages to be submitted and approved in order to accommodate the Fast Track method of design and construction as stated on page 59 of 77 in the section entitled “Design Conferences”.

A: Submission of multiple design packages is acceptable; total number of packages is limited to 6. Utilization of Fast Track method of design and construction is acceptable. All submissions are subject to Government review and approval.

Q33: The RFP instructs the use of mandatory forms Attachments A, B, C and D that were provided in PDF form. However, the pagination is off for the forms starting on page 20. Can respondents recreate the forms in MS Word? If not, will the Government please provide the forms in MS Word format.

A: Pagination realigned in Amendment 1.

Q34: Please advise the Government expectations/requirements for the small business goals associated with this project.

A: There is no small business requirement in the Phase 1 Solicitation.

Q35: Please confirm the correct delivery address for the proposal on 10-31-13. Page 1 of the RFP (SF1442) refers to the USACE Baltimore offices; Page 7 refers to the USACE Real Property Services Field Office in Annapolis-Junction, MD.

A: See Answer to RFI Question 1.

Q36: The RFP page 58 “Sequence of Construction” advises:

"No construction may be started until the Government reviews the final design submission and determines it satisfactory for purposes of beginning construction." Please clarify the Government's meaning of "final design". Also please advise if the Government will accept the utilization of a fast-track design and construction approach where construction starts before the final design completion.

A: See Answer to RFI Question 32.

Q37: Reference is made to Page 1, boxes 8 and 7, and page 7 item 2.5. Please confirm that proposals should be addressed and delivered to the location described on page 7, item 2.5, and not the address noted on page 1.

A: See Answer to RFI Question 1.

Q38: Reference is made to Page 14, item 5.2.1, paragraph 2. Please confirm that the resume of the full-time, on-site Superintendent should included in the proposal.

A: See Answer to RFI Question 9.

Q39: Reference is made to Page 24, Attachment B. On recent submissions to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the "Contractor’s Past Performance" has included a section for Cost and Time Growth Discussion: Reason(s) for differences between original and final schedule or costs. Should this be included as part of each "Contractor’s Past Performance"?

A: Please complete Attachment B as included in the Solicitation.

Q40: Within paragraphs 5.1 and 5.3, Past Performance of Relevant Projects, PPQs are required to be filled out by the client. If a subcontractor’s experience is being utilized will a PPQ completed by the Prime Contractor be acceptable in lieu of a PPQ completed by the Client?

A: No; Please comply with paragraphs 5.1 and 5.3 as stated in the Solicitation.

"If a formal evaluation is unavailable, the offeror shall obtain the information using the Past Performance Questionnaire included (Attachment D). The Past Performance Questionnaire included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1, Past Performance of Relevant Projects. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Ms. Brandi Fialek via email at brandi.m.fialek@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date."

Q41: Within paragraph 5.1, Factor 1: Past performance of Relevant projects - please clarify the order of projects and performance evaluations. Would the Government prefer that each project 1-5 be followed by it's relevant evaluation, or that the offeror list projects in order 1-5, followed by performance evaluations 1- 5?

A: Please comply with paragraph 3.8, Binder 3, Technical Proposal as stated in the Solicitation. Specific order within each tab is at the discretion of the Contractor.

Q42: Question and Answer will be provided in the next Amendment.

Q43: Reference paragraph 5.2.1 Project Team Organization on page 14 of the Solicitation. Please define the role of the "Designer of Record Design Manager," and clarify if this is an employee of the Architect- Engineer (Designer of Record) or the Design-Builder.

A: The Designer of Record Design Manger may be an employee of the AE DOR; this position is responsible for coordinating all design efforts of the design team.

Q44:"The Solicitation states on page 58 of 77 in the section entitled “ Sequence of Design-Construction” that the Design must be reviewed and deemed satisfactory by the USACE before Construction begins.

Specifically: (a) After receipt of the Contract Notice to Proceed (NTP) the Contractor shall initiate design, comply with all design submission requirements as covered under Division 01 General Requirements, and obtain Government review of each submission. No construction may be started until the Government reviews the Final Design submission and determines it satisfactory for purposes of beginning construction.

The ACO or COR will notify the Contractor when the design is cleared for construction. The Government will not grant any time extension for any design re-submittal required when, in the opinion of the ACO or COR, the initial submission failed to meet the minimum quality requirements as set forth in the Contract.

This RFI is intended to confirm approval by the USACE to allow multiple design packages to be submitted and approved in order to accommodate the Fast Track method of design and construction as stated on page 59 of 77 in the section entitled “Design Conferences”."

A: See Answer to RFI Question 31.

Q45:Please confirm if East Campus Building Marine Corps (ECB-MC) project includes a parking garage as stated in the 1391 document, the RFP makes no mention of it.

A: There is no garage requirement for this project.

Q46: Please confirm if bridging documents have been prepared for East Campus Building Marine Corps (ECB-MC) and if so to what percentage.

A: Technical information will not be provided in Phase 1.

Q47: Please confirm if the building site has been cleared of UXO? Can you provide the location and or orientation of the Marine Corps building relative to other projects to be under construction in the same area?

A: Technical information will not be provided in Phase 1.

Q48: Section 00100, Paragraph 5.3: Amendment 0001 provided further requirements for the past performance of the DOR to submit 5 to 6 projects with at least one design-bid-build project and one design-build project and that all projects must be at least 100% design complete and 75% construction complete.

For the design-bid-build project we would ask that the 75% construction be reduced to no more than 25% complete as our contractor teaming was based on using a design only project that met all of the criteria at the time of the posting of the original RFP only requiring 100% design complete with no requirment for percentage of construction complete. We also believe that the quality of the design effort will be apparent by the time a project has progressed to a 25% level of completion.

A:Please comply with paragraph 5.3 of the Solicitation as stated.

Q49: Section 00100, Paragraph 5.3: One requirement for similar projects is Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) construction experience. Will experience with the design of SCIF areas within a facility be looked upon equally regardless of the overall facility size (square footage) and construction value?

For example, will a facility containing multiple SCIF areas that is 10,000 SF with a construction value of $3 mil be looked at equally to a facility containing multiple SCIF areas that is 250,000 SF and over $75 mil in construction value since they both contain SCIF areas and illustrate design experience with the SCIF criteria?

A: As stated in the Solicitation, paragraph 5.1, “The more items included in each project, the higher the relevancy factor may be.”

Reference paragraph 6.1 and 6.3 “The more relevant a proposed project is, the more consideration it will be given in the overall confidence assessment rating.”

The following have been modified:

AMENDMENT 1 RFI Q&A

Q1: Item 13 on page 1 of the Solicitation indicates the offerors are to due at the place specified in Item 8 which is the 10 S. Howard Street, Room 7000, Baltimore address. Paragraph 2.5 on page 7 of the Solicitation states that Offerors shall submit their proposal to the RSFO, 300 Sentinel Dr, Suite 400, Annapolis Junction address. Please clarify where the Phase 1 proposals are to be submitted.Offerors shall submit their proposal to the RSFO, 300 Sentinel Dr, Suite 400, Annapolis Junction address.

A: Proposals are to be submitted to 10 SOUTH HOWARD STREET, ROOM 7000, BALTIMORE MD 21201.

Q2: Reference paragraph 2.2 Contractor Team Arrangements on page 6 of the solicitation. In Tab F:

Teaming Agreements of the Phase 1 proposal, does the Government want the Offeror to including teaming agreements between the Offeror's Designer of Record (DOR) and any design sub-consultants that the DOR plans to use? For example, if the Offeror's DOR is planning to use a design sub-consultant for the civil design, does the Government want to see a specific teaming agreement between the offeror's DOR and civil design sub-consultant?

A: Yes, please submit teaming agreements for the design team to include any agreements between the DOR and other designers or design consultants.

Please comply with the Amended Solicitation regarding Factor 3.

“Organize the projects submitted under tabs to facilitate the evaluation. Provide past performance that demonstrates the Offeror’s Architecture-Engineer (Designer of Record) (DOR) and/or design team’s experience. For the purposes of this solicitation, the AE DOR is the proposed A-E firm or A-E firm entity, e.g., an A-E joint venture, that will be responsible for coordinating all design efforts for this project. The design team includes the AE DOR and any designers or design consultants.

Projects submitted for this factor must demonstrate the past performance of the design team that the Offeror proposes to use for the project. The Offeror shall submit five to six projects that demonstrate the design team’s experience on 1) design only and 2) design-build projects. For ongoing projects, 100% of the design and at least 75% of the major construction milestones must be completed at the time of proposal submission. For design only projects, 100% of design must be complete. All projects must be submitted by the proposed design team in accordance with the offeror’s proposed design approach. All projects must have been completed within six years of the original date of issuance of this RFP. The information regarding the projects that is required to be supplied is identified on the form entitled “AE (DOR)’s Past Performance Attachment C.”

The AE (DOR) submitted in Phase 1 is binding and will become part of the contract; a substitution for the AE (DOR) cannot be presented in Phase 2.

Similar projects must demonstrate all of the following project types (either individually or in combination thereof):

- Designer of Record on design-bid-build project where the total construction was at least $50,000,000.00 (present day value)

- Design-build projects where the total construction was at least $75,000,000.00 (present day value)

- Projects that included constructing buildings containing heavy mechanical and electrical

- Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) construction

- Projects with Operation Centers/Watch Centers

- Facilities with utility infrastructure, electrical service, water, and sewer

- Projects in excess of 100K SF of space

- Projects containing perimeter site security measures, fuel storage, potable/reclaimed water, chiller plant, fire suppression systems, electrical generator, UPS back up capacity, storm drainage, site improvements, supporting facilities including AT/FP and ABA”

Q3: Reference paragraph 5.3 Factor 3: Past Performance of Architect-Engineer (Designer of Record). The paragraph at the top of page 16 of the Solicitation states "For ongoing projects, 100% of the design and at least 75% of the major construction milestones must be completed at the time of proposal submission."

Does this sentence apply to both design only and design-build projects?

A: No, this sentence does not apply to both design only and design-build projects; as stated in the Amended Solicitation, “For ongoing projects, 100% of the design and at least 75% of the major construction milestones must be completed at the time of proposal submission. For design only projects, 100% of design must be complete.”

Q4: Reference paragraph 5.3 Factor 3: Past Performance of Architect-Engineer (Designer of Record). The paragraph at the top of page 16 of the Solicitation states "For design only projects, 100% of design must be complete." What percentage of the major construction milestones must be completed for design only projects?

A: See Answer to RFI Question 3.

Q5: Reference paragraph 5.3 Factor 3: Past Performance of Architect-Engineer (Designer of Record). The 2nd paragraph on page 16 of the Solicitation states that "Teaming agreements for the AE (DOR) are not acceptable." Please clarify this statement. We understood that the Government wanted the offeror to include teaming agreements with the DOR in Binder 3, Tab F: Teaming Agreements.

A: See Answer to RFI Question 2; Yes, please submit teaming agreement between the Prime and DOR in Binder 3, Tab F. It is required that this teaming agreement be binding and is unalterable in Phase 2.

Q6: Reference paragraph 5.3 Factor 3: Past Performance of Architect-Engineer (Designer of Record). The third paragraph on page 16 of the Solicitation indicates that similar projects must demonstrate design-bid-build projects valued at least as $50M, and design-build projects valued at least at $75M. We interpret this statement as requiring Offerors to submit at least one (1) design-bid-build project for the Designer of Record's (DOR) experience. Four (4) questions related to this requirement:

1. East Campus Building - Marine Corps is a design-build project. This requirement prevents offerers from submitting three (3) design-build projects for the DOR if we deem all three projects as most highly relevant.

Please clarify if offerors can submit all design-build projects.

2. Will extra consideration be given if the Offeror submits three (3) design-build projects and zero (0) design-bid-build for the DOR? Or does the Government want the Offeror to submit at least one (1) design-bid-build project for the DOR in order to receive the highest evaluation rating?

3. Can the Offeror submit three (3) design-bid-build projects and zero (0) design-build projects for the DOR and still receive the highest evaluation rating?

4. Please confirm the intent is not for the Offeror to submit six (6) projects for the DOR: Three (3) design-bid-build projects and three (3) design-build projects."

A: Each offeror must provide 5 to 6 projects that in combination or individually meet each of the bulleted relevancy criteria, including a project where the AE (DOR) and/or a design team member was “Designer of Record on design-bid-build project where the total construction was at least $50,000,000.00.” These bulleted items indicate the Government’s standard for relevant past performance for ECB-MC.

See Answer to RFI Question 2 for sub-questions 1 and 4.

For sub-questions 2 and 3, this solicitation does not provide for “extra consideration” or “extra credit.” At a minimum, proposals must comply with the terms of the solicitation, including the evaluation factor submission requirements. See Solicitation Section 6, Phase I Evaluation Criteria, for further information on proposal evaluation ratings.

Q7: Reference paragraph 5.3 Factor 3: Past Performance of Architect-Engineer (Designer of Record). The third paragraph on page 16 of the Solicitation indicates the dollar value that similar projects submitted for Factor 3 must demonstrate. Are the values of the projects to be submitted for Factor 3 to be "present day value"? The solicitation on page 13 states that the value of the projects submitted under Factor 1 are to be in "present day value", but the solicitation doesn't make this clarification for Factor 3. Please clarify.

A: The use of present day value for the project costs for Factor 3 is acceptable; Please comply with the Amended Solicitation regarding Factor 3.

Q8: Do the Representations and Certifications on page 36 of the solicitation need to be submitted within the Phase 1 proposal? If so, please clarify which Tab they should be submitted in.

A: Yes; Please include in Binder 2, Tab E, Ownership Disclosure.

Q9: Reference paragraph 5.2.1 Project Team Organization on page 14 of the Solicitation. Please clarify the difference between the "Overall On-Site Project Manager" and the "Construction Project Manager".

A: For the purposes of this project, the Construction Project Manager position is similar to the industry title of "Construction Superintendent."

Q10: Reference paragraph 5.2.1 Project Team Organization on page 14 of the Solicitation. Should a "Construction Superintendent" be added to the list of key personnel?

A: No; See Answer to RFI Question 9.

Q11: What date should the Contractor assume for contract award?

A: 2-Jun-2014

Q12: Have any geotechnical investigations been performed by the Government? If yes, please provide any reports that are available.

A: Technical information will not be provided in Phase 1.

Q13:If the Offeror and DOR have previous experience working together on highly relevant project(s), can the same project(s) be submitted for both Factor 1: Past Performance of Relevant Projects and Factor 3:

Past Performance of Architect-Engineer (Designer of Record)?

A: Yes.

Q14: Will design-build projects submitted under Factor 1 and/or Factor 3 performed jointly by the Offeror and DOR receive extra credit in the evaluation process?

A: The solicitation does not provide for "extra credit" or "extra consideration" for Factors 1 or 3. However, previous experience between the Prime and DOR working on similar projects to ECB-MC may be more favorably rated.

Q15: Under Factor 3, Past Performance of Architect-Engineer, it is stated that "For design-only projects, 100% of the design must be complete." However, under the Evaluation Criteria for the same Factor, it is stated that "…if a project is not 100% physical construction completed by the original date of the RFP issuance, it will not be considered for purposes of evaluation of Factor 3." Please clarify whether design-only projects for our Architects need to be only 100% design complete and construction ongoing or 100% design and construction complete to be compliant.

A: Please note the Amended Solicitation, Factor 3 Evaluation Criteria.

“ If a submitted project does not meet the minimum requirements identified above, that submitted project will not be considered for purposes of evaluation of Factor 3. For example, if a project was completed more than six years from the original date of RFP issuance it will not be considered for purposes of evaluation of Factor 3. If the rejection of this project reduces the total number of a proposal’s past performance projects for this factor below the minimum number required, 5, then the highest rating that may be assigned for this factor is 'Limited Confidence/Relevant.'”

Q16: Under 5.2.1 Project Team Organization, the Offeror is required to provide an Overall On-Site Project Manager and a Construction Project Manager. Will the Construction Project Manager serve as the Construction Superintendent? Please clarify the difference between these roles.

A: See Answer to RFI Question 9.

Q17: "Page 7 of 77, item 3.3 Printed Matter Submissions. Written material shall be on 8 ½ x 11 inch paper printed in no less than a 10 point font. For organization charts or schedules, a folded 11” x 17” format may be used. The page count is at the discretion of the contractor. However, it is anticipated this should be approximately 50 pages but no more than 75 pages in total for Phase 1. All pages submitted will be evaluated; all pages shall be numbered. Question: Can the Past Performance Questionnaires be excluded from the 75-page total?

A: There is no page limit or page total; Please refer to Solicitation "The page count is at the discretion of the contractor."

Q18: Because of the extensive requirement of the teams, you have determined that the page count is at the discretion of the contractor. Does that mean we will not be disqualified if the page count is more than 75 pages?

A: Yes.

Q19: Page 14 of 77, paragraph 5.2.1 Project Team Organization: The RFQ requires a Construction Project Manager but does not list a Construction Project Superintendent; please confirm that the information about the Construction Project Superintendent is to be included within the proposal.

A: See Answer to RFI Question 9.

Q20: In the past the Construction Project Manager title has been changed to the Construction Project Superintendent. Can the Corps elaborate, please, what are the duties and responsibilities of the Construction Project Manager?

A: See Answer to RFI Question 9.

Q21: "Page 15 of 77, paragraph 5.2.2 Construction Organization: This project is principally a concurrently maintainable facility with perimeter site security. The Offeror shall discuss its construction organizational structure to build the facility. The narrative shall state why your construction firm is uniquely qualified to undertake this project. Question: Will there be a site visit scheduled in order for offerors to examine the site prior to submission of proposal, to include a site logistic plan in Section 5.2.2 Construction Organization.

A: Please reference paragraph 1.3 "For the purposes of this solicitation, the Government will utilize the Two Phase Design-Build Process." A site visit will not be conducted in Phase 1.

Q22: Is a design/construction schedule required as part of the response of this RFQ?

A: Please comply with the Solicitation as stated in paragraph 5.2.6, Schedule.

Q23: Page 16 of 77, Past Performance of Architect-Engineer (Designer of Record); Question: Would the Government prefer that all three projects be design-build followed by its relevant evaluation.

A: See Answer to RFI Question 6.

Q24: Reference is made to item 3.3 Printed Matter Submission on page 7. Sentence 3 states that the page count should not exceed 75 pages. By our estimate, the Past Performance Questionnaires and Relevant Projects will require 46 pages. Please confirm that if more than 75 pages are submitted, they will be evaluated.

A: Yes; See Answer to RFI Questions 17 and 18.

Q25: Reference is made to item 5.3 Past Performance of the Architect-Engineer on page 16 of the solicitation. Please confirm our understanding of the meaning of the solicitation is as follows;

1) For Design Only Projects, 100% of the design must be complete. The percentage of major construction milestones complete on Design Only Projects is not a relevant factor. On the “Attachment C” form on page 25, for Design Only Projects, the Boxes labeled “Lost Time Accidents”, “75% Construction Completion” and “Beneficial Occupancy Date” should be filled out with “not applicable”.

2) For Design-Build Projects, 100% of the design must be complete and 75% of the major construction milestones must be completed.

A: See Answer to RFI Question 3.

Q26: Reference is made to item 5.3, paragraph 2 on page 16. Please confirm that Item 5.3, paragraph 2, sentence one should read “Teaming agreements between two or more AE(DOR) firms are not acceptable”

A: See Answer to RFI Question 2.

Q27: Reference is made to item 6.3 on page 17. Please confirm that the last sentence of the second paragraph should read “For example, if a project’s design was completed more than six years from the original date of the RFP issuance, it will not be considered for purposes of evaluation of Factor 3.”

A: See Answer to RFI Question 15.

Q28: Reference is made to item 52.236-4 (b) on page 52 of the solicitation. Please provide a site plan and geotechnical and soil reports for where this project will be built. We do not have access to the JOC project drawings or geotechnical and soil reports referenced in the solicitation.

A: See Answer to RFI Question 12.

SECTION 00800 - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

The following have been modified:

WAGE DETERMINATION

General Decision Number: MD130053 09/20/2013 MD53

Superseded General Decision Number: MD20120077

State: Maryland

Construction Type: Building

County: Anne Arundel County in Maryland.

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS (does not include single family homes or apartments up to and including 4 stories).

Modification Number Publication Date 0 01/04/2013 1 01/11/2013 2 02/01/2013 3 03/29/2013 4 05/10/2013 5 06/14/2013 6 06/28/2013 7 07/12/2013 8 07/26/2013 9 08/09/2013 10 08/16/2013 11 09/20/2013

CARP0101-019 04/01/2013

North of Route 450 including Ft. Meade

Rates Fringes

CARPENTER (Including Drywall Hanging, Form Work and Metal Stud Installation (Excluding Acoustical)......................$ 26.01 11.93

PILEDRIVERMAN....................$ 26.01 11.93

CARP0132-013 05/01/2013

Remaining Area

Rates Fringes

CARPENTER (Including Drywall Hanging, Form Work and Metal Stud Installation) (Excluding Acoustical)...........$ 26.81 8.13

PILEDRIVERMAN....................$ 26.62 8.15

CARP1831-002 04/01/2012

Rates Fringes

MILLWRIGHT.......................$ 27.96 12.20

* ELEC0024-012 06/01/2013

Rates Fringes

ELECTRICIAN (Including low voltage wiring for and installation of alarms; HVAC controls)........................$ 35.10 5.25%+14.24

ELEC0024-013 06/03/2013

Rates Fringes

ELECTRICIAN (Communication and Sound Equipment).............$ 24.63 11.62

PAID HOLIDAYS: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day, Day after Thanksgiving, Christmas Day

ENGI0037-026 04/01/2012

Rates Fringes

OPERATOR: Bobcat/Skid Steer/Skid Loader................$ 24.73 12.50+a OPERATOR: Bulldozer.............$ 26.68 12.50+a OPERATOR: Excavator.............$ 26.68 12.50+a OPERATOR: Forklift..............$ 26.68 12.50+a OPERATOR: Gradall...............$ 26.68 12.50+a OPERATOR: Paver (Asphalt, Aggregate, and Concrete).........$ 26.68 12.50+a OPERATOR: Roller excluding Asphalt..........................$ 21.10 12.50+a

a. PAID HOLIDAYS: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veterans' Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day.

IRON0016-012 04/01/2013

Rates Fringes

GLAZIER..........................$ 26.88 17.55

IRONWORKER (Fence Erection-Chain Link/Cyclone).....$ 26.63 17.55

IRONWORKER, ORNAMENTAL,

REINFORCING AND STRUCTURAL.......$ 26.88 17.55

IRONWORKER, SHEETING.............$ 27.13 17.55

PAIN0051-024 06/01/2013

Rates Fringes

PAINTER

Brush, Roller, Spray, Drywall Finisher/Taper and Paperhanger.................$ 24.89 8.91 Industrial..................$ 29.18 8.91

PLAS0891-005 07/01/2012

Rates Fringes

PLASTERER........................$ 28.33 5.85

PLAS0891-006 05/01/2010

Rates Fringes

CEMENT MASON/CONCRETE FINISHER...$ 27.15 9.58

PLAS0891-008 08/01/2011

Rates Fringes

PLASTERER (Fireproofing Including Sprayer, Mixer, and Handler) Handler.....................$ 15.00 3.89 Mixer/Pump..................$ 17.00 3.89 Sprayer.....................$ 21.50 3.89

PLUM0486-012 06/01/2013

Rates Fringes

PIPEFITTER (Including HVAC Pipe and System Installation)....$ 36.495 16.79

ROOF0030-032 10/01/2012

All Areas South of the following line: where the point at which Maryland Route No. 175 crosses into Anne Arundel County from Howard County, southeast on Highway No. 175 into Highway No. 178 into Highway No. 50, then to Highway No. 2 to West Street; east to Bay Bridge Road and follow Bay Bridge Road to the bay.

Rates Fringes

ROOFER, Excludes Installation of Metal Roofs...................$ 26.90 10.18

ROOF0030-034 08/01/2012

Remainder of Area

Rates Fringes

ROOFER, Excludes Installation of Metal Roofs...................$ 24.39 8.48

SFMD0536-003 01/01/2013

Rates Fringes

SPRINKLER FITTER (Fire Sprinklers) Baltimore City including a 10 mile radius beyond the city limits.................$ 30.80 16.85

SFMD0669-003 07/01/2013

Rates Fringes

SPRINKLER FITTER (Fire Sprinklers) Remaining Areas.............$ 31.14 17.62

SHEE0100-020 01/01/2013

Rates Fringes

SHEETMETAL WORKER (HVAC Duct Installation Only)...............$ 30.26 16.65

SUMD2010-087 08/20/2010

Rates Fringes

ABATEMENT WORKER: ASBESTOS

(Removal from Mechanical Systems).........................$ 12.37 3.91

ASBESTOS WORKER/HEAT & FROST

INSULATOR........................$ 22.60 8.26

BRICKLAYER (Excluding

Pointing, Caulking and Cleaning)........................$ 24.20 6.22

CARPENTER (Acoustical Installation Only)...............$ 16.00 2.60

ELEVATOR MECHANIC................$ 29.11 6.13

LABORER: Common or General......$ 9.64 2.34

LABORER: Grade Checker..........$ 16.00 2.90

LABORER: Landscape..............$ 10.00 0.00

LABORER: Mason Tender - Brick...$ 12.63 1.29

LABORER: Mason Tender - Cement/Concrete..................$ 17.81 0.00

LABORER: Mason Tender - Stone...$ 14.03 0.00

LABORER: Mason Tender (Pointing, Caulking, Cleaning)...$ 12.93 0.00

LABORER: Mortar Mixer...........$ 16.61 9.08

LABORER: Pipelayer..............$ 16.00 00.00

MASON - STONE....................$ 29.82 10.05

OPERATOR: Asphalt Roller........$ 21.35 5.38

OPERATOR: Backhoe...............$ 22.78 5.94

OPERATOR: Boom..................$ 21.44 8.29

OPERATOR: Crane.................$ 20.17 4.64

OPERATOR: Grader/Blade..........$ 16.75 5.79

OPERATOR: Loader................$ 17.25

PLUMBER..........................$ 27.91 10.85

POINTER, CAULKER, CLEANER,

Includes pointing, caulking, cleaning of existing masonry, brick, stone and cement structures (restoration work); excludes pointing, caulking, cleaning of new or replacement masonry, brick, stone or cement...........................$ 19.75

SCAFFOLD BUILDER.................$ 16.60 0.56

SHEET METAL WORKER (Excluding HVAC Duct and Metal Roof Installation)....................$ 26.08 7.29

SHEET METAL WORKER (Metal Roof Installation Only)..........$ 20.71 6.23

TILE FINISHER....................$ 17.08 2.10

TILE SETTER......................$ 21.38 4.65

Truck Driver, Dump...............$ 15.40 1.96

TRUCK DRIVER: Tractor Haul Truck............................$ 17.87 9.98

WELDERS - Receive rate prescribed for craft performing operation to which welding is incidental.

Unlisted classifications needed for work not included within the scope of the classifications listed may be added after award only as provided in the labor standards contract clauses (29CFR 5.5 (a) (1) (ii)).

The body of each wage determination lists the classification and wage rates that have been found to be prevailing for the cited type(s) of construction in the area covered by the wage determination. The classifications are listed in alphabetical order of "identifiers" that indicate whether the particular rate is union or non-union.

Union Identifiers

An identifier enclosed in dotted lines beginning with characters other than "SU" denotes that the union classification and rate have found to be prevailing for that classification. Example: PLUM0198-005 07/01/2011. The first four letters , PLUM, indicate the international union and the four-digit number, 0198, that follows indicates the local union number or district council number where applicable , i.e., Plumbers Local 0198. The next number, 005 in the example, is an internal number used in processing the wage determination.

The date, 07/01/2011, following these characters is the effective date of the most current negotiated rate/collective bargaining agreement which would be July 1, 2011 in the above example.

Union prevailing wage rates will be updated to reflect any changes in the collective bargaining agreements governing the rates.

0000/9999: weighted union wage rates will be published annually each January.

Non-Union Identifiers

Classifications listed under an "SU" identifier were derived from survey data by computing average rates and are not union rates; however, the data used in computing these rates may include both union and non-union data. Example: SULA2004-007 5/13/2010. SU indicates the rates are not union majority rates, LA indicates the State of Louisiana; 2004 is the year of the survey; and 007 is an internal number used in producing the wage determination. A 1993 or later date, 5/13/2010, indicates the classifications and rates under that identifier were issued as a General Wage Determination on that date.

Survey wage rates will remain in effect and will not change until a new survey is conducted.

WAGE DETERMINATION APPEALS PROCESS

1.) Has there been an initial decision in the matter? This can be:

* an existing published wage determination

* a survey underlying a wage determination

* a Wage and Hour Division letter setting forth a position on a wage determination matter

* a conformance (additional classification and rate) ruling

On survey related matters, initial contact, including requests for summaries of surveys, should be with the Wage and Hour Regional Office for the area in which the survey was conducted because those Regional Offices have responsibility for the Davis-Bacon survey program. If the response from this initial contact is not satisfactory, then the process described in 2.)

and 3.) should be followed.

With regard to any other matter not yet ripe for the formal process described here, initial contact should be with the Branch of Construction Wage Determinations. Write to:

Branch of Construction Wage Determinations Wage and Hour Division U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20210

2.) If the answer to the question in 1.) is yes, then an interested party (those affected by the action) can request review and reconsideration from the Wage and Hour Administrator (See 29 CFR Part 1.8 and 29 CFR Part 7). Write to:

Wage and Hour Administrator U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20210

The request should be accompanied by a full statement of the interested party's position and by any information (wage payment data, project description, area practice material, etc.) that the requestor considers relevant to the issue.

3.) If the decision of the Administrator is not favorable, an interested party may appeal directly to the Administrative Review Board (formerly the Wage Appeals Board). Write to:

Administrative Review Board U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20210

4.) All decisions by the Administrative Review Board are final.

END OF GENERAL DECISION

(End of Summary of Changes)