W912DY24R0043 TF SAFE QA Matrix _ 9 August 2024.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 27 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W912DY24R0043-0001
About this file
This document is a Question and Answer (Q&A) matrix related to Solicitation Amendment 0001 for a federal contract opportunity with the Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Engineering Support Center Huntsville.
The key details are as follows: The solicitation number is W912DY24R0043-0001 for the "Task Force Safety Assessments of Fire and Electricity/ Unified Facilities Criteria (TF SAFE)" requirement. The proposal due date remains unchanged from the original solicitation. The Q&A matrix addresses various questions and comments from industry regarding topics such as the proposal due date, key personnel requirements, database maintenance, page limitations, past performance requirements, and other clarifications to the solicitation and Performance Work Statement. Several revisions and amendments are mentioned, including changes to fire protection specialist/engineer roles, QC manager/specialist locations, and pricing for the 6-month extension period.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q_A
| TF SAFE RFP Questions/Comments from Industry | |||
| Soliciation: W912DY-24-R-0043 | |||
| Question # | Reference | Contractor Question | Government's Response |
| 1 | Within the solicitation document, Page 1 states the due date as "09:00 AM 16 Aug 2024," while Page 118 states the due date as "9:00 am Central Time, 19 August 2024." Please confirm due date and time. | The due date is August 16, 2024. Refer to Amendment 0001 | |
| 2 | We kindly request the government extend the due date one week to 26 August 2024. | Due to the urgency of this requirement, no extension will be permitted. A special notice was posted to Sam.gov on 1 August 2024 advising potential offerors of the short suspense for this requirement and that there would be no extensions. | |
| 3 | RFP | RFP page 118/132 states that the solicitation closes at 9:00 am Central Time, 19 August 2024. Given the complexity of the TF SAFE/UFC Program and the projected short time period between the Government's response to questions and proposal submittal, we kindly consideration that a minimum 2 week extension be granted. | Refer to Question #1 and #2 response |
| 4 | RFP | SF1449 block 8 indicates that offers are due 16 August 2024. RFP page 118/132 states that the solicitation closes at 9:00 am Central Time, 19 August 2024. Please clarify. | Refer to Question #1 and #2 response |
| 5 | PWS Section 2.2.2 | PWS section 2.2.2 Project Manager states 'The Property Manager will be primarily assigned in Kuwait but will be forward-deployable to mission requirement in CENTCOM AOR as determined by the COR based on the needs of the customer and program'. Please confirm that this statement should read 'Project Manager', not 'Property Manager'. | Refer to Amendment 0001 |
| 6 | PWS Section 3.2.1 | PWS section 3.2.1, bullet #2 states that each inspection teams is defined as including '1 fire protection specialist/engineer' . PWS Sections 3.3.3 and 3.3.3.1 define the requirements of the Fire Protection Engineer and Fire Protection Specialist respectively. Please clarify that offerors will satisfy the requirements of PWS section 3.2.1 by providing either a qualified Fire Protection Engineer or a Fire Protection Specialist for each inspection team. | Refer to Amendment 0001. The intent is to provide both. The FP specialist is to be deployed with the UFC team. The FPE must be a part of the UFC team, but located remote with the ability to deploy forward as noted in PWS Section 3.3.3. |
| 7 | PWS Section 2.2.1 | PWS Section 2.2.1 states that 'Key Personnel must be forward-deployed'. Section 2.2.3 states that 'The QC Manager and QC Specialists will be primarily remote..'. Please confirm that the QC Manager and QC Specialist are both allowed to be remotely located and that all other key personnel are required to be forward deployed. | Refer to Amendment 0001 |
| 8 | PWS Section 2.5.3 | PWS Section 2.5.3 requires that offerors 'The Contractor shall establish and maintain a database of facilities inspected, deficiencies identified, and repairs made that is easily searchable by country, base, and facility.' Please confirm that this database currently exists and will be provided to the incoming contractor during phase in. |
Correct. This database is considered Government Property and is maintained in two redundent systems. This informationwill be provided to the awardee. Updated data is also provided at every quarterly meeting and returned to HNC via hard drive.
9 Misc. Please confirm that resumes are not required for UFC Inspection Team members. Confirmed. The Key Personnel Package in the current solicitation/PWS is the same as it is in 22-C-0028. I don't recommend changing unless there is an extremely strong reason to make the change.
tc={9CE73E02-46D6-4D47-BC28-171435CCBC2D}: [Threaded comment]
Your version of Excel allows you to read this threaded comment; however, any edits to it will get removed if the file is opened in a newer version of Excel. Learn more: https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=870924
Comment:
Recommend that we add this as a requirement, but the remainder of the PDT needs to weigh in.
| 10 | PWS 2.2.3 | QC Specialist Question to pin down number required – PWS 2.2.3 requires that 'The Contractor shall propose a single QC manager and one QC Specialist per four (4) fielded electrical inspection teams.' Subtasks 2A-2D each require 'field three (3) Electrical Teams' for a total of 12 Electrical Teams. Please confirm that offerors are able to satisfy the requirements of PWS 2.2.3 by providing a total of 3 QC Specialists. | Confirmed, subject to award of optional tasks. QC managers and specialists should be brought on as necessary so that there are no more than four electrical teams per QC manager/ specialist. |
| 11 | Misc. | Questions and comments are due on 6 August. We kindly request consideration for an additional round of Q&A in response to the Government's first response to questions based on the complexity of the TF SAFE / UFC Program. | Refer to Question #1 and #2 response |
| 12 | Misc. | The RFP defines the Key Personnel Package as including a minimum of 7 key personnel. Offerors are required to submit 1 page resumes as well as letters of commitment for each personnel within Factor 1, Technical Approach. Factor 1, Technical Approach is limited to 20 pages. As resumes and letters of commitment total a minimum of 14 pages, we request that both resumes and letters of commitment be excluded from the page count restrictions. | Refer to Amendment 0001 |
| 13 | Misc. | Page sizes are required to be 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17". We kindly request confirmation that 11" x 8.5" or 17" x 11" (horizontally oriented) pages be allowed. | There is no restriction on the orientation of pages stated in the solicitation. |
| 14 | Misc. | Factor 1, Technical Approach is limited to 20 pages. Given the complexity of this technical solution, we request consideration that the page count limitation be increased to 25 pages | No change. |
| 15 | Misc. | Section L, Element B requires that offerors submit either CPARs or PPQs. Please confirm that offerors may submit PPQs previously completed in support of other RFPs so long as the PPQ is in a similar USACE/NAVFAC format as Attachment 1. | Confirmed. |
| 16 | Page 1 of 32 | The due date is listed as 16-AUG-24 but the posting on sam.gov says 19-AUG-24. Can USACE update the due date on page 1 to 19-AUG-24? | Refer to Question #1 and #2 response |
| 17 | Page 1 | Due to the complexity of the proposal and the volume of information required, we request a full 30 days to respond by extending the due date to 2-Sep-24. | Refer to Question #1 and #2 response |
| 18 | Attachment 6 | 6 mo extension tasks 4a and 4b. Since the extension is for only 6 months (half the other periods), should the value of the ODC and Travel tasks be half as well ($400k and $100k)? | Refer to Amendment 0001 |
| 19 | Section 7.5 | Specifically states off base housing costs in Jordan should be captured in Tasks 2C or 2D. Will housing in Kuwait be provided by the government or will the contractor be required to provide off-base housing for the UFC team, electrical inspection teams, and key personnel located in Kuwait? | Housing in Kuwait should be captured within the respective tasks for the PMO, and UFC & electrical teams. |
| 20 | Section 7.5 | If Government lodging is ultimately unavailable, will contractors be reimbursed through task 4 for securing necessary lodging? | Yes, key personnel located in Jordan &/Or Kuwait have resided off post regardless of lodging availability. |
| 21 | Section 7.13 | What is the expected duration of the quarterly meetings with the COR? | NTE 2 days. Travel day on either end plus 2 days for the actual meeting. |
| 22 | Section 7.13 | For the quarterly meetings with the COR, please confirm the contractor is responsible for the travel costs of its personnel (airfare, Per Diem, hotel, ground transportation) and meeting facility rental costs and the USG is responsible for the travel costs of its personnel (CORs, KO, etc.) attending the meetings. | Confirmed. |
| 23 | Section 7.19 | Lists a Program Manager and a Project Manager but the PWS only requires a Project Manager as a Key Person. Please confirm that the Program Manager and Project Manager listed in 7.19 are the same person/position and not two positions. If the Program Manager is a separate position, please define the requirements, location, and designate them as either key or not key. | See change in Amendment 0001 |
| 24 | Page 123 | The RFP lists key personnel but it excludes the Material Control Specialist and Quality Specialist. These appear in PWS sections 2.2.3 and 2.2.6 as key personnel. Are these two positions considered key or not? | See change in Amendment 0001 |
| 25 | Page 120 of 132 | Please confirm that offerors are required to submit the Attachment 2 Form for each of its 3-5 projects in Factor 2. | Confirmed |
| 26 | Attachment 2 | Please confirm that the Attachment 2 pages are excluded from the Factor 2 page count (5 pages) based on the exclusion statement on the form, "This form is not included in the page count". | Confirmed. |
| 27 | Attachment 2 | Is there a page limit for each project presented on the Attachment 2 form? | See change in Amendment 0001 |
| 28 | Page 123 | Technical Approach, Element A: Paragraphs 2-4: Much of the project specific requirements listed under Element A, is redundant information being presented in Factor 2: Past Performance on Attachment 2. Can the USG review the RFP requirements to ensure its intent is for project performance to be included in both Factor 1, Technical Approach, Element A and Factor 2 Past Performance? | Reviewed and confirmed |
| 29 | Page 120 | The page limit for Factor 1: Technical Approach is 20 pages. Since the PWS is 20 pages, can USACE increase the page limit by 30 pages to 50 pages so that offerors can fully respond to the 20 pages of requirements in the PWS and the other requirements in Elements A-B? The current 20 pages is not sufficient to respond to all the requirements. | No change. |
| 30 | Page 120 | Are full page graphics, figures, and or photographs excluded from the page counts in Factors 1 and 2? For example, would a one-page flow chart that graphically depicts a process be excluded? | Spreadsheets, tables, charts, etc. may be 11” x 17” but will count as two pages IAW the solicitation and are acceptable |
| 31 | Page 120 | Are full page graphics, figures, and or photographs excluded from the page counts in Factors 1 and 2? For example, would a full page table listing the names, titles, education, and experience of a contractor's current electricians be excluded from the page count? | Refer to Question #30 response |
| 32 | Page 120 of 132 | Factor 1 – Technical & Management Approach. Do we need to provide a separate Table of Contents and List of Tables and Figures for the Technical AND Management approaches in Factor 1, or just one Table of Contents and List of Tables and Figures for all of Factor 1? On Page 121 it states these items are needed "for each Factor," not each section of each Factor. | One Table of Contents for each Factor |
| 33 | Page 123 of 132 | Factor 1 – Technical Approach – Element A. Paragraph 3, beginning with "The types of information presented shall include such information as to..." Do we need to show all the information requested in this paragraph for our projects in Factor 1 when we are presenting it in Factor 2 through Attachment 2? | Yes. |
| 34 | Page 125 of 132 | Page 125 of 132: Will the summary level Property Management Plan (PMP) requested in Factor 1-Management Approach-Element D be counted in the page count or can we attach it as an appendix? | This is included in the page count. |
| 35 | Page 126 | Will past performance on Government contracts, providing the same or similar products and services be weighted more, less, or the same as Commercial contracts? | See change in Amendment 0001 |
| 36 | Page 132 | The Government states that it "reserves the right to make an award based upon price in the event that the Technical & Management and Past Performance evaluation results of all the offerors' proposals are substantially the same". Will the Government consider the quantity of strengths/weaknesses in its determination of proposals being "substantially the same"? | See change in Amendment 0001 |
| 37 | Page 132 | The Government states that it "reserves the right to make an award based upon price in the event that the Technical & Management and Past Performance evaluation results of all the offerors' proposals are substantially the same". Does the Government only consider the Factor I Adjectival ratings and Factor II Relevancy and Confidence assessment ratings when determining if "proposals are substantially the same"? | See change in Amendment 0001 |
| 38 | Page 129 | The RFP requires a signed certification sheet stating the offeror has implemented a Safety and Health program IAW OSHA regulation 29 CFR 1926.65(b). Is this certification sheet excluded from the page count in Factor 1: Management Approach? | See change in Amendment 0001 |
| 39 | Page 126 item C | Does this section only apply to electrical projects that have been terminated or to all contracts regardless of scope? | This applies to all contracts |
| 40 | Attachment 6 | Price Worksheet: The formula in cell f59 is incorrect and produces #REF!. Please revise the formula. | Corrected. |
| 41 | Page 3, A.4 | Period of Performance: There are two possible POPs depending on if the awardee is or is not the incumbent. If the incumbent is selected, the base period POP is a full 12 months. If the incumbent is not selected, the base period POP is a two-month phase in period followed by a 10-month performance period. Please confirm all bidders should prepare a total price on Attachment 6, task 2A for a 12-month performance period whether they are the incumbent or not. | See change in Amendment 0001 |
| 42 | Attachment 6 | The 6 month extension portion of Attachment 6 lists units as 12 months. Shouldn't these all be 6 months? | yes, see revised Attachment 6 provided with Amendment 0001. |
| 43 | PWS 2.1.1 | PWS section 2.1.1 states 'All personnel must be capable of implementing the requirement of this task throughout CENTCOM for a period of twelve (12) month.' Per A.4 Period of performance, there is a 60-day mobilization and 10 months on site. Please clarify the period for which personnel must be on site. | See response to #41 |
| 44 | Misc. | The RFP requires that offerors submit proposals through PIEE. Does the Government intend to publish any amendments or updates to the RFP to PIEE or only SAM.gov? | All amendments to solicitation will be published to the Sam.gov website using the PIEE Solicitation Module. |
| 45 | Misc. | RFP page 120 / 130 indicates that 'Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line.' Please confirm that this blank line may be provided via 6 point spacing after each paragraph. | All font shall comply with the requirements of the solicitation. Please refer to Section L of the solicitation. |
| 46 | Misc. | RFP page 120 / 132 indicates that 'Font type: New Times Roman; font size; 11, font size for headers and footers may be increased to 14 or reduced to 10 (excluding resumes).' Please clarify what is excluded from the resumes - ability to change font size from 11 point? | Yes, resumes are required to have 11-point font |
| 47 | Misc. | RFP page 120 / 132 states that 'Administrative Documents (not included in page count)'. Please confirm that this relates to the administrative documents listed on page 121, #1-6. | Confirmed |
| 48 | Misc. | RFP page 120 / 132 indicates that the Management Approach (all elements) is limited to 10 pages. Given the complexities of managing a program like TF SAFE/UFC, we kindly request consideration that the Management Approach page limitation be increased to a minimum of 20 pages. | No change |
| 49 | Misc. | RFP page 120 / 132 indicates that Factor 2 - Past Performance, Element A is limited to 5 pages. As offerors are allowed to submit up to 5 projects, this equates to only one page per project which is not adequate to demonstrate project relevance. As such, we kindly request consideration that Factor 2, Element A page limitation be raised to at least 10 pages. | Refer to amendment 0001 |
| 50 | Misc. | RFP Page 121 / 132 indicates that the proposal cover is excluded from page count. Please confirm that this is in reference cover page (i.e. first page) of each Factor (individual PDF document). | Confirmed |
| 51 | Misc. | RFP page 121 / 132 indicates that both the Proposal Cover and Title Page for each Factor are excluded from page count. RFP page 120 / 132 defines what is required on the proposal cover. We kindly request clarification as to what is required for the title page. | Refer to amendment 0001 |
| 52 | Misc. | Page 22. Section 2.2 Key Personnel, sub-section 2.2.7 Field Office Admin - The field office admin now has a requirement to be a licensed master electrician. We kindly request consideration that this requirement be removed as it seems unnecessary for that role? | See change in Amendment 0001 |
| 53 | Attachments | The Government has provided offerors with Attachments 1 - 5 for use in proposal submittals. We kindly request confirmation that offerors may be allowed to complete minor editing / formatting changes to each of these attachments. | Attachments 1 and 2 may not be edited; however Attachments 3, 4 and 5 may have minor edits provided the formats remain substantailly the same and with the same order of information. |
| 54 | Misc. | The addition of paragraphs #1-4 on RFP page 123 / 132 which outline example project requirements is a significant addition to the overall Element A requirement, particularly when considering that these projects must demonstrate all tasks required. For example, it would be very difficult to present all of the information in paragraph #3 in less than 2 pages. If offerors were to present 5 projects at 2 pages per project, that would total 10 pages, or 50% of the overall page limits for the Element. As such, we request that all past performance information required by Element A be excluded from the overall page count. | No change. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .