QA_1_thru_82_W912EP25R0007_20250422.pdf

W912EP25R0007, Indefinite Delivery Contract for Multi-Discipline Miscellaneous Civil Works and Other Architect and Engineering (A-E) Services Within the Boundaries of the Jacksonville District

PLEASE NOTE: The Q’s & A’s addressed during the 7 April 2025, 1300-1400 EDT, Pre-Proposal Teleconference are posted separately to SAM.gov as an attachment to the solicitation.

Questions Received and Answered through the time of posting this Q&A document to SAM.gov on April1, 2025 are as follow below:

Q1. Confirm if resumes are to be 1 or 2 pages

A1. Two pages.

Q2. Confirm that more than 1 resume for each discipline may be submitted.

A2. Confirmed. “A minimum of one resume is required for each key discipline.”

Q3. Due to the amount of information being requested for each key personnel in Arial 11 pt font, please confirm that an 11x17 page may be used for the requested summary table.

A3. Yes, an 11x17 sheet can be used for this table.

Q4. Confirm that the requested key personnel table is to be placed prior to the resumes.

A4. Yes, place table at beginning of resumes.

Q5. Confirm the date first licensed includes the month and year only.

A5. Yes, month and year is sufficient.

Q6. Confirm if USACE wants firms to include a minimum of 1 resume per Civil Water Resources category (i.e., 1 resume focused on hydraulics, 1 resume focused on hydrology, and 1 resume focused on coastal).

A6. Yes, a minimum of one resume is required for each Water Resources category, one each for Civil Hydraulics, Civil Hydrology, and Civil Coastal.

Q7. Confirm supporting documentation for past performance is to be included in an Appendix and doesn't count against the 15 pages in Section H.

A7. Supporting documentation for past performance will count against the 15-page limit for Section H.

Q8. Confirm that only Prime contract/task orders are required for the Volume of DoD table.

A8. This only applies to the Prime/JV.

Q9. Is there a page restriction on the resumes?

A9. 2 pages

Q10. Will multiple resumes in a single category be averaged?

A10. Each resume will be considered on its own merit. Multiple resumes will be considered in totality. There is no averaging.

Q11. Please reconsider requiring Small Business Joint Ventures to SBA submit audits. We requested an audit from SBA in September 2024, but SBA has not yet reviewed it.

A11. SBA audits are recommended, not required, and lack thereof will not be evaluated negatively. SBA audits are one method to help demonstrate capacity to accomplish the work.

Q12. The solicitation states that "a firm submitting a proposal as a prime contractor may NOT also be listed as a subcontractor in ANY other submitted proposal under this solicitation." Can our SB partner in our mentor-protégé JV also be a sub to our unrestricted team?

A12. This language has been struck from the solicitation.

Q13. Please confirm responses to questions asked prior to April 7th will be distributed prior to the pre-proposal meeting. There is a 2-week period between solicitation drop and the pre-proposal meeting where firms are working on their responses. Delays in answering questions will impact development of responses and potentially cause rework for firms.

A13. Yes

Q14. The first sentence in Criteria A reads, "Offerors must clearly demonstrate experience and competence for engineering and design services through relevant projects completed within the last ten years (measured from the date of this synopsis)." Further in the paragraph it reads, "If the project is not 100% complete, note the current percentage and estimated date when the project will be completed for each contract and/or task order." Confirm how many of the 10 projects must be 100% completed.

A14. Zero projects must be 100% complete.

Q15. Confirm the Volume of DoD Work is not included in the 15-page Section H. Volume of DoD can take up anywhere between 1-4 pages with Arial 11pt font, depending on firm.

A15. Volume of DoD work is not included in the 15-page Section H.

Q16. Firms are required to respond to a lot of information within Section H and have been given a 15-page limit. We respectfully ask that the Section H page limit be increased to 20 pages (not including Volume of DoD Work, requested in a prior question, and the documentation as requested below).

A16. A 15-page limit will be enforced for Section H.

Q17. In response to the answer to the documentation question being included in the Section H page count, we want to provide clarification. Other credible, documented supporting information may include Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) which are a minimum of 4 pages each. We respectfully ask that any documentation such as PPQs, Letters of Commendation, or other document proof - where the information is provided to firms in a PDF to prove credibility - will be excluded from the page count. To assist with organization, please confirm the documentation may be included in an Appendix. The concern is that Section H is currently limited to 15 pages and firms are required to respond to a lot of information within these pages even before providing the documentation. Firms are then restricted in adding documentation due to the page limitation.

A17. Past Performance can be addressed in multiple sections, including Section H; However, copies of letters, commendations, etc. provided to firms should be placed after Section H and will not be counted in the 15-page limit.

Q18. We understand CPARS are available to the government to evaluate past performance.

However, please confirm if firms may include the full CPAR report (with reviewer ratings and comments) for each Section F project as documentation of past performance? If USACE will allow the full CPAR reports, confirm they do not count against the Section H, 15-page limit and may be included in an Appendix. Note: CPARS reports typically run 3-4 pages each. The concern is that Section H is currently limited to 15 pages and firms are required to respond to a lot of information within these pages even before providing the documentation. Firms are then restricted in adding documentation due to the page limitation.

A18. There is no need to include CPARS reports. The government pulls reports for the selection board to review.

Q19. For the above-referenced RFP, the instructions say to upload our response via PIEE. If we are to submit on this RFP as a Joint Venture, can the proposal be uploaded via either one of the joint venture partner’s PIEE account or do we need to create a PIEE account for the Joint Venture? So please advise how we can proceed.

A19. The JV may use either partner’s PIEE account.

Q20. To ensure the District selects the best possible pool of AE contractors for the next five years, we kindly request a reconsideration of how submissions will be assessed concerning evaluation criteria A.(1) – A.(4). The solicitation indicates that project summaries should document breadth and depth of expertise and technical competence for all four criteria. This approach may result in selecting firms with balanced proficiency without showcasing industry-leading expertise. For a more robust selection, we respectfully recommend evaluating firms that demonstrate exceptional expertise and technical competence in at least two of the four areas: Inland Flood Risk Management, Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, Coastal Storm Risk Management, and Navigation.

This method would allow the District to choose firms that provide the depth of expertise and technical competence needed while ensuring redundancy in AE resources given the four areas and eight intended awards. We believe this approach will help the District achieve its goals and maintain a high standard of excellence in its projects.

A20. The Government intends to award task orders in all of the areas evaluated in the solicitation. As a result, the most highly qualified firm would be a firm that has experience completing projects in all of the subject areas evaluated in the solicitation.

Q21. Please clarify whether information to be summarized in a table for key personnel should be included in Section E or Section H.

A21. The table summarizing information regarding key personnel is to be placed at the beginning of Section E, prior to the resumes.

Q22. Is it possible to use a different font type instead of Arial or a smaller font (9 or 10 point) for graphics submitted in Section H to make them more readable and more concise?

A22. 9-point Arial font may be used for graphics in Section H.

Q23. Can multiple resumes be provided to address the “hydraulics, hydrology, and coastal” requirements for the Civil Water Resources position?

A23. Yes, a minimum of one resume is required for each Water Resources category, one each for Civil Hydraulics, Civil Hydrology, and Civil Coastal.

Q24. The past performance section indicates we must submit information for relevant contracts/subcontractors including name, address, and telephone number of references…is this information just required for the 10 Section F projects or for any project discussed in the past performance section?

A24. The information requested in Selection Criterion D, Past Performance, is required for any project your firm provides as an example in response to Selection Criterion D, Past Performance.

Q25. Can the Section E summary table for key personnel information be on 11 x 17 pages? It is not possible to include all the required information on 8.5 x 11 pages.

A25. Yes, you can use a 11X 17.

Q’s & A’s 26 through 40 posted on 7 April 2025:

Q26. The solicitation states, “All Offerors responding to this announcement MUST identify to which category they are submitting.” Can you please confirm that the “categories” are listed as evaluation criteria A1-A4 (1. Inland Flood Risk Management, 2. Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, 3. Coastal Storm Risk Management, 4. Navigation)?

A26. The categories are Small Business and Other than Small Business as follows in the next sentence of the solicitation which reads: “All Offerors must state the words, Small Business, or Other than Small Business after the solicitation number in PART I, A, Block 3 of Standard Form 330.”

Q27. The solicitation states, “A separate SF 330 MUST be submitted for each category in which the firm wants consideration.” Can you please confirm that “A separate SF 330” is an entire package (SF330 Part I A-I and Part II for each office on the team).

A27. Yes, a separate SF 330 is an entire package, i.e., SF 330, Parts I and II submitted as two PDF files.

Q 28. The solicitation states, “No one firm will receive more than one award as a result of this solicitation.” Can you please confirm that “firm” refers to the Prime Firm?

A28. Yes, the “firm” refers to the Prime firm. Please note that the following language has been deleted from the solicitation: “To avoid a conflict of interest, any contractor proposing as a prime may not have a subcontractor who is also proposing as a prime. This solicitation shall be viewed as one singular solicitation. Therefore, a firm submitting a proposal as a prime contractor may NOT also be listed as a subcontractor in ANY other submitted proposal under this solicitation. This requirement also applies to Offerors submitting as Joint Ventures. In the event a conflict of interest is found, the Contracting Officer reserves the right to deem ineligible for award the proposal submitted by the prime firm who is also a subcontractor under another firm proposal.”

Q29. The solicitation states, “No one firm will receive more than one award as a result of this solicitation.” Can a firm be both prime and subconsultant in separate awards or subconsultant on multiple awarded teams?

A29. Yes. Please note that the following language has been deleted from the solicitation: “To avoid a conflict of interest, any contractor proposing as a prime may not have a subcontractor who is also proposing as a prime. This solicitation shall be viewed as one singular solicitation. Therefore, a firm submitting a proposal as a prime contractor may NOT also be listed as a subcontractor in ANY other submitted proposal under this solicitation. This requirement also applies to Offerors submitting as Joint Ventures. In the event a conflict of interest is found, the Contracting Officer reserves the right to deem ineligible for award the proposal submitted by the prime firm who is also a subcontractor under another firm proposal.”

Q30. The solicitation states, “No one firm will receive more than one award as a result of this solicitation.” Can you please confirm that each awarded contract is for a single category only? Or could a single team be accepted for multiple categories that are then included in a single contract?

A30. The categories are Small Business and Other than Small Business. “The Government intends to award a target of eight contracts as a result of this announcement. The Government has a target to award four other than small business (OTSB) awards and a goal of four awards to small businesses (SB) with a SB reserve target of 10 awarded task orders.”

Q31. The solicitation reads, "g. Cost Engineer (Licensed Engineer with cost experience)" Will USACE accept a Cost Engineer who holds a Certified Cost Engineer (CCE), Certified Cost Consultant (CCC), Certified Cost Professional (CCP), or hold an equivalent accreditation in lieu of a

PE?

A31. For purposes of selection, USACE will accept a Cost Engineer who holds a Certified Cost Engineer (CCE) credential or a Licensed Engineer with cost experience.

Q32. Section D – Past Performance: Would the Government consider allowing Letters of Commendation to be submitted as an appendix to SF330 Part I and excluded from the page count?

A32. Yes. Copies of letters, commendations, etc. provided to firms should be placed after Section H and will not be counted in the 15-page limit.

Q33. Supplemental Instructions – SF 330 Formatting (Sections 3 & 7): The instructions specify Arial 11-point font and standard English formatting. Would the Government permit the use of 9-point font for graphics, tables, and charts—particularly in SF 330 Sections D, E, F, and H—provided the content remains legible and professionally formatted?

A33. Yes. 9-point Arial font may be used for the items you have listed.

Q34. Section B – Qualified Professional Personnel: Would the Government please clarify whether the Key Personnel Table should be placed in Section E (Resumes) or in Section H (Additional Information) of SF 330 Part I?

A34. The Key Personnel Table can be shown on 11” x 17” page(s) and is to be placed at the beginning of Section E, prior to the resumes.

Q35. Section G – Extent of Participation of Small Business: Will the Government allow the Small Business Participation Plan to be included as an appendix to SF 330 Part I, with a reference to its location provided in Section H, in order to preserve page limits and maintain formatting clarity?

A35. Yes. The Small Business Participation Plan is to be included after Section H and will not be counted in the 15-page limit.

Q36. G. Extent of Participation of Small Businesses: The RFP requests offerors provide a Small Business Participation Plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-8, in Section H. Given the number of pages expected to put together a comprehensive Small Business Participation Plan, we request this plan be excluded from the 15-page limit for Section H and included as an appendix?

A36. Yes. The Small Business Participation Plan is to be included after Section H and will not be counted in the 15-page limit.

Q37. H. Volume of Past DoD Contracts Awarded to Firm: The RFP requests offerors provide the volume of work awarded by DoD agencies during the previous 12 months, excluding IDIQs. For our Firm, this list is extensive, we request this list be excluded from the 15 page limit for Section H and included as an appendix?

A37. Volume of DoD work is not included in the 15-page Section H.

Q38. Supplemental Instructions: Will the government permit offerors to use a type font smaller than 11pt for tables, graphics, etc., so long as the text is legible?

A38. Yes. 9-point Arial may be used for tables & graphics so long as the text is legible.

Q39. Supplemental Instructions: The RFP states “All pages of the proposal shall be 8.5 in. x 11.0 in., except that the SF 330 PART I, Section D, Organizational Chart of the Proposed Team, and the Matrix required as SF 330 PART I, Section G may each be presented on a page up to 11.0 in. x 17.0

in. at the proper location and each counted as one individual page.” Please consider permitting offerors to also use the 11.0 in x 17.0 in specification for the key personnel table requested in B.

QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL.

A39. Yes. The Key Personnel Table can be shown on 11” x 17” page(s) and is to be placed at the beginning of Section E, prior to the resumes.

Q40. Are projects that cover other select criteria listed in the synopsis (for example maintenance dredging, numerical modeling) considered as relevant as design projects?

A40. The primary selection criteria are listed in the synopsis/solicitation in descending order of importance from A to F per paragraph 3 of the solicitation. Also, per paragraph 3.A. of the solicitation, “Offerors must clearly demonstrate experience and competence for engineering and design services through relevant projects completed within the last ten years (measured from the date of this synopsis). Project summaries should document breadth and depth of expertise and technical competence for the following evaluation criteria A.(1) – A.(4). Additional projects may be included in SF 330 Section H.” The examples that you provided in your question are all included in selection criterion A, which is the most important of the primary selection criteria.

The Q’s & A’s addressed during the 7 April 2025, 1300-1400 EDT, Pre-Proposal Teleconference are posted separately to SAM.gov as an attachment to the solicitation.

The following Q’s & A’s 41 through 58 were posted on 11 April 2025:

Q41. Is there a total page count limit for SF330 Part I form (sections A through H)?

A41. Answer: No. Please note that the third paragraph from the end of the solicitation states in part: “Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentations beyond those sufficient to present a complete and effective response to this announcement are not desired. While there is not a specific page limit, clear and concise proposals are preferable.”

Q42. Are there any other page count limits for individual sections (e.g., Sections A through D) besides the two-page resumes (Section E), two-page project descriptions (Section F) and 15-page limit for Section H?

A42: No other page limits for SF 330 Part I. Please note the supplemental instructions regarding SF 330 Part II – GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS included in the solicitation.

Q43. Who are the incumbents on the small business contracts?

A43: 1) ILSI & Arcadis JV; 2) Singhofen & Wantman Group JV; and 3) Genterra-Freese & Nichols JV.

Q44. What is total value of the task orders issued to the existing incumbents under their existing contracts?

A44: 1) $0.00; 2) $1,104,681.23; 3) $0.00; A) $1,915,942.40; B) $1,513,383.78; C) $9,928,880.89;

and D) $1,774,475.86.

Q45. Who are the incumbents on the unrestricted contracts?

A45. A) CDM Federal Programs Corp.; B) Kimley-Hanson-Bergmann JV; C) AECOM – Black & Veatch Civil Works JV; and D) Stanley-Stantec JV.

Q46. As coastal modeling was emphasized by the three presenters, would USACE consider adding a Coastal Modeler to the personnel requirements under Section E? If so, please allow for the modeler to either be a licensed professional engineer or have a PhD in coastal modeling noting many within the modeling community have their doctoral degree but may not necessarily be a licensed PE.

A46. A minimum of one resume is required for each key discipline showing relevant education, training, and registration. In addition, supplemental resumes of unlicensed subject matter experts may be submitted for the same discipline/intended contract role.

Q47. For Selection Criteria G, Extent of Participation of Small Businesses, what criteria are you evaluating that will meet the FAR 52.219-8 compared to Executive Order 13895?

A47. 1. OTSB will need to submit a subcontracting plan according to FAR 19.704; 2. SB can count their own work as small business participation.

Q48. Can you put a deadline on the question period so that we know when to expect a final addendum and are not waiting for potential changes at the due date?

A48. The solicitation will be amended to read: “Questions may be submitted up to 3 days prior to the final submission due date. Final Q’s & A’s will be posted to SAM.gov not later than 2 days prior to the final submission due date.”

Q49. For resumes in Section E, which key personnel designation corresponds to the Dredging/Navigation Engineers that will be supporting the Specialized Exp?

A49. Section E is tied to selection criterion B and the disciplines applicable would be from selection criterion 3.B.1. and would depend on who your team has with the corresponding qualifications to demonstrate specialized experience and technical competence in dredging/navigation. Normally this would be one of the Civil Water Resources disciplines.

Q50. May we request an extension of the due date? After striking the conflict of interest clause, the makeup of our team has changed substantially, and now we are trying to make up for time.

A51. Currently, we do not anticipate changing the due date.

Q52. May we use a size 7 font in the SF330 Part IIs sections 9-11 to keep the forms to one page?

A52. No. Please use another SF 330 Part II form as a continuation page, if needed, and clearly identify the continuation page as such.

Q53. Please confirm Section F should address the following criteria and it does not need to be addressed in Section H:

o A. Specialized Experience & Technical Competence

A53. Confirmed, however per the first paragraph of section 3.A. of the solicitation, it states:

“Additional projects may be included in SF 330 Section H.” Each firm must decide how it will use the pages allowed for the SF 330 Part I. The Standard Form 330 Instruction No. 30 states: “Section H. Additional Information. 30. Use this section to provide additional information specifically requested by the agency or to address selection criteria that are not covered by the information provided in Sections A-G.”

Q54. Please confirm Section E should address the following criteria and it does not need to be addressed in Section H:

o B. Qualified Professional Experience

A54: Confirmed.

Q55. Do you require all resumes to be 2 pages, or can some be 1?

A55. Resumes may be 1 page. Two pages is the maximum acceptable length for resumes.

Q56. Please confirm Section H should address the following criteria:

o C. Capacity to Accomplish the Work o D. Past Performance o E. Knowledge of Locality o F. Geographic Proximity of Firm Relative to the Worksite o G. Extent of Participation of Small Businesses (appendix that does not count in the 15 pages) o H. Volume of Past DoD Contracts Awarded to Firm (appendix that does not count in the 15 pages)

A56. Confirmed, however each firm must decide how it will use the pages allowed for the SF 330 Part I. The Standard Form 330 Instruction No. 30 states: “Section H. Additional Information. 30. Use this section to provide additional information specifically requested by the agency or to address selection criteria that are not covered by the information provided in Sections A-G.”

Q57. Please confirm where we should include our JV agreement – Part I or Part II?

A57. Submit the JV Agreement as an Appendix to SF 330 Part I Section H. The JV Agreement will not count toward the Section H 15-page limit.

Q58. Under C. Capacity to Accomplish the Work, it states “Offerors must have the capacity to proceed with work and accomplish it in a timely manner once a notice to proceed is issued and accomplish it in accordance with scheduled completion dates, to include emergency response following significant storm events.” We do not see emergency response listed in the A. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence. Please confirm if we should address it in our Section F.

A58. The wording in selection criterion C “to include emergency response following significant storm events” will be struck from the solicitation.

The following Q’s & A’s 59 through 72 were posted on 15 April 2025:

Q59. H. Volume of Past DoD Contracts Awarded to Firm: if we are proposing as a joint venture, do you require our volume of work awarded by DoD agencies during the previous 12 months from just the JV, or for the JV partner firms individually? So, one response for the JV, or one response for each JV partner?

A59. One response from the JV if available, if unavailable one response for each JV partner.

Q60. Please clarify the requirement for dams. Any dams in Florida would be low head dams.

However, dams in Puerto Rico would be large dams. To submit the best example, is the requirement for Florida dams or Puerto Rico dams or both?

A61. All experience is good, but the most relevant experience would be directly related to the work anticipated in the SAJ AOR. Please reference the following, which is found in the second paragraph of the solicitation under solicitation paragraph No. 1. CONTRACT INFORMATION: “The primary purpose of this contract is to provide A-E services for projects located within the geographic area of Civil Works (CW) responsibility of the Jacksonville District (SAJ) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on land, and on protected and unprotected water, to include portions of Florida and Georgia (See Exhibit A –SAJ AOR MAP). The South Atlantic Division (SAD) includes parts of Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Puerto Rico, and the Antilles. The primary purpose of this proposed contract is to provide services for projects located within the SAJ AOR. Secondarily, the contract may be used to provide services throughout the SAD AOR. The contractor will have the right to refuse orders for services to be performed outside the SAJ AOR.”

Q62. Because of the volume of Q&A and the wait for the next amendment, can you please extend the due date by one week?

A62. The solicitation due date has been extended to May 01, 2025, 01:00 PM EDT.

Q63. Please cut off the questions a week prior to the due date so that firms have an opportunity to response to your answers.

A63. The solicitation was amended on April 11, 2025, to read: “Questions may be submitted up until 21 April 2025.”

Q64. Solicitation Part B, Qualified Professional Personnel asks for: “9) Experience Performing the Required Services (indicate for which services addressed in this synopsis the key person has experience)”. What is meant by “Required Services”? Those in “Project Information” or “Specialized Experience and Technical Competence”?

A64. Yes. The first sentence of selection criterion B states: “The A-E shall demonstrate that all expertise requirements (see Project information and Selection Criterion A above.) are reflected on key personnel resumes.”

Q65. Please provide a revised solicitation incorporating all answers/changes from the extensive Q&A into the official solicitation.

A65. The Government has revised the official language in the solicitation. Because of how the systems work, the Government recommends using the SAM posted solicitation as the official solicitation guidelines. Some of the answers in the Q&A did not result in a revision to the solicitation. Therefore, the revised solicitation from SAM and the Q&A document will need to be used to complete the response correctly.

Q66. Please update the due date for this solicitation in PIEE.

A66. Updated.

Q67. As part of the original Q&A, the government indicated that the cost engineer is required to have either a PE certification or a CCE certification. During the pre-proposal teleconference, multiple individuals indicated that there are other industry standard certifications for cost estimators/cost engineers and the government indicated that it would consider the request to allow these other professional cost estimator certifications. I did not see this addressed in the updated Q&A that was issued. We respectfully request that the government allows other industry standard cost engineer certifications such as the ASPE Certified Professional Estimator (CPE) and the AACE Certified Cost Professional (CCP) in lieu of the PE and/or CCE certification.

A 67. In response to the Pre-proposal teleconference, the Cost Estimator requirements in the Solicitation were amended as follows:

B. QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL:

The following disciplines with applicable professional registrations are required.

“3. Cost Estimator: Cost Estimators must have a minimum of five years’ experience preparing both cost estimates and construction schedules, a minimum of five years’ experience using Microsoft Project software, and a minimum of five years’ experience using Micro-Computer Aided Cost Estimating System (MCACES) software. Applicable licensure or certification will be given additional consideration, but lack thereof will not be weighed negatively.”

Q68. Small Business: In the SAM.gov synopsis, Section G. EXTENT OF PARTICIPATION OF SMALL BUSINESSES reads, “In PART I, Section H, provide a Small Business Participation Plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-8.” The answer to Q47 states a subcontracting plan is required (according to FAR 19.704). Please confirm which type of small business plan to submit: a participation plan or a subcontracting plan. We respectfully request an update be made to the synopsis on SAM.gov if a subcontracting plan is being requested.

A68. Please submit a Small Business Participation Plan

Q69. SAM.gov: We received a notification this morning that the synopsis had changed. When I went to check the record, the content seems to have reverted to the original synopsis published in March. An example is shown below where a Cost Engineer is now being requested, the emergency response following significant storm events is included, the Cost Estimator information has been crossed out, and the Capacity requirement now includes the $25M for the OTSB response whereas it was removed in an earlier amendment. Please advise how we should proceed.

A69. Please disregard the update that occurred this morning (15APR25). There is a known glitch when updating the posting in PIEE that this sometimes occurs in SAM. I will correct the synopsis in SAM to our last intentionally updated version posted 11APR25.

Q70. I am writing to request clarification regarding the update posted on April 15, 2025, to the solicitation W912EP25R0007. Can you confirm the re-addition of the following clause was intended as it was previously removed?

"To avoid a conflict of interest, any contractor proposing as a prime may not have a subcontractor who is also proposing as a prime. This solicitation shall be viewed as one singular solicitation.

Therefore, a firm submitting a proposal as a prime contractor may NOT also be listed as a subcontractor in ANY other submitted proposal under this solicitation. This requirement also applies to Offerors submitting as Joint Ventures. In the event a conflict of interest is found, the Contracting Officer reserves the right to deem ineligible for award the proposal submitted by the prime firm who is also a subcontractor under another firm proposal."

A70. Please disregard the solicitation update that occurred today (15 April). It was an error caused by an update in a different system. It will be corrected NLT COB today. The following is still correct and will be updated to reflect the verbiage as of 11APR25:

Q12. The solicitation states that "a firm submitting a proposal as a prime contractor may NOT also be listed as a subcontractor in ANY other submitted proposal under this solicitation." Can our SB partner in our mentor-protégé JV also be a sub to our unrestricted team?

A12. This language has been struck from the solicitation

Q71. When I reviewed the solicitation on SAM and selected “show revisions”, it shows that new language as stricken.

A71. Please disregard the solicitation update that occurred today. It was an error caused by an update in a different system. It will be corrected NLT COB today. The verbiage as of 11APR25 is the correct verbiage. We became aware of this issue shortly after my reply to you this morning.

Q72. – I also noticed that the language about primes not being able to be subs on another team has been added back into the solicitation (see below). Is that intentional? Can you provide clarification on this?

A72. Please disregard the solicitation update that occurred today. It was an error caused by an update in a different system. It will be corrected NLT COB today. The verbiage as of 11APR25 is the correct verbiage. We became aware of this issue shortly after my reply to you this morning.

The following Q’s & A’s 73 through 77 were posted on 16 April 2025:

Q73. The District posted an updated solicitation (morning of 15 Apr 25) but many of the items you modified previously are now back in the solicitation. Can you please double check what you posted?

A73. We had an unexpected reversion to original as a result of an update in PIEE. I corrected that reversion to the solicitation updated as of 11APR25 moments before you sent your question.

According to what I’m seeing on SAM, the version I just posted (afternoon of 15 Apr 25) is the correct version.

Q74 We received the Q&A updates regarding the changes to the solicitation 15 April 2025.

However, I received a notification from the PIEE system that amendment 0001 was posted this morning. There is no attachment. (1) Can you confirm that there is no amendment 0001? (2) Please correct this in PIEE because we will be required to acknowledge the amendment upon submittal.

A74(1). Amendment 0001 showed up because we corrected the extension in PIEE to reflect the extension in SAM.

A74(2). Extending the date in PIEE activated a known glitch that reverts the current Solicitation back to the original un-amended Solicitation. For that reason, we will not be updating this Solicitation in PIEE unless absolutely necessary. Please reference the listing in SAM for the most current Solicitation, attachments, etc. In cases in which SAM and PIEE contradict each other, SAM will be correct. However, please feel free to contact me in those cases and we will verify or make corrections as needed.

Q75. Our question is in regard to the Qualified Professional Personnel Summary Table. Please clarify what type of response is expected on the Resume Table for # 9) Experience Performing the Required Services (indicate for which services addressed in this synopsis the key person has experience)”. Due to the open-ended nature of the criteria as well as the extensive list of both required services as well as specialized experience and technical competence, this column in the table could easily become unwieldy. Would you provide an example of a satisfactory response to #9 in the table?

A75. Item No. 9 for the Qualified Professional Personnel Summary Table is intended to be supplemental to item no. 3 of the table, Role in this Contract. Use Item 9 to highlight sub-specialties for which the Key Person has noteworthy specialized experience and technical competence. An example might be item 3 is Civil Water Resources-Coastal and item 9 for the same key person might include: numerical modeling; beach nourishment.

Q76. The updated solicitation language indicates that the Cost Engineer must have a minimum of 5 years’ experience using Microsoft Project. We respectfully request that the Primavera P6 scheduling software is allowed in lieu of the MS Project software. Would that be acceptable?

A76. Jacksonville District Engineering currently uses Microsoft Project but is likely to transition to Primavera P6. We’ll adjust the criteria to require experience using both packages, eliminating the 5-year minimum experience requirement. Obviously, greater experience will be given greater consideration along with demonstrated ability to work with and produce files compatible with both packages. Paragraph 3.B.3. Cost Estimator will be amended to read:

3. Cost Estimator: Cost Estimators must have experience preparing both cost estimates and construction schedules, experience using Microsoft Project and Primavera P6 software, and experience using Micro-Computer Aided Cost Estimating System (MCACES) software.

Applicable licensure or certification will be given additional consideration, but lack thereof will not be weighed negatively.

Q77. Per the RFQ, SF 330 Part II should be a single-page form. However, due to the font requirement of Arial size 11 and for some multidiscipline firms may need to list additional positions, would it be acceptable for Part II to extend to two pages?

A77. Yes. Please use another SF 330 Part II form as a continuation page, if needed, and clearly identify the continuation page as such. Reference Q&A 52 posted on 11 Apr 25.

The following Q’s & A’s 78 through 82 were posted on 22 April 2025:

Q78. My question is in response to Q77 / A77. When downloading the SF330 Part II from GSA, the fillable PDF uses Arial 10 pt font. Our firm uses this font and size for all Part IIs which are updated bi-yearly. Would you allow for GSA’s standard font size of Arial 10pt to be used for Part IIs? It is timely to convert the font size on each Part II. Thank you for your consideration.

A78. Yes. Arial 10 pt font may be used for the SF 330 Part II forms.

Q79. From the Q&A posted April 16 Q76 and A76:

3. Cost Estimator: Cost Estimators must have experience preparing both cost estimates and construction schedules, experience using Microsoft Project and Primavera P6 software, 14 and experience using Micro-Computer Aided Cost Estimating System (MCACES) software. Applicable licensure or certification will be given additional consideration, but lack thereof will not be weighed negatively.

Since you have not yet transitioned to P6, our cost estimators may not have had a chance to demonstrate experience, would you please consider rewording so that the requirement for Cost Estimator experience reads: experience using Microsoft Project and Primavera P6 software, 14 and/or experience using Micro-Computer Aided Cost Estimating System (MCACES) software

A79. We removed the minimum years of experience to make this less of a pass-fail criterion for pre-selection and create flexibility in how firms address our need. Demonstrate the experience your team has along with any plans to shore up perceived shortcomings with respect to specific software. Since we currently use Microsoft Project, it will be important to accommodate that in some fashion right away and be able to accommodate Primavera P6 at some point in the future.

Q80. For the SF 330 Part II requirement, do you require each firm to submit one per office, or can we submit 1 per firm and include the headquarter office information?

A80. Reply: Please reference item 2 of the General Instructions to the SF 330, which is copied & pasted here:

“2. Prepare a separate Part II for each firm that will be part of the team proposed for a specific contract and submitted with Part I. If a firm has branch offices, submit a separate Part II for each branch office that has a key role on the team.”

Q81. Would you consider a 1-week extension based on the amount of questions that was released last week to allow our team enough time to incorporate the proper changes and coordinate receiving information from subconsultants.

A81. No. The due date was previously extended from 24 April 2025 to 1 May 2025.

Q82. We are currently preparing our response for the subject solicitation and are including a relevant project completed for the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). As part of our past performance documentation, we reached out to SFWMD to request completion of the standard NAVFAC PPQ form.

However, SFWMD has confirmed that they do not complete NAVFAC PPQ form and only provide past performance documentation in their own standard format. As this is the only documentation they are willing to provide, we would like to confirm if their format will be acceptable for submission under this solicitation.

A82. Yes. That is acceptable as a letter of recommendation.