MATOC_1_31_13.pdf

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS RELATED TO:

SOLICITATION No: W912J6-13-R-0002

PROJECT: MATOC 2013 IDIQ

Questions are on a non-attribution basis

Date: 31 Jan 2013

Q1: Exhibit D, question 2b & 3a. Can a key employee hold more than one key personnel position (i.e. double – hat)

A1: Yes they can unless specific project at task order level specifies otherwise.

Q2: Exhibit F. Please confirm that an electronic copy is only required for Binder #2, Volumes 2 and 3. If no and electronic copy is required for all binders, can one CD with 2 separate PDF files

(one for binder 1 and one for binder 2) be submitted? Which binder would you like the CD to be in?

A2: An electronic copy is required for both binder #1 and binder #2. We would like a CD copy included with each binder. You are not required to provide an electronic copy of Exhibit E.

A2: REVISED: An electronic copy is required for Binder #2, Volumes 2 and 3 only. Although it doesn't matter you can put the one CD/DVD in the original file binder. You are not required to provide an electronic copy of Volume 1 or the Exhibit E- however, although not required a copy of your introductory letter on the CD would be helpful.

Q3: We are trying to determine whether to submit our proposal in the SB or 8(a) pool. Our company is close to graduating from the 8(a) program. If we submit our proposal in the 8(a) pool and then graduate from the 8(a) program prior to the first option period, will the option periods be exercised?

A3: Yes option periods will still be exercised and the social economic status will remain within the contract even after graduation as long as the contract is ongoing.

Q4: On Page 22, Section 1.4.4.1 it notes to include a bonding letter ... "at the minimum, the highest level requested in areas of consideration. Please confirm if you select one of the Option

B Escalating Scale options, that the bond letter minimum is for the basic option period. If no, which option year is the minimum bonding amount.

A4: Your bonding capacity needs to cover your highest level of consideration. If you select the escalating scale option at a lower threshold, your bonding needs to be able to cover that amount.

The escalating scale dollar level of the contract will be determined before exercising the option.

If you are found responsible at the next option period to move up to the next threshold your bonding, at the time, will need to cover that new threshold amount.

Q5: I just got off the phone with the U.S./Canada Joint Certification Office, Defense Logistics

Information Services (DLIS), Federal Center, 74 Washington Avenue North, Battle Creek, MI

49017-3084, toll free (800) 352-3572 <tel:%28800%29%20352-3572> . I was told that their are only two personnel working in the office and now that it is mandated that all contractors have to be certified their office has been bombarded with applications and the time of acceptance has moved from 5 days to 55 days. Can your office verify this? and if so how will EDWOSB's that have not been certified be able to obtain the specs and drawing for the prototype project by 05

Feb?

A5: We were able to verify that DLIS has been bombarded with applicants and the time of acceptance will take significantly longer. Even though the government handed out a CD with the plans and specs you will still need to register. The government reserves the right to use the site on future projects and failure to register may result in not being considered on projects.

Q6: on page 26 of 151 (2.2.5. Other Optional Past Performance Considerations: ) states that the offeror is allowed (5) submissions for optional past performance however Exhibit F Proposal

Content Aid "Offerors lacking relevant Past Performance experience may submit three (3) references for each Predecessor Company, Subcontractor or Key Personnel on an Exhibit C, or resume for key personnel". Can you clarify the number of submissions allowed if the offeror is lacking in self performed past performance?

A6: If you do not have any past performance you can submit 3of a predecessor company. The government will also consider additional letter references, certificates etc. is if you do not have the direct past performance.

Q7: On page 25 of 151 (2.2.2.2.) "References for subcontractors from the proposing offeror are not acceptable." and page 26 of 151 (2.2.4.) "Offerors lacking relevant Past Performance experience may submit information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement if such information is relevant to this acquisition". Can you clarify if the Offeror can submit its Team Partners/ Key Subcontractors past performance (Reference) if the offeror is lacking, as the two clauses seem to contradict each other?

A7: Page 25 (2.2.2.2) refers to subcontractors providing references and completing an Exhibit B

“Subcontractor Information and Consent Form” on primes that they are direct subs for.

Subcontractors, being used as a reference to a prime, is not acceptable. Page 26 (2.2.4) Refers to primes using subcontractors past performance when they are lacking past performance on their own. This is acceptable.

Q8: I apologize for the inconvenience, but we had a minor question on the Exhibit B form (the

Subcontractor Consent Form). As highlighted on the attachment it states “… issued by the insert

USPFO P&C name for multiple…..” Thus I just wanted to clarify what the USPFO P&C name is or if we could simply just insert “….issued by the USPFO for multiple….”. I also attached this inquiry on the Exhibit G form as instructed on the solicitation. Thank you very much for your assistance on this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you need additional information from us or have any questions or concerns.

tel:%28800%29%20352-3572

A8: USPFO P&C is an acronym for United States Property and Fiscal Office Hawaii, Purchasing and Contracting Division. You can simply insert USPFO.

Q9: In review of the RFP noticed that we need to select “Dollar Value of Projects” to be used in the evaluation process. We are considering the $200-$5M or the $2M-$5M. Would you consider $200k - $5M instead? Not sure we want to prepare proposals for very small task orders and don’t want to be penalized if we do not submit cost proposals on some of these.

A9: When selecting the dollar value of projects you are welcome to select more than one category.

Q10: Paragraph one states projects may be ongoing, if complete to 70%, however, the following paragraph (marked with ** halfway down the page) states that the proposal must discuss relevant task order(s) complete to 90%. Please clarify whether projects are to be 70% or 90% complete.

A10: 70% an amendment to the solicitation will be issued to clarify the confusion.

Q11: Section 00110, paragraph 2.1.8.1 states, "All Joint Ventures are advised to avoid a potential conflict of interest Joint Venture (JV) partners WILL NOT be eligible for individual

MATOC awards in additional to an award to the JV entity." As it is understood that there will be two pools of selected MATOC awardees (small business and 8(a)), does the referenced statement also preclude a JV partner from submitting as an individual for one pool while also submitting as a JV entity for another pool?

A11: You would have to choose one or the other. If you choose to go in alone, you can have your JV partner listed as a subcontractor. A JV partner submitting as an individual for one pool cannot also submit as a JV entity for another pool.

Q12: Section 00110, paragraph 2.2.2.3 states that multiple subcontractors may be named for the same discipline but are limited to a maximum of three subcontractors per discipline. Please clarify if for each task order, each offeror will then be limited to subcontract work to only those subcontractors included in its own RFP submittal package.

A12: They will not be limited but the government would start really to question your rationale if performance is bad and the subs listed are different then the sub contractors used.

Q12: ANSWER REVISED, Substitutions will be allowed pending the approval of the contracting officer IAW section 00800 SC#09

Q13: Section 00110, paragraph 2.2.2.1 states to provide the names of subcontractors for

Horizontal disciplines. Please clarify what is intended for Horizontal disciplines.

A13: Although not part of the prototypical/seed project, for the purpose of this being a procurement for a MATOC project for which within its lifespan may contain projects with

Horizontal requirements, please provide a list of names for subcontractors for: concrete paving, asphaltic/flexible pavements, below grade utilities (water, storm water, sanitary sewer and communications), earthwork, landscaping and irrigation.

Q14: Can an Offeror be included and listed as a major subcontractor in another Offeror's RFP submittal package?

A14: Yes

Q15: FedBizOpps.gov shows the response date for this solicitation as December 20 th

, 2012 2:00

PM Hawaii, and therefore, the posting has been archived, as of January 4 th

, due to

FedBizOpps.gov policy. Can the solicitation response date listed on the SF1442 of February 5 th

2013, 2:00 PM be confirmed please?

A15: This hiccup has been corrected. Solicitation response date is still February 5 th

, 2013, 2:00

PM.

Q16: Section 2.3 Binder 2-Volume 3, Technical Information of the RFP states “This Volume is limited to 20 pages excluding table of contents, tabs resumes and the Prototypical Schedule.

Additional requirements for the technical proposal are found in Exhibit D.” However, Exhibit D states “Each question should be covered in sufficient detail to clearly address all required information. Answer questions in order presented. You are NOT limited to the space provided;

use as much space as necessary to provide answers.” These items appear to be in conflict of each other, with the RFP stating 20 page limit, and Exhibit D stating no limitation, please clarify which is correct in regards to page limitations for Volume III.

A16: The form only shows one fillable area. The intent is to still limit volume III to 20 pages exclusive of required attachments such as resumes, schedule, org chart etc.

Q17: Table of contents shows an exhibit E-1 self performed work Form. Form does not appear to be in our bid package.

A17: This is an error- there is no Exhibit E-1 - Self performance is discussed in Exhibit D

Q23: We are submitting a proposal as a prime contractor. We also frequently work as a subcontractor and have been asked by other primes to submit Exhibit B - Subcontractor

Information & Consent. Is it acceptable for us to be part of another Prime Offeror's submission as a subcontractor when we are also submitting a proposal as a Prime?

A23: Yes it is acceptable to be a subcontractor for a general and still be your own prime.

Q24: We are asked to provide a SAM code, however, we are registered on SAM but are unfamiliar with a SAM Code. The site identifies us by CAGE Code and DUNS. Please clarify what is meant by the SAM Code.

A24: All offerors must register in SAM. SAM has replaced CCR. Even if your company was carried over from CCR to SAM, you still must validate and update your information. SAM Code refers to cage code and SAM account number refers to DUNS.

Q25: Per section 00110, paragraph 2.1.4 – It states to provide an introductory page to include

SAM Code, …(etc) We are registered in SAM, but there is no such thing as a SAM Code.

Please advise.

A25: All offerors must register in SAM. SAM has replaced CCR. Even if your company was

Q26: per section 00110, paragraph 2.1.7.3 – It also state to provide an introductory letter that contains points of contact with names……. Provide SAM account number…..(etc) Again we are registered in SAM, but cannot locate an account number. Please advise

A26: All offerors must register in SAM. SAM has replaced CCR. Even if your company was

Q27: Page 26 of 151: Paragraph 2.2.5 states that other optional past performance considerations

(5) can be submitted. Please confirm if this is in addition to the first 6 past performance projects being submitted as part of Paragraph 2.2.1 on page 24 of 151.

A27: Only 6 exhibit A’s can be completed. Exhibit A part 2 gives examples you can discuss in addition to those exhibits but your only allowed six.

Q28: Is there any preference as to the line spacing, indent and format? For this technical proposal?

A28: No preference other then what is stated in section 00110 para 1.6.3 on page 23.

Q29: Please confirm that the Past Performance Questionnaire (Exhibit C2) is only three (3) pages. The instructions on the EXHIBIT C PACKAGE INFORMATION AND FORMS of the

RFP, under Respondent Info Rating Sheets state, "(Exhibit C2)(the next 4 pages) Offeror should put name in space indicated and ensure it is on every page for identification purposes."

However, the Questionnaire form provided in the RFP as Exhibit C2 is only three pages.

A29: Correct, the form itself is only 3 pages. However there are title pages that are also part of

EXHIBIT C2.

Q30: The pre-proposal slides indicate to send in original and 3 copies of Volume 1. Page 22

1.4.1 states to send an original and one copy. Please confirm the number of copies required for volume 1.

A30: Original and 1 copy. Solicitation is correct.

Q31: For 1.4.4 can the pre-award information for FAR 9.105-1 be placed in a sealed envelope and included in the Volume 1 Original Binder?

A31: Yes, that is the intent

Q32: Exhibit C past performance questionnaire: states for Government contracts, send questionnaire to contracting officer for technical representative. Would the end users of the

Government facility be considered as a viable contact?

A32: The government prefers the questionnaire be sent to the contracting officer. End users are encouraged to give the Contracting Officer their input.

Q33: Where is the Contractor supposed to indicate if they are submitting a proposal for the

8(a) category, small business category, or both? If we are bidding on both categories, can we submit just one proposal?

A33: Only one proposal is needed. In your introductory letter, everyone submits as a small business and states their socio-economic categories. The government will go through the validation process and make a determination based on the claimed categories. All those categories that are verified will be granted to the contractor at time of award. Categories will be further set aside at the task order level.

Q34: Which order do we follow? The order of the checklist and the submission requirements in section 00110 (pages 23-27) vary slightly.

A34: Follow the submission requirements in section 00110. The checklist is to be used for a guide.

Q35: Section 00110, para 2.1.4 & para 2.1.7.3 (introductory letter) appear to be duplicates.

They do ask for slightly different information. Which one should we follow?

A35: Follow the requirements and create an introductory page as stated in section 00110 para

2.1.4.

Q36: Section 00110, para 1.4.4 asks that the Contractor provide documentation of financial resources in a sealed enveloped which appears to be separate from Binder 1 (Vol 1) and Binder 2

(Vol 2 & 3). Section 00110, para 2.1.7.4 also makes mention of the sealed envelope of documentation of adequate financial resources. However, this paragraph is listed under the requirements of Binder 1 (Vol 1). Please advise which one we are to follow.

A36: Please provide financial resources in a sealed envelope as part of binder one as referenced in section 00110, para 2.1.7.4.

Q37: Section 00110, para 2.2.3 states that CCASS evaluations may be submitted in lieu of the

Exhibit C Performance Evaluation Questionnaires. Can contractor's use other past performance questionnaires that have been completed for other solicitations or in other formats other than

CCASS and the Exhibit C format?

A37: No, we would prefer CCASS or other Government assessment forms. If these are not available, Exhibit C performance Evaluation questionnaires must be used. Other questionnaires are unacceptable.

Q38: Section 00110, para 2.1.4 & 2.1.7.3 refer to a SAM code / SAM account number. In

SAM, I haven't been able to find either that is associated with the company profile. It seems all references made are linked to the DUNS or CAGE codes. Please advise.

A38: All offerors must register in SAM. SAM has replaced CCR. Even if your company was

Q39: Section 00100, para 1.3.2 states that Dunhill Professional Staffing “must execute an agreement with each offeror that states that they will (1) protect the offers’ information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and (2) refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished. To expedite the evaluation process, each offeror must contact the above companies to effect execution of such an agreement prior to submission of proposals. Each offeror shall submit copies of the agreement with their proposal.”

Can this requirement be disregarded with the contractor’s knowledge that Dunhill Professional

Staffing may be privy to the proposals while serving as advisors to the Source Selection

Evaluation Board but that all proposal information will remain proprietary and protected from unauthorized use.

Additionally, no agreement form has been included in the solicitation. And the solicitation does not state in which section the agreement should be included in nor is it listed on the checklist.

A39: The government will have its own agreement with the Dunhill staffing employees. The agreement this paragraph refers to is between the offeror and Dunhill. If an executed agreement is not provided it does not exclude an offeror from further consideration. Offerors who fail to execute agreements do solely at their own risk.

Q40: The solicitation states that the government intends to award two (2) pools of contracts: 8(a) set aside and small business (SB) set aside. It is then stated that the contracting officer may set-aside task orders for HUBZone, SDVOSB and WOSB with the SB pool. Must you be in one of the three socio-economic categories in order to quality for the SB pool? In other words, within the SB pool, is the intent to always solicit task orders to one of the socio-economic programs

(HUBZone, SDVOSB or WOSB) provided that there 2 or more qualified contractors in each category? Or will some task orders be solicited to the entire pool where HUBZone, SDVOSB, WOSB, and just SB all compete?

A40: The government reserves the right to solicit the entire SB pool, or break it down by social economic category. The decision will be made at the task order level where complexity of the requirement, dollar threshold, contractor capabilities and social economic goals will all be considered.

Q44: Section 4.2.1.5.3 states, “Personnel must meet any applicable experience….Letters of intent are provided where required.” Please define where letters of intent are required for personnel.

A44: In the event the person or persons you are proposing for these positions do not work for the prime contractor a letter of intent would be required to show their intent to work for you in the position proposed if you are awarded this contract.

Q46: The form states “** If reference is for an IDIQ contract provide items 1-3 above, contract completion date and number of task/delivery orders issued.” The contract completion date and number of task/delivery orders issued are not part of items 1-3. Also, item 4 provides space to describe differences in contract value. Should we complete all of Section C (items 1-5) for an

IDIQ contract?

A46: No just sections 1-3 for an IDIQ contract

Q47: In exhibit D technical proposal data paragraph 3A mentions that education, training and experience in managing construction projects can be submitted in a resume. Are the actual training and educational certifications required as part of an attachment?

A47: Not at this point. Your welcome to include them but it the solicitation just calls out for a resume

Q48: Exhibit D technical proposal data paragraph 4, Scheduling Methodology. Does the sample project schedules also need to show itemized cost breakdown?

A48: No

Q49: If a company can qualify for a proposal under 2 separate entities and possibly 2 separate size/capability categories, could they submit 2 separate proposals under 2 separate entities?

A49: There is not a scenario where you would qualify as two separate entities. You would be a sub to a prime and you could be a prime. The contract will be with the prime contractor. You will, however, as a prime be able to qualify for multiple soci-economic categories. Only one proposal is required.

Q50: REF: page 78/151 of the RFP, Sec. 00800, SC4, 4.1.1.

When partial or incomplete plans and specifications are provided in the RFP/RFB for the project and an item is specified, is the contractor still required to provide according to UFGS, which may be at a higher standard?

A50: When complete plans and specifications are not provided, in the task order RFQ/RFP the

Master Specifications and Section 00800 General Conditions will apply for elements of work not addressed by a project specific specification. Without a specific question related to a project we cannot answer this question fully at this time. Concerns must be asked on a project specific basis at the time the task order solicitation is issued. Generally if not specified then the MASTER specs will apply.

Q51: On page 24, section 2.1.7.1., It says “Offerors shall provide all price/cost information necessary to provide a meaningful basis for the Government’s analysis and evaluation of price.cost for the project set forth in Section 001200 of this solicitation.”, do we need to separate our cost by CSI division or do we submit our cost by one lump sum?

A51: please separate your cost by division

A51 REVISED: One sum for the job as designated on the Exhibit E is all that is needed with the proposal.

If during the evaluation process additional information is required it will be requested as a clarification.

Q57: In exhibit A part 2, paragraph 2D. Are we to discuss problems/corrections that occurred on specific projects? Or can we discuss problems that occurred in general and how we corrected them?

A57: We expect that you would discuss problems that occurred and how you corrected them.

Q58: Volume I is referred to as both “Pro Forma Documents” and “OFFER DOCUMENTS

AND

PRICE/COST INFORMATION.” Please clarify what title should be used for our proposal submissions.

A58: Either title is acceptable.

Q59: Where should offerors include the execute agreement with Dunhill Professional Staffing?

A59: Please provide in Volume I

Q60: In regards to the Past Performance Evaluation, will projects performed as a prime contractor be rated higher than projects performed as a subcontractor?

A60: Page 30 paragraph 3.8 states- These ratings may not have the same weight as the ratings of the proposing company. This would be the same for projects performed as a subcontractor versus performed as a prime since this contract is for a "prime" contract.

Q61: Since the table of contents and attachments such as resumes, schedule and org chart are excluded from the 20-page limit of Volume 3, is it acceptable for offerors to number the attachments with separate, non-consecutive page numbers (e.g., A-1,etc)?

A61: Yes

Q62: 2.1.7.4 (pg 24 of 151) Is the offeror supposed to include the sealed envelope with the original binder 1 or the copy or both? Also does the sealed envelope information need to be included in the electronic copy?

A62: No we just need a hard copy in the sealed envelope

Q63: In the proposal format paragraph 1.6.3 it states to use 8 ½ X 11 paper. Due to the size of the CPM construction schedule for the project over $1M, would it be ok to place the construction schedule on an 11 x 17 size paper? To fit the schedule onto an 8 ½ X 11 size paper will require font size to be much smaller than 10.

A63: yes 11x17 paper used for a CPM would be acceptable to accommodate the font size

Q64: In exhibit D paragraph 3B notes to provide a list of major subcontractors and their trades that we intend to use on these projects. Are these the same major subcontractors as noted in exhibit A, paragraph 2b? Is the intent to provide a list of 3 subcontractors for the 4 major scopes, electrical, mechanical, roofing, and horizontal disciplines?

A64: Yes these would be the same contractors as given in Exhibit A as stated in the Exhibit D -

3B question. "(These also should have been listed in Exhibit A PART 2 and there must be an

Exhibit B in the proposal for the named subcontractors or they will not be considered.)" You are committing to using these subcontractors on future projects and can propose up to three in each of the trades listed. Please note we make a decision that can be partially based on your subcontractor relationships so In the event you intend to use a different subcontractor than proposed on a task order you will have to get the contracting officer's approval in advance.

Q65: For the requested key personnel – Please clarify whether we are to provide key personnel for the task order level (i.e., prototypical project) or for the management of the overall contract.

A65: we would like to see both.

Q66: Needing more clarification on Q&A 37: Does this mean we can use DD Form 2626? Once a contract is closed, the evaluation may or may not be available to the contractor on ppirs.gov.

depending on whether or not the contracting officer had posted it.

A66: Use of a DD2626 would be acceptable

Q67: Is this eligibility for 8(a) concerns in both pools after award or do they have to submit separate category proposals? Does VIP certified SDVOSB concerns have eligibility in both pools.

Same as question 1 for SDVOSB concerns.

A67: 8(a) concerns would be eligible for both pools and only need to submit one proposal.

What is declared on your cover sheet will be evaluated for other pool eligibility. SDVOSB concerns only have elegiblity in the SB pool.

Q68: The exhibit attachment A, furnished with the RFP, labeled “PERFORMANCE

RELEVANCY

QUESTIONNAIRE”, has what appears to be a typo in the header, identifying the RFP number. It calls out RFP W9126-13-R-0002 in lieu of RFP W912J6-13-R-0002. Note: missing J.

Should we turn in the questionnaire as-is or will you re-issue by amendment?

A68: You can correct if you like in your submission or may turn in as is.

Q69: Section 00120, 4. Technical Proposal Evaluation, paragraph 4.2 of the RFP identifies the sub-factors of

Volume 3 as follows:

1) Capability and Experience

2) Organization

3) Quality Control

4) Specific Personnel

5) Scheduling Methodology

6) Safety

However, Exhibit D provides the Subfactors in the following order:

1) Capability and Experience

2) Organization

3) Specific Personnel

4) Scheduling Methodology

5) Quality Control

6) Safety

Therefore as there is a discrepancy between the order/labeling of the sub-factors, please clarify that Offerors shall follow the order specified in Exhibit D.

A69: You may propose in either order, however evaluation will be IAW section 00120 4.2

Q73: Exhibit A – Part 2, Question 2B indicates to provide a maximum of three subcontractors per discipline for the following disciplines: electrical, mechanical, roofing, horizontal disciplines

(including paving and civil site work). However, under Technical Evaluation Criteria, paragraph

4.2.1.5.4 references electrical, mechanical, roofing, horizontal disciplines, civil site work—indicating civil site work as a separate category rather than combined with horizontal disciplines. Please clarify if we are allowed to indicate up to three subcontractors for horizontal disciplines in addition to three subcontractors for civil site work.

A73: Yes you are allowed to indicate three subcontractors for horizontal disciplines in addition to three subcontractors for civil work.

Q74: On the solicitation, for the Technical Proposal (Exhibit D), on Items 5 and 6, it seems as though referencing and attaching an example (or another project’s) Safety Plan and Quality Control Plan are acceptable. However, it is not specified that the example Safety Plan and QC plan would NOT count toward the 20 pg limit (example plans are over 20 pgs alone). At your earliest convenience, can you confirm that if we were to reference and attach an example safety plan and QC plan, it would NOT count toward the 20 page limitation?

A74: Although the submission of a sample or another project Safety and/or QC plan is highly undesirable in lieu of submitting the direct answers to the Safety and QC questions if provided it will not count toward the 20 page limit.

Q75:The Questions and Answers document dated 16 Jan 2013, provides a “Q12: Answer Revised” response, However, it is placed between A32 and Q33. Please confirm that this “Q12: Answer Revised response is in regard to Q12 and A12.

A75: Yes it is

Q76: Under Exhibit D, Item 3A, would it be acceptable to insert an SF330 of an A-E firm we propose to use for more complex design build projects as an attachment? If acceptable, would the SF330 count toward the 20pg max limit (the SF330 of our proposed A-E firm exceeds the 20pgs alone).

A76: In this MATOC, unlike previous, we are not pre-qualifying AE and therefore do not desire the

SF330s. If provided it will not be evaluated. Each project for design build will be solicited IAW

Section 00800 and the experience and capabilities of the firm you will be using for the TO specific project will be evaluated at this time. All awardees within the respective pools will be afforded the opportunity to propose on DB projects in either a single or 2 phase process.

Q77 -Volume 1, Past Performance Information, paragraph 2.2.3 of the RFP states:

2.2.3. Past Performance References - REQUIRED - A "Final" Performance Evaluation (Construction)

(also referred to as CCASS Evaluation) issued for a project may be included in lieu of sending out reference package for the project. OR Offerors shall prepare and submit to prior client(s) of the all the projects listed on your Exhibit A submission a Reference Package (Exhibit C) (Detailed instructions are included in Exhibit C Package). This includes correspondence explaining the requirement to obtain an independent evaluation of prior contract performance, and the Past Performance Questionnaire for use in evaluating Past Performance.

Government customer personnel intimately involved with the project have indicated that they are extremely busy at the moment. Will the Hawaii Air National Guard consider accepting Exhibit C's from previously submitted HIANG proposals (by reference) and other government generated evaluations such as the Naval Facilities Engineering Command and Army Corps of Engineers Standard Past

Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ-0)? An example of the form is provided in this email.

Unfortunately, some personnel are reluctant to complete such questionnaires especially when they recently completed a similar questionnaire or other recent evaluations. Therefore, it would be helpful if the Hawaii Air National Guard would consider accepting other evidence of customer satisfaction

(i.e. previous evaluations submitted to the HIANG, other government generated standard evaluation forms, etc.) if available.

A77: While the CCASS report or a current reference Package (Exhibit C) is preferred we will accept other questionnaires and PPQ's completed within the last 9 mos if all attempts to obtain current information have been exhausted. If you send in alternative past performance references include a short explanation why they are being provided as well as a current, and valid name, phone number and email for the person providing the reference. This is needed in the event we need to validate this reference, as the references should be coming directly from the customer to the contracting office.

Q78: Section 110 Paragraph 1.3 Subparagraph 1.3.2 states that we need to get a separate Non Disclosure

Agreement and submit with our proposal. What section or binder will this NDA be placed in?

A78: Please place NDA in binder #1 volume #1 after your representations and certifications.

Q79: In regards to the highest level of an offeror's selected category of projects selected in Section

00010, will projects that exceed the highest level have a greater impact than those that lie within the selected range or are closer to the highest level?

A79: No, projects that exceed will not have a greater impact than those within the range. As this contract is for a specified range of contracts contractors are best served by showing a wide variety within the range selected, although some may be slightly higher than the high end range and still be considered.

Q80: Please consider changing the proposal due date to February 13th or later. The 1/29/2013 Q

& A responses still has pending questions and RFIs are going to be accepted until January

31st. If all RFI responses are sent out on Friday, February 1st, the 2nd and 3rd are weekend days. This only gives the offeror, subcontractors and material suppliers one day to review the RFIs and make adjustments to their proposals.

A80: After further consideration in changing the proposal due date the Contracting officer has decided to keep the proposal due date as 5 FEB 2013 at 2:00 PM HST.

Q81: Questions Q10, Q19, and Q22 state an amendment will be issued to clarify the confusion. Please confirm an amendment will be issued.

A81: An amendment will be issued to make the changes within the solicitation and incorporate the Q&A’s as part of the solicitation.

Q82: How do I go about getting approval for base access to deliver our proposal? Please advise.

A82: We will prepare the guards on duty that day to expect a lot of traffic. You simply need to state your company and let them know that you will be dropping off a proposal to the USPFO. If you are unsure of where to go, an attached map will help guide you. Offerers are also cautioned to allow for traffic and any other unforseen conditions to ensure their proposal arrives before 2:00 PM. We suggest you drive here a day in advance to familiarize yourself with the area.