W912JB10R4004 Q A 16Jun2010.pdf

W912JB10R4004

Questions and Answers

16 Jun 2010

Q1. Can you give examples of possible design build projects/TO’s?

A1. As stated Solicitation Section 00100 1.1.2 & 1.3; the majority of projects will principally be bid‐build type form previously completed designs. However, offerings may include some design/build projects.

The typical design build project will generally not exceed $1,000,000. The types of construction projects for design build will be similar to that of the bid/build projects (multi‐disciplined construction projects) with additional design requirements/responsibilities.

Q2. Is there opportunity for Engineering (Elect) design in this package?

A2. Selfridge requires contractors that can complete all disciplines by themselves or partially with sub‐ contractors. Individual trades or design elements will be handled through the general /MATOC contractor.

Q3. Do joint ventures & teaming have to be pre‐approved? If so, by what agency?

A3. Paragraph 1.1.14 of section 00110 states, “Joint Ventures must be registered in CCR as a joint

Venture, prior to award. Offerors are advised to coordinate their Joint Venture with the SBA, if applicable, prior to submitting a proposal.” It is advised to carefully read the entire section 00110 of the solicitation for additional information regarding submitting a proposal as a Joint Venture.

Q4. Some small businesses may not have six (6) general construction projects. Can we utilize subcontractors past performance experiences? OR would we be disqualified if we provide fewer than six

(6) past performance experiences?

A4. You will not be disqualified based on the number of past performance references provided.

However, the performance risk assessment will be based on the past performance data submitted by the contractor. Reference Solicitation section 00120 Paragraph 3 for information regarding past performance evaluation. Paragraph 3.8 states, “An offeror with no Past Performance may receive a rating based on the evaluation of its predecessor companies, key personnel, and/or subcontractors, provided an Exhibit B has been executed and included in the proposal for proposed subcontractors and/or potential key personnel not employed by the contractor.”

Q5. Past performance: requiring six (6) past performance. Relevancy questionnaires are generally required for “large” competitors and three (3) for small. Will the government reduce the amount of past performance questionnaires from six (6) to three (3)?

A5. Reference solicitation section 00110 Paragraph 2.2.1, “Offerors shall discuss, using the

Performance Relevancy Questionnaire format, Exhibit A, Part 1 their performance for six (6) general construction and two (2) design build if requesting consideration for this option.” The number of required questionnaires remains as stated in the solicitation.

Q6. As part of the DB option, does the A/E have to submit past performance survey as part of the

SF330?

A6. If electing the design/build option, you are required to include 2 relevancy questionnaires in addition to the 6 required for general construction for previous design build projects completed. Also include an SF330 for your proposed A&E for the design build option. The A&E does not need to send out exhibit C Questionnaires.

Q7. What contracting decisions were made based on the sources sought submittals?

A7. The Sources Sought submittals were for market research to determine the level of interest and types of vendors likely to respond to the MATOC solicitation.

Q8. Would architect/engineering firms be allowed to submit on their own (ie without being part of a design‐build team) for evaluation for design‐build work? Meaning they could be awarded a contract for design whenever task orders require design‐build.

A8. No: MATOC contracts are intended for multidiscipline general contractors with the option to include design/build requirements provided suitable design build capability is demonstrated in the proposal and the offeror is awarded the design/build option.

Q9. Is the prototypical project – CE Admin Facility a design‐build project?

A9. No: This is a bid/build type project. The plans and specifications are available on www.fbo.gov along with all solicitation requirements.

Q10. If we are in a joint partnership with a company, does either company fill out exhibit “B”?

A10. Exhibit B is not required for either partner when submitting as a joint venture. An exhibit B is required for proposed subcontractors, teaming partners and/or potential key personnel not employed by the contractor or the joint venture.

Q11. If we are in a joint partnership can the evals & past experience be a combination from the joint partnership or do they have to be from just one company?

A11. Reference Solicitation section 00110 paragraph 2.2.1.6, “If proposing as a joint venture, a minimum of three (3) of the six (6) contracts referenced shall be for each member of the joint venture. A copy of the executed joint venture agreement must also be included with the proposal. “

Q12. Are the Emerging Small Business, (ESB), set aside contracts in addition to the nine (9) contracts anticipated to be issued?

A12. No: Any successful ESB offerors will be included among the nine (9) anticipated awards. ESB set asides are only applicable to the Task Orders issued off of the contracts.

Q13. Is there a set number of HUBZone, 8(a), SDVOSB of the nine (9) contracts to be issued?

A13. No: Reference Solicitation Section 00100 paragraph 1.1: All awards will be to small business pursuant to a 100% small business set‐aside. However, the contracting officer may set‐aside task orders for 8(a) and HUBZone and Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, providing 2 or more qualified contractors in each category present conforming offers and are awarded a MATOC.

Q14. With newly formed teams of Contractor/A‐E firms, will they be evaluated on their separate past performance’s when they have not worked together in the past?

A14. Reference Solicitation section 00120 Paragraph 4.2.1.10 – “The Government intends to use the SF 330 information provided in Volume I (Exhibit B) for AE (s) proposed.”

Q15. Can their separate past performance’s be combined and evaluated as one team?

A15. Reference Solicitation section 00120 Paragraph 4.2.1.10, “ Design‐Build Experience ‐ The Government will evaluate the proposal to determine if it demonstrates that the offeror and proposed A&E and major subcontractors have sufficient backgrounds in the design build process capable of meeting the contract scope requirements for design‐build projects. “

Section 00120 Paragraph 4.2.1.10.1, “Design‐Build Team Experience ‐ The Government will evaluate the proposal to determine if the offeror indicates its ability to assemble a team of contractors, designers, estimators and other personnel necessary to perform design‐build projects, at the location(s) required, as well as the extent of their experience with these teams.

Offerors who propose Design‐Build teams with whom they have had experience in design‐build may receive a more favorable rating in this element due to this experience.”

Q16. The aforementioned synopsis and specifications include an elevator. However, there is no evidence of same on the Architectural, Mechanical or electrical drawings. It appears that the elevator scope of work was eliminated/deleted by addendum. Is this assumption correct?

A16. Yes, that assumption is correct. There was no need for the additional cost of an elevator. So any reference to an elevator in the specifications should be ignored.

Q17. We are a civil engineering, land surveying and architectural firm with gross revenues of approximately $12M dollars. Under our primary business we would be considered a large firm. We are trying to clarify if we can provide subcontract services to the prime contractors under this solicitation which has the total SBA set aside and the NAICS codes of 236220 and 237990 which have limits of $33.5M dollars. The most likely component of our work would be survey work (construction layout) or construction administration (construction observation).

A17. Small Business may subcontract to a large business provided they adhere to FAR 52.219‐14 Limitations On Subcontracting which requires 15% of the work to be self performed. Also Solicitation section 00800 paragraph 34.1.4 which states, “ Superintendence. The contractor shall give his personal superintendence to the work or have a competent foreman or superintendent from his/her own staff, satisfactory to the Contracting Officer, at the work site while work is in progress, with authority to act on behalf of the contractor.”

Q18. Section page 65/122 mentions Betterments/Enhancements are requested. Are these betterments /enhancements for the prototypical project?

A18. No: Clause NG‐DB‐SCR 002. – Proposed Enhancements/Betterment is for design build projects.

Q19. If page numbers must be used for all referencing and references, “Such statements as see Company profile or see Safety Plan are not acceptable,” is consecutive pagination required for the Attachments as well? Will references such as “See Attachment 1” be acceptable?

A19. You can reference Attachments such as, “see Attachment 1 “As long as it is clearly identified what the document is an attachment to. Such as, “See–Attachment 1 of document XYZ” The purpose of this requirement is to ensure an inordinate amount of time is not spent attempting to locate any referenced material.

Q20. Exhibit C Package Information and Forms gives the instruction that “You are encouraged to send a questionnaire to other clients of contracts listed in your ‘List of 10 other projects.’” However, after several searches for other mention of the “List of 10 other projects,” we are unable to locate where the list is initially requested. Is such a list required? If so, where is it to be inserted?

A20. You are correct. There is no requirement for a, “list of 10 other projects.” Your Exhibit C questionnaires are to coincide with projects of exhibit A: Six (6) for general construction and two (2) for design build, if requesting consideration for this option.

Q21. I have the following questions to ask regarding the prototype project:

1) The included bid for only asks for a lump sum bid breakdown. Are we to assume this is the only number that is needed for the MATOC purposes? Drawing sheet 2 of 68 asks for multiple bid breakdowns.

2) Is there any intrusion detection systems to install on this project?

3) Is there a base preferred DDC contractor? If yes, who?

4) Are any design fees to be included in our project price (detailing/as‐built/misc steel/etc)?

5) Is there any control systems to include for energy management of the HVAC/Plumbing/Electrical systems?

6) Is the furniture systems shown on dwgs 33 & 34 of 68 to be included in this project?

7) Is tele/data to be included as part of our package?

A21. 1) Your proposal should include the basic bid and the optional items prices separately. An Amendment will be issued to include the additional line items on Exhibit E.

2) No intrusion detection system is required

3) There is no preferred contractor, however the brand that is required is Automated Logic Corp (ALC). ALC’s sales are driven through Metro Environmental, Inc. for this area, so though we do not have a preferred contractor, they are the only contractor at this time that sells the brand that we require.

4) Assume this design is ideal and that there is a separate AE firm who did a perfect 100% design. If something specific in the design or plans are ambiguous or not specific enough for bidding purposes contact Contracting for clarification.

5) Other than what is specified, there needs to be “smart meters” for all three utility types.

These meters must be able to interface with an ALC LAN Gate Router (LGR‐250)

6) Yes, these are to be included

7) Yes, the hardware and wiring within the building are to be included. Any connections/interface needed to connect with the base’s tele/data network are needed.

Phones, fax machines, etc are not to be included.

Q22. Our company would like to include a specific contract in the past performance information but are concerned about the dates. The project was awarded prior to 2005. The actual completion date was to be June 30, 2006. The project was completed almost a year ahead of schedule, July 15, 2005. Is this project allowable?

A22. The relevancy requirement is based on performance, not schedules. However, a project completed July 15 2005 meets that requirement, albeit just barely. Reference an excerpt from the solicitation section 00110 paragraph 2.2.1.1 which states,” Offerors should consider the currency and relevancy of the Past performance information. Current performance may have greater impact than older performance. “

Also from Section 00120 3.9.1, “For the purpose of this solicitation, currency is performance occurring within the last five years through the solicitation release date. Within this period, performance occurring later in the period may have greater significance than work occurring earlier in the period. For example, performance information for work occurring during 2010 may have greater importance than performance information for work occurring during 2007

Q23. I am contacting you regarding the above referenced project to ask where I can get a copy of the specs for the asbestos, lead, mold and hazardous waste removal?

A23. They can be found in Section 18 & 19 of ANG ETL 01‐1‐1 “Tab D” (March 2004). This is readily available online.

Q24. Section 4.2.1.6.1 suggest that we may provide a list of major subcontractors who will be utilized throughout the life of the contract:

1. is there a limit to the number of subcontractors that can be listed?

2. Are subcontractors required to complete exhibit B prior to the submission of our proposal?

A24. There is no set limit as to the number of subcontractors listed. However, the intent isn’t to list all subcontractors but Major subcontractors that will play an integral role in your future work.

Reference solicitation Section 00110 2.2.2, “Provide a list of major subcontractors and or Teaming

Partners to be utilized on this project. (Include those identified in Exhibit A narratives, as applicable.) If a formal teaming arrangement is proposed, a copy of the executed Teaming Agreement shall also be included with the proposal.”

Section 00110 2.2.2.1, “As a minimum, unless you will be self‐performing, provide the name(s) of subcontractors to be utilized in the following areas: Electrical, Mechanical, Roofing, Horizontal disciplines, Civil Site Work and potential A&E for use in Design Build (if you have selected consideration for the Design Build Option). “ Exhibit B is due with the rest of the proposal documents.

Q25. Drilled piers: note indicates that there are seventeen (17) drilled piers. There is only fourteen (14) shown on plans.

A25. There are only fourteen piers. The seventeen reference was carried over from when the plans indicated an elevator. Use fourteen piers for bidding purposes, as laid out on the drawing (despite note).

Q26. Sample project addendums: It appears that there were addendums on the sample project.

Addendums were not included with the bid documents. Do we need to concern ourselves with these missing documents?

A26. Many of the Addendums are for the removal of items. The plans reflect those removals

Q27. Access control and intrusion detection: Cannot find this system on the plans. Please advise where this system is on the plans.

A27. Do not include this system as part of the bid

Q28. Video surveillance system: cannot find this system on the plans. Please advise where this system is part of the plans/sample project.

A28. Do not include this system as part of the bid

Q29. Prevailing wage schedule: solicitation document do not include a prevailing wage rate schedule.

Please advise / provide wage rates to be used for sample project estimate.

A29. Reference Exhibit E for the Wage Determination applicable Prototypical Project.

Q30. In the Solicitation page 16 of 122, 1.4.1 it states “Binder #1 includes Volume 1: Pro forma documents in original and (1) one copy”. Then below that, 1.4.2 it states “(original and 3 copies)”. Is this “original and (1) one copy” just referring to the Pro forma documents in binder 1, or is this referring to all of binder #1?

A30. Contractor should provide an original and one (1) copy of binder 1, while providing an original and three (3) copies of binder 2.

Q31. Has the proposal date been extended?

A31. Yes: Amendment 0001 extended the proposal due date from 18 June 2010 to 25 June 2010, 2:00PM local time.

Q32. Question and or clarification regarding the IDIQ MATOC Past Performance Reference and questionnaire. Over the past five years due to economic changes in the Detroit area, we have realized that the project manager/owner representative for the project has either left the firm and/or transferred to another location. Thus, in our case we do not have a reference contact that will be familiar with the project. In that regard, can other references be provided?

A32. An alternate reference can be used, provided they have enough knowledge of the project and your performance to offer a reasonable assessment.

Q33. Is a bid bond required to be submitted with the proposal?

A33. No a bid bond is not required.

Q34. Can you tell me how many Exh. A's have been returned to you for our company?

A34. Exhibit A’s are submitted as part of the proposal package. It is the contractor’s responsibility to follow up with their references to ensure the Exhibit C’s are submitted.

Q35. The government's election to use a prototypical project for it's benchmark to evaluate proposals that was constructed by an incumbant MATOC contractor, gives an unfair advantage to that incumbant contractor. The requested cost proposal, construction schedule and ability to perform have already been completed by this incumbant contractor...and will be the basis of the government's review and comparision with other offerers. As the incumbant contractor has Superior Knowledge over the other offerers, this is an unfair advantage.

To alleviate this disparity, would you please disclose the Contract Amount including all modifications, actual construction period versus the contractual Period of Performance, Schedule of Values and Construction Schedule from the completed project so we all have the same information as the incumbant contractor?

A35. Answer Pending

Q36. We are reviewing the scope and trying to decide if this contract would be a good fit for our company. Would this type of work be more along the lines of repair work? Or would this be more along the lines of construction work?

A36. Reference Solicitation Section 00100 Paragraph 1.2 for potential project categories

Q37. Prototypical project “blinds”. Please clarify specs for blinds:

A37. Horizontal Blinds: 1” slats and not perforated. Provide hold downs. Vertical Blinds: Are to be manual; Fabric vanes; no specific manufacturer called for.

Q38. Prototypical project: Demo plans call for asphalt pavement to be crushed and salvaged on site and the concrete pavement rubblized on site. There is a very small quantity of both these items of removal and cost to crush and rubblize on site for these small quantities is very expensive. It would make sense to recycle both asphalt and concrete to/at an offsite location. For pricing purposes is this acceptable?

A38. Yes

Q39. Prototypical project “Impact resistant wall protection spec section 10265 (corner guards)”: cannot locate corner guards on plans. Please advise where the corner guards are shown on plans or if this work was deleted by amendment to this project.

A39. Corner guards will not be used.

Q40. Prototypical project “Unit pavers – spec section 02780”: Cannot find unit pavers on plans. Please clarify if there are any unit pavers.

A40. Unit pavers will not be used.

Q41. Ceramic/Quarry tile:

1) Reference sheet LI‐802; The Crossville material specified for Quarry Tile 1 is actually a glazed porcelain tile. It is not a quarry tile and does not meet specification 09310‐2.1C. Please advise.

2) Reference Sheet LI‐802; The American Olean material specified for CT‐1 is actually 3 7/8” x 3 7/8”.

Specification 09310‐2.1D&E call for a 4 ¼” x 4 ¼” tile. Please advise.

3) The material specified for CT‐2 on the Room Finish Schedule LI‐A802 has been discontinued. Please advise.

4) The Finish Schedule on LI‐802 calls for QT‐1/RFT‐1 at Stair #2, but the details on LI‐A702 call for RFT‐1.

Which is correct?

5) For option #3 there is no specification for the abrasive strips in the stair treads. Please provide spec for these abrasive strips.

6) Finish Floor Plan LI‐A806 calls for CPT‐1 at room 108, but the Finish Schedule on LI‐A802 calls for CT‐1.

Which is correct?

A41. Ceramic/Quarry tile:

1) Use the material specified on Sheet LI‐A802.

2) Use the material listed on Finish Schedule on Sheet LI‐A802 to include flat tile, base and wainscot cap.

3) Use material that is equal to the product specified.

4) Use RFT‐1

5) Provide per notes on Sheet LI A701 and any applicable codes/regulations.

6) CT‐1

PENDING:

Q. Related to exhibit D, number 4, Scheduling Methodology, Number 4B is Microsoft Project Manager Scheduling an accepted tool and comparable to the (CPM) Critical Path Method format?

Q. Optional line items #5: Please clarify if option 5 has been deleted – write up is confusing.