QuestionsAnswers-19Apr2010.pdf

NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU

US PROPERTY AND FISCAL OFFICE FOR PENNSYLVANIA

DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AND VETERANS AFFAIRS

ANNVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17003-5003

SOLICITATION NO.: W912KC-10-R-0001

PENNSYLVANIA NATIONAL GUARD CONSTRUCTION INDEFINITE-DELIVERY /

INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) MULTIPLE AWARD TASK ORDER CONTRACT

(MATOC)

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS (DOCUMENT UPDATED APRIL 19, 2010)

MARCH 31, 2010

Q1. There are two (2) Solicitation Documents referenced on WWW.FBO.GOV (WWW.FEDBIZOPPS.GOV) (Solicitation 1 & Solicitation 2). Are there two different MATOC opportunities against which to submit proposals?

A1. No. There is only one MATOC Solicitation. Solicitation 2 is an erroneous duplication of the document identified as Solicitation 1. Both should be noted as identical in all respects.

Q2. How do I access the files/documents for the Prototypical Projects?

A2. See, Sections 4.4, 4.5 & 4.7 of the FBO Vendor Guide available for download in PDF format via the Federal Business Opportunities / FBO Home Page. See also, Section 00100 1.6.4 of the Solicitation. Additionally, to view and/or download Export Controlled Materials, a company must be certified (via an approved DD Form 2345) by the Joint Certification Program (JCP) administered by the Defense Logistic Information Service (DLIS). This certification establishes that a company is a U.S. or Canadian contractor eligible to receive unclassified technical data that is under the control of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) or the Canadian Department of National Defense (DND). Questions about this program or DD Form 2345 should be addressed to U.S./Canada Joint Certification Office, Defense Logistics Information Services (DLIS), Federal Center, 74 Washington Avenue North, Battle Creek, MI 49017-3084; or telephone (616) 961- 4358, toll free (800) 352-3572; or email jcp-admin@dlis.dla.mil.

APRIL 2, 2010

Q3. There appears to be an inconsistency relative to the location of the Pre-Proposal Conference on April 7, 2010. Page 13 of the Solicitation indicates Building 8-80 and Page 36 indicates Building 13-190. Can you clarify the location information?

A3. The location for the April 7, 2010 Pre-Proposal Conference and Site Visit is misstated in Paragraph 1.5.1 on Page 13 of the Solicitation. The correct location for the April 7, 2010 Pre-Proposal Conference and Site Visit is reflected on Page 36 of the Solicitation in Clause 52.236-27(c) as the Fort Indiantown Gap Recreation Center (Auditorium), Building 13-190.

APRIL 9, 2010

Q4. May my company still submit a proposal, if it did not attend the April 7, 2010 Pre- Proposal Conference?

A4. The April 7, 2010 Pre-Proposal Conference and Site Visits was not a mandatory event.

Q5. Who may submit a proposal?

A5. As set forth in the Synopsis and in the Solicitation, this acquisition is a Total Small Business Set-Aside (i.e., the acquisition is reserved for small business concerns). As defined by FAR 19.001 a “concern” is “any business entity organized for profit (even if its ownership is in the hands of a nonprofit entity) with a place of business located in the United States or its outlying areas and that makes a significant contribution to the U.S. economy through payment of taxes and/or use of American products, material and/or labor, etc. ‘Concern’ includes but is not limited to an individual, partnership, corporation, join venture, association, or cooperative.” “Small business concern” is further defined by the clause at FAR 52.219-6, which is incorporated in the Solicitation. This clause further provides that offers/proposals are solicited only from small business concerns and that offers/proposals received from other than small business concerns shall be considered nonresponsive and will be rejected. See, FAR 52.219-6(b)(1).

Q6. For this particular MATOC I know the “prime” contractor has to be a small business but can a large business be a subcontractor, partner, team member, and/or mentor? In other words is there anyway a large business could be associated with a task order other than a supplier of material?

[Q6. Alternately stated]. Please confirm whether only small businesses will be allowed to participate as subcontractors to the “Prime Contractor” awarded on this MATOC contract?

A6. The clause at FAR 52.219-8 (Deviation) is incorporated in the Solicitation.

This clause relates the policy of the United States for maximum practicable opportunities for small business concerns to participate in performing Federal contracts. Under this clause, prime contractors on Federal contracts agree to carry out the policy of the United States by awarding subcontracts “to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance.” FAR 52.219-8(b) (Deviation). Additionally, the clause at FAR 52.219-14 is incorporated in the Solicitation. This clause identifies limitations on subcontracting. In the case of a contract for general construction (e.g., the anticipated MATOC awards and resulting task orders), the prime contractor “will perform at least 15 percent of the cost of the contract, not including the cost of materials, with its own employees”.

In view of the foregoing, the Answer is “Yes” to the question of whether a large business may be a subcontractor, partner, team member, mentor, etc. to the small business prime contractor. The Answer is also “Yes” to the question of whether there is any way for a large business to be associated with a task order other than as a supplier of material. Any statements made during the April 7, 2010 Pre-Proposal Conference in conflict with this Answer are not effective.

Q7. May I receive an electronic form of the Exhibit C2 Questionnaire forms.

A7. All Exhibits to the Solicitation were initially uploaded in Adobe PDF format and remain accessible in that format. Additionally, MS Word versions of Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, E-1, E2, E2-1, E4, E4-1, F and G have been uploaded to www.fbo.gov and can be downloaded. Exhibit E3 and E3-1 were deleted by Amendment 0001 to the Solicitation.

Q8. Please confirm that Prototypical Project Three – Muir Airfield Runway Resealing has been deleted from the Solicitation and should not be quoted.

A8. It is confirmed that Prototypical Project Three – Muir Airfield Runway Resealing has been deleted from the Solicitation and should not be quoted.

Q9. Please clarify where Pricing information should go in the Proposals.

A9. Pricing information should be included only on Exhibits E, E2 and E4. See, Section 00110 (1.4.1; 2.1.2; 2.1.5; 2.1.5.1; 2.1.5.2; and 2.3). See, Section 00120 (2.1.3 and 5). No other pricing sheets are required.

April 9, 2010 – Continued (1st Update)

Q10. Will there be additional opportunities to visit/view the Prototypical Project sites?

A10. The Prototypical Project Sites were opened for viewing during the Pre- Proposal Conference on April 7, 2010. Due to the volume of requests for additional opportunities a secondary site visit day has been scheduled for April 21, 2010 as follows:

Wednesday, 21 April 2010

Prototypical Project Four 0930 - 1130 HRS (9:30 am - 11:30 am) - Bldg. 13-128, 13-129, 13-140, 13-141 and (potential add-on) 13-142 to be open and available for inspection. SSG Tim Morris is the Project Manager and will be on-site to answer technical/ project specific questions. Potential contractors are advised to sign-in with SSG Morris by Bldg. 13-128 (corner of Lys Ave and Grubb Ave, Fort Indiantown Gap, North Annville Twp., PA). Contract specific questions are to be submitted in writing in accordance with the Solicitation.

Prototypical Project Two 1300 - 1500 HRS (1:00 pm - 3:00 pm) - FTIG Community Club (by the intersection of Fisher Ave and Clement Ave, Fort Indiantown Gap, North Annville Twp., PA) to be open and available for inspection. Mr. Ben Barger (Project Manager) and Mr. John La Rosa (KlingStubbins / A-E) will be on-site to answer technical/project specific questions.

Potential contractors will are advised to sign-in with Mr. Barger at the FTIG Community Club. Contract specific questions are to be submitted in writing in accordance with the Solicitation.

Prototypical Project One FTIG Paving Project – No additional Site Visit is scheduled. It is noted that Fort Indiantown Gap is an open post and that the sites for the FTIG Paving Project are outside any gated/fenced areas and therefore viewable by the public-at-large.

Prototypical Project Three This project has been deleted from the Solicitation.

NOTE: NO ADDITIONAL SITE VISITS WILL BE HELD. SITE VISITS ARE NOT

MANDATORY, BUT ARE RECOMMENDED.

April 9, 2010 – Continued (2nd Update)

Q11. I am trying to access the [export controlled] packages and have a number as assigned on DD Form 2345 but cannot get the packages to open. Our DD 2345 Number is ####### expiration ##/##/2015.

A11. The U.S./Canada Joint Certification Program (JCP) office reported to this office that once a company is certified with the JCP office (3 to 5 business days), the company should contact FBO to have them add their JCP number to their FBO account. The FBO help desk (Federal Service Desk) reported to this office that companies need to make sure that they are registered and login as a Vendor to FBO. When the Vendor click’s to open an export controlled package/document, they should be asked for their MPIN. After entering the MPIN, the export controlled package/document should be viewable/downloadable by Vendors that have gone through the JCP process. If a Vendor still has problems, the Vendor should check to make sure that their CCR registration and MPIN are valid and up-to-date. If problems still persist, the Vendor may call the FBO help desk at 866-606-8220, selection option 2 for FBO issues, and ask for troubleshooting assistance.

Q12. Please provide information on the currently in effect MATOC (awards, awardees, when it ends, etc.)

A12. The currently in effect Pennsylvania National Guard Construction Indefinite- Delivery / Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) was issued in 2005 on an unrestricted basis under Solicitation No. W912KC-05-R- 0001 (the “2005 MATOC”). There were sixteen (16) initial IDIQ awards under the 2005 MATOC. The 2005 MATOC contracts expire on June 21, 2010, and remains available for the issuance of Task Orders through June 21, 2010.

Since its inception there have been in excess of Ninety (90) Task Orders with an aggregate value in excess of $61 Million issued against the 2005 MATOC. Current 2005 MATOC contract holders are as follows:

W912KC-05-D-0002

Syska Hennessy Group 11500 West Olympic Blvd, Ste 680 Los Angeles, CA 90064

W912KC-05-D-0011

James Construction 243 East Main Street Carnegie, PA 15106

W912KC-05-D-0003

Senate Builders & Const Managers, Inc.

525 Plymouth Road Suite 319 Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462-1641

W912KC-05-D-0012

Dick Corporation 1900 State Route 51 Large, PA 15025

W912KC-05-D-0006

AnVi & Associates, Inc.

1108 N. York Road Willow Grove, PA 19090

W912KC-05-D-0013

Lobar, Inc 1 Old Mill Road P.O. Box 50 Dillsburg, PA 17019-0050

W912KC-05-D-0008

Hirani Engineering & Land Surveying, P.C.

30 Jericho Executive Plaza Suite#200C Jericho, NY 11753

W912KC-05-D-0014

eciConstruction 124 west Church Street Dillsburg, PA 17019

W912KC-05-D-0009 W912KC-05-D-0015

Midatlantic Construction & Design Associates, Inc.

126 Lexington Street Trenton, NJ 08611

W912KC-05-D-0010

Pride Enterprises, Inc.

700 East Main Street, 2nd Fl Norristown, PA 19401

Magnum, Inc.

650 Catherine Street Warminster, PA 18974-2802

W912KC-05-D-0016

R.A. Glancy & Sons, Inc.

2361 Venture Drive Gibsonia, PA 15044-7499

APRIL 16, 2010

Q12. Will the due date be extended since some companies still do not have the access to view the bidding documents and since the site visit date is on the 21st? That only leaves 6 working days to pull the proposals together.

A12. The time and date for the receipt of proposals and performance questionnaires will be extended until 1500 HRS (3:00 pm EDT) on Friday, May 7, 2010. This extension will be reflected in an appropriate Amendment to the Solicitation to be posted on www.fbo.gov. This extension is being made due to the proximity of the April 21, 2010 non-mandatory site visit date. This extension is not being made due to the ability of potential contractors to access and view “export controlled” documents/data on www.fbo.gov.

Q13. Exhibit G appears to have a spelling error regarding the e-mail address for CPT Jason S. Frankenfield.

A13. An Amended Exhibit G will be posted to www.fbo.gov to reflect the correct e-mail for CPT Jason S. Frankenfield: jason.s.frankenfield@us.army.mil.

Q14. Concerning Prototypical Project Two is there a parts list like there is for Prototypical Project Four?

Q14. All project documents for Prototypical Project Two have been posted on www.fbo.gov.

Q15. Will the delivery date be extended due to the potential subcontractor site visit on the week of the 19th?

A15. See A12, above.

Q16. Please clarify the statement made in the pre-bid conference that all subcontractors are required to be small businesses. This appears to be contrary to the statement that no subcontracting plan is required. Moreover, we cannot find any reference to this requirement in the FAR, which allows subcontracting of up to 85% of work in the construction marker – with no limitation on the size standard of the subcontractors.

A16. See, A5 and A6, above. Additionally, at the Pre-Proposal Conference Mr.

Brown communicated that he was uncertain relative to the subcontracting requirement and that a Q&A would be posted to confirm or correct any statement made during the April 7, 2010 Pre-Proposal Conference. The above Q&A for A5 and A6 were posted as a result.

Q17. Do we need to let you know who the additional people are that will be coming to the site visits next week [April 21, 2010]?

A17. The Project Managers for Prototypical Projects Two and Four (see A10, above) will be on-site at the Project locations and will have sign-in sheets.

Otherwise, no notice is required.

Q18. In reference to Exhibit D, 5B: Does the Pennsylvania National Guard currently require testing laboratories to be approved by either a third party or Government Agency? And if so is there a website or listing that we can reference to find approved testing facilities?

A18. Exhibit D at 5B reads: “Provide the names of testing laboratories to be used for projects requiring testing and the procedures for test data reporting.”

Potential contractors will need to make their own determinations regarding their response to 5B. The Pennsylvania National Guard does not maintain a listing of approved testing laboratories. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers does maintain a list of “validated” laboratories which may be of aide to preparing a response to 5B: http://www.wes.army.mil/SL/MTC/ValidatedLabsList.htm.

Q19. We would like to use a reference for this solicitation that we feel is applicable to the projects at FIG. The project was a joint venture project. We want to make sure that there are no issues with listing this project as a reference for our company and that we will be meeting the requirements for listing 6 relative projects/references.

A19. Submission of a project where the proposing company was a joint venture partner is permissible. However, the proposing company should make certain to demonstrate the company’s own involvement in the project (e.g. responsibilities, percentage of work performed, etc.).

Q20. We would like to request an extension of the proposal due date due to the site visits for the protypical projects not occurring until 4-21-10. Our subcontractors need an additional week to complete their bids to provide the best pricing and our references need the additional time to have completed the questionnaires and have them back to Michael Brown before the closing date.

A20. See A12, above. The time and date for the receipt of proposals and performance questionnaires will be extended until 1500 HRS (3:00 pm EDT) on Friday, May 7, 2010.

Q21. Under section 01451 – Contractor Quality Control states the contractor shall identify a CQC manager and must be onsite at all times. Can this person have other duties besides the QC manager (ie. superintendent be the CQC manager)?

A21. Yes. The Contractor Quality Control manager may have other duties such as Contractor’s superintendent.

Q22. Please clarify SC9 “Proposed KEY Personnel and proposed minimum qualifications of Key personnel and proposed subcontractors”. It states in this section that the contractor shall obtain the contracting officer written consent before making substitutions. Does this have to occur before submitting your price on a task order or after you have been awarded the task order? Please note that depending on the location, the best price may come from a local subcontractor or other subcontractors that you had not made as part of your team for this MATOC submittal. Moreover, the best subcontractor will most likely not be known until you have received there price on the task order before the due date.

A22. “Key Personnel” are people whose own experience you are asking the Government to credit to you relative to the evaluation of your Proposal.

“Proposed subcontractors”, key or otherwise, are subcontractors that you intend to use on relevant projects (not all subcontractors will be suited to work on every project; i.e., a paving company would likely not be the subcontractor on an electrical project); and whose experience you are asking the Government to credit to you relative to the evaluation of your Proposal. Relative to the issue of substitutions, this is one of the reasons for asking potential contractors to submit information on up to three (3) subcontractors per discipline. If the potential subcontractors are included in the proposal and the proposal is then accepted (i.e., an award is issued), the use of those subcontractors is acceptable with any resultant task order. If, however, on a particular task order, the prime determines it is in the prime’s best interest to use a different/new subcontractor, then the Government reserves the right to approve of the use of that subcontractor. For example, the Government may disallow the use of a subcontractor that was debarred from doing business with the Government. Notice of substitutions does not need to occur prior to submitting a price on an individual task order, but should occur contemporaneously with the submission of the price quote. It is recognized as stated in the question that from time-to-time “the best price may come from” another subcontractor and the Government would not unreasonably withhold its consent to a substitution.

Q23. Regarding the design build technical proposal, does the A&E need to be a small business also?

A23. If the Architectural and Engineering Firm (A-E) is the business concern submitting the Proposal, then the A-E needs to be a small business concern (see A5, above). If the A-E is a subcontractor, then the A-E does not need to be a small business concern (see A6, above).

Q24. Is there Davis Bacon Wage determination for these Protypical projects? If so, please provide the reference number so that we can go to the davis bacon website to download those rates.

A24. See Exhibit E, Exhibit E2 and Exhibit E4. Each of these documents contains a heading “Wage Determination”. Following that heading, you will find Davis-Bacon information.

Q25. We are sending an executed copy of DD Form 2345 to Battle Creek, Michigan, in order to access the Prototypical Project Data. Do you know how long does it take to receive their approval and an MPIN?

A25. See A11, above.

Q26. Please clarify the discrepancy between the instructions provided on Exhibit A & Exhibit F. Exhibit A, Part 1 states that we are required to prepare (6) part 1 forms for general construction while Exhibit F, under Binder #2 states that we are required to submit (5) part 1 forms for general construction.

A26. Exhibit F has been amended to reflect the correct information under Binder #2, six (6) part 1 forms.

Q27. Prototypical project #1 calls for a mandatory site visit conformation form. Section

1.4 calls for a mandatory site visit. I did not find the site visit conformation form attached as stated in 1.4-B.

A27. The Pre-Proposal Conference and Site Visits held on April 7, 2010 were not mandatory. The secondary Site Visits scheduled for April 21, 2010 are not mandatory. For purposes of the current Solicitation, the site visits are only recommended. The Section 1.4 of the Scope of Work for Prototypical Project One is in error. The provisions of the Solicitation, as amended, control. Any discrepancy between the Solicitation and the Scope of Work for Prototypical Project One concerning Site Visits, shall be resolved in favor of the information contained in the Solicitation. Additionally, Site Visit Confirmation Forms as referenced in the Scope of Work for Prototypical Project One are not Required.

Q28. Does the prebid visit on April 7th cover this requirement or do we need to revisit and get the correct form signed for this prototypical?

A28. See A27, above.

Q29. Reference self performance E-1 for each prototypical project. For clarification only, under FAR 52.219-14 is the direct cost for “Self-performed work” calculation inclusive of direct office administrative cost, direct submittal labor and material cost, direct scheduling cost, direct office project management cost, etc., which normally would fall under the general and administrative overhead costs and calculated into the percentage cost of the contract with its own employees?

A29. Exhibit E-1, Exhibit E2-1 and Exhibit E4-1 each provide a definition/instructions for “Self-performed work” as follows:

"Self-performed work" generally includes costs for: mobilization and utilization of owned or rented plant and equipment to be operated by the contractor's own employees and labor associated with the aforementioned equipment; contractor's own labor to fabricate or to install materials into the finished construction; performance by the contractor's own employees of design work, land surveys and other engineering or technical specialist services required by the contract; supplies to directly support the aforementioned work to be accomplished by the contractor's own employees; and the contractor's own job overhead costs. Contractor markups for profit, general and administrative overhead, bonds, or other indirect costs on "self-performed" or subcontracted work are not "self-performed work" and are to be excluded from "total cost of the contract" for calculation purposes. Rental of plant or equipment for operation by subcontractors is not "self-performed work" but shall be included in the "total cost of the contract" for calculation purposes . Cost of materials to be incorporated into the work and supplies to support other than construction by the contractor's own employees are excluded from the above definition. Do not include these costs in the calculation.”

Q30. Is the due date going to be extended for this proposal?

A30. See A12, above. The time and date for the receipt of proposals and performance questionnaires will be extended until 1500 HRS (3:00 pm EDT) on Friday, May 7, 2010.

Q31. [Prototypical Project Four] Does the existing wall covering in the latrine get removed? (spec section 4.1 A&C)

A31. Answer Pending.

Q32. [Prototypical Project Four] Is the wainscoating just 5/8” plywood good one side, or is there a veneer and if so, of which wood species, or is there a manufacturer & style of wainscoating to be used?

A32. Answer Pending.

Q33. [Prototypical Project Four] What is the style & manufacturer of the 2’x2’ ceiling tile?

A33. Answer Pending.

Q34. [Prototypical Project Four] Is the ceiling grid white?

A34. Answer Pending.

Q35. [Prototypical Project Four] What is the VCT style and who is the manufacturer?

A35. Answer Pending.

Q36. [Prototypical Project Four] What is the interior wood door veneer species? Oak, Pine, etc?

A36. Answer Pending.

Q37. [Prototypical Project Four] What is the type & manufacturer of the paint?

A37. Answer Pending.

Q38. [Prototypical Project Four] There is no detail for the FRP @ the barrack showers

– Are the walls to be furred to hide the exposed plumbing / shower diverter or is the FRP to be applied directly to the existing shower wall? The Zurn shower fixture is made for a wall system and not exposed piping.

A38. Answer Pending.

Q39. [Prototypical Project Four]: Although the FRP as a wall material in the shower is cost effective it may be a maintenance issue in the future due to possibilities of moisture seeping through the vertical seems. Is FRP the only option of a shower wall material?

A39. Answer Pending.

Q40. [Prototypical Project Four] The Electrical Panels are to be increased to 200 amp from a current 100 amp. Is there enough power from the pole mounted transformers to allow this increase?

A40. Answer Pending.

Q41. [Prototypical Project Four] Who is responsible for increasing the power load from the transformer to the barracks? Government or Contractor?

A41. Answer Pending.

Q42. [Prototypical Project Four] Where are the smoke alarms connected to? Are they connected to the base fire department notifying system? Please clarify

A42. Answer Pending.

Q43. [Prototypical Project Four] Are the utility rooms to remain unpainted? Are the walls required to be patched and repaired?

A43. Answer Pending.

Q44. [Prototypical Project Four] Fuel Source – The Government is supplying the propane tanks – Who is removing the old tank? Who is placing the new tank(s)? Are the tanks above or below grade? Please provide more detail.

A44. Answer Pending.

Q45. [Prototypical Project Four] Toilet room flooring – Can an alternate of similar or above quality be chosen for the epoxy coating?

A45. Answer Pending.

Q46. [Prototypical Project Four] There is a considerable amount of moisture damage and rotted wood at the existing barracks at the inside of the exterior sheathing / and exposed balloon framing studs. How is the government planning on addressing the stoppage of the moisture penetrations? Be advised ‐ Once the insulation is up and the walls are sheathed with drywall it will create an area that could possibly lead to a future mold hazard issue? Please clarify.

A46. Answer Pending.

Q47. [Prototypical Project Four] Has the government identified the areas of Asbestos that need to be removed?

A47. Answer Pending.

Q48. [Prototypical Project Two] Has the government specified an exact location for the new transformer?

A48. Answer Pending.

Q49. [Prototypical Project Two] Are there additional roof penetrations required for the power poles?

A49. Answer Pending.

Q50. [Prototypical Project Two] When panels are removed is the contractor required to patch /repair/ paint walls from previous panel?

A50. Answer Pending.

Q51. [All Prototypical Projects] Since they are handling the permit process, will the government also handle the Miss Utilities call to mark all underground utility lines?

A51. Answer Pending.

Q52. [Prototypical Project Four] Will contractor be allowed to use one of the vacant buildings for storage and/or office use? If not, contract will need to use mobile office trailer and access to temporary power. Please clarify steps for power connections needs.

A52. Answer Pending.

Q53. [Prototypical Project Two] Regarding the main feed, will government coordinate for the shut downs as needed or is that the contractor's responsibility? Also, are there any time constraints for when work can be done since the club is active and in use?

A53. Answer Pending.

Q54. [Prototypical Project Two] Do we have to predict what the index is going to be when we're installing it, or is there a escalation clause in the contract?

A54. Answer Pending.

Q55. Specification pg 12 of 24 (addm#1) para 2.1.1 states Exhibit A, Part 1 – discuss six (6) general constr. Projects. However, Exhibit F, Contents Aid states five (5) general constr. Project Q Is 5 or 6 general construction projects needed for Exhibit A?

A55. See A26, above.

APRIL 19, 2010

Q56. Can you please confirm that only Contractors are required to submit PPQ’s for their 6 Construction projects + 2 Design Build Projects, meaning A/E firms submitting 330 submissions do not have to submit PPQ’s?

A56. The intent of the Government is that offerors (business concerns who are submitting the proposals) have Past Performance Questionnaires submitted on their behalf. See Solicitation Section 00110, 2.2.2.2; 2.2.4; 2.2.5 and 2.2.6.

Q57. Please confirm which Volume the A/E 330 form should be located in?

A57. See Amended Exhibit F – Proposal Volume Contents Aid – This indicates that the SF 330 should be included in Volume 2 (Binder 2).

Q58. We are a General Contractor in XXXXXXXXXX, and unfortunately did not find out about this solicitation until after the prebid conference. We have printed the specifications and there is still a bit that is unclear. Are there any bid meeting minutes that you would be able to forward to us? Our main question is what has to be filled out and sent back by April 30th.

A58. See A12, above. The time and date for the receipt of proposals and performance questionnaires is extended until 1500 HRS (3:00 pm EDT) on Friday, May 7, 2010. An amendment to the Solicitation regarding this extension will be posted. Please see www.fbo.gov for a copy of the Pre-Proposal Conference Presentation. Please review the Solicitation, as Amended; the Solicitation Exhibits; the most recent Question and Answer document (check website often for updates); and other documents posted on www.fbo.gov in connection with Solicitation No. W912KC-10-R-0001.