QuestionsAnswers-29Apr2010.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 29, 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. April 22, 2010. Yes.

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. April 22, 2010. The wainscoting is 5/8” Georgia Pacific or equal bead ply with three inch detail. The species is Pine.

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

A33. April 22, 2010. Radar Ceiling - item number 2110 ME2110 or equal will suffice.

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

A34. April 22, 2010. Yes.

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

A35. April 22, 2010. On recent projects the product used was Congoleum 12”x12”x1/8” AL-40 Warm Taupe. The Government will accept similar products that meet the specifications of this product.

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

A36. April 22, 2010. The Interior are luan solid core doors or equal.

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

A37. April 22, 2010. Sherwin-Williams Quali-koate or equal.

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. April 22, 2010. The walls are not to be furred out to hide the plumbing. The Government is looking in to see if the Zurn product can be plumbed for the top of the fixture. If the product cannot be installed in this manner the Government will specify a different BRAND NAME OR EQUAL product to be used by means of an amendment to the package for Prototypical Project Four.

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. April 22, 2010. FRP as a material is the standard for this contract. Offerors submitting proposals shall be deemed to have included the use of this material in their pricing for Prototypical Project Four. Successful MATOC Awardees are certainly welcome, on a post-Task Order Award basis to make value-added or cost saving proposals to the Government.

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. April 22, 2010. The contractor is responsible for the service from the main breaker to three feet past the service head. The three feet past the service head is to allow The Governments High Voltage Crew enough length for the connection to the Fort Indiantown Gap electrical grid.

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

A41. April 22, 2010. The Contractor is responsible for the service The Government will supply the required voltage and insure that the transformer can handle the load.

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

A42. April 22, 2010. The smoke / carbon dioxide detectors are hard wire interconnected with a battery backup they are not to alert the Fire department or other agencies. They are required to alert the occupants in the facility to evacuate.

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

A43. April 22, 2010. Wall Covering: All walls will receive 5/8” sheetrock wall board except the latrine and boiler room. The latrine shall receive ½” moister resistant drywall and the boiler room will receive ½” standard drywall. Drywall shall be taped joints and finished with compound to achieve a seamless finish.

Walls shall receive primer and 2 coats of finish coat paint (colors to be determined by government).

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. April 22, 2010. Fuel Source: The government will supply the propane tanks and the tank regulator; it will be the contractor’s responsibility to connect to the propane tank. The Contractor is responsible to supply and install all other regulators and supply lines from the propane tank to the building and mechanical units. From the propane tank to the facility the contractor will use type PE gas piping all gas lines will be manufactured and installed to comply with the 2009 International Fuel Gas Code.

The Government will be responsible for removal of the old oil tank and setting of the new propane tank. The tank will be an above ground tank.

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

A45. April 22, 2010. Please review the scope of work for Prototypical Project Four, Section 4.2, Paragraph F. Please note the reference to “or equal”.

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. April 22, 2010. The Government has replaced the roof on all the facilities involved in this contract to stop water from entering the facility. If there is an area of rotten wood that was exposed during either the April 7, 2010 Pre-Proposal Conference and Site Visit or the April 21, 2010 secondary Site Visit the contractor should include the cost of the replacement of said areas in its proposal to the Government for Prototypical Project Four.

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

A47. Yes. Supplemental 1 Prototypical Project Four is posted to www.fbo.gov containing the following documents: (1) a one-page Asbestos Testing Report;

and (2) a two-page Test Report from EMSL Analytical, Inc.

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

A48. April 21, 2010. Approximate location of transformer is shown on the drawings. Contractor to coordinate final transformer location with government and underground utilities. Note from A-E added April 27, 2010: The design documents note that both transformers (100 KVA and 300 KVA units) be located 25’-0” away for the Community Club, but this notation does not “exactly” locate the transformers. The contractor, after they have confirmed the actual routing and inverts of the existing underground utilities, will need to coordinate with the FTIG the exact and final locations of these components. This last statement is most relevant to the 300 KVA transformer and the existing propane storage tanks that may require relocation.

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

A49. April 21, 2010. There are no foreseen roof penetrations.

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

A50. April 21, 2010. Yes, contractor to repair & prepare wall for installation of new panel if required.

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. April 21, 2010. The government will address the location of known utilities.

April 22, 2010. Relative to Prototypical Project Four, the contractor will coordinate with the project manager to obtain and fill out a dig permit.

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. April 22, 2010. The Contractor can use one of the buildings in the contract for his office or storage but the completion date for the project will remain the same. If the Contractor uses a mobile office, the Government will provide a temporary electrical service for them. For the connection the Contractor will coordinate with the Project Manager.

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. April 21, 2010. The club will remain in use (in as much as possible) during construction. The contractor will coordinate any shutdown with the club, training site, and state reservation maintenance at least one week prior. The contractor is responsible for any temporary means that must occur to maintain electrical service and distribution to the club, to include, but not limited to, generation, distribution, etc.

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. April 27, 2010. Party submitting question was requested to provide clarification of the question being asked. April 29, 2010. Clarification received is:

What asphalt oil index should we base our price on? Answer: It is up to the offeror to determine how to price the Prototypical Project.

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.

April 21, 2010 – See Q48 through Q51 and Q53, above.

April 22, 2010 – See Q31 through Q46 and Q51 and Q52, above.

Q59. We supply and install metal roofing/siding and I was wondering if there was any on the USPFO job listed in this solicitation.

A59. This Acquisition will select contract awardees that will compete on individual Task Orders for at least a base period of two years. Both the Synopsis and the Solicitation, as amended, provide that Task Orders may include a wide range of construction projects which could include Task Orders for roofing/siding projects.

Q60. How should I go about bidding on these projects?

A60. As reflected in the Solicitation, as amended, and in the Presentation from the April 7, 2010 Pre-Proposal Conference, this acquisition is not an Invitation for Bids under FAR Part 14 and interested offerors will not be submitting bids. This acquisition is a Request for Proposals under FAR Part 15 and interested offerors are invited to submit proposals prepared in accordance with the instructions contained in the Solicitation and supporting documents.

Q61. All Prototypical Projects. Does the FTIG DPW conduct all inspections or is 3rd party inspections needed for electrical and other trades?

A61. April 27, 2010. The Project Manager for the Government will handle all inspections.

Q62. All Prototypical Projects. What scale is to be used for the prints for the prototypical projects 2 and 4?

A62. April 27, 2010 / corrected April 29, 2010. The scale for the Barracks project will be 1/4” = 1 foot.

Q63. Prototypical Project Four. Left side of print 5 of 7 on the first floor lighting there appears to be a 2x2 fixture. Is there preferred model # or should this be a 2x 4 fixtures?

A63. April 27, 2010. There is one 2x2 light fixture on the first floor in each facility. Type will be Copper model number: 2GR8-2U6T8A-UNV-EB81-U or equal.

Q64. Prototypical Project Four. Lighting print 5 of 7 is there preferred model # for the exit signs?

A64. April 27, 2010. Dual Lite model number #LZURWE or equal.

Q65. Prototypical Project Four. Are the outside lights above door a remote head from the exit sign or a switches outdoor fixture and is there a preferred model # for this fixture?

A65. April 29, 2010. Outside lights are a switches outdoor fixture. No preferred model.

Q66. Prototypical Project Four. Is the shower light a light fan combo unit and is there a model #?

A66. April 29, 2010. Light and fan are intended to be separate, but are wired together to come on at the same time. No preferred model.

Q67. Prototypical Project Four. The drawings do not show any ductwork, flex or diffusers. Is the HVAC portion of this project design/build?

A.67. April 27, 2010. The Government will require the contractor to install a balanced system using a minimum of 10 2’X2’X8” diffusers on the first floor and 11 on the second floor. The placement of the diffusers in the bay areas will be beside the light fixtures and in the cadre rooms they will be centered on the rooms. Adjustments may be made if the diffuser impacts the placement of the light fixture. The diffusers will be connected to the existing duct work by the use of UL listed flexible duct. A transition piece will have to be fabricated to made the transition from the square duct to round duct. In the latrine there are wall mounted grills instead of 2’X2’ diffusers. The grill can be reused if they are taken down, cleaned and inspected for survivability and damage. If they are found to be survivable and free of damage, they may be reinstalled. If not, they must be replaced at no additional cost to the Government.

Q68. Prototypical Project Four. Scope of work page 1 of 14 section 1.4 A. Bid Breakout. The Contractor will be required to submit a breakdown of bid items. Refer to Attachment 1 for standard breakout format. Q. Where do I find the referred attachment?

A68. The reference to “Attachment 1” and “Bid Breakout” in the scope of Work for any of the Prototypical Projects is in error. Price Quotes for the Prototypical Projects are ONLY to be addressed on Exhibit E, E(2) or E(4). As this acquisition is not an Invitation for Bids, no “Bid Breakouts” are required and none should be provided as part of an offeror’s proposal.

April 27, 2010 – See Q61 through Q64 and Q67, above.

Q69 through Q80. Prototypical Project Two. Questions from secondary site visit.

Q69. Prototypical Project Two. With regard to the Scope of Work (SOW), and the existing electrical panels located in the Boiler room and throughout the Community Club, what is the line of demarcation?

A69. This project will require the replacement of the existing panels and feeders as shown on electrical plans E-601 and E-602. Only electrical panels NB1, NB2 and the Square D panel located in the Ball Room are to remain. The SOW does not include replacement of any of the branch circuits. The SOW does not include replacement of any non-code compliant cable that may be fed from any of the existing electrical panels shown on electrical plans E-601 and E-602.

Q70. Prototypical Project Two. Does the SOW require the repair of the existing Community Club roof resulting from the removal of the service head?

A70. Yes. See digital image (uploaded to www.fbo.gov as Supplement1ProtoTwo.pdf) for clarification.

Q71. Prototypical Project Two. Where is the Cold Water Feed, and how are to ground?

A71. Entrance of cold water feed is located in the Boiler Room. Coordinate with Community Club with exact location of metal water pipe. Provide a grounding electrode within 5'0" of point of entrance of pipe. National Electrical Code Article 250 requires an additional supplemental electrode for grounding. A ground rod may be used to accomplish this requirement. Verify existing grounding configuration.

Q72. Prototypical Project Two. Who removes the existing utility poles?

A72. The Contractor must remove the utility poles. The utility poles will not be salvaged by the Government. The Contractor will be responsible to remove the existing utility pole mounted transformers to grade only. The Government will then transport the existing transformers to a storage location of the Government’s choice.

Q73. Prototypical Project Two. Will new conduit be required?

A73. Yes, The new power feeds from the new transformers to their respective panel boards will require new wire and new conduit.

Q74. Prototypical Project Two. Is there a preferred manufacturer for the new panels?

A74. Square D or equal.

Q75. Prototypical Project Two. Does the SOW require the removal and replacement of the existing electrical box located immediately to the left of existing electrical panel A/B?

A75. No. Existing panel is being used as a splice box and it is considered to be branch wiring.

Q76. Prototypical Project Two. Does the SOW require the removal of the coat-rack located in front of existing panel NB 1?

A76. Yes to provide 3'0' clearance in the front of the panel.

Q77. Prototypical Project Two. Please clarify the statement that the Community Club must remain operational 7 days a week, 24 hours a day during the full construction duration of the project.

A77. Minimal utility shut-downs (1 hr maximum) will be allowed, but prior to any utility shutdown, the Contractor must give the Government at least 5 days prior notification of such an event, and schedule the shutdown with the Government accordingly.

Q78. Prototypical Project Two. Since the transformers are to be provided with a precast concrete vault please clarify the need of detail #6 on E-801.

A78. Detail 6 on E-801 is not required for a precast concrete vault mounted transformer. Coordinate with Sunbelt for transformer installation details.

Q79. Prototypical Project Two. Does the SOW require that we remove the existing insulated line located below the 2nd floor electrical panel for code compliancy?

A79. No, electrical contractor to move the 2nd Floor Electrical panel to the left to allow the panel to be clear from above the insulated piping. Closet door may need to be re-adjusted to provide adequate working space. Verify that the panel will have NEC required working space for the panel (NEC Article 110 - 30" wide and 3'0" front clearance with the closet door opened).

Q80. Prototypical Project Two. How can we get a copy of the project specifications?

A80. See documents for Prototypical Project Two posted on www.fbo.gov in reference to this Solicitation.

Q81. Will there be a new due date for the PPQ’s since the RFP due date has been pushed to May 7, 2010?

A81. See Answers to Questions 12, 20, 30 and 58, above.

Q82. Prototypical Project Two. There is no scale on the drawings, can one be provided?

A82. April 29, 2010. The scale on the site plan (e-050) is 1” = 30’ – 0”. The scale on the remaining plans is 1/8” = 1’ – 0”. Since the drawings are diagrammatic in nature it is recommended during construction that you do not scale off these drawings, but confirm dimensions via actual field measurement. For estimating purposes scaling off the drawings is acceptable.

Q83. Prototypical Project Two. There is no Panel schedule on the prints or in the spec, will one be provided?

A83. April 29, 2010. A panel schedule is not required. Please refer to drawings E-602 & ED-801 for the required panel information.

Q84. Prototypical Project Two. Is Panel DP being replaced? The drawings are not clear on this issue. It shows the old panel being removed but I do not see a replacement, please advise.

A84. April 29, 2010. Yes, the DP panel is to be replaced.

Q85. Prototypical Project Two. Is the existing structures composites suspended ceiling with wood joists? If so, what type of clearance do I have to run the new feeder conduits? Or do I have to run conduits in the basement?

A85. April 29, 2010. Existing structure is wood joists and suspended ceiling based on architect’s field observations. Clearances need to be verified in field.

There is no basement except for a small basement room with a sump accessed by a single steep staircase that descends from the kitchen freezer area. There is a crawlspace which may be used as needed for conduit runs.

Q86. Prototypical Project Two. In Building 9-67 I am supposed to re-feed panels I & II? There is no drawing that indicates the locations of these panels. I assume they are somewhere in the vicinity if the meter from the existing service, please advise.

A86. April 29, 2010. Panels I & II will need to be re-fed. Panels I & II are located in the room adjacent to the AC Unit disconnects.

Q87. Prototypical Project Two. Who is responsible for the High/Medium Voltage work?

I know the Gap has their own HV utility crew. Do we provide and terminate everything and just leave a service drop at the pole for the Gap’s Utility crew to terminate? (Ref.

Note 2 Drawing E-050) Or are they providing & installing the wire and terminating at the transformers and the pole? Please advise.

A87. April 29, 2010. The contractor is responsible to route the overhead conductors down the utility pole as noted on Note #2 on E-050. The Government is not responsible to complete this task.

Q88. Please explain the difference in FAR part 14 and FAR part 15.

A88. Reference Q60, above. The role of the USPFO for PA is not to provide legal advice. Offerors are encouraged to read and review FAR Part 14 and FAR Part 15 should they have questions concerning differences between the two Parts. FAR Part 14 as its caption implies, concerns “SEALED BIDDING” wherein bids are received. FAR Part 15 as its caption implies, concerns “CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION” wherein proposals are received. This acquisition is conducted under FAR Part 15.

Q89. The National Guard’s PA MATOC questions and answers at www.fbo.gov indicate that an amendment will be coming out effectively changing the due date for the proposal from April 30, 2010 to May 7, 2010. However, it is now April 26, 2010, and we have not seen this amendment come out, meaning that the contractual due date is still this Friday, April 30. Given the issues with time limitations on this proposal, we are concerned that we haven’t seen the amendment yet. Would you please indicate when this amendment might be coming out? Thank you.

A89. The referenced Amendment became viewable on www.fbo.gov at approximately 5:00 pm EDT on Tuesday, April 27, 2010. By clicking on the fbo.gov link, a separate Army Single Face to Industry (ASFI) website should be opened with links to several .PDF documents related to this acquisition. The 4/27/2010 link should be “Amendment 0002.pdf” which is an Amendment of the Solicitation on Standard Form 30. See, Block 14 which confirms the Question and Answers document – “Extension of Date for Receipt of Proposals and Questionnaires from Friday, April 30, 2010, to Friday, May 7, 2010.”

Q90. Prototypical Project Two. There is existing telephone data wiring on one of the poles being removed on print E-050. These wires extend to building 9-67 and 9-65. Is there any Telephone/Data work to be included in this project?

A90. April 29, 2010. Yes, these wires will need to be re-fed to buildings 9-67 and 9-65.

Q91. Prototypical Project Two. The preferred buss type, aluminum or copper, is not stated on the prints for the 800A switchboard or the new panels. Is there a spec. for these items? Is copper or aluminum required?

A91. April 29, 2010. Copper Bus required. The specification for the copper bus is included in the Statement of Work.

April 29, 2010 – See Q54; Q65 & Q66; Q82 through Q87; Q90 & 91, above.

Q92. We intend to submit for the D/B A/E portion of the MATOC solicitation. In completing the SF 330, is identifying the Architect as the main contact with ourselves as a Prime for the proposed team sufficient? Do you also want to see MEP, structural, and Civil engineers listed as Prime? Sometimes, these engineers change, depending on the scope of work. Additionally, section F of the form SF 330 requests projects to be listed, 10 if not specified. Please confirm you wish for 10 projects.

A92. Relative to the SF 330, the Architect may be listed as the main contact.

MEP, structural and civil engineers should be listed in the capacity in which they serve the Architectural-Engineering firm that is completing the SF 330 (do they work for the prime or a sub-contractor). It is recognized that engineers may change over time; however, SF 330s by the form’s design seek the resumes of individuals as part of the SF 330. It is up to the offeror to determine what resumes they want to include. It is correct that Section F of the SF 330 requests 10 projects unless otherwise specified. 10 projects should be provided.

Q93. A62 [above] dated April 27, 2010 indicates that the scale for the Barracks project will be ½” = 1 foot. However, the details on the drawings indicate ¼” = 1 foot which we believe to be correct. Please clarify.

A93. A62 has been corrected to read ¼”.

Q94. Is new conduit required from the service pole to the building? If so is there a trench detail especially under the existing gravel road areas and where conduit transfers from underground to on the building or on the pole indicating depth and conduit type required?

A94. New conduit is…