ERCIP Nationwide MATOC Virtual Preproposal Conference Questions and Answers.pdf

ERCIP MATOC Virtual Preproposal Conference Questions and Answers

12 September 2024, 10:00AM – 11:30AM Eastern Time

Q: Can we get a list of all the attendees?

A: Yes. We will publish as much as possible in a single amendment to include questions we aren’t able to answer today and questions in Projnet and items such as the list of attendees.

Q: Past performance is limited at 7 years. Will the Government entertain pushing Past Performance out to 10 years?

A: The RFP requirements will stand. As you all know, this solicitation has been in the works for quite some time and this has been asked previously and is an issue we have looked into previously and the requirements in the RFP as currently stated will stand in that respect.

Q: Regarding sample project – will it be DB or DBB?

A: It will be Design Build.

Q: Looking at the program itself, do they have percentage of projects under program that will be DB vs DBB?

A: Generally, no. Programmatically the intent at the OSD level and down is to shift more towards DB over time as ERCIP gets up and running but that is about as much granularity as we have around that. Generally, at onset at time of award we will be looking at primarily DBB projects, but it should be your expectation that that could shift over time to a great number of DB.

Q: I recall a total of 12 contracts will be issued but how many teams do you plan on shortlisting from Phase 1 onto Phase 2?

A: That answer is in the RFP and in the slides. The answer is up to 18.

Q: Section 5.1.7 for the AE designer of record, it says the identification of more than 1 design firm will result in the evaluation of the least qualified firm. If we have more than one DOR can we submit 3 projects for each AE design firm or just a total of 3?

A: The latter, a total of 3.

Q: Reference to MP JV – we are engaged with a SB for a MP JV and waiting for SBA to sign final letter, should take place before October 7, but if it does not and we submit our status, will that preclude us from using the JV or not?

A: Restate the question please? (can we still submit without final letter and still proceed?) – Generally, no, again it’s all about block 14 and how you’re registered in SAM. If you’re unable to represent at time of proposal submission and have the documents required and can represent that way, then you are in fact not that entity. Does that make sense? (They say yes)

Q: Will additional consideration be given to CONUS projects over OCONUS?

A: There is no additional consideration in the RFP vs CONUS or OCONUS. Please refer to the additional consideration elements that are listed in the RFP.

Q: Substantially complete – design or construction?

A: What is the RFP reference? At 5.1.7. RFP states there that description of up to 3 projects that are constructed, complete or substantially completed, by the AE contractor. Please submit that in writing for us to take a further look at.

Q: Should bidder inquiries go to Projnet or email address on slide?

A: Through ProjNet, same process as stated in the RFP for other inquiries unless we are answering them here today.

Q: Related to 5.1 factor 1 energy projects, for the scope and size criteria. No definition on that first Past Performance piece on water projects. Are there any water projects required or allowed by the prime or the AE under that first 5.1 requirement or are they solely supposed to be under factor 2. In factor 2 it gives you the size and relevancy requirement but doesn’t say the specific things to list for the requirement. Do you want the same info in factor 1 for factor 2 for the water projects?

A: This may require further addressing. Draft RFP vs final RFP, the intention was to place electrical expertise under one factor and water separately, so we will relook at that and see if there will be further clarity for that via amendment. Please also submit this in writing to look at further.

Q: In regard to 5.1.8 – it states that contractors other than the offeror, including teaming partners, subcontractors and affiliates will not be evaluated if they put the Past Performance in. Does that prove meaningful involvement for companies like…(didn’t catch last word)?

A: There is paraphrasing at the end of your statement which is not what is stated in the RFP. The RFP states that projects performed by contractors other than the offeror including but not limited to teaming partners. . . will not be evaluated UNLESS those other contractors are part of the JV and/or teaming arrangement as demonstrated by the proposal.

Q: Are some of those projects still likely to come out as standalone contracts?

A: Yes, as you all have seen a lot of ERCIP has shifted, we have solicited later than anticipated, things have generally been pushed, there will be fluctuations in that list and it is not exhaustive or definitive, so there is a reasonable likelihood that some of those projects will be solicited separately than on this MATOC.

Q: Can you clarify how sole sourcing will work?

A: Can you please elaborate on your question? So generally, not a lot of detail there so I will close that out based on how it is asked. There is reference in the RFP to sole source procedures as part of the general ordering procedures contained in the RFP on page 3, there are a couple of sentences there, those procedures are outlined specifically in regulation, and the Government doesn’t have anything to add to that.

Q: Is there a projection for when an amendment will be posted?

A: It will depend on number of questions received.

Q: Could you talk about how this works in tandem with ERCIP in Huntsville and Louisville? Is it in conjunction, does one feed the other?

A: Generally, the contract out of Huntsville is an AE IDIQ, this is generally the construction IDIQ. That said, programmatically the intent by OSD is that we want to shift to DB over time.

Q: So eventually does it exceed Huntsville’s main and becomes defacto contract?

A: There’s no scope under Huntsville for construction.

Q: I understand. Does one contract feed the other?

A: Potentially. In general, I would say the Government always has multiple acquisition strategies available to it. Neither Huntsville nor ours is a requirements contract, so for any given requirement the Government is going to go about the best way to procure it, so it’s going to vary depending on the situation.

Q: Does the respondent need to show capabilities for both water infrastructure and power infrastructure or can we propose for only the power aspect?

A: As you saw in the slides, capability and experience with Water resiliency projects is part of the technical approach factor and offerors will be rated accordingly.

Q: Does that also include construction or is that design only?

A: So, I would call your attention to 6.1.1 of the RFP as an example at Bravo it states projects which contain one or more of the following tech elements and three of those refer to construction, I would ask you though to submit that in writing as well. It is somewhat similar to the previous question as to water so please submit that in writing per the RFP instructions.

Q: Projects that may contract to the conveyee of the utility, (Government asks) are you referring to privatized utilities there? Yes, to privatized utilities.

A: Generally, in respect to the privatized utilities, the authority to sole source some of those projects came out in this FY’s National Defense Authorization Act, we expect to see more of that and those will be handled based on the authorities provided which are separate and distinct from this vehicle.

Q: For the sample project – will it be for electrical, water, or have elements of both?

A: The Government intent with the sample project is electrical but ultimately that will be determined when we release the phase 2 portion of the solicitation.

Q: Joint Ventures – are they allowed to contract or team up with other entities? Joint Ventures – Are they allowed to add or create a teaming agreement with a 3rd entity to expand capabilities?

A: Are you asking if a JV can team with another JV or company?

Q: Yes, a company, for water capabilities.

A: Please submit this question in writing.

Q: Is an extension for the response available?

A: Currently proposal due date is 7 OCT of course pending questions and RFP amendments. The current due date is 7 OCT at 1400.

Q: When do you think you’ll say who will go to phase 2 based on that date?

A: The Government would refer you to the 90 day bid validity that is when the Government intends to meet that milestone.

Q: We have a technology that produces water from the humidity of the environment, what capacity and quality of water are you looking for?

A: I would point you to the RFP in general, this is a source selection for DBB construction and DB construction of electrical and water infrastructure projects. So, this is much broader scope than what the question asks, so please take a deep dive into the requirements of the RFP.

Q: In RFP 7.4 - Tab D, Pre-award information, the Government requests a list of present commitments, including the dollar value. As we are a large business with multiple business segments and an extremely long list of commitments, would it be acceptable to include a list of relevant present commitments within the appropriate business segment?

A: Please submit that question in writing as well just so we can get you a complete answer.