W9133L-24-R-6100 RFIs and Responses 20231117.pdf

RFI

# RFI Text

Date Received from Firm KO Response

1 Will each contract be required to cover all Regions? 13‐Nov‐23

Covering all regions is not a requirement, however in accordance with Criteria C (Capacity), the capacity to accomplish multiple simultaneous ANG task orders across the United States and its territories will be considered as one of the technical evaluation factors.

2 Is the capacity equally shared across each region? 13‐Nov‐23 The total capacity of $225M is shared amoung all firms across the entire multi-region area. The amount awarded to each firm will be dependent on the selections at the task order level.

3 How will our individual qualifications be judged against such broad-ranging geographic and programmatic coverage? 13‐Nov‐23

The Government will utilize the criteria published in the synopsis for Critera A (Professional Qualifications); Criteria B (Specialized Experience and Technical Competence); Criteria C (Capacity); Criteria D (Past Performance); Criteria E (Location and Knowledge of the Locality), and Criteria F (Secondary Criteria) to evaluate proposals.

We’re writing to request clarification of the following requirement:

*All engineers and architects must have the following in the role they are assigned on the project team: a bachelor's degree, professional registration, and at least five years of relevant experience.

Question: Does this mean you are requiring “a bachelor's degree and professional registration and at least five years of relevant experience.”

13‐Nov‐23

Yes, the requirement for a bachelor's degree, professional registration, and at least five years of relevant experience is the minimum that the engineer and architect disciplines that have an asterisk "*" next to them need to have in order to be rated “GREEN (Acceptable).” Any professional team member that you submit that has the words “architect” or “engineer” in Block 13 (Role of This Contract) of the Standard Form 330 must meet this minimum requirement.

For mentor protégé teams, will all (or minimum of 7) of the section F projects be limited to the small business team member’s qualifications?

(instead of using the large business’ projects to compete on a small business contract) 15‐Nov‐23

In a mentor protégé agreement, both parties’ experience may be used to respond to the requirements in synopsis. There is no restriction and/or limiting requirement on the quantity of demonstrated experience and technical expertise by either the mentor or protégé firm. This applies to all criteria requirements in the synopsis.

Criteria F tiebreaker states a preference for firms to be within 50 miles then lists all the sates on the contract. Can you clarify how this will be scored? Should firms be within 50 miles of each state listed to receive the points? How will small business will be scored? Does scoring vary based on the amount of locations of the whole team or states the firm or team has offices in? is licensed in? 15‐Nov‐23

Criteria F will be used as tie-breaker criteria. Distance is measured in miles from the states listed in the synopsis to the firm's physical base or branch office address; P.O. Boxes will not be conisdered. The same criteria will be used to evaluate both unrestricted and small business firms. The secondary criteria F does not consider licensing.

7 Can questions be responded to weekly, so we get responses as we are preparing the proposal? 15‐Nov‐23

As questions are submitted throughout the synopsis posting period, the Government will make every effort to post the responses on a weekly basis. This is dependent on the availability of all members of the contracting and technical team and that they have adequate time to prepare detailed responses to all questions.

The National Guard has requested that we include our Volume of DOD contracts for the previous 12 months. This is several pages of information for a company our size and I am requesting that the volume of DOD work be excluded from the total 75-page count. 15‐Nov‐23

Volume of DoD work is secondary criteria that should not be comingled with primary criteria. A properly filled out SF330 part II provides the required information.

Does the Contracting Officer intend to limit contract awards such that no one (1) Large or Small Business firm will receive more than one (1) award as a result of Solicitation W9133L24R6100?

Reason/Rationale for Question: Solicitation W9133L24R6100 is silent regarding a singular firm’s opportunity to be awarded a contract under the Large Business category and also receive a contract under a Mentor-Protégé arrangement under the Small Business category.

In the preceding (cancelled) National Guard Bureau (NGB) synopsis documents for Indefinite Delivery Type Architect Engineer (A-E) Contracts for the NGB in support of the Air and Army National Guard Vertical Construction Programs throughout Regions referenced in the active Solicitation W9133L24R6100, NGB’s Contract Information language specifically said the following:

NGB Vertical Region 4 Solicitation Citation Example (reference attachment): “All firms responding to the announcement will be required to identify which category they are submitting. All firms will be required to state the words, “Small Business,” or “Other than Small Business” after the PART I, A, Block 3 of Standard Form 330. Firms will be required to submit a separate SF 330 for each category in which the firm wants consideration. No one (1) firm will receive more than one (1) award as a result of this solicitation.”

15‐Nov‐23 There are no restrictions on a firm submitting an SF330 for both categories (unrestricted and small business). For example a firm may submit as a prime in one category and as subconsultant or as a JV in the other category.

Does the Contracting Officer intend to avoid a conflict of interest and reserve the right to deem ineligible for award a proposal submitted by a prime firm who is also proposing as a subcontractor or JV partner under another firms’ proposal?

Reason/Rationale for Question: In the preceding (cancelled) National Guard Bureau (NGB) synopsis documents for Indefinite Delivery Type Architect Engineer (A-E) Contracts for the NGB in support of the Air and Army National Guard Vertical Construction Programs throughout Regions referenced in the active Solicitation W9133L24R6100, NGB’s Additional Requirements language specifically said the following:

NGB Vertical Region 4 Solicitation Citation Example (reference attachment): “To avoid a conflict of interest, any contractor proposing as a prime may not have a subcontractor who is also proposing as a prime. This solicitation shall be viewed as one singular solicitation. Therefore, a firm submitting a proposal as a prime contractor may not also be listed as a subcontractor in ANY other submitted proposal under this solicitation. This includes any proposals submitted either under the Small Business Category and the Unrestricted Category. This requirement also applies to firms submitting as Joint Ventures. In the event a conflict of interest is found, the Contracting Officer reserves the right to deem ineligible for award the proposal submitted by the prime firm who is also proposing as a subcontractor under another firms’ proposal.”

15‐Nov‐23

For the current synopsis, it has been determined there is no conflict of interest on behalf of the Government if a firm submits in both categories. Therefore, there are no restrictions on a firm submitting an SF330 for both categories (unrestricted and small business).

Vertical Multi-Region RFI LOG W9133L-24-R-6100

RFI

# RFI Text

Date Received from Firm KO Response

Why did NGB change the fair opportunity guidelines for completion of task orders for the active solicitation W9133L24R6100 and omit two categories for Non-Complex and Complex A-E task orders?

Reason/Rationale for Question: In the preceding (cancelled) National Guard Bureau (NGB) synopsis documents for Indefinite Delivery Type Architect Engineer (A-E) Contracts for the NGB in support of the Air and Army National Guard Vertical Construction Programs throughout Regions referenced in the active Solicitation W9133L24R6100, NGB’s Guidelines for competition of task orders specifically said the following:

NGB Vertical Region 4 Solicitation Citation Example (reference attachment): “Guidelines for competition of task orders:

•Non-Complex A-E task order requirements with a Programmed Amount (PA) less than $3M must be set-aside for competition among the reserved

Small Business Firms •Non-Complex A-E task order requirements with a Programmed Amount (PA) above $3M may be competed among all IDIQs •Complex A-E task order requirements with a Programmed Amount (PA) less than $3M may be competed among all IDIQs •Complex A-E task order requirements with a Programmed Amount (PA) above $3M may be competed among Unrestricted IDIQs”

The current Solicitation W9133L24R6100 Language states: “Guidelines for competition of task orders:

•Non-Complex A-E requirements with a Task Order amount of less than $1M (or a Programmed Amount (PA) less than $5M) will be set-aside for competition among the pool of Small Business Firms in accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F).

•Complex A-E task requirements with a Task Order amount greater than $1M (or a Programmed Amount (PA) greater than $5M) will be competed among both pools of Unrestricted and Small Business firms.

Note: Complexity definition for A-E design task orders is in accordance with DFARS 219.502-2.”

The following categories are omitted:

1.Non-Complex A-E requirements with a Task Order amount greater than $1M (or a Programmed Amount (PA) greater than $5M) may (or will) be competed among both pools of Unrestricted and Small Business firms.

2.Complex A-E task requirements with a Task Order less than $1M (or a Programmed Amount (PA) less than $5M) may (or will) be competed among both pools of Unrestricted and Small Business firms. 15‐Nov‐23

The guidelines for competition of task orders in the current synopsis were developed congruent with DFARS 219.502-2, and strive to be a streamlined, simplified approach that strives for competition to the greatest extent practicable.

Does the Contracting Officer expect to see relevant Communications Specialist expertise and experience demonstrated under the Electrical Engineer discipline, another discipline, or not required at all?

Reason/Rationale for Question: In the preceding (cancelled) National Guard Bureau (NGB) synopsis documents for Indefinite Delivery Type Architect Engineer (A-E) Contracts for the NGB in support of the Air and Army National Guard Vertical Construction Programs throughout Regions referenced in the active Solicitation W9133L24R6100, NGB’s Selection Criteria A – Professional Qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services (SF 330, Part I, Section E) listed the Communications Specialist with Registered Communications Distribution Design (RCDD) as a requirement. Previous inclusion of the Communications Specialist professional qualifications was consistent with design requirements under DoD Unified Facility Criteria.

Selection Criteria A for active Solicitation W9133L24R6100 documents that “Professional disciplines are listed in priority order based on anticipated workload and benefit to project success.” The Communications Specialist discipline is not listed as a necessary professional qualification for satisfactory performance.

15‐Nov‐23 The Government has identified all required disciplines in critereia A.

Vertical Multi-Region RFI LOG W9133L-24-R-6100