Fort Lee JOC Solicitation Questions and Aanswers - April 29.pdf

Fort Lee JOC Solicitation Questions April 29, 2020

Fort Lee JOC Solicitation Questions

April 29, 2020

Fort Lee JOC Solicitation Questions: Set 1

1. Senior Site Manager (PE):

a. Professional Engineer: We recommend removing this requirement for the Senior Site Manager. The qualifications, function, and services of a professional engineer may be provide through other means.

Answer: No, this item will not be removed we require a Professional Engineer (licensed), and dedicated to the Job Order Contract as stated.

b. Professional Engineer: If this requirement remains, please confirm that the Senior Site Manager may have 15 years of relevant experience in the construction industry in lieu of a professional engineer registration?

Answer: The Professional Engineer (licensed), and the Senior Site Manager can be one in the same.

c. Annual Volume ($): The solicitation identifies the JOC value as $20 million per year, however the Senior Site Manager is required to have experience managing $50 million per year. We recommend that the Senior Site Manager shall have experience managing a minimum of $20 million in a fiscal year, which meets the requirements of this contract.

Answer: No, this will not be changed because the Senior Site Manager needs to show experience managing $50M per year in various stages of construction. That may have many different disciplines.

d. Education: We recommend revising the education requirement so that the Senior Site Manager may have 15 years of relevant experience in the construction industry in lieu of a bachelor’s degree.

Answer: No, this will not be changed, because the Government requires a Professional Engineer (licensed).

e. Education: If the bachelor’s degree requirement remains, we recommend adding Business Management and Business Administration as applicable programs of study.

Answer: No, we will not change our requirement or add any other types of degrees.

f. If the contractor provides two or more Senior Site Managers who combine to meet the annual financial and volume requirements of the contract rather than one, would this be acceptable to the Government?

Answer: No, this would not be acceptable to the Government, the Government requires a Professional Engineer (licensed).

2. Senior Site Manager/Project Manager:

a. Annual Volume (# of Projects): If the contractor’s personnel proposed for the Senior Site

Manager/Project Manager has managed $20 million in projects per fiscal year consisting of 10-15 projects annually, would this be acceptable to the Government?

Answer: No, this would not be acceptable, because we are unaware as to the volume of projects that we will be required to perform annually. And do not want to put the contactor at a disadvantage to perform.

b. If the contractor provides two or more Senior Site Manager/Project Managers who combine to meet the annual financial and volume requirements of the contract rather than one, would this be acceptable to the Government?

Answer: No, it would not be acceptable to the Government.

3. Senior Construction Site-Superintendent

a. Annual Volume (# of Projects): If the contractor’s personnel being proposed for the Senior Construction Site-Superintendent has managed $40 million in projects per fiscal year consisting of 3-4 projects annually, would this be acceptable to the Government?

Answer: No, this is not acceptable, this person shall have experience overseeing construction of no less than Twenty (20) projects per fiscal year simultaneously at various stages of construction.

b. Education: We recommend revising the education requirement so that the Senior Construction Site Superintendent may have 15 years of relevant experience in the construction industry in lieu of a bachelor’s degree.

Answer: No, this requirement will not be revised, the requirement stands as stated.

c. If the contractor provides two or more Senior Construction Site-Superintendents who combine to meet the annual financial and volume requirements of the contract rather than one, would this be acceptable to the Government?

Answer: No, this would not be acceptable to the Government.

Fort Lee JOC Solicitation Questions: Set 2

1. On the Standard Form 1442 box 13 B. states “An offer guarantee is required.” Would the Government please confirm that the requirements stated in Volume I – General Tab F, Placement of the Offeror’s Bond page 81 cover the required “offer guarantee” and that a Bid Bond is not required?

Answer: Offerors can place their offeror guarantee in Volume I – General Tab F, Place of Offeror’s Bond. However, offerors shall still submit information showing minimum bonding capacity of $20 million aggregate with verification from the Securities or Bonding Company (to be completed by Surety Company and submitted by Offeror) as required.

2. On page 81 Volume II – Project Management Ability Tab A, the Government requests the Offeror to provide their “proposed Quality Control and safety plans.” Would the Government please confirm whether the Offeror’s actual Quality Control and Accident Prevention Plan (in accordance with EM385 and over 200 pages combined) are necessary to provide or whether a narrative summarizing these plans are acceptable?

Answer: Offerors shall provide a detailed summary of these plans.

3. Would the Government consider raising the page limit of Volume II – Project Management Ability from 30 pages to 250 pages, should the Government require the Offeror’s actual Quality Control and Accident Prevention Plan (in accordance with EM385) instead of a narrative of those plans?

Answer: Offerors shall provide a detailed summary of these plans.

4. It is noted on page 80 Volume I – General Tab E, Section K (Representation and Certifications) that “An offeror shall complete only paragraphs (b) of this provision if the offeror has completed the annual representations and certificates electronically via https://www.sam.gov.” Would the Government please confirm that if the Offeror falls under the requirement of only filling out paragraph (b) that the Offeror is then not required to submit a copy of their FAR & DFARS Report from https://www.sam.gov?

Answer: The Government confirms that if the offeror shall complete only paragraphs (b) of this provision if the offeror has completed the annual representations and certificates electronically via https://www.sam.gov, then the offeror dos not need to need to submit a copy of their FAR & DFARS Report.

5. If the Government requires a copy of the Offeror’s complete FAR & DFARS Report from https://www.sam.gov despite already completing the annual representations and certifications electronically, thus qualifying to only complete paragraph (b) of the Section K provision, would the Government then consider raising the page limit to accommodate the 50+ pages of the FAR & DFARS report?

Answer: The Government will exclude Section K from Volume I page limit.

https://www.sam.gov/ https://www.sam.gov/

6. Would the Government please confirm that a ProjNet Key has not been issued for this Solicitation?

Answer: The Government is confirming that a ProjNet Key has not been issued for this solicitation.

7. If a ProjNet Key has not been issued for this Solicitation, would the Government please confirm that RFI Responses, etc. will be issued by Amendment?

Answer: The Government confirms that RFP questions and responses will be issued by Amendment on www.beta.sam.gov.

8. If Amendments are issued for this Solicitation, please confirm how Offeror’s will be notified of Amendments.

Answer: Amendments will be issued on www.beta.sam.gov. It is the offeror’s responsibility to follow the postings on there.

9. On page 82 (3) Past Performance Questionnaire, the Government request that the questionnaires be returned directly to the KO to be reviewed and evaluated. Due to this requirement, is the Government requesting the PPQs also be included in the Offeror’s proposal?

Answer: No, offerors shall provide a summary list of questionnaire recipients to include Points of Contacts (POCs) and phone numbers. Please see revised Section L.

10. If the Government should decide to require the completed PPQs that have already been submitted directly to the KO in the Offeror’s proposal, it would be impossible for the Offeror to stay within the required page limit of Volume III – Past Performance Proposal. It is our suggestion that the Government consider raising the page limit of Volume III – Past Performance Proposal as a result.

Answer: No, offerors shall provide a summary list of questionnaire recipients to include Points of Contacts (POCs) and phone numbers. Please see revised Section L.

11. Would the Government consider accepting CPARS in lieu of PPQs for Volume III – Past Performance Proposal?

Answer: No. The Government will be pulling CPARS records as well.

12. If CPARS are acceptable in lieu of PPQs, would the Government please advise whether to send directly to the KO or add to the Offeror’s proposal? If the Government requests to include the acceptable CPARS in the proposal, would the Government consider raising the page limit for Volume III – Past Performance Proposal?

http://www.beta.sam.gov/

Answer: CPARS will not be accepted in lieu of PPQs.

13. Please confirm that the Government would deem it acceptable for an Offeror to submit an IDIQ Contract that had Task Orders awarded and performed within the last 5 years, regardless of the original overall IDIQ Contract Award date (e.g. the IDIQ Contract was awarded in 2014 but was a 5yr contract that had task orders awarded and completed throughout 2015-2019 i.e. within the past 5 years as required by this solicitation).

Answer: The offeror can submit the performance of the task orders that was awarded within the last 5 years but not the overall IDIQ contract if it was awarded past the five years.

Fort Lee JOC Solicitation Questions: Set 3

Question No.

Reference QUESTION

RFP

Please confirm the Prince George County Business Use Tax is to be included in the Coefficient.

Answer: Yes it is.

RFP

EuroJOC / RS Mean software & book cost change year to year approximately 5%, please confirm that it is acceptable to include quoted price increase year-to-year on the bid sheet.

Answer: Offerors please include the cost for the EuroJOC / RS Means Book and Software Renewal on the Attachment 4 – Price Schedule for each year.

Please confirm that the RS Means & Estimating Tool cost is for reference only and it should not be included in calculations per the Attachment 4 Price Schedule.

Answer: Offerors please include the cost for the EuroJOC / RS Means Book and Software Renewal on the Attachment 4 – Price Schedule for each year.

Based on your bidform you have asked for a EuroJOC / RS Mean breakout. Is this RS Means cost to be included in our Coefficient. IF it is included in the coefficient, should we include that column in our overall total? Please confirm that column L&M is for reference ONLY and not included in the column N totals.

Answer: RSMeans cost are included in the Coefficient. Please include the cost for the EuroJOC / RS Means Book and Software Renewal on the

Attachment 4 – Price Schedule for each year. Attachment 4 will be revised so that the Colum M price will not be included in Column N.

RFP

Please confirm the Government requires two (2) Quality Control (CQC) / Safety Inspectors.

Answer: Yes

Please confirm that all contractor employees and subcontractor employees will be required to wear photo identifications badges.

Answer: No

Please confirm two (2) third party partnering sessions will be included in the coefficient for the five (5) year contract period.

Temporary protection measures are typically negotiated on a project to project basis, should we assume that the 20,000sf minimum can be negotiated with the CMB PM?

Clarification on page 34 - "All applicable LEED requirements". Are there LEED requirements or will this be determined on a project to project basis?

For purposes of establishing coefficient, is there a known percentage of task orders that are Design/Build vs Design/Bid/Build?

Answer: No, this depends on the types of projects, and we have no way of determining that at this present time.

RFP -

Section L

Volume III - Past Performance Proposal submission requirements states:

"The offeror shall submit their Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts as individual projects as evidence of relevant past performance." Does this mean that ONLY IDIQ contracts will be considered relevant experience? Please consider allowing stand-alone projects or individual task orders that fall under an IDIQ to be considered relevant.

Answer: Stand-alone projects and/or individual task orders that fall under an IDIQ will be considered relevant.

Section M

Paragraph M.3.2.3.2. States: "In order to be relevant to this solicitation’s requirements, the past performance reference must demonstrate management and execution of multiple minor construction projects, involving multiple trades, simultaneously."

Will individual, stand-alone projects considered relevant if they were performed simultaneously with other stand-alone projects or IDIQs?

Section M

Paragraph M.3.2.3.2. States: "In order to be relevant to this solicitation’s requirements, the past performance reference must demonstrate management and execution of multiple minor construction projects, involving multiple trades, simultaneously."

For the purposes of evaluation, how is the government defining "minor construction projects"? Is there a dollar value associated with "Minor construction projects"? Consider projects similar in size between $2K and $7.5M, RFI.

Section L

Volume II - Project Management Ability, TAB A indicates that a "staffing plan including labor categories and qualifications" is required.

Please confirm if resumes of Ft. Lee JOC management office are to be included with the proposal to be considered technically acceptable.

Answer: Yes it is.

Section L

Volume III submission requirements indicate: "Past Performance Questionnaire - See Attachment 3, Past Performance Questionnaire.

(*Sheets must be within the page limitation for Volume III)" The section ALSO indicates that Past Performance Questionnaires are to be submitted directly to the contracting officer. Confirm that full blank past performance questionnaires are not to be provided, as each Past Performance Questionnaire is 4 pages long and this factor is limited to 20 pages. Instead, please consider a list of references who have been asked to provide the contracting office with evaluations OR excluding blank PPQ forms from page count.

Answer: Offerors shall provide a summary list of questionnaire recipients to include Points of Contacts (POCs) and phone numbers.

Please see revised Section L.

Section L

Volume III requests IDIQ contracts to be submitted as a single project.

Task orders on an IDIQ contract are not always managed by the same contracting personnel, which makes getting a Past Performance Questionnaire completed for an IDIQ contract problematic. For IDIQ contracts submitted in this factor, please consider allowing CPARS evaluations or previously completed Past Performance Questionnaires to be submitted for completed task orders if there is no single point of contact.

Answer: Stand-alone projects and/or individual task orders that fall under an IDIQ will be considered relevant.

Section L

Volume III requires Past Performance Questionnaires to be submitted to the contracting officer. For IDIQs submitted as relevant experience with multiple awarded task orders, there are typically different points of contact for each task order. It would likely be very difficult to find a single point of contact for all task orders on an IDIQ for most contractors. Will PPQs submitted for individual task orders on IDIQs submitted as relevant experience be considered?

Answer: Yes.

Section L

Volume III indicates that a minimum of 4 Specific Relevant Contracts Format forms are to be included, while 3 Past Performance Questionnaires must be returned to the contracting officer. If ONLY IDIQ contracts are considered relevant, please consider requiring a minimum of 3 Specific Relevant Contracts, equal to the 3 required past performance questionnaires.

Answer: Stand-alone projects and/or individual task orders that fall under an IDIQ will be considered relevant.

RFP

Section L

Volume IIII, Consent Letters and Client Authorization Letters - since this volume is limited to 20 pages and requires a considerable amount of information, consider allowing consent letters and client authorization letters to not go to page count.

Answer: Page count will remain the same. (Get with DPW)

Section L

Volume I - Tab F, requires the offeror to submit information showing minimum bonding capacity of $20M aggregate. Please confirm a letter from the surety confirming minimum bonding capacity will be considered sufficient.

Please consider moving bid date fourteen (14) calendar days so that we have enough time to review and double check RFI responses.

Answer: The revised solicitation closing date will be May 8, 2020 at

2PM EST.

Will the contractor be allowed to use 01 21 53.60 security factors for working in areas with security requirements?

Answer: This is negotiable for construction areas only, NOT for use at entry and exit access control points to Fort Lee.

Will the contractor be allowed to modify his coefficient if the rules, regulations, directives, and requirements which are issued during the contract term by DA military command authorities change during this contract, or will that be a risk he assumes when he bids his coefficient?

Answer: No, the coefficient will not change.

Sales tax on material and equipment costs has NOT been included in previous JOC solicitations. Please confirm sales tax is to be included in the coefficient.

Answer: It’s included in the coefficient, page 17 of 87 para 2.1.2

On the teleconference call, DPW Environmental mentioned that the contractor was required to obtain stormwater permits. "Permits" is listed in the coefficient. Will the contractor be allowed to charge for stormwater permits on individual task orders?

Answer: Yes, can be included in your task order proposal

The coefficient shall include nine (9) sets of RS Means books and nine

(9) EuroJOC software licenses per year. But there is a separate place to list the software costs in the coefficient calculation table.

Answer: RSMeans cost are included in the Coefficient. Please include the cost for the EuroJOC / RS Means Book and Software Renewal on the Attachment 4 – Price Schedule for each year. Attachment 4 will be revised so that the Colum M price will not be included in Column N.

Confirm the same set of three coefficients will be utilized throughout the contract term and that the contractor cannot adjust rates for option years.

Answer: Correct, they will remain the same throughout the contract term.

5.2.4 Labor percentages on top of line items (refer to RS Means Unit Price Book for line item numbers). Please provide the numbers.

Answer: It varies

Proposal submission general instructions paragraph 2 d. The Government makes a best-value decision based upon the evaluations of the initial proposal as submitted, Section M1.1 this is a best-value source selection using lowest price technical acceptable. Is this Best Value or Best Value

- LPTA?

Answer: Best Value - LPTA

Due to the logistics of delivery services impacted by COVID-19, we request that the government allow for DoD SAFE Upload of proposals prior to 11 AM on the due date to be followed by disc copies within 24 hours. Since the government does not require any hard copies of the proposal, DoD SAFE upload as an acceptable delivery method will ensure the government receives timely proposals and delays in physical delivery will not eliminate qualified contractors.

Answer: Proposals will now be required to be submitted via email.

Please see revised Section L.

Coefficient

There are numerous places within the Solicitation that define the coefficient. The contractor needs to look at page 17, 25, 83 as well as various places within the entire solicitation. Could the Government please provide one, clear, concise paragraph that states exactly what the contractor needs to include in his coefficient? Please avoid using vague language or the term "etcetera"/"etc.".

Answer: Stated in Part 5, 5.2 thru 5.2.5

Part 5, 5.2.1

Can the Government please clarify "etc." with regards to specific "exception costs" listed that are to be included in the Contractors coefficient? The solicitation states that "Offerors shall include the above-mentioned exception costs and all others beyond those costs in their coefficient". "All others [costs?]" cannot be reasonably estimated.

Please provide specific costs to be included in the contractors' coefficient.

Answer: Stated in Part 5, 5.2 thru 5.2.5

5.2.4

Can the Government clarify "Dust Protection up to 20,000 sq. ft."? Is this building square footage? Can the Government provide some examples of this, or provide any specific line items in RS Means this is in reference to?

Answer: Clearly already stated in 5.2.4

5.2.4

Can the Government clarify "Temporary protection of equipment, existing facilities and construction up to 20,000 sq. ft."? Is this building square footage? Can the Government provide some examples of this, or provide any specific line items in RS Means this is in reference to?

Answer: Clearly already stated in 5.2.4

5.2.4

Labor percentages on top of line items (refer to RS Means Unit Price Book for line item numbers) This is too vague to interpret for calculating the coefficient. Can the Government please provide the line item numbers from RS Means, or at least an example?

Answer: No, it varies

Part 2, 2.1.2

Does the first part of the paragraph 2.1.2. (from "COEFFICIENT" to "incorporated in JOC") give the definition of what a coefficient is, or are the items listed , such as protective clothing, equipment rental, to be included in the contractors coefficient?

2.1.2

Small equipment is listed specifically (drills, hammers, sensors, screwdrivers) but then includes "etc.". If there are small equipment line items required on task orders that are not ones specifically listed, can the contractor use them in his estimates?

Answer: That will be determined on a case by case situation.

2.1.2

Will the contractor be allowed to use mobilization and demobilization line items as allowed in RS Means for equipment on task orders?

Answer: It depends on the equipment to be used.

2.1.2

Could the Government please further describe "Compliance with environmental laws", and/or provide an example of an EPA/OSHA regulation (include regulation number/title), license, permit, or report that the contractor would need to include in his coefficient?

Answer: There is a line item for this.

2.1.2

In the teleconference one of the projects listed on the slide show was a vehicle crash barrier installed on an existing bridge column support in the median of a public highway. Would the contractor have to include the cost of any VDOT permits in his coefficient?

2.1.2

In the teleconference one of the projects listed on the slide show was a vehicle crash barrier installed on an existing bridge column support in the median of a public highway. Would the contractor have to include all of the traffic and work site signs and barriers for this project in his coefficient?

2.1.2

Can the Government provide examples of a permit, a license, and a fee that the contractor would need to include in his coefficient?

Answer: Already stated in 2.1.2

Proposal Content, 4.

Volume IV

- Price Proposal

(c)

Can the Government please define "protection and/or moving of Government property", and provide any examples of "Government property" that the contractor would need to protect and/or move as part of his coefficient? Would the moving of furniture to and from a building as part of a renovation be included as part of the contractor's coefficient?

Answer: This depends on the situation a will be negotiated on a case by case basis.

Content, 4.

Volume IV

- Price Proposal

(c)

Can the Government please define "Cost escalation"?

Answer: Cost Increase

Content, 4.

Volume IV

- Price Proposal

(c)

Can the Government please define "adjustments to listed prices"?

Answer: Cost adjustment to listed prices

Content, 4.

Volume IV

- Price Proposal

(c)

Mobilization and demobilization is to be included in the contractors coefficient in this paragraph. This is not consistent with other sections of the solicitation. Will the contractor be allowed to use mobilization and demobilization line items as allowed in RS Means for equipment on task orders?

Answer: Yes it is included in the coefficient, but also it depends on the item. This will be negotiated on a case by case basis.

Content, 4.

Volume IV

- Price Proposal

(c)

Can the Government please clarify "engineering services" with respect to this paragraph? It could be interpreted that engineering services are to be included in the contractor’s coefficient. Is that the intent, or will the contractor be allowed to use engineering and architectural "design" line items in his proposal (for design build task orders)?

Answer: No, they will not.

Content, 4.

Volume IV

- Price Proposal

(c)

Please qualify "incidental" as this is vague language as it could mean different things to different people.

Answer: A minor concomitant circumstance, event, item.

Fort Lee JOC Solicitation Questions: Set 4

Question No. RFP Reference Comments & Questions

1 • Section L, 3(3)

Are CPARS or prior PPQs allowed to replace the PPQ requirement in Section L? We have several Federal clients, including USACE, who will no longer fill in PPQs since they use CPARS. If so, should we submit the CPARS or prior PPQs in our response?

Answer: No, PPQs will need to be filled out.

• Part 5 Specific Jobs, Section 5.22 Design-Build Services

The pricing form does not have a difference in pricing for design-build vs bid-build. The solicitation references that there will be design-build projects. What percentage of projects will be design-build versus bid-build?

Answer: In this section we are only referring to Design- Build not Bid Build. Design-Build approximately 10% - 15%.

• Part 5 Specific Jobs, Section 5.22 Design-Build Services

Please indicate what percentage of work under the current/past JOC was solicited/awarded as design-build.

Answer: Design-Build approximately 10% -15%.

4 • Section B

How many decimal points are to be used for each of the coefficients?

Answer: Two decimals points.

5 • PWS 1.6.11

Please provide the qualifications for the “contract manager” as they do not appear in the SOW.

Answer: This position refers to the Senior Site Manager

(PE) , 1.6.8.4.1

6 • PWS, Part 5

For Design-Build Task Orders, how are the A/E costs to be captured in the Task Order? Are they an NPP Item or are they to be part of the coefficient?

Answer: There are line items within the RS Means for A/E costs. No, they are not a NPP item and not part of the coefficient.

7 • PWS, Part 5

Are there any specific sections of the RS Means Facilities Cost Data that are excluded from being used other than the items in 5.2.4 and 5.2.5?

Fort Lee JOC Solicitation Questions: Set 5

Reference: Section L, General Instructions, 3. Proposal preparation Instructions, Paragraph 2, Volume II - Project Management Ability - Tab A, 2nd Bullet (RFP page 81 of 87)

- Question 1: Section L states, "Offeror shall provide their proposed quality control and safety plans." All of Volume II is limited to only 30 pages. QC and Safety plans are upwards of 30 pages each by themselves. Please clarify that the Government is only interested in the key aspects of our QC and Safety Plans as part of the proposal response.

Reference: Section L, General Instructions, 3. Proposal preparation Instructions, Paragraph 2, Volume II - Project Management Ability - Tab A, 2nd Bullet (RFP page 81 of 87)

- Question 2: Section L states, "Offeror shall provide their proposed quality control and safety plans." All of Volume II is limited to only 30 pages. QC and Safety plans are upwards of 30 pages each by themselves. If the Government is requiring the full QC and Safety Plans, please exempt them from the page limitations of Volume II.

Reference: Section C, Paragraph 1.6.8.4.1, Senior Site Manager (RFP page 11 of 87)

- Question 3: Section C requires that the Senior Site Manager demonstrate experience managing no less than fifty (50) projects per fiscal year simultaneously totaling a minimum of $50 million. The Fort Lee JOC is only anticipated to burn $20M annually. In looking at the historic burn of the last JOC, less than $60M of the $99M contract was spent. This requirement seems overly excessive for the capacity of the Fort Lee JOC.

Please consider changing this requirement to read, "experience managing no less than fifty (50) projects per fiscal year simultaneously totaling a minimum of $20 million.

- Answer: No, this requirement will remain the same.

Reference: Section C, Paragraph 1.6.11.3.2.1, Senior Site Manager/Project Manager (RFP page 14 of 87)

- Question 4: Please clarify if this section is supposed to be for the Senior Project Manager and Section 1.6.8.4.1 is for the Senior Site Manager.

- Answer: They both are for the Senior Site Manager (P.E.) Licensed Engineer

Reference: Section C, Paragraph 1.6.11, Key Personnel (RFP page 13 of 87)

- Question 5: Section C states, "The follow personnel are considered key personnel by the Government: Senior Site Manager, Contractor Project Manager (CPM), Senior Program Manager, and Senior Construction Site-Superintendent.” This list is not consistent throughout the RFP documents or the PWS (Section C). Please clarify the personnel the Government considers as key personnel.

- Answer: Senior Site Manager (P.E.) Licensed Engineer, Senior Construction Site Superintendent, Contractors Quality Control (CQC)/Safety Inspector(s).

Reference: Section C, Paragraph 1.6.8.2 (RFP page 11 of 87)

- Question 6: Are letters of commitment for key personnel required with our proposal? If so, will they be excluded from the page limitations?

- Answer: Yes, they are required, and not excluded.

Reference: Section C, Paragraph 1.6.11.2 and 1.6.11.3 (RFP page 13 of 87)

- Question 7: Paragraph 1.6.11.2, states, "The contractor shall be fully staffed at the time of award of this contract." and Paragraph 1.6.11.3, states "The contractor shall provide the following staff at time of award of this contract. (a) Senior Site Manager/Program Manager (Licensed PE) (10 year(s) experience)." Please clarify that is in reference to the Senior Site Manager listed in Paragraph 1.6.8.4.1 and that this is in fact the only required person at the time of award.

- Answer: Yes, the Senior Site Manager (P.E.) Licensed Engineer

Reference: Section C, Paragraph 1.6.8.4.1, Senior Site Manager (RFP page 11 of 87)

- Question 8: Paragraph 1.6.8.4.1, states, "The Contractor shall provide, a Senior Site Manager who is a licensed Professional Engineer..." It also states, "The Senior Site Manager shall have a Bachelor’s degree of Engineering in either, Mechanical, Electrical, Civil, or Structural engineering. Or the Senior Site Manager shall have a bachelor’s degree in Construction Management. Or the Senior Site Manager shall have a bachelor of Architecture degree or equivalent." Please clarify if an active Professional Engineer license is actually required.

- Answer: Yes, an active Professional Engineer license is required.

Reference: Section L, General Instructions, 3. Proposal preparation Instructions, Paragraph 1, Volume I - General, TAB A, Section A of the Solicitation; Standard Form 1442, Solicitation, Offer, and Award (RFP page 80 of 87)

- Question 9: Section L states, "Acknowledgment of Amendments can be made on the face of the SF 1442 or signed copies of the amendments can be included in this Section." We typically submit signed SF 30s for each amendment with our proposal. However, with the page limitations of Volume 1, please confirm it is acceptable to only acknowledge amendments on the SF 1442 and not include any SF 30s.

- Answer: Both ways are acceptable. There is an Acknowledgement of Amendments section (Block 19) on the SF 1442.

Reference: Section C, 2.1.2. Coefficient (RFP page 17 of 87) and Attachment 4 - Pricing Worksheet

- Question 10: We are accustomed to including costs for Government licenses, as well as our own licenses, for RSMeans and estimating software as part of our coefficient. And Section C of the RFP lists, "Cost of providing nine (9) sets of R.S. Means books annually, and nine (9) licenses for EuroJOC software quarterly" to be included in our coefficient as well. However, the pricing worksheet has a separate column for this cost.

Are we to include the cost of Government's licenses in our coefficient, or separately as indicated on the worksheet?

- Answer: Refer to 2.1.2, 5.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3, and 5.2.4.

Fort Lee JOC Solicitation Questions: Set 6

There was mention that this was the 4th JOC in the last 15-years. Who were the previous Incumbents? Will the Government provide the Award and contract numbers?

Answer: That was not mentioned during the teleconference site visit. And the information you are requesting needs to be requested via FOIA request.

Is the Government requiring a Subcontracting Plan from the Prime awarded the contract?

Answer: No. This requirement is 100% Total Small Business set-aside so it is not required.

Will the Government anticipate a set-aside (percentage of work effort) from Primes to Small Business?

Answer: No. This requirement is 100% Total Small Business set-aside so it is not required.

Regarding the site visit—will the Government provide copies of the sign-in sheets? Handouts if any?

Answer: Site visit wasn’t held and there will be no copies of sign-in sheets provided.

Are April 16th or April 17th confirmed dates and times? How will the site visits be conducted with respect to COVID-19 distancing and other safety precautions?

Answer: Teleconference was held on 16 April 2020 at 0830 thru 1200.

Regarding the response deadline. Does the Government anticipate a possible extension of time to respond due to the significant changes to personnel working from home and the shutting down of access to and from installations (not regarding site visits)?

Answer: The revised solicitation closing date will be May 8, 2020 at 2PM EST.

Fort Lee JOC Solicitation Questions: Set 7

1. SF 1442, Section 13.B.

1. This section states that an offer guarantee is required. Can you clarify the amount of the bid bond and where it should be included in our proposal submission? Should it be included Volume I, Tab F or with the Price Volume?

Answer: Solicitation states that offerors shall submit information showing minimum bonding capacity of $20 million aggregate with verification from the Securities or Bonding Company (to be completed by Surety Company and submitted by Offeror). Please include in Volume I, Tab F as stated in the solicitation.

2. Section B.

2. Does the Government intend to exercise options early if the $20 million is achieved prior to the end of the year? Conversely, will capacity carry over to the next year if unused?

Answer: It’s a possibly that we may exercise early if the $20M is achieved prior to the year end of the year. And there will be NO carryover to the next year if unused.

3. Section B

3. Will the option to extend services for an additional six months be included in this contract?

Answer: No

4. Section C, Paragraph 1.6.4

4. Please clarify the manned on-site office. What is the minimum required staffing that must be on-site even if no work is underway?

Answer: This is addressed in 1.6.11 Key Personnel.

5. Section C, Paragraph 1.6.7

5. What percentage of work is expected to occur in classified areas requiring Government escort? Please confirm this escort will be provided at no cost to the contractor.

Answer: This percentage is unknown, because we are unaware of projects within these areas at this present time. A Government escort will be provided as prescribed in 1.6.7 at no cost to the contractor.

6. Section C, Paragraph 1.6.7.4

6. This paragraph requires a dedicated Project Manager or Superintendent on every worksite when work is being performed. Please confirm that “worksite” in this case applies to the installation where work is being performed. If not, could you please clarify the statement later in the paragraph that the Superintendent is expected to manage more than one worksite.

Answer: Correct it is where the work is to be performed.

7. Section C, Paragraphs 1.6.11 and 1.6.8.

7. Section 1.6.11, Key Personnel, list the following position as key:

1. Senior Site Manager

2. Contractor Project Manager (CPM)

3. Senior Program Manager

4. Senior Construction Site-Superintendent

And states “Qualifications for all key personnel are listed below”; however, the following positions are listed:

1. Paragraph 1.6.11.3.1: Senior Site Manager / Program Manger

2. Paragraph 1.6.11.3.2: Senior Site Manager / Project Manager

3. Paragraph 1.6.11.3.3: Senior Construction Site – Superintendent

In addition, Section 1.6.8, provides qualifications for the following positions:

1. Paragraph 1.6.8.4.1: Senior Site Manager

2. Paragraph 1.6.8.4.2: Contractor’s Quality Control (CQC) / Safety Inspectors

3. Paragraph 1.6.8.4.3: Office Manager (OM)

Given that the position titles listed above do not correspond across these solicitation sections, and, in some cases, overlap (for example “Senior Site Manager”), please clarify the required position titles and corresponding qualifications and clearly specify which positions are required to be submitted with the contractor’s proposal.

Answer: The positions are Paragraph 1.6.8.4.1: Senior Site Manager (P.E.), Paragraph 1.6.11.3.3:

Senior Construction Site – Superintendent, and Paragraph 1.6.8.4.2: Contractor’s Quality Control (CQC) / Safety Inspectors.

8. Section C, Paragraph 1.6.8.4.

8. The paragraph states, “Individual resumes of personnel to be assigned to management office at Fort Lee shall be submitted for the duties required, i.e., Senior Site Manager, Senior Project Manager, Senior Construction Superintendent, Contractor’s Quality Control (CQC) Managers/Safety Inspectors, and Contractor Office Manager.” Please confirm that these resumes are to be provided with our proposal and that they are the only resumes that are required to be submitted at the time of proposal submission.

Answer: Yes they are.

9. Section C, Paragraph 1.6.8.4.2.

9. Are contractors to provide an SSHO or Safety Officer (Safety Officer is referenced in Section C.4.1.6) in addition to the two CQC/Safety Inspectors? If so, are there any requirements for the SSHO/Safety Officer position? Please confirm personnel performing in this position do not need to be identified at this time.

Answer: Refer to Section C, Paragraph 1.6.8.4.2, and C.4.1.6, these are our requirements.

10. Section C, Paragraph 1.6.8.4.2.

10. This paragraph describes the qualifications required for the CQC/Safety Inspectors.

However, this paragraph also states that Construction Superintendents shall also have experience in the execution of asbestos and lead paint base abatements. Please confirm this is as intended and is not meant to reference only CQC/Safety Inspectors.

Answer: This is in addition to, if the Construction Superintendents meet our requested qualifications. He/she should be well versed in CQC/Safety and be able to perform oversite.

11. Section C, Paragraph 1.6.11.1

11. Please confirm that only the Senior Site Manager/Program Manager must be provided to be considered fully staffed at time of award of this contract. Please define what “provided” means in this context.

Answer: On-site, fully operational and ready to proceed.

12. Section C, Paragraph 2.1.2.

12. As permit requirements and cost vary from job to job, would the Government consider removing permit costs from the coefficient?

Answer: Yes, but not every job has a permit.

13. Section C, Paragraph 2.1.2.

13. Please confirm that land disturbance permits and Storm Water Pollution Plans requiring professional engineering services are excluded from the coefficient.

Answer: Yes

14. Section C, Paragraph 5.1.5.

14. This paragraph indicates use of the R.S. Means Unit Price Book along with associated EuroJOC estimating software. R.S. Means has undergone numerous changes in the past five years. Please confirm that the EuroJOC software is still readily available and has been maintained.

Answer: It is still readily available, and can still be procured.

15. Section C, Paragraph 5.1.5.

15. Would the Government consider allowing use of a similar estimating system that utilizes the R.S. Means data such as e4clicks rather than EuroJOC?

Answer: No.

16. Section C, Paragraph 5.1.5

16. The contractor is to provide quarterly updates to the EuroJOC software. Does this mean that the most recent quarterly updates are to be used for pricing estimates?

Answer: Yes.

17. Section C, Paragraph 5.1.5

17. Please clarify if contractors are to provide nine sets of the RSMeans books specified on page 7, or if they are to provide nine RSMeans Facilities Cost Data books as specified in Paragraph 5.1.5.

Answer: The contractors are to provide (9) complete sets of RSMeans Unit Price Books as specified on Page 7, and shall provide (9) CD’s and licenses of the associated EuroJOC cost estimating software.

18. Section C, Paragraph 5.2.1

18. The paragraph references an attachment with historical workload data for Fort Lee. We did not see this included. Can this be provided by the Government?

Answer: This historical workload data will be provided with this Amendment.

19. Section C, Paragraph 5.2.4.

19. Please clarify the requirement for labor percentages on top of line items to be included in the coefficient. Can the Government please provide the line item numbers it is referring to?

Answer: It varies, this item is a negotiable item.

20. Section C, Paragraph 5.3.

20. What percentage of Job Orders does the government anticipate will be Design-Build Job Orders?

Answer: Estimated 10% - 15%.

21. Section C, Paragraph 5.3.1

21. How will the contractor be reimbursed for providing professional design services, RS Means Line Item or Non-prepriced Line Item?

Answer: RSMeans Line Item

22. Section G, Paragraph G.4.1.2. (4)

22. Does the posted time for submittal of the contractor’s proposal include the time for any design, if required?

Answer: Yes, that is negotiable if needed.

23. Section L, no specific paragraph

23. Please confirm that there are not additional requirements for offerors proposing as a joint venture or otherwise clarify what is required (e.g., a copy of the JV agreement.)

Answer: No. Just make sure the JV company is registered in SAM.

24. Section L, Paragraph 1.a

24. To allow contractors to minimize working in close proximity within their organizations and to practice adequate social distancing, would the Government consider allowing an all-electronic submission, e.g., through the SAFE website rather than producing and mailing CDs?

Answer: Proposals will now be required to be submitted via email. Please see revised Section L.

25. Section L, Paragraph 1.a

25. IF CDs are required, is it acceptable to submit all volumes of our proposal on one CD or are separate CDs for each volume required?

Answer: Proposals will now be required to be submitted via email. Please see revised Section L.

26. Section L, Paragraph 1.a

26. Are all volumes to be combined into a single PDF or is it the intent of the Government that we submit 4 files, one each per volume?

Answer: Separate Volumes.

27. Section L, Paragraph 3.a.3 (table)

27. Would the Government please expand the page limitation for the Past Performance volume to 40? Submission of 4 PPQ with only limited comments would represent 16 of the 20 allotted pages. PPIs for four projects are likely to require an additional 8 pages, already exceeding the page limitation without many of the Volume requirements.

Answer: Offerors shall provide a summary list of questionnaire recipients to include Points of Contacts (POCs) and phone numbers. Please see revised Section L. Page count will remain the same.

28. Section L, Paragraph 2, Tab A

28. Please clarify the requirements for submittal of the proposed quality control and safety plans. Are these excluded from the page limitation? If not, please confirm an overview of the program is acceptable because it is likely that even just one plan will exceed the limitations on page count.

29. Section L, Paragraph 3.b.3, Volume III

29. Because the size / complexity of this contract is rare within the Federal arena, would the Government consider allowing offerors to represent similar past performance within the past eight (8) years rather than restricting it to the past five (5) years?

Answer: No. The offeror SHALL NOT go back any farther than 5 years for the submitted data.

30. Section L, Paragraph 3.b.3, Volume III

30. Please confirm that past performance contracts may be submitted by a joint venture partner of the offeror, provided they performed in a similar role as they will with the offeror.

Answer: Past performance contracts can be submitted by a joint venture partner of the offeror.

31. Section L, Paragraph 3.b.3, Volume III

31. If Company A was previously in a joint venture with Company B and Company A performed in JV A/B in the same role as they hold in the proposing joint venture between Company A and Company C, may the experience of JV A/B be submitted for Company A as part of JV A/C on this contract?

Answer: Yes

32. Section L, Paragraph 3.b.3.(1), Volume III

32. Please confirm that offerors are to submit information on four (4) IDIQ contracts, and not four representative task orders performed under an IDIQ contract.

Answer: Offerors can submit stand-alone projects and/or individual task orders that fall under an IDIQ will be considered relevant.

33. Section L, Paragraph 3.b.3.(1), Volume III

33. Please confirm that data on IDIQ contracts that were completed within the five years should be submitted, even when some option years/task orders may have been performed longer that five years ago (e.g., a contract awarded in 2012 but ending in 2017 should be submitted with data representing 2012-2017 and not just 2015-2017).

Answer: The offeror can submit the performance of the task orders that was awarded within the last 5 years but not the overall IDIQ contract if it was awarded past the five years.

34. Section L, Paragraph 3.b.3, Volume III; Attachment 3 – Past Performance Questionnaire

34. Attachment 3 – Past Performance Questionnaire provides the following instructions to respondents: “Please provide examples and/or explanations (use additional pages if necessary).”

Will the Government exclude Attachment 3, PPQ from the page limitation for Volume III due to the fact they are returned directly to the KO and offerors will not know exactly how many pages have been submitted?

Answer: Offerors shall provide a summary list of questionnaire recipients to include Points of Contacts (POCs) and phone numbers. Please see revised Section L.

35. Section L, Paragraph 3.b.3, Volume III; Attachment 3 – Past Performance Questionnaire

35. Is it acceptable for the respondents to Attachment 3 – Past Performance Questionnaire to submit a handwritten form? During the Coronavirus epidemic, we have found that some Government personnel have been subject to quarantine or are working from home with reduced technical capability and have not been able to complete forms as they might have in the office.

Answer: If a PPQ is submitted in handwritten form, it must be legible to read, scanned in, and submitted by email to the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer.

36. Section L, Paragraph 3.b.3, Volume III

36. Given that, in some cases, more than one Consent Letter or Client Authorization Letter will be required, can these letters be excluded from the page limitation for Volume III?

Otherwise, the basic requirements for submission will exceed the 20-page limit as currently outlined.

Answer: Page count will remain the same.

37. Section L, Paragraph 3.b.4.(b), Volume III

37. The page limitation for Volume IV states that only the Excel Worksheet should be included in Volume IV; however, a narrative and computations for the coefficient development are also required. Can this be submitted in a separate Microsoft Word document? Please confirm that all other volume requirements (e.g., a table of contents) shall be submitted.

Answer: Offerors can submit narrative and computations for the coefficient in a separate Microsoft Word document in Volume IV.

38. Section L, Paragraph 3.b.4.(d) (Volume IV)

38. This paragraph defines the bare NPP cost as the cost of the work without prime or subcontractor overhead. Subcontractor overheads can vary significantly by trade and are typically considered part of the bare cost to which the NPP coefficient is applied. Would the Government consider allowing the NPP coefficient to be a markup to a complete subcontractor quote including the sub’s overhead and profit?

Answer: No

39. Attachment 4, Pricing Sheet

39. Note 6 references Emergency Response. Please clarify if/how that applies to this contract and specifically the pricing schedule.

Answer: Note 6 – Emergency Response has been removed.

40. Attachment 4, Pricing Sheet

40. The base year description for RSMeans + Estimating Tool indicates contractors are to provide a price for RSMeans book, software, and training. Is the training for the estimating software or RSMeans generally? Please clarify what type of training will be required (in-person or online) and how many people will be trained.

Answer: RSMeans training for Fort Lee personnel is not required. Attachment 4 – Pricing Sheet has been revised.

41. Attachment 1, Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Form

41. Please clarify how joint venture partners are to complete this form. May we substitute JV partner in for (Subcontractor/teaming partner?)

Answer: Yes.

42. Attachment 2, Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet

42. Attachment 2 states that “This document may be altered but the required information listed below MUST be included or it will not be considered for evaluation.” Please confirm that it is acceptable to include our Relevant Contracts information in a Microsoft Word format that responds to each item fully and in the correct order, and, if so, that the original blank form with references such as “See attached” is unnecessary and does not need to be…