Inactive

SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE, SF330, FOR RFP 36C10F19R0057 WESTERN REGION A/E IDIQ TOTAL SDVOSB SET-ASIDE AMENDMENT 1 Responses to Requests for Information (RFI) are as follows. RFI #1 I Question: took a loo... SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE, SF330, FOR RFP 36C10F19R0057 WESTERN REGION A/E IDIQ TOTAL SDVOSB SET-ASIDE AMENDMENT 1 Responses to Requests for Information (RFI) are as follows. RFI #1 I Question: took a look at Sol. 36C10F19R0057, and you may want to change the project tile- it s coming in with a few spelling errors. Answer: The title of the FBO announcement is corrected to read, C-Architect Engineer Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Services, Western Region, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business Set Aside. RFI #2 Question: Would it be possible to change the NAICS code to 541330 instead of 541310? The 541330 NAICS code. Answer: No. Although a number of the tasks are for engineering services, this AE IDIQ is primarily for architectural design services, NAICS Code 541310 and not for engineering services NAICS Code 541330. RFI #3 Question: Are we able to pursue the above-mentioned solicitation via a SDVOSB Joint-Venture that is officially recognized through SAM? Answer: Yes, The joint venture must also certified in VetBiz. RFI #4 Question: Is this a Sources Sought as indicated or is this an actual solicitation? The wording is very unclear. Please provide clarification. Answer: The announcement in FBO is posted as a source sought requesting submission of SF330 s. After the most highly qualified firms are determined, a request for fee proposal solicitation will be issued. to those firms. RFI # 5 Question: Is there an incumbent contractor currently providing the services? If so, please provide thus with the contract details. Answer: No ,there is no incumbent contractor. RFI #6 Question: Will the VA accept Team Subcontractor s projects wherein that subcontractor served as the Architect of Record for any of the six mandatory project types or MUST all six mandatory projects be performed by the submitting SDVOSB prime, either by the SDVOSB on its own or by any of the joint venture partners? Answer: The Offeror is considered the prime for the purposes of this contract.   RFI #7 Question: For the fifth project, is it acceptable to show a project where the prime completed the Design Bridging Documents, but was not a part of the Design Build team completing construction? Answer: The intent is the prime completed the Design Build bridging documents. RFI #8 Question: Are 11x17 sheets allowed for organization chart or Section G? Answer: No. RFI #9 Question: If allowing 11x17 sheets for the organization chart or Section G, how many pages will they count as? Answer: Not applicable. RFI #10 Question: For Joint Ventures, do you want combined Part IIs or separate Part IIs for each company within the JV? Answer: Follow the SF330, Part II instructions. RFI #11 Question: With regard to the limit of 120 pages for the entire submission:  If each 8.5 x 11 piece of paper is considered 2 pages, and if tabs/divider pages are included in the total page count, then we are required to lose a total of 14 pages for each of the 7 required tabs. Would you please reconsider the addition of tabs/divider pages to the total page count, or would you consider expanding the page limit to 134? If each 8.5 x 11 piece of paper is considered 2 pages, and if there are an odd number of pages in a tabbed section, then we are required to lose a page that would be designated Intentionally blank in order to be able to place a tab/divider at the designated point in the submission. Would you consider that a page marked Intentionally Blank would be excluded from the total page count? Answer: The 120 page limit remains. RFI #12 Question: With regard to fulfilling the Past Performance reporting:,We can devise a table to address the items required; however, we are not exactly certain what it is you are asking for in this requirement. In the past a CPARS has been acceptable to answer ratings for cost control, quality of work, and schedule compliance. This would then be supplemented with the other information requested. May we submit a CPARS report if it is available?   Answer: A CPAR rating is acceptable, however the items listed under the supplemental instructions shall be addressed. RFI #13 Question: With regard to fulfilling the Past Performance reporting, If the design of a project has been completed and accepted by the VA, but the project has not yet been opened for construction bids, how would you like us to address the requirement to include a construction contract award amount and/or final construction cost?  Answer: As best to show the strength of your team.  RFI #14 Question: With regard to fulfilling the Past Performance reporting, Likewise, there are times when VA representatives will not disclose the construction contract award amount and/or final construction cost. How would you like us to address that eventuality?  Answer: As best to show the strength of your team.  RFI #15 Question: With regard to fulfilling the Past Performance reporting, We will have at least 1 project that was for a non-VA client, which means there is no CPARS assessment available. Would you prefer a PPQ to be submitted? If yes, do you have a preferred PPQ form? Answer: Provide information to the best of your knowledge. RFI # 16 Question: With regard to fulfilling the Past Performance reporting, We will have at least 1 project for which a CPARS assessment is due to be filed; however, the item will not be available to us before the submission due date. Would a PPQ be an acceptable substitute?   Answer: Provide information to the best of your knowledge. RFI #17 Question: There appears to be redundancy in the lists of required information for this section (e.g., a request for Project point of contact with telephone number and email address and current client contact information ). Is the following a correct interpretation of what is requested:  Project Name, Project Location (city and state), Current Point of Contact for this Project (name, telephone number, and email address), Design Due Date, Actual Design Completion Date, Initial Design Dollar Funding Limitation, Final Cost Estimate (at delivery of 100% CDs), Construction Contract Award Amount (note whether bid or negotiated), Final Construction Cost Answer: Acceptable. RFI # 18 Question: With regard to the Sample Projects for Section H:  We discovered this past Spring, the Gantt charts will fit sideways on a standard-sized sheet of paper (8.5 x 11), but the type is considerably smaller than 12 pt. Is the minimum 12 pt type rule rescinded for these charts. May we submit these charts on 11 x 17 sheets; or do you have a different preference as to how these are submitted? a.If the Gantt charts are printed sideways (in landscape page orientation), is it acceptable that other information related to that Sample Project is included in the same orientation? b.If the Gantt charts are printed sideways (in landscape page orientation), is it acceptable that other information related to that Sample Project is included in the same orientation? Answer: Landscape orientation is acceptable. RFI #19 Question: With regard to the required matrix of Key Personnel information:   Would you like that to be placed before or after Section E (within Tab 4), or will you be looking for it to be in Section H (within Tab 6)? We discovered this past Spring that this matrix quickly becomes quite large with minimum 12 pt type (even when using a condensed font). May we submit this sideways on the page (in landscape page orientation)? If we must submit it on the page in portrait orientation, may we break the table across at least 2 pages? May we submit it on an 11 x 17 sheet? Do you have a different preference as to how this is submitted? Answer: Landscape orientation is acceptable. RFI # 20 Question: I would like to confirm that the following information (requested last Spring) is NOT required for this submission:    A list of Germain, Recent, and Relevant Projects from the Past 5 Years. Record of claims and/or equitable adjustments against the firm because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services over the past 15 years. Type and amount of insurance carried. A list of relevant projects completed by the firm or joint venture partners and appropriate subcontractors for all branch offices which may be supporting any task orders issued under this contract. Answer: The request for SF330 s has been revised for this submission.  RFI I #21 Question: Does the offeror pertain to only the firm listed as Prime? Or does the offeror pertain to the whole group submitting. We would like to know if our consultant s project experience can be listed in this section, specifically a project page in Section F. Answer: The Offeror is considered the prime for the purposes of this contract. RFI #22 Question: In reference to your solicitation number 36C10F19R0057 A/E Western Region IDIQ, we would like to respectfully request a time extension on your deadline of 10.08.2019, for additional two(2) weeks.   Answer: The due date and time for submittal of SF330 packages is extended to 4:00 p.m. Pacific Time on October 22, 2019.