MODIFICATION
Q -- Geological and Terrain Characterization for Test and Evaluation
- Notice Date
- 11/1/2016
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- NAICS
- 541380
— Testing Laboratories
- Contracting Office
- Department of the Army, Army Contracting Command, MICC, MICC - Yuma Proving Ground, ATTN: CCMI-CHD-YP, Bldg 2364, 301 C Street, Yuma, Arizona, 85365-9498, United States
- ZIP Code
- 85365-9498
- Solicitation Number
- W9124R-16-R-0012
- Point of Contact
- LaTasha A. Isaac, Phone: 9283286162, Tejae Craig, Phone: 9283286903
- E-Mail Address
-
latasha.a.isaac.civ@mail.mil, tejae.craig.civ@mail.mil
(latasha.a.isaac.civ@mail.mil, tejae.craig.civ@mail.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- Amendment 0004 - This amendment is issued to provide a response to questions received from the industry. (1) Text for PRS #1 (in Technical Exhibit 1) states 'contractor shall provide workshops'; however, under Section 5. Specific Tasks, Task 5.2.1 suggests only 1 workshop be proposed ('a workshop'). Should proposed activities account for only one workshop, or multiple workshops? Response to question # 1: The proposed activities should account for multiple workshops. (2) On page 84 of the RFP document, there is a list of Submission Requirements for the Past Performance Volume: For number (4), Client Authorization Letters, are you requiring official letters from us, the Offeror, giving authorization to the U.S. government to contact our previous clients? Not letters from the clients themselves? Do you have a specific format for these letters? If the letter is from us we are assuming the letter should contain the specific contact information of the previous clients? Response to questions # 2: Yes, we are requiring official letters from the offeror. The Offeror shall submit a client authorization letter, authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the Offeror's performance (PROPOSAL SUBMISSION c. Volume III - Past Performance (i)). We do not have a specific letter type or format for these letters. Yes, the letter should contain the specific contact information of previous clients. (3) Past Performance: text: 'the offeror shall not go back any further than 3 years from the issue date...... for submitted data'. We read this as that if any project that was active during this 3 year interval is eligible to be included. In other words any project started BEFORE 11/13 and that is currently active or was completed after 11/13 can be provided as an example of past- performance. The alternative interpretation is that only projects that fully started AFTER 11/13 are eligible for examples of past performance. Please advise as to the correct interpretation. Response to question # 3: If it was an ongoing effort that fell within the 3 years from the date of RFP issued the past performance should be adequate.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/notices/44c89566532c2fd91cf537df0efa2702)
- Place of Performance
- Address: MICC-Yuma Proving Grounds, Yuma, Arizona, 85365, United States
- Zip Code: 85365
- Zip Code: 85365
- Record
- SN04317126-W 20161103/161101234108-44c89566532c2fd91cf537df0efa2702 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |