FY26 Architect-Engineer Services--Request for Qualifications Minneapolis Air Force Reserve Base, Minnesota

Solicitation No. FA663326QA004

Notice to Offeror(s)/Supplier(s): Funds are not presently available for this effort. No award will be made under this solicitation until funds are available. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation, either before or after the closing date. In the event the Government cancels this solicitation, the Government has no obligation to reimburse an offeror for any costs.

This is a public announcement for a Request for Architect-Engineer (A-E) Qualifications in accordance with the Revolutionary Far Overhaul (RFO) Subpart 36.202, Selection of Firms for Architect-Engineer Contracts, Department of the Air Force, and the Brooks Act. Price proposals are not requested with this announcement and will not be considered.

The Government anticipates awarding to one (1) responsible offeror with the most highly qualified firms following evaluation, selection, and negotiation. The Government reserves the right to award one contract under this solicitation if in the best interest of the Government.

Statutory fee limitation: Adhere to 10 U.S.C. 9540. Current limitation is ten percent. The contract price for production and delivery of designs, plans, drawings, and specifications shall not exceed ten percent of the estimated cost of construction of the public work or utility, excluding fees.

These contracts will fulfill requirements for:

(1) Provide Professional Design Servies (Title I Type A, Title I Type B and Title II Services) all supervision, labor, materials and equipment necessary to fully meet all requirements of the Statement of Work (SOW), SOW Drawings and all other Contract Documents related to and/or titled: “REPAIR EMERGENCY SERVICES B710” at the Minneapolis Air Reserve Station, Minneapolis, Minnesota. The Government will provide Contractor(s) with access to the site and/or facilities along with any existing documentation pertinent to the project, including existing drawings for this facility. It is the Contractors responsibility to verify the accuracy of these drawings and documents. Professional services of an architectural or engineering nature associated with design or construction of real property.

(2) Title I (type “A” Services) Involves field investigations and surveys (roof investigations, façade evaluations, etc.); similar fact-finding surveys of the site essential to proper design; preparation of reports and similar services not involved in the preparation of designs, plans, drawings, and specifications.

(3) Title I (Type “B” Services). These services include those items normally furnished by an AE in the actual preparation of the design documents (plans, drawings, specifications, submittal register, etc.) and include visual inspection of the site or facility for familiarization with scope, general conditions, and coordination with using activities.

(4) Title II (Type “C” Services). Those items involve inspecting, monitoring, and evaluating construction activities to validate conformance to plans and specifications, including reviewing, evaluating and testing product submittals and shop drawings, and preparation of construction contract modifications.

Refer to the contract-level scope of work for details.

No construction contract may be awarded to the firm that designed the project.

Product Service Code: C215 Architect-Engineering- General: Production Engineering, includes;

Design and Control, Building Programming

NAICS: 541330 Engineering Services

Small Business Size Standard: $25.5M

Each potential contractor shall be evaluated in terms of its:

(1) Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services.

(2) Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required, including, where appropriate, experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials.

(3) Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time.

(4) Past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules.

(5) Location in the general geographical area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project; provided, that application of this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the project.

(6) Acceptability under other appropriate evaluation criteria, as indicated below.

Minneapolis Air Force Reserve Base will provide one architect-engineer evaluation board composed of its members who, collectively, have experience in architecture, engineering, construction, and Government and related acquisition matters. One Government member of each board shall be designated as the chairperson.

Under the general direction of the 934th Contracting Flight Chief of the Contracting Office (COCO) the evaluation board shall:

(1) Review the current data files on eligible firms and responses to the public notice.

(2) Evaluate the firms in accordance with the criteria listed.

(3) Hold discussions with at least three of the most highly qualified firms regarding concepts and the relative utility of alternative methods of furnishing the required services.

(4) And prepare a selection report for the 934th Civil Engineering Squadron Base Civil Engineer recommending, in order of preference, at least three firms that are considered to be the most highly qualified to perform the required services. The report shall include a description of the discussions and evaluation conducted by the board to allow the selection authority to review the considerations upon which the recommendations are based.

The final selection decision shall be made by the Base Civil Engineer.

The selection authority shall review the recommendations of the evaluation board and shall, with the advice of appropriate technical and staff representatives, make the final selection. This final selection shall be a listing, in order of preference, of the firms considered most highly qualified to perform the work. If the firm listed as the most preferred is not the firm recommended as the most highly qualified by the evaluation board, the selection authority shall provide for the contract file a written explanation of the reason for the preference. All firms on the final selection list are considered "selected firms" with which the contracting officer may negotiate in accordance with RFO 36.201- 1(b)(2).

The selection authority shall not add firms to the selection report. If the firms recommended in the report are not deemed to be qualified or the report is considered inadequate for any reason, the selection authority shall record the reasons and return the report through channels to the evaluation board for appropriate revision.

The board shall be promptly informed of the final selection.

The final selection authorizes the Contracting Officer to begin negotiations, beginning with the most preferred firm in the final selection.

The Contracting Officer will request priced proposals for fully burdened contract rates that will be used to price orders made under each contract. Refer to the table of categories for which rates will be requested.

If a mutually satisfactory contract cannot be negotiated, the contracting officer shall obtain a written final proposal revision from the firm and notify the firm that negotiations have been terminated. The contracting officer shall then initiate negotiations with the next firm on the final selection list. This procedure shall be continued until a mutually satisfactory contract has been negotiated. If negotiations fail with all selected firms, the contracting officer shall refer the matter to the selection authority who, after consulting with the contracting officer as to why a contract cannot be negotiated, may direct the evaluation board to recommend additional firms in accordance with RFO 36.202-3.

Instructions.

To be considered for contract award, firms must file a Standard Form 330. The most current version is available for download at https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms/architectengineer-qualifications

Qualification files shall be submitted through the DoD SAFE. No other method will be used for submission. Prior to submission, notify the POC (points of contact) under the General Information section below and request DoD SAFE request drop off.

Submit a complete Standard Form 330 (all parts) and the support documentation. Follow the instructions of the Standard Form 330 for generation of the support documentation and ensure the submitted information demonstrates the qualifications of the firm against the specific selection criteria listed below. Firms shall also use this Request for Qualifications document to self-evaluate under each selection criteria and total of points. Include the self-evaluation using this document with the other support documentation.

Total submission is limited to 50 pages of standard 8.5 x 11 with 1-inch margin. 10-point font minimum. The Standard Form 330 itself and the self-evaluation using this document does not count against the 50-page limitation.

Do not provide any pricing information.

https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms/architectengineer-qualifications

Selection Criteria.

The selection criteria and points of each criterion are as follows:

(1) Professional Qualifications – 100 Points

(2) Past Performance – 100 Points

(3) Specialized/Technical Competence – 100 Points

(4) Capacity – 50 Points

(5) Location – 100 Points

Total possible points – 450

(1) Professional qualifications of the staff to be assigned to the project.

Each firm will indicate the following design disciplines: Architectural (including landscape architects), Civil (general and airfield design), Structural, Mechanical (primarily HVAC, plumbing, and fire protection), Environmental (hazardous waste identification and design), and Electrical Engineers (building design, fire detection and alarm systems, exterior lighting). Complete in-house capability of the listed design disciplines is preferred. For points to be awarded for professional credentials of staff, personnel must be full-time, permanent employees of the firm. Resume submissions for key personnel are limited to these positions. Organizational charts showing other positions may include other professional disciplines or certifications, however only these will be used for evaluation purposes.

□ 0 points – No registered personnel on staff.

□ 15 points - One or more cost estimators (CPE) on staff.

□ 5 points - One or more registered environmental engineers (PE) on staff.

□ 10 points - One or more registered structural engineers (PE) on staff.

□ 5 points - One or more registered fire protection engineers (FPE) on staff.

□ 5 points - One or more certified fire alarm technicians (NICET IV) on staff.

□ 15 points - One or more registered architects (RA) on staff.

□ 15 points - One or more registered civil engineers (PE) on staff.

□ 15 points - One or more registered mechanical engineers (PE) on staff.

□ 15 points - One or more registered electrical engineers (PE) on staff.

PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS POINTS (100 MAX):

(2) Past performance on contracts with government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, compliance with performance schedules.

The Government will evaluate the past performance of the firm on its three most recent and relevant from Section F. The firm may pre-identify what those contracts are with the submission. DoD or other federal contracts using Contractor Performance Assessment Rating System (CPARS) categories: Quality, Schedule, Cost Control, Management, and Regulatory (see provided table below for definitions). Past performance questionnaires may be used if CPARS assessments do not exist provided they utilize the categories and ratings below. Each category will be rated with one of the following: Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory (see provided table below for definitions and scores). Based on the ratings that have been assigned to each category, scores will be averaged, providing an average score between 0 and 4. Points will then be assigned based on this average score.

Category: Definition:

Quality Quality reflects the Contractor's management of the quality control program, as well as the quality of the work itself. Questions which should be addressed are as follows: Has a quality product been provided? For example:

- Ability to maintain quality control

- Ability to address and review comments

- Independent Technical Review

- Whether plans are coordinated with specifications

- Coordination between disciplines

- Compliance with design criteria

Schedule The timeliness of the Contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or affect the schedule variance).

Cost Control The Contractor's effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract or order cost. For contracts or orders where task or contract sizing is based upon contractor-provided person hour estimates, the relationship of these estimates to ultimate task cost should be assessed. In addition, the extent to which the Contractor demonstrates a sense of cost responsibility, through the efficient use of resources, in each work effort should be assessed.

Management The integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract or order, specifically the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the Contractor's history of reasonable and cooperative behavior (to include timely identification of issues in controversy), customer satisfaction, timely award and management of subcontracts.

Regulatory Compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract/order relating to applicable regulations and codes. Considering aspects of performance such as compliance with financial, environmental (example: Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act), safety, and labor regulations as well as any other reporting requirements in the contract terms and conditions.

Rating: Definition: Point Value:

Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government's benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective.

Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government's benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The Contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the Contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

Example Calculation

Project #1 Project #2 Project #3

Quality Exceptional (4) Exceptional (4) Satisfactory (2)

Schedule Very Good (3) Very Good (3) Marginal (1)

Cost Control Satisfactory (2) Very Good (3) Satisfactory (2)

Management Marginal (1) Exceptional (4) Marginal (1)

Regulatory Unsatisfactory (0) Very Good (3) Satisfactory (2)

Project Average 2 3.4 1.6

Past Performance Score = 2.33

□ 0 points – 0.0 < Past Performance Score < 2.0

□ 5 points – 2.0 < Past Performance Score < 2.1

□ 10 points – 2.1 < Past Performance Score < 2.2

□ 15 points – 2.2 < Past Performance Score < 2.3

□ 20 points – 2.3 < Past Performance Score < 2.4

□ 25 points – 2.4 < Past Performance Score < 2.5

□ 30 points – 2.5 < Past Performance Score < 2.6

□ 35 points – 2.6 < Past Performance Score < 2.7

□ 40 points – 2.7 < Past Performance Score < 2.8

□ 45 points – 2.8 < Past Performance Score < 2.9

□ 50 points – 2.9 < Past Performance Score < 3.0

□ 55 points – 3.0 < Past Performance Score < 3.1

□ 60 points – 3.1 < Past Performance Score < 3.2

□ 65 points – 3.2 < Past Performance Score < 3.3

□ 70 points – 3.3 < Past Performance Score < 3.4

□ 75 points – 3.4 < Past Performance Score < 3.5

□ 80 points – 3.5 < Past Performance Score < 3.6

□ 85 points – 3.6 < Past Performance Score < 3.7

□ 90 points – 3.7 < Past Performance Score < 3.8

□ 95 points – 3.8 < Past Performance Score < 3.9

□ 100 points – 3.9 < Past Performance Score < 4.0

PAST PERFORMANCE POINTS (100 MAX):

(3) Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required.

Including experience in design charrettes, economic analyses, energy and water conservation investigations, pollution prevention, and environmental investigations.

Additionally, experience in planning site developments and installations, design for repair and construction projects, and design analysis computations, and reports is preferred.

Expertise in other A-E services, such as engineering, feasibility, environmental impact studies, and investigations and evaluations of facilities and infrastructure, as well as construction support and cost estimating. Scoring will be based on projects from Section F. Projects that show multiple categories may be used.

(Maximum 10 points). Specialized experience in performing design charrettes for the initial planning of facility or infrastructure projects.

□ 0 points - No experience in design charrettes for facility projects

□ 5 points - Performed at least one design facility charrette for non-DoD installations.

□ 10 points - Performed at least one design facility charrette for DoD installations.

(Maximum 10 points). Specialized experience in performing economic analyses of facility or infrastructure projects.

□ 0 points - No experience in economic analyses for facility projects

□ 5 points - Performed at least one fac i l i ty economic analysis for non-DoD installations.

□ 10 points - Performed at least one facility economic analysis for DoD installations.

(Maximum 10 points). Specialized experience in energy and water conservation investigations and related studies:

□ 0 points - No experience in conservation investigations or studies.

□ 5 points - Experience in one or two conservation investigations or studies.

□ 10 points - Experience in three or more conservation investigations or studies.

(Maximum 10 points). Specialized experience in DoD design (e.g. preparing drawings and specifications using SpecsIntact) for repair and construction projects of facilities or infrastructure.

□ 0 points - No experience in DoD design.

□ 15 points - Completed at least one design (drawings and specifications using SpecsIntact) for a DoD project.

□ 25 points - Completed at least three designs (drawings and specifications using SpecsIntact) for DoD projects.

(Maximum 10 points). Specialized experience in preparing design analyses, including computations, reports, etc., to directly support DoD design projects of facilities or infrastructure.

□ 0 points - No experience in preparing design analysis for DoD design.

□ 5 points - Performed at least one design analysis for DoD project.

□ 10 points - Performed at least three design analyses for DoD projects.

(Maximum 10 points). Specialized experience in construction support (Title II Services) such as post award engineering support, inspection and/or surveillance on facilities and utilities infrastructure.

□ 0 points - No experience in construction support on facilities.

□ 5 points - Project construction support experience on non-DoD facilities.

□ 10 points - Project construction support experience on DoD facilities.

(Maximum 25 points). Specialized experience and performance in cost estimating on facilities and utility infrastructures:

□ 0 points - No experience in cost estimating.

□ 10 points - Project cost estimating experience.

□ 25 points - Project cost estimating experience on DoD facilities utilizing Micro- Computer Aided Cost Estimating System Second Generation software (MII application).

SPECIALIZED/TECHNICAL COMPETENCE POINTS (100 MAX):

(4) Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time.

Past and current organization projects within the last 5 years demonstrate that the firm can handle design projects with estimated construction costs of at least $10 million (LARGE FIRM) or $2 million (SMALL FIRM) in value.

□ 0 points - Firm has not performed projects of this size.

□ 10 points - Firm has performed one project of this size.

□ 20 points – Firm has performed two projects of this size.

□ 30 points - Firm has performed three projects of this size.

□ 40 points - Firm has performed four projects of this size.

□ 50 points - Firm has performed five or more projects of this size.

CAPACITY POINTS (50 MAX):

(5) Location within a radius of Minneapolis-St. Paul Air Reserve Station (MSP-ARS).

Priority will be given based on the location of the prime A-E firm’s personnel intended to support any resulting contract.

(Maximum 70 points). Proximity of the following full-time staff members in the following disciplines: Cost Estimator, Structural Engineer, Geotechnical Engineer, Architect, Civil Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, Electrical Engineer in general geographic area. Each discipline and staff member can only be counted once.

□ 0 point per staff member - 300 miles and greater radius from MSP-ARS.

□ 5 points per staff member - 100 miles to less than 300 miles radius from MSP-ARS.

□ 10 points per staff member - Less than 100 miles radius from MSP-ARS.

(Maximum 30 points). Proximity of the project manager who is either a PE or PMP certified within a defined radius of MSP-ARS. This person cannot be included in Item 1 from above.

□ 0 points - 300 miles and greater radius from base.

□ 10 points - 100 miles to less than 300 miles radius from base.

□ 35 points - Less than 100 miles radius from base.

LOCATION POINTS (100 MAX):

TOTAL EVALUATED POINTS (450 MAX):

General Information.

Questions regarding this notice must be submitted via email to:

Procuring Contracting Officer: chin.dahlquist.1@us.af.mil

Administrative Contracting Specialist: karen.gillen@us.af.mil

Reference the solicitation number and title in the email subject line.

Questions must be submitted no later than 3:00 PM local (Central Standard Time), May 15, 2026.

Qualifications must be submitted through DoD SAFE no later than 3:00 PM local (CST), 5 June 5, 2026.

Attachments:

(1) Standard Form 330

(2) 20260505 Clause Set

(3) B710 Statement of Work (SOW) and attachments

01 B710 FOCUS Floor Plans

02 B710 Concept Floor Plan with Furniture

03 B710 Existing Floor Plan mailto:chin.dahlquist.1@us.af.mil mailto:karen.gillen@us.af.mil