36C25626R0044 0001.pdf

5. PROJECT NUMBER (if applicable)

CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED

PAGE OF PAGES

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED

BPA NO. 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

FACILITY CODE CODE

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

E. IMPORTANT:

is extended,

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning __________ copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(REV. 11/2016)

is required to sign this document and return ___________ copies to the issuing office. is not, A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

15C. DATE SIGNED

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER

Contractor

16C. DATE SIGNED

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

STANDARD FORM 30 PREVIOUS EDITION NOT USABLE

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

(Type or print) (Type or print)

(Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code)

(If other than Item 6)

(Specify type of modification and authority)

(such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

(If required)

(SEE ITEM 11)

(SEE ITEM 13)

(X)

CHECK

ONE

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

1 14

0001 04-23-2026 564-26-4-604-0013 564-26-103

36C256

Department of Veterans Affairs Network Contracting Office 16 5075 Westheimer Road, Suite 750

Houston TX 77056-5643

36C256

Department of Veterans Affairs Network Contracting Office 16 5075 Westheimer Road, Suite 750

Houston TX 77056-5643

To all Offerors/Bidders 36C25626R0044

04-23-2026 X

X X

X 1 (one)

AMMENDMENT 0001

RE: Replace Campus Steam and Condensate Lines

A. Provides RFI responses see attached document.

B. Attachments Added - Asbestos Survey and For Reference Geotech Report (Ans. #43)

See Attachment - Geotech Report See Attachment - Asbestos Survey

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//

Herbst Jennings

VA-VHA-RPOC-2023-0125

See attached document: For Reference Geotech Report.

See attached document: 564-26-103 Asbestos survey.

RFI’s 36C25626R0044 Replace Steam and Condensate Lines

RFI’s for 564-26-103 Replace Campus Steam and Condensate Lines

Questions Answers 1- SF 1442 indicates “Sealed offers in original and 1 emailed copies…” however Section A.6.7 states “Only e-mail proposals will be accepted. Hard-copy proposals will not be accepted.”

Please confirm the official method of submission for Phase I and Phase II proposals, and whether any physical (original’) hard copy is required.

SF 1442 Block 13 contains standard form text and does not override Section A.6.7;

no hard-copy originals are required. If any submission requirements change, the Government will issue an amendment to the Solicitation.

2- Section A.6.7 states the bid bond is “PHASE II ONLY,” but also states failure to furnish the bid guarantee “by the time specified in Block 13 of SF 1442” will result in rejection.

Please clarify the required due date/time for the Phase II bid bond and confirm whether “Block 13” is intended to be replaced/updated by the Phase II notice/amendment.

The bid guarantee is required in Phase II only and is due to the Phase II proposal due date/time stated in the Government’s Phase II notice/amendment. Block 13 timing in SF 1442 will be superseded by the Phase II instruction.

3- SF 1442 includes an “offer guarantee is required” statement, while A.6.7 describes a bid bond requirement for Phase II.

Please confirm whether any offer guarantee/bid guarantee and/or Letter of Bondability is required for Phase I and confirm the bid guarantee requirement applies only to Phase II.

No offer/bid guarantee (and no Letter of Bondability) is required for Phase I. The bid guarantee requirement applies only to Phase II.

4- Section A.6.3 states RFIs are due “by 16 April 2026 at 2:00 PM CDT” and also states this is “14 calendar days prior to the date set for receipt of proposals.” Please confirm the controlling RFI deadline is 16 April 2026 at 2:00 PM CDT (regardless of the “14 days prior” statement) and that RFIs received after that time will not be accepted.

The controlling deadline was April 16, 2026, at 2:00 PM CDT.

5- Factor 2 of the Phase I evaluation requires submission of resumes for identified Key Personnel, but does not reference letters of commitment, or other documentation when a proposed Key Person is not currently employed by the Offeror, Design Team or Subcontractor.

Please confirm whether a resume alone satisfies the Phase I requirement for Key Personnel who are not currently employed by the Offeror, Design Team or Subcontractor.

In Phase I, a resume alone is sufficient to meet the requirement for Key Personnel who are not currently employed by the Offeror/Design Team/Subcontractor.

Letters of commitment are not required in Phase I.

6- Factor 2 of the Phase I evaluation requires submission of resumes for identified Key Personnel, but does not reference letters of commitment, or other documentation when a proposed Key Person is not currently employed by the Offeror, Design Team or Subcontractor.

If additional documentation beyond Key Personnel Resumes is required or permitted for such personnel, please identify the specific documentation and confirm whether it is included in or excluded from the Phase 1 page limitation.

If Offerors elect to include letters of commitment, they may do so; however, they will count toward the Phase I page limits unless otherwise noted. The Government does not require letters of commitment in Phase I.

7- Under Phase I, Factor 2, Subfactor B (Key Construction Personnel & Experience), the solicitation references identification of subcontractors including an electrical engineer and fire protection engineer.

Given that this project is primarily a mechanical steam and condensate utility project.

Please confirm whether identification of electrical engineer and fire protection engineer subcontractors are required only if those disciplines are applicable to the offeror’s proposed scope of work, or if they are required for all Phase I submissions regardless of approach?

Identify electrical and fire protection engineer subcontractors only if those disciplines are applicable to your proposed approach. They are not required for all submissions if not relevant.

8- For Phase I submissions under Factor 2, Subfactor B, the second sentence of the fourth bullet point, states that offerors shall “provide names of proposed subcontractors” and “provide a listing of all subcontractors.” If the government requires both a list and a resume of each name on the list of proposed subcontractors, will that list and/or the resume count towards the 30- limit page requirement?

The list of proposed subcontractors and any subcontractor resumes submitted in Phase I will count toward the 30-page limit, unless otherwise specified.

9- Factor 3 (Past Performance) states:

“Separately provide any completed Past Performance Evaluations, if available, for any of the projects on subsequent sheets.”

For Phase I submissions, please clarify the following:

Does the term “Past Performance Evaluations” refer to CPARS reports, Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs which were not attached as an exhibit), or another form of evaluation?

“Past Performance Evaluations” includes CPARS and completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) or comparable owner evaluation forms. If available, include CPARS; if not, see RFI’s #27–28

10- Factor 3 (Past Performance) states:

“Separately provide any completed Past Performance Evaluations, if available, for any of the projects on subsequent sheets.”

For Phase I submissions, please clarify the following: What is meant by “separately provide” in this context (e.g., a separate section within the Phase I PDF, an appendix, or a separate PDF submission)?

“Separately provide” means include these evaluations as a clearly labeled appendix within the Phase I PDF (single submission).

No separate PDF is required for Phase I.

Appendices count toward page limits unless otherwise stated in RFIs #11–12.

11- When added up, the minimum amount of resumes, three pages for the technical narrative, three pages for each Exhibit A, at least three exhibit B’s, any Past Performance Evaluations, the cover page and the table of contents will quickly exceed 30 pages.

Do the Exhibit A & B count towards the 30-page limit?

Exhibit A (Performance Relevancy Survey) and Exhibit B (Subcontractor Consent) are excluded from the 30-page limit. They must be packaged within the single Phase I PDF place or incorporated into the main body, and properly tabbed/bookmarked.

12- When added up, the minimum amount of resumes, three pages for the technical narrative, three pages for each Exhibit A, at least three exhibit B’s, any Past Performance Evaluations, the cover page and the table of contents will quickly exceed 30 pages.

Do the Past Performance Evaluations (CPARS, PPQs or other documents) count towards the 30-page limit?

Past Performance Evaluations (CPARS/PPQs) are excluded from the 30-page limit.

13 - Page 16 of the Solicitation, Factor 3: Past Performance/Submission Requirement 1) states: A listing of no more than five (5) COMPLETED projects consistent with submission criteria below. Page 18 of the Solicitation within Evaluation Methodology references “Only ongoing and completed projects within the last five (5) years, measured by the issuance date of the solicitation, will be considered.” Page 17 of the Solicitation states in reference to Submission Criteria: Performance Relevancy Survey (Exhibit A): Utilizing Performance Relevancy Survey (Exhibit A). The offeror shall demonstrate completed/or ongoing (>50% complete). Will the government clarify if submitted projects must be COMPLETED or if they can be ONGOING but more than 50% complete?

The Government will accept completed or ongoing (>50% complete) projects performed within the last five (5) years as measured by the solicitation issuance date, consistent with the relevancy criteria in Exhibit A.

14- Factor 3: Past Performance/Submission Requirement 1) states: A listing of no more than five (5) COMPLETED projects consistent

Submit up to five (5) projects for Factor 3.

Exhibit A is formatted to capture up to three with submission criteria below. Refer to The Exhibit A – Performance Relevancy Survey. The sixth line under “Part 1” states (NOTE: Offerors allowed NO MORE than 3 projects- offerors to make appropriate copies).

Will the government clarify if the maximum number of projects to be submitted are 3 per Exhibit A, or 5 projects per the solicitation requirements?

(3) per form; use multiple Exhibit A forms (as needed) to reach five total.

15- Solicitation Page 16, Factor 3 – Past Performance, Submission Requirement 2 Exhibit A, Bullet Point 2 states: “Also submit a list of current projects separately on Exhibit A.”

Please clarify whether the Government is requesting:

(a) a list of all current/ongoing projects being performed by the Offeror at the time of proposal submission, or (b) a list limited to the projects submitted for past performance evaluation under Exhibit A.

Provide a list of all current/ongoing projects being performed by the Offeror at the time of proposal submission (not limited to those in Exhibit A). Keep it concise (project name, owner, scope, percent complete).

16- Please confirm whether the 30-page limitation is inclusive of all required proposal elements, or whether the Government will consider adjusting the page limit or excluding specific required sections to maintain fair and complete responses across Offerors.

The Government will retain the 30-page limit for Phase I. As clarified above, Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and Past Performance Evaluations are excluded to ensure fair, complete responses.

17- Solicitation Page 16, Factor 3: Past Performance /Submission Requirement 2) Exhibit A Bullet Point 2 States – “Also submit a list of current projects separately on Exhibit A”.

Will this list count towards the 30-page limit as stated and required on Page 13, under A.6.7/A.1 -Phase 1 Proposal Format & Evaluation?

The current projects list is included in the Phase I submission body and counts toward the 30-page limit. Keep to one page if possible.

18- Will Section E of a SF330 satisfy the Phase I Key Personnel requirement for members of the Design Team?

Yes. SF330 Section E entries may be used to satisfy Design Team Key Personnel resumes in Phase I, provided they meet the two-page per person limit and include required details.

19- Paragraph A.6.7 Proposal Requirements, Paragraph A.1. references a “preface” but a “preface” is not further described. Is a “preface” required or desired?

Yes. A brief preface is required per A.6.7(A)(1). See RFIs #20/#29/#55 for content.

20- If a “preface” is required, will the government clarify is required to be included in the “preface” and detail the evaluation criteria?

The preface should be a one-page transmittal that: (a) identifies the Offeror/JV structure; (b) confirms SDVOSB eligibility/visibility; (c) identifies the main point of contact; and (d) provides a concise summary of the team composition (Prime, DOR, major subs). The preface is not scored separately; it supports compliance and clarity.

21- Please clarify whether Exhibit B is required at the entity level (Each subcontractor, including the design firm), or whether the Government intends Exhibit B to be submitted separately for each proposed key individual if Key Personnel are employees of a subcontractor.

Exhibit B is required at the entity level (each subcontractor, including the design firm). It is not required per individual Key Person.

22- If Exhibit B is required for each Key Personnel rather than the entity level, will these Exhibit B’s be excluded from the 30-page limitation?

Not applicable. See #21; Exhibit B is per entity and excluded from the page limit.

23- Has a certified asbestos survey been completed for this project?

No.

24 - If a certified asbestos survey has been completed for this project, please provide the written report, including lab analysis of samples, to confirm compliance.

No survey for this project. Attached is the station’s AHERA inspection for reference only.

25 - For each identified subcontractor, may the Offeror present:

• the company’s relevant experience and

• the resume/background of the identified lead/key Personnel combined on a single page, provided all required information is addressed; or does the Government require a separate resume page for each identified key individual in addition to a separate description of the subcontractor’s corporate experience.

This clarification will assist us in meeting the solicitation requirements while adhering to the established page limits.

Yes. For each identified subcontractor, you may present one combined page covering the company’s relevant experience and the key individual’s resume/role, provided all required info is addressed. That page counts toward the 30-page limit.

26 - Reference: Solicitation, Subfactor B – Key Construction Personnel & Experience, Page 15 The solicitation states: “Project Engineer – Provide the project engineer’s state of

“Project Engineer” in Subfactor B refers to the licensed engineer supporting the design effort (Designer of Record / Engineer-of-Record) with relevant underground steam replacement license and any design-build related underground steam replacement experience and installations on a similar location as the VHSO….” In many construction organizations, the “Project Engineer” position refers to a contractor project staff role during the construction phase, while professional engineering licensure is typically associated with the design team (e.g., Designer of Record or Engineer-of-Record).

Please confirm whether “Project Engineer,” as used in this section, refers to:

a) the Contractor’s on-site/project staff role (construction project engineer), or

b) a licensed engineer supporting the design effort (Designer of Record / Engineer-of- Record).

experience (not the contractor’s on-site “construction project engineer” staff role).

27 - Under Factor 3 – Past Performance, the solicitation states:

“Separately provide any completed Past Performance Evaluations, if available, for any of the projects on subsequent sheets.”

For Phase I submissions, if no completed Past Performance Evaluations (e.g., CPARS) exist for a submitted project, please clarify whether the offeror is required to submit any alternate documentation, such as a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), or whether no additional documentation is required in that circumstance.

If no CPARS exist, no additional documentation is required beyond Exhibit A and the project narratives. Offerors may include PPQs or owner letters if available (see RFI #28)

28 - If the Government requires submission of Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) when completed Past Performance Evaluations are not available under Factor 3 – Past Performance, please clarify: a) Whether the Government will provide a standard PPQ form to be used, OR

b) Whether an offeror-generated PPQ is acceptable, and if so, whether any specific content or format requirements apply.

The Government will not issue a standard PPQ form for Phase I. Offeror-generated PPQs are acceptable if they identify the owner POC, project scope, performance rating/comments, and completion dates.

Include them in the appendix (excluded from page limit per RFI #12).

29 – Revised RFI #20 If a “preface” is required, will the government clarify what is required to be included in the “preface” and detail the evaluation criteria?

See #20: one-page transmittal covering Offeror/JV identification, SDVOSB eligibility visibility, POC, and concise team summary.

Not evaluated as a separate factor.

30 - Section 2.4 (52.228-1) of the solicitation currently defaults to a bid guarantee in the

Yes. In accordance with FAR 28.204-3, an Irrevocable Letter of Credit (ILC) is an form of a firm commitment (bid bond). Will the Government clarify that, in accordance with FAR 28.204-3, offerors may provide an Irrevocable Letter of Credit (ILC) in lieu of a traditional corporate surety bond? Providing an ILC as an alternative would ensure that certified SDVOSB firms with significant liquid backing but limited traditional surety lines can remain competitive for this set-aside.

acceptable alternative to a corporate surety bid guarantee.

31 - In the event an offeror utilizes an ILC for the Phase II bid guarantee, will the Government also allow the use of an ILC for Performance and Payment bonds upon award, as expressly permitted by FAR 28.204?

Yes. RFO FAR 28.204-3 permits ILCs as security for Performance and Payment bonds if they meet the clause requirements and coverage period.

32 - Under FAR 28.102-1(a), the Contracting Officer has the authority to determine the required amount of performance and payment bonds. Given the two-phase design-build structure where CLIN 0001 (Design) must be completed before CLIN 0002 (Construction) is fully executed, will the Government consider Phased Bonding? Specifically, could the Government require a bond for the value of CLIN 0001 upon award, and then require the bond for CLIN 0002 only upon the Government's acceptance of the 100% Construction Documents?

The CO may structure bond requirements consistent with RFO FAR 28.102-1 and 28.102-2. For this acquisition, the Government will require Performance/Payment bond coverage commensurate with the awarded contract as a whole (turnkey) and phased bonding will not be considered.

33 - To support the small business goals of this SDVOSB set-aside, will the Government consider exercising its authority under FAR 28.102-2(a) to reduce the required amount of the payment bond to a percentage of the contract price that is less than 100%, provided the Government's interest is sufficiently protected by the specialized qualifications of the Designer of Record?

RFO FAR 28.102-2 sets the default statutory amounts for construction Performance and Payment bonds under the Miller Act. The Government will not reduce the Payment bond below statutory requirements for this procurement.

34 - Factor 3 (Past Performance) permits the evaluation of the A-E firm’s projects in support of a Design-Build offer. Will the Government confirm that, per FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii), it will take into account the past performance of the Designer of Record as a critical factor in the confidence rating? Specifically, since Cromwell has "in spades" experience with the VHSO campus steam systems, can this technical history be used to satisfy the "relevancy" requirement even if the Lead JV

The Government will consider past performance of critical subcontractors, including the Designer of Record, as part of the confidence assessment where relevant to the underground steam scope, consistent with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii) and RFO 15.202(c)(3)(iii).

partner's construction portfolio is smaller in scale?

35 - The solicitation identifies NAICS 236220 (Commercial and Institutional Building Construction). However, the "Relevant" project definition in Factor 3 requires specific experience in "replacement and/or installation of underground steam and condensate distribution systems". Will the Government clarify that, consistent with NAICS 236220, an offeror can satisfy the Past Performance requirement by demonstrating successful management and oversight of these specialized systems as a Prime Contractor, even if the specialized technical work was performed by a subcontractor?

Under NAICS 236220, primes may demonstrate relevancy by showing successful management/oversight of specialized systems performed by subcontractors; that past performance is acceptable and will be evaluated for relevancy. (Utility system components may also involve specialty NAICS; however, this procurement uses 236220.)

36 - Given the selection of a "General Construction" NAICS, which carries an 85% subcontracting allowance, will the Government confirm that the Past Performance evaluation will place equal weight on the Prime's ability to coordinate complex trades in an active medical environment, rather than requiring the Prime to have self-performed underground steam work in the past?

Yes. The evaluation will emphasize the Prime’s demonstrated ability to coordinate complex trades in occupied healthcare environments; self-performed underground steam work is not required to achieve relevancy if effective management/oversight is substantiated.

37 - Factor 3 states that for offerors without Design-Build experience, the Government will evaluate the projects of the A-E firm. Will the Government clarify that in a Design-Build context under NAICS 236220, the DOR's specialized steam experience is sufficient to mitigate any lack of specialized "self-performance" history by the Prime, provided the Prime demonstrates general construction management on an occupied campus?

Yes. In a design-build context, DOR specialized steam experience will be considered a critical relevancy factor that may mitigate a prime’s limited self-performance history, provided the prime demonstrates strong construction management on occupied campuses.

38- In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii), which allows the Government to consider the past performance of "critical" subcontractors, will the Government confirm that the specialized technical experience of the Designer of Record will be used to satisfy the technical "relevancy" requirements for the underground steam scope?

Yes. Per FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii) and RFO 15.202(c)(3)(iii), the Government may consider past performance of critical subcontractors (including the DOR) where relevant to the instant acquisition.

39 - To ensure maximum participation from certified SDVOSBs under NAICS 236220, will the Government utilize its authority under FAR 28.102-1(a) to permit Phased Bonding?

Phased bonding will not be considered (see RFI #32).

Specifically, can the Performance and Payment bonds be submitted in stages—first for the Design portion (CLIN 0001) upon award, and then for the Construction portion (CLIN 0002) only after the Government's final approval of the 100% Construction Documents?

40 - Section 4.5 (Supplemental Insurance) requires general liability without asbestos exclusions. Will the Government clarify if Pollution Liability Insurance is required for this project, given the high probability of encountering legacy contaminated soils during campus-wide trenching for steam lines?

Solicitation requires general liability without asbestos exclusions. Given trenching scope, the Government will expect coverage commensurate with site risk.

41 - The solicitation notes that the Government does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the planning information.

Given the critical requirement to maintain continuous steam service, will the Government provide As-Built drawings for all known underground utilities within 50 feet of the proposed path? If not available, will the Government allow Phase I offerors an additional 21 days to review the site to ensure the feasibility of the proposed phasing strategy?

The Government has provided its most recent as-built utility information. Where drawings are incomplete, Offerors remain responsible for developing a feasible phasing approach consistent with Phase I requirements. No extension to the Phase I due date will be granted solely for additional site review.

42 - The SOW mentions the use of temporary boilers. Will the Government clarify the required capacity (psig and lb/hr) for these interim systems and specify the exact tie-in points to the existing building manifolds? This information is essential for accurate scheduling and equipment procurement planning.

The SOW does not mention use of temporary boilers. The use of temporary boilers will be design specific. Currently the station operates up to three 250 HP boilers (demand- dependent) that supply steam for the entire station. These three boilers are in Building 10, Boiler Plant, as cited in the SOW. Tie-in’s at buildings shown in SOW Attachment 3.

43 - Does the Government have a recent Topographic Survey or Geotechnical Report for the Fayetteville campus? If so, please provide them as an amendment to this RFP. If not, how does the Government intend to evaluate "Technical Approach" (Factor 1) regarding excavation and shoring without verified soil data?

The station does not have complete topographic survey or Geotechnical report.

The attached geotechnical report is from an unrelated project and is provided for reference only; it may be used at the Offeror’s discretion to inform proposal development for technical Approach Factor 1. For evaluation purposes, proposals will be evaluated under Technical Approach Factor 1 on the Offeror’s understating of subsurface uncertainties and the adequacy of proposed excavation and shoring methods, including investigative approaches, contingency planning, and risk mitigation strategies appropriate for unknown conditions.

44 - Section 4.10 (VAAR 852.204-70) requires personal identity verification. Will the Government clarify if unescorted access will be granted to the contractor for after-hours utility tie-ins, or will the VA provide 24/7 coverage? This impacts the "Draft Project Schedule" requirements in Phase II.

The VA will provide coverage on behalf of the facility during necessary utility outages and can provide access to areas outside of construction. Contractor may work within limits of disturbance as needed. Reference SOW for after-hours work.

45- The solicitation states the Phase I proposal shall not exceed thirty (30) pages. Will the Government clarify if Exhibit A (Past Performance) and Exhibit B (Subcontractor Consent) count toward this 30-page limit?

Given that an offeror may submit up to five projects at one page per project, including these in the page count significantly limits the narrative space for Factor 1: Technical Approach.

As clarified in RFI #11, Exhibit A and Exhibit B are excluded from the Phase I 30-page limit.

46 - Section A.6.7 (A)(1) requires a "detailed table of contents, and preface" within the 30-page limit. Will the Government exclude the Title Page, Table of Contents, and Divider Tabs from the final page count to allow for a more robust technical response?

The Title Page and Table of Contents are excluded from the 30-page count. Divider pages containing substantive text/graphics count; simple tab pages with only section labels do not.

47 -Please provide a Phase I Response Outline.

Currently, the "Submission Criteria" for Factor 2 (Technical Qualifications) asks for resumes and subcontractor listings. Should these resumes be integrated into the single PDF document for Phase I, or are they considered an attachment?

Submit one PDF for Phase I containing: (1) Title Page & TOC (excluded), (2) Preface (see RFIWIL #20), (3) Factor 1 narrative, (4) Factor 2 resumes/lists (integrated—not separate attachments), (5) Factor 3 forms (Exhibit A), (6) Exhibit B (entity-level), and

(7) Appendix (CPARS/PPQs).

48 - Section A.6.2 requires Joint Venture Agreements to be submitted with the Phase I proposal. If a Joint Venture is still in the process of SBA certification at the time of Phase I submission, will the Government accept a Letter of Intent to Form a JV signed by all parties, provided the formal agreement is finalized prior to the Phase II submission?

If the JV’s SBA VetCert is pending at Phase I, the Government will accept a signed Letter of Intent to Form a JV, provided the formal JV agreement and certifications are finalized before Phase II submission.

49 -Section A.6.2 (SDVOSB Set-Aside) requires firms to be "visible and verified/certified" in

For Phase I eligibility, the Managing Partner (Lead) must be a certified SDVOSB, and the

Phase I and at the time of award. For a Joint Venture, will the Government clarify that only the Managing Partner (Lead) must be a certified SDVOSB, provided the JV entity itself is registered in SAM.gov by Phase II?

JV entity must be registered in SAM by Phase II. All VetCert requirements must be met at award. (See VAAR/VetCert program rules.)

50- Factor 2: Subfactor B asks for the percentage of work the prime and subcontractors will perform. Given that this is Phase I (Qualifications), and a final price has not been established for the 15% / 85% Limitations on Subcontracting calculation, will the Government accept a preliminary estimate of these percentages for Phase I evaluation?

Yes. Provide preliminary estimated percentages of work for Prime vs.

subcontractors in Phase I.

51 -While a Bid Bond is listed as a Phase II requirement, the Standard Form 1442, Block 12a, asks if bonds are required. Will the Government clarify its authority under FAR 28.102-1(a) to set the bonding amount?

Specifically, will the Government consider Phased Bonding for the resulting contract, where the bond for CLIN 0001 (Design) is provided at award, and the bond for CLIN 0002 (Construction) is provided only after the Government approves the 100% Design?

Phased bonding will not be considered (see RFI# 32).

52- To ensure all offerors can properly format the 30-page Phase I response and finalize the complex Joint Venture certifications required by Section A.6.2 , we respectfully request a 21-calendar day extension to the Phase I due date.

The Government declines the requested 21-day extension. The current schedule supports the agency’s delivery requirements under RFO FAR 36.101-2 two-phase procedures.

53 - Section A.6.7 (5) states that page size is 8.5X11inches, but Section A.6.7 (6) allows 11X17 for the draft project schedule. Will the Government clarify if 11X17 pages are allowed in the Phase I submission for technical graphics or phasing diagrams, and if so, do they count as one or two pages toward the 30-page limit?

11×17 pages are allowed only for the Draft Project Schedule as stated. Other technical graphics/phasing diagrams should be formatted on 8.5×11. The single 11×17 schedule page counts as one page.

54 - Factor 2 (Technical Qualifications) requires resumes for six specific design roles and at least three construction roles, plus subcontractor listings. Since resumes are limited to two pages each, the resumes alone could total 18+ pages. Will the Government consider moving Resumes and Subcontractor Lists to an Appendix that does not count

No. Resumes and subcontractor listings are part of Factor 2 and must appear in the main 30-page body (see exclusions in RFIs #11–12 for Exhibits/CPARS).

toward the 30-page limit to ensure offerors have sufficient space to address the Technical Approach (Factor 1)?

55 - Section A.6.7 (A)(1) mentions a "preface" for Phase I. Please clarify the required content of this preface and whether it is intended to serve as a Transmittal Letter or a summary of the Joint Venture's socioeconomic status.

The preface serves as a transmittal that includes Offeror/JV identification and SDVOSB status visibility. See RFI #20 for content; it is administrative, not separately scored.

56 - The solicitation includes VAAR 852.219-75, which requires a "Certificate of Compliance" for the Limitation on Subcontracting. However, Phase I evaluation Factor 2 asks for "approximate percentages of work". Will the Government confirm that the formal signed Certificate of Compliance (VAAR 852.219-75) is only required during Phase II, as suggested by the Note in Section A.6.6 (D)?

The formal Certificate of Compliance (VAAR 852.219-75) is required during Phase II / award (consistent with Section A.6.6(D) Note). Phase I requires only approximate percentages (see RFI #50).

57 - Section A.6.2 requires offerors to be "visible and verified/certified" in the SBA database at the time of Phase I submission.

For a newly formed Joint Venture, please confirm that if the JV's registration is "Pending" in the SBA Veteran Small Business Certification portal, the Government will accept the certification of the Managing Partner as proof of eligibility for the Phase I evaluation.

If the JV’s VetCert is Pending at Phase I, the Government will accept the Managing Partner’s current SDVOSB certification as proof of eligibility for Phase I. The JV must be visible/verified before award.

58 - The SOW requires the replacement of Campus Steam and Condensate lines but does not specify the point of demarcation between the new lines and existing building systems.

Will the Government provide an inventory of building tie-in locations and current valve conditions to ensure the Phase I "Technical Approach" accurately reflects the complexity of the phasing?

Reference SOW Attachment 3 and Sec 1.2 of SOW. All steam and condensate line to be replaced to and from Buildings 1,3, 4, 10, & 21. Tie-in locations shown on Attachment 3 are accurate.

59- Will the Government clarify if a Third-Party Commissioning Agent is required for the steam system, and if so, should their qualifications be included in the Phase I Technical Qualifications (Factor 2)?

Yes, reference Section 7 of SOW.

Yes, Phase 1 Factor 2, Subfactor B.