CMS Roofs and Elevators-DB Procurement RFI Log 05192026.pdf

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION LOG

RFP#: 47PB5126R0022

Due Date: May 18th, 2026 CMS Roofs & Elevators

RFI # Date Request for Clarification/Interpretation Response Date: Response

1 5/11/26

Subfactor 1.A requires a minimum of one (1) project per team-member firm role (Design/Builder, Design Team, General Contractor). The solicitation notes that favorable consideration may be given for higher quantity of similar project experience.

Please clarify whether there is a maximum number of projects that may be submitted per firm role, or in total, under Subfactor 1.A.

5/19/26 The Solicitation has been updated to include 2 Design Team projects and a 1 page document highlighting additional projects from any of the offerors team members demonstrating prior experience on relevant projects.

2 5/11/26

May an offeror submit additional projects beyond the one (1) per firm-role minimum under Subfactor 1.A, and if so, should those additional projects be organized within the existing firm-role categories (Design/Builder, Design Team, General Contractor) or submitted separately?

5/19/26 The Solicitation has been updated to include 2 Design Team projects and a 1 page document highlighting additional projects from any of the offerors team members demonstrating prior experience on relevant projects.

3 5/14/26

Reference: Solicitation document- page 13, Factor 1- Technical Qualifications- Submittal Requirement.

Question: Please advise the difference between Design/Builder* and General Contractor?

● Design/Builder* – One (1) Project

● General Contractor – One (1) Project

5/19/26 The Design/Builder project must be a design build project from a team member, while the General Contractor project does not have to be design build project.

4 5/14/26

Reference: Solicitation document- page 14, Factor 1- Technical Qualifications-Standard for Evaluation.

Question: Please confirm the Roof Type required for this project so we may highlight that in our project pages.

5/19/26 Please see the "CMS Roof Replacement Program of Requirements_Final" for additional detail.

5 5/14/26

Reference: Solicitation document- page 17, FACTOR 3 - LEAD ROOF DESIGNER

Question: Please advise if you are looking for an architect that has completed projects that are similar to this project with regard to Roof Design or are you are looking for us to list a consultant or subcontractor qualifications?

5/19/26 This is to be the Engineer of Record for the roofing system.

6 5/14/26

Reference: Solicitation document- page 18, FACTOR 4 - LEAD ELEVATOR

DESIGNER

Question: Please advise if you are looking for an architect that has completed projects that are similar to this project with regard to Elevator Design or are you are looking for us to list a consultant or subcontractor qualifications?

5/19/26 This is to be the Engineer of Record for the elevators.

7 5/14/26 In order to have enough time to obtain PPQ’s and complete the proposal once RFI’s are answered, we respectfully request the due date be extended to Friday, June 12th. 5/19/26 Due date remains 5/29/26 at 1PM ET.

8 5/14/26 Please confirm that the cover, cover letter, tabs, and table of contents will not be counted toward any of the maximum page counts. 5/19/26 Confirmed.

9 5/14/26 If an offeror includes a page of only images for a project description in Subfactor 1.A., will that page be considered one of the two allowed, or will it be excluded from the maximum page count?

5/19/26 A page of just pictures will be excluded from the page count.

10 5/14/26 5/19/26 Confirmed.

11 5/14/26 5/19/26 The language has been removed from the solicitation.

12 5/18/26 5/19/26 Yes see updated Solicitation

13 5/18/26 5/19/26 Yes see updated Solicitation

14 5/18/26 5/19/26 If the PPQ was completed after final completion, no new PPQ is required.

15 5/18/26 5/19/26 Yes

16 5/18/26 5/19/26 Yes

17 5/18/26 Are any GSA forms or Bonding capacity letters required to be submitted with Phase 1 submission? 5/19/26 No, Phase 1 submission only requires the technical factors 1-4.

18 5/18/26 Confirm that the key subcontractors utilized and identified for Phase 1 selection cannot be substituted or changed for Phase 2. 5/19/26

That is the intent of this procurement. If a key subcontractor is changed, it should be brought to the government's attention in writing ASAP and may decrease the chances of an award.

19 5/18/26 Please confirm which key personnel are to be designated to be full time dedicated positions and available for onsite meetings anytime construction activities are active. 5/19/26

The Project Manager (construction), Construction Superintendent, and Quality Control/Assurance Coordinator (roofs), Quality Control / Assurance Coordinator (elevators) are to be available for on-site meetings anytime construction activities are active.

20 5/18/26

Please clarify the extent to which the Design-Builder is responsible for undocumented existing conditions, concealed deficiencies, code deficiencies, deteriorated substrates, structural deficiencies, and conflicts with existing utilities or systems not identified in the provided documents. Will such conditions qualify for equitable adjustment if discovered after award?

5/19/26 The Design Builder is urged to thoroughly review the project site before bid and during the design phase. The concealed deficiencies, deteriorated substrates or other unforeseen conditions would qualify for an equitable adjustment.

21 5/18/26

Please clarify whether hazardous material abatement, including asbestos, lead, PCB-containing materials, and other regulated materials, is included within the project scope and base bid. If included, please provide available surveys, known locations, quantities, and expectations regarding remediation responsibility and phasing.

5/19/26 No hazmat remediation is expected in this project. Please see attached Tier II Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Report for further detail.

22 5/18/26

Please provide anticipated quantities or allowance criteria for replacement of deteriorated roof deck, lightweight concrete, gypsum deck, wood nailers/blocking, and structural supports encountered during demolition. Confirm unit prices will be established for unforeseen deck replacement work?

5/19/26 Phase 2 of the procurement will include a bid sheet with unit pricing.

23 5/18/26 Please clarify the relative weighting and importance of the technical evaluation factors versus price evaluation for the Phase II best-value tradeoff selection process. 5/19/26 The non-price factors, when combined, are regarded as significantly more important than price.

In the solicitation, it is stated that Offerors are permitted to include photos of completed projects in their project descriptions for Subfactor 1.A., but the RFP allows projects in progress to be submitted in this section. Please confirm that images for active projects are also permitted.

In the solicitation, it is stated that additional consideration for the Subfactor 1.A projects includes projects of the same roof type proposed by the offeror for this project. As offerors have not formally proposed a roof type, and will not be doing so at this time, please clarify how this is being evaluated.

Would GSA consider allowing offerors to submit in Factor 1 an additional secondary design project in order to demonstrate experience in both roofing replacement design and elevator modernization projects?

Would GSA consider allowing additional General Contractor past performance projects in Factor 1 to show depth of previous relevant experience?

If Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) have been completed previously for the presented projects, would GSA consider accepting those in lieu of requiring the Government Project Manager to complete a new PPQ?

May the “Prior Experience on Relevant Projects” worksheet be formatted or tailored to better align with branding, provided all required information is maintained?

For Phase 1 submission is only the information and supporting documents ask for in Factors 1-2-3-4 required at this time?

Due Date: May 18th, 2026 CMS Roofs & Elevators

RFI # Date Request for Clarification/Interpretation Response Date: Response

24 5/18/26 Please clarify whether the GSA intends to perform a price realism analysis in addition to price reasonableness, and whether unrealistically low pricing may negatively impact technical or risk evaluations.

5/19/26 No price realism analysis is planned, only price reasonableness.

25 5/18/26 Please clarify which subcontractors, consultants, specialty contractors, and/or trade partners are required to be identified as part of the Phase I and/or Phase II proposal submissions and should not change from Phase 1 to Phase 2 submissions.

5/19/26 There are no specific requirements but the more evidence that the Offeror worked on prior projects together with one or more of its proposed team members is considered additional favorable.

26 5/18/26

The elevator specifications appear to substantially define the basis-of-design systems, manufacturers, operational requirements, and interior finishes, including requirements to match the existing North Elevator installations. Please clarify whether elevator technical evaluation will primarily assess execution capability, modernization experience, phasing/logistics, maintainability, and lifecycle support versus elevator design innovation or alternate design concepts.

5/19/26 Correct the execution capability, modernization experience, phasing/logistics, maintainability, and lifecycle support , campus uniformity are more important than design innovation.

27 5/18/26

Please clarify whether the specified elevator systems and manufacturers, including Smartrise C4 controllers, GAL MOVFR door operators, Innovation Bruiser fixtures, Formula Vision Plus, MosaicONE VMS (MAD), and IDEC interiors, are mandatory requirements or basis-of-design standards permitting approved equals, and whether proposed alternates are encouraged.

5/19/26 Listed products are basis of design. Proposed alternates are welcome with the goal of campus uniformity in mind.

28 5/18/26

The specifications state the renovated passenger elevator interiors are to “match the existing North Elevator installations.” Please clarify whether as-built drawings, specifications, finish schedules, approved submittals, and/or photographs of the existing North Elevator modernizations will be provided to Phase II proposers to establish the intended design standard and basis for technical evaluation.

5/19/26 Confirmed, additional documentation will be provided in Phase 2.

29 5/18/26

Section 6.5 states that the existing primary and overflow roof drainage systems connect to the same piping system and that modifications to provide independent overflow drainage piping will not be required. Please confirm the Design/Build Contractor is not required to redesign or replace the existing building storm drainage piping systems to provide separate overflow drainage piping in order to comply with current plumbing code requirements.

5/19/26 Confirmed.

30 5/18/26

Please clarify whether prior working relationships and demonstrated coordination history between the Design/Build Contractor and proposed key subcontractors will be considered as part of the technical evaluation of team integration and project execution capability.

5/19/26 Confirmed.

31 5/18/26 Please clarify whether the project is required to achieve LEED certification or comply with any specific GSA sustainable design, Green Globes, Guiding Principles, or other formal sustainability certification requirements

5/19/26 LEED certificate is not required. Offeror to follow the Core Building Standards

(CBS).

32 5/18/26 Solicitation: Please clarify if the Pre-Submission Oral Presentation can be held virtually, via Microsoft Teams or Google Meet. 5/19/26 To be confirmed in Phase 2.

33 5/18/26 Solicitation: Please clarify if the Post-Submission Oral Presentation is required or optional. 5/19/26 The Post-Submission Oral Presentation is required and will be held in person in

Woodlawn, MD with each Phase 2 Offeror.

34 5/18/26 Solicitation: If the Post-Submission Oral Presentation is required, can it be held virtually, via Microsoft Teams or Google Meet? 5/19/26 The Post-Submission Oral Presentation is required and will be held in person in

Woodlawn, MD with each Phase 2 Offeror.

35 5/18/26 Solicitation: Please confirm that a cover page, cover letter, table of contents, and divider tabs do not count toward the overall page count. 5/19/26 Confirmed.

36 5/18/26 Solicitation: Please clarify if there is a preferred font type and size to be used. 5/19/26 The font should be fully legible and highly readable.

37 5/18/26 Solicitation, Factor 1: Please confirm CPARS are acceptable in lieu of PPQs. 5/19/26 Confirmed 38 5/18/26 Solicitation, Factor 1: Please confirm previously completed PPQs are acceptable. 5/19/26 Confirmed

39 5/18/26 Solicitation, Factor 1: Please clarify the difference between the Design/Builder and the Design Team. 5/19/26 The Design/Builder project must be a design build project from a team member, while the Design project does not have to be design build project.

40 5/18/26 Solicitation, Factor 1: Please clarify the note that "each submission should be a unique project".

5/19/26 Each project submitted under Factor 1 should be a different project. Do not re-use a Design Build project done by the designer and contractor for all 3 requested projects even though the project could fall under any of the 3.

41 5/18/26 Solicitation, Factor 1: Some of our government POCs are no longer with the same agency or will not fill out PPQs. Please confirm a project will still be accepted for Factor 1 - Prior Experience even if we are unable to get a PPQ completed for it.

5/19/26 Confirmed.

42 5/18/26 Solicitation, Factors 1, 3, and 4: Please confirm projects used in Factor 1 are also acceptable to be used in Factors 3 and 4. 5/19/26 Confirmed.

43 5/18/26 Solicitation, Factor 2: Can the government please consider allowing additional pages for Factor 2? The current five-page limit may not provide sufficient space to thoroughly address all of the requirements for this section.

5/19/26 The Factor 2 page limit will remain at 5 pages.

44 5/18/26 Solicitation, Factor 3: Please clarify if the Lead Roof Designer is to be a single person or if we are to submit the qualifications of an entire firm. 5/19/26 Lead Roof Designer is to be a single person.

45 5/18/26 Solicitation, Factor 4: Please clarify if the Lead Elevator Designer is to be a single person or if we are to submit the qualifications of an entire firm. 5/19/26 Lead Elevator Designer is to be a single person.

46 5/18/26 Solicitation, Factors 3 and 4: Please clarify if we are to use the Prior Experience sheet used in Factor 1 for the projects included in the Lead Designer's portfolio. 5/19/26 Confirmed. Projects from Factor 1 can be used in Factor 3 & 4.

47 5/18/26

Solicitation, Factors 3 and 4: Can the government please consider allowing additional pages for Factors 3 and 4, Philosophy & Design Intent Description? The current one-page limit may not provide sufficient space to thoroughly address all of the requirements for these sections.

5/19/26 The Philosophy & Design Intent Description section will remain at a 1 page limit.

48 5/18/26

Solicitation, Factors 3 and 4: Please confirm that certificates, awards, peer recognition, references, representative floor plan, site plan, rendered 3-D model, building section, other appropriate drawings, photographs, etc. are excluded from the page limitations.

5/19/26 Confirmed.

49 5/18/26

Please confirm minimum roof size, in square feet, that the Government will consider relevant for evaluation under Phase I, Factors 4 and 5. The project scope identifies approximately 300,000 SF of campus roof replacement/renovation. Should offerors submit prior roof projects of comparable size to the total campus roof scope, or will smaller roof projects be considered relevant if they demonstrate similar complexity, occupied-campus conditions, phasing, security, and design-build delivery?

5/19/26 The Government will examine the breadth, depth and relevance of the Offeror’s prior experience in performing projects similar in size, scope and complexity to the one described in the solicitation.

50 5/18/26 Please confirm no bonding information is required in Phase I of the proposal. 5/19/26 Confirmed.

51 5/18/26 Phase I says to submit other required documents in the instructions to bidders. What other documents are required? 5/19/26 No additional documentation is required in Phase 1.

52 5/18/26 Since the solicitation requires separate designers for the roofing and elevator scopes of work, please confirm that we will have separate design documents for each scope and they are not to merged together.

5/19/26 Roofs and elevators will be developed and submitted as two separate packages.

Due Date: May 18th, 2026 CMS Roofs & Elevators

RFI # Date Request for Clarification/Interpretation Response Date: Response

53 5/18/26

For each designer, the solicitation does not seem to require that each designer have specific design experience for the roofing nor the elevators. Does the government wish to require the roofing designer submit specific past roofing projects and the elevator designer to have specific past elevator projects?

5/19/26 The Government will examine the breadth, depth and relevance of the Offeror’s prior experience in performing projects similar in size, scope and complexity to the one described in the solicitation.

54 5/18/26

In phase II, it states that the project has a specific Quality Control manager for the roof and one for the elevator. Typically, a project has one Quality Control manager for the entire project. Please confirm if this project is to have two separate QC Managers.

5/19/26 Confirmed.

55 5/18/26 In Factor I, its states that the designer, design/builder and the general contractor are to each submit a project. Wouldn't the design project also be listed in Factor 3 or 4 for the roofing or elevator designer?

5/19/26 Factor I refers to the Design Team as a whole not specifically the Lead Designer.

Factors 3 and 4 refer to the Lead Roof Designer and Lead Elevator Designer.

56 5/18/26 Will the offeror need to include teaming agreements for the elevator & roofing designer along with the general contractor?

5/19/26 If applicable, Joint-Venture Agreement and any Mentor-Protégé Agreements.

Additional favorable consideration may be given for written, binding agreements between the team members on the equitable distribution of the stipend.