BOTA LPOE Amendment 0001.pdf

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:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning 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 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.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

GSA Solicitation 47PB5126R0003, Design Build Services for the Bridge of the Americas (BOTA) Land Port of Entry (LPOE), El Paso, Texas

See description of changes herein.

All offerors must acknowledge the amendment in accordance with the instructions in Block 11.

GSA PBS OAM Capital Projects Delivery Division 819 Taylor Street, 11th Floor, Fort Worth, Texas POC: Marsha Howard, Contracting Officer Email: marsha.howard@gsa.gov

PH: 817-505-8543

47PB5126R0003

KAHUA 0347

1 4

02/19/2026

01/26/2026

BOTA LPOE Modernization Project, El Paso, TX GSA PBS Capital Delivery Projects Division Solicitation 47PB5126R0003

BOTA LPOE Modernization Project, El Paso, TX

Amendment 001 amends Solicitation 47PB5126R0003 as follows:

See attached Chart of Questions and Answers.

All offerors must acknowledge the amendment in accordance with the instructions in Block 11 on Standard Form 30.

The proposal due date of March 23, 2026, at 2:00 pm CT remains unchanged.

All other items remain unchanged.

END OF AMENDMENT 0001

# Reference in Scope Question Answer

Change the last sentence from “ALL projects must have been delivered utilizing the design-build approach with construction achieving substantial completion within the past ten years prior to the submission deadline for Phase 1 proposals” to “At least one project must have been delivered utilizing the design-build approach with construction achieving substantial completion within the past ten years prior to the submission deadline for Phase 1 proposals.”

The dollar threshold will remain as noted, 2 General

In Section II.C.1, Offeror’s Technical Qualifications, An Offeror may not submit a project that is only 75 percent construction complete.

Phase 1 Evaluation Criteria, Similar in Type definition

No, "additional favorable consideration" is specifically targeted toward projects that align most closely with the unique operational challenges of a Southern Border Land Port of Entry (LPOE).

5 In Section II.C.3, Lead Designer

Yes, based on the provided Solicitation documents for the BOTA LPOE Modernization project, an A/E firm whose lead designer has responsibility and oversight for programming, concept design, bridging, construction documents, and commissioning would meet the criteria for having the required responsibility (pp. 11, 13).

6 General

No, the PDS information will be released in Phase 2 RFP. You may visit the public website at www.gsa.gov/bota that does have public information, that includes the NEPA EIS. The NEPA EIS does provide some information on constraints and challenges.

7 Phase 2 Draft Document

Would it be possible for GSA reissue the Phase 2 Draft Document with the "DRAFT" watermark more transparent or moved to the back of the text? The word DRAFT obscures a fair amount of the content and makes it difficult to read.

Yes, the draft water mark will be corrected to allow better visibility.

Phase I Evaluation Criteria; Factor 1 – Offeror’s Technical Qualifications

The submittal requirements for Factor 1 currently state that ALL past performance projects must have been delivered utilizing the design-build (D-B) approach. A review of recent Land Port of Entry (LPOE) projects and other similar type projects delivered with the Federal Government shows that many similar projects of this scale and complexity have historically been delivered via other methods, such as Design-Bid-Build (D-B-B) or CMAR. Additionally, several projects completed in recent years were under the $200M mark but represent the same level of technical complexity as the current solicitation.

Suggestion: To allow the Government to evaluate a broader range of relevant experience, we suggest the following revisions to the Factor 1 requirements: (1) Allow the inclusion of projects delivered via other procurement methods (such as D-B-B or CMAR) to demonstrate experience with LPOE complexity and scale. and (2) To ensure Design-Build proficiency is maintained, the Government could require that at least one (1) of the submitted projects was delivered utilizing the Design-Build method. These changes would allow Offerors to demonstrate their most relevant technical experience for similar projects while still meeting the Government's requirement for Design-Build expertise.

Please kindly share your list of potential bidders for the RFP D/B - Design-Build Services for the Bridge of the Americas (BOTA) Land Port of Entry (LPOE) Modernization Project

#47PG5126R0003.

Yes, the list of offerors for Phase 2 will be posted on www.sam.gov.

May the Offeror submit a Design-Build project completed within the past 10 years where the design is 100 percent complete and construction is at least 75 percent complete at the time of Phase 1 submission?

The RFQ states that additional favorable consideration may be given to certain southern border LPOE projects. Will GSA consider other complex secure federal infrastructure projects located along the U.S. border, including multi-building campus facilities with inspection, access control, perimeter security, and controlled circulation requirements, as eligible for similar additional favorable consideration when they demonstrate comparable operational and construction complexity?

In Phase One Evaluation Criteria, would a lead designer having responsibility and oversight for programming, concept design, bridging, construction documents, and commissioning meet the criteria for the A/E having “responsibility for developing the detailed design and construction documents?

Is there any information available that GSA can release in references to the Project Development Study (PDS) documents to gain a better understanding of the scope challenges/constraints?

To be considered similar in size, a project managed must have exceeded $200,000,000.00 in costs, consisting of design and construction, a construction schedule over two years and be completed in the last ten (10) years.

8 Attachment 1

Proprietary Information Agreement - Attachment 1. Please advise if the intent of this attachment being submitted is for it to be executed by the offerer and with the Consultant's signature remaining blank, or if the offerer is required to reach out to the Consultant to obtain their signature prior to the RFQ submission.

The Proprietary Information Agreement is provided as a sample. GSA is not party to the Proprietary Information Agreement and the contents of such agreement is between the consultant and the offeror. The intent is for the offeror to submit the agreement with the consultants signature.

9 In Section II.C.3, Lead Designer

Lead Designer - Tangible evidence such as certificates, awards, or peer recognition. Please confirm this evidence is not included in the page count.

Yes, the tangible evidence such as certificates, awards, or peer recognition for the Lead Designer is not included in the page count.

RFQ Page 14, Section II.C.3. Lead Designer

Yes, the tangible evidence such as certificates, awards, or peer recognition for the Lead Designer is not included in the page count.

A list of panel participants will be provided during the phase 2 RFP RFI period.

12 Yes

13 Yes

Response will be provided during the phase 2 RFP RFI period.

Response will be provided during the phase 2 RFP RFI period.

Paragraph II.D.(3) Proprietary Information Agreement - Attachment 1.

Delete Gareth Montgomery, Project Director from page 15 of

31. This individual is no longer with the company.

Delete Gareth Montgomery, Project Director from page 15 of 31. This individual is no longer with the company.

Clarification of Past Performance Delivery Methods: The Submittal Requirements for the Lead Designer portfolios includes a requirement to submit 'tangible evidence such as certificates, awards, or peer recognition demonstrating Design Excellence.' Please confirm that these supplemental documents and items are excluded from the proposal page count.

Draft Phase 2 RFP

Initial Presentation: Oral Presentation Panel Will the Government provide a list of the stakeholders or agencies that will be seated on the evaluation panel for the Initial Oral Presentation? Knowing the participating stakeholders will help us ensure our presentation addresses the specific priorities of the various user groups.

Draft Phase 2 RFP

Proprietary RFI Session Will the Government open a proprietary RFI session immediately following the Phase II notifications? Early access to a proprietary RFI channel will allow Offerors to refine their design solutions and prepare a high-quality, project-specific presentation.

Draft Phase 2 RFP Phase 2 Questions Period Will there be a period for Phase 2 Scope of Work RFIs after the Phase 1 shortlist is announced?

Draft Phase 2 RFP Page 11, Section II.C..3.B, Subcontracting Plan Is this subcontracting goal a requirement for the Design-Build prime only, or also for each individual A/E team?

Draft Phase 2 RFP Page 12, Section II.D. Technical Proposal Please confirm that there is no time limitation to projects listed as similar past experience.