6982AF25R000016

Construction Inspection IDIQ

5/1/2026

Questions Answers

1. We have a question regarding the RFQ requirements, the RFQ states that firms must be licensed to practice

A&E services could you please clarify what specific licenses are required beyond an individual

Professional Engineer (PE) license for providing engineering services?

The RFQ requires that firms be licensed to practice architect-engineer (A&E) services within at least one of the states served by CFLHD. Beyond individual Professional

Engineer (PE) licenses, this refers to a state-level

Engineering Firm License or a Certificate of Authorization

(COA). Firms responding to the RFQ must specify the

Engineering Firm License, Certificate of Authorization, or other state-issued approval that permits the Firm to practice architecture and engineering (A&E). Include the license number(s) and the state(s) of issuance.

2. Section 3.2.2 of the RFQ reads: "Firms that have the qualifications to perform the services described in this

RFQ and wish to be considered for contract award shall submit a qualifications package to include a

Standard Form 330 (SF 330) Architect-Engineer

Qualifications, parts I and II, as well as a written response to the evaluation factors 1-5 outlined in RFQ

Attachment A - Evaluation Factors."

However, Attachment A lists only Evaluation Factors

1–3. Please clarify how many Evaluation Factors there are.

Please see amendment A001 to RFQ #6982AF25R000016.

3. The RFQ requires submission of both an SF-330 and a written response to the Evaluation Factors. Evaluation

Factor 2 (Personnel Qualifications) and Evaluation

Factor 3 (Past Performance) correspond directly to information requested in SF-330 Section E (Resumes of Key Personnel) and Section F (Example Projects

Which Best Illustrate Proposed Team’s Qualifications for this Contract), respectively. In fact, Evaluation

Factor 2 specifically states, “The Firm shall submit these qualifications using the Standard Form 330 (SF-

330), clearly demonstrating each individual’s capability to perform the required construction inspection services and to meet all performance expectations associated with the contract.” How are these two responses (the information provided in the

SF-330 and the information provided in the

Evaluation Factor narrative) supposed to be different or similar? Should the Evaluation Factor narrative response reiterate what is stated in the corresponding

SF-330 section?

The narrative responses serve as a supplement to the structured data in the SF 330. Firms are to address all evaluation items within the SF 330 while providing the information in the sequence required by Attachment A.

Written responses to the Evaluation Factors should be included alongside the SF 330 as part of a single, integrated qualifications package.

4. Should the written responses to the Evaluation Factors be provided as a separate document, or included

Written responses to the Evaluation Factors should be included alongside the SF 330 as part of a single, integrated within the SF-330 as Section H - Additional

Information? Also, is the Attachment A chart intended to be included in the submission as a cover sheet for the Evaluation Factor response?

qualifications package. Firms may input information deemed necessary into SF 330 Section H – Additional

Information. The Attachment A chart is intended to be included in your submission, but it functions more as a navigational index or reference table rather than just a cover sheet.

5. How many proposed staff does CFLHD expect to see included in Section E of the SF-330? Is there a target range or minimum/maximum number of personnel the

Government prefers for COTAs and/or CIs?

The Government does not provide a specific target range or a numerical minimum/maximum for the number of personnel to be included in Section E of the SF 330. Firms should offer sufficient staff to meet the requirements of

CFLHD.

6. On Page 20 of the RFQ , it states that “documentation submitted to identify contracts will not be counted toward the total page limit.” Can you clarify what type of documentation this refers to and/or what CFLHD is expecting to see as far as this documentation?

While your written narrative responses for up to ten (10) projects will count toward the 50-page limit, the actual

CPARS reports or equivalent performance documentation from non-federal agencies will not count toward that total.

This allows you to provide full, unedited performance reports to validate your experience without sacrificing space for your technical qualifications.

7. Can you also please confirm when responses to questions are anticipated to be issued?

Please see RFQ Section 4.6. Communications.

8. Is there any incumbent/recompete or this is a brand-new project? If yes, could you please provide us with their award number or even if the customer bought similar services in the past.

Please see https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/business/ae-services/contract-holders for information regarding incumbent contract holders.

Questions received on 4/15/2026

9. Our firm intends to submit a proposal under this solicitation as a Joint Venture formed pursuant to an

SBA-approved Mentor-Protégé Agreement. The

Mentor-Protégé Agreement will remain active through the proposal submission date but is scheduled to expire prior to contract award. Can you please confirm whether the Joint Venture will still be considered eligible and evaluated as a small business under the

Mentor-Protégé Program for this procurement, provided it was properly certified and compliant at the time of proposal submission?

Please see 13 C.F.R. § 121.404 and applicable rules for the

SBA Mentor-Protégé program.

10. With our acknowledgement of amendments, do we include only the first page (SF 30 form) in our submittal, or would you like the entire document included? (e.g., Amendment 1 - 80 pages).

Firms should include the signed first page of Standard

Form 30 for each amendment to acknowledge receipt, rather than the entire amendment package.

11. Do amendments have a mandatory location in the document, or is their placement at our discretion?

There is no mandated location for the placement of amendments within your submission.

12. Section 3.2 Submission Format, 3.2.3 (pg 11). In the list of pages that do not count toward the 50 pages, please advise if the following can be included with our

The RFQ specifically excludes cover letter, tab dividers, amendments to this RFQ, and back cover. Additionally, supporting materials in an appendix, such as maps, graphs, and charts, are excluded.

https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/business/ae-services/contract-holders https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/business/ae-services/contract-holders submittal and whether or not they count towards the

50 page count:

-Graphical Cover

-Table of Contents

13. Attachment A - Evaluation Factors Form (pg. 17)

Does Attachment A have a mandatory location in the document, or is its placement at our discretion?

There is no mandated location for Attachment A within your submission.

14. Evaluation Factor 3 asks to provide a list of up to ten

(10) construction inspection services contracts awarded to the firm and completed within the past six

(6) years. Does the 6-year requirement apply only to the completion date?

Yes. The completion date must fall within the six-year window preceding the proposal due date.

15. Can SF 330 Part IIs be excluded from the page limit? No. SF 330 Part II cannot be excluded from the page limit.

Part II will be excluded towards the 50-page limit.

16. In Attachment A, Evaluation Factor 3 asks to provide

“15. Past performance documentation from the client agency.” Many client agencies do not provide this information. Would a client letter of recommendation for staff who worked on that project be acceptable?

Individual staff letters of recommendation do not fulfill the requirements for Past Performance documentation under

Evaluation Factor 3.

Questions received on 4/16/2026

17. The RFP Attachment A, Evaluation Factor 3, says

“Provide a list of up to ten (10) construction inspection services contracts awarded to the firm and completed within the past six (6) years…”. (Underline added for emphasis). Please verify that individual

Task Orders under IDIQ Contracts qualify as a

“contract” in this context.

Yes. For the purposes of Evaluation Factor 3, the

Government will consider individual Task Orders issued under an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract or Master Service Agreement (MSA) as separate

“contracts.” Offerors should ensure that each Task Order listed includes its own unique project description, specific dollar value, and a completion date within the required six-year period.

18. The RFP Attachment A, Evaluation Factor 3, asks for

15 pieces of information for each project. It also states," Documentation submitted to identify contracts will not be counted toward the total page limit."

Please clarify if items 1-15 will not be included in the

50-page count? Should this additional material be submitted on the SF330Section F pages or in the separate appendix that will not be included toward the maximum page count?

The 15 required data points for each project (e.g., project name, value, dates, etc.) are considered part of the core evaluation criteria and will count toward the 50-page limit if included in Section F of the SF330. However, "documentation" such as actual contract awards, CPARS reports, or project completion certificates submitted to verify those 15 points will be considered "supporting documentation" and will not count toward the page limit.

These should be placed in a separate, clearly labeled

Appendix.

19. RFP section 3.2.4 states “All documentation should be in an 8.5 x 11 inch electronic format…”. Can the

Origination Chart, which is required to be included as an attachment in 3.2.5, be presented in an 11 x 17 inch electronic format?

Please adhere to the requirement specified in RFQ Section

3.2.4.

Questions received on 4/17/2026

20. Does CFLHD want to see SF 330 Section E Resumes only for the prime firm, or should subcontractor resumes be included as well?

Please see instructions for SF 330, Part I, Section E.

21. Similarly, for SF 330 Section F Example Projects, does CFLHD want to see projects only performed by the prime firm, or those performed by subcontractors?

The Government intends to evaluate the qualifications and experience of the entire proposed team in accordance with

SF 330. Accordingly, Section F example projects may be performed by the prime firm, joint-venture partners, or key subcontractors to demonstrate the collective capability of the team. The evaluation of operational capacity will similarly consider the total size of the workforce, inclusive of both prime and subcontracted personnel.

22. I understand the prime has to fill out SF 330 Part IIs for each branch office that will be involved in performing the work. Do subcontractors also have to provide?

Yes. Please see instructions in SF 330.

23. Section 3.2 Submission Format, 3.2.3 (pg 11). In this statement, “Please note that SF 330s are not required for all subcontractors, subconsultants, or joint venture partners.”

Please confirm that all you want from our subconsultants are their names to appear on SF330

Part I, Section C, Blocks 9,10 and 11, Section D

Organization Chart, and by name, brief company description, and resources in the Evaluation Factor criteria responses in Section H?

The Government requires a separate SF 330 Part II for every firm and branch office performing a key role on the proposed team. Subconsultants must be formally identified in Part ISection C. Proposal Team. Additionally, subconsultant personnel must be included in Part I, Section

D. Organizational Chart of Proposed Team andPart I, Section EResumes of Key Personnel Proposed for this

Contract, to demonstrate technical qualifications. You must also account for subcontracted personnel when describing your firm's total operational capacity under Evaluation

Factor 1.

24. Section 3.2 Submission Format, 3.2.3 (pg 11). In this statement, “Please note that SF 330s are not required for all subcontractors, subconsultants, or joint venture partners.”

Do you require an SF 330 Part II for our subconsultants? If so, are theirs and the prime firm’s

SF 330 Part II included in the page count?

Please see response to Question #22.

All portions of the SF 330, including the Part IIs for the prime and subcontractors, are included in the 50-page limit.

25. Additional Services and Other Classifications (OC)

RFQ Section 2.1.3 Additional Services: Are the additional services described in this paragraph considered “Other Classifications (OC)” as define in

Section 2.5? Is it our discretion what positions we define as OC, such as, Scheduler Reviewers, Corporate Contract Manager (CCM), Off-site Project

Office Assistant?

The Additional Services defined in Section 2.1.3 are categorized as Other Classifications (OC), with specific qualifications established on a case-by-case basis per individual Task Order. Evaluation Factor 2 requires the submission of professional qualifications specifically for

COTA, CI-I, and CI-II positions. Corporate or administrative roles cannot be defined as OCs and must be treated as indirect overhead costs rather than direct contract charges.

26. Evaluation Factor (EF) #3 – Attachment A

Per the SF 330 instructions*, it states that projects can be ongoing and a narrative is required to explain the completion status; however, EF #3 states instruction state the projects have to be COMPLETED in the past

6 years. Please confirm if we can include ongoing projects in SF330 Part F and in our response to EF #3.

*SF 330 Section F Instructions Year Completed. Enter the year completed of the professional services (such as planning, engineering study, design, or surveying), and/or the year completed of construction, if applicable. If any of the professional services or the construction projects are not complete, leave Year

Completed blank and indicate the status in Brief

Description of Project and Relevance to this Contract

(block 24).

While the standard SF 330 instructions permit ongoing projects, Evaluation Factor 3 of this solicitation specifically requires contracts that were completed within the past six years. Therefore, all projects submitted for this factor must demonstrate a final completion date within that window to satisfy the requirement for successful performance.

Questions received on 4/20/2026

27. Evaluation Factor (EF) #3 – Attachment A

Do the 10 projects have to be AWARDED in the past

6 years or just completed in the past 6 years?

Please see response to Question # 14.

Questions received on 4/22/2026

28. RFI dated 4.15.26, Q&A #3 and 4. Please clarify

"alongside the SF330 as part of a single integrated qualifications package". Is Attachment A. Evaluation

Factors response to be provided as a separate document? If it is intended to be a separate document, is it included in the 50-page submission limit?

Your submission must be in electronic file format that includes both the Standard Form 330 (Parts I and II) and your written responses to the Evaluation Factors.

Questions received on 4/24/2026

29. RFP, Attachment A, Evaluation Factor 1 says: “Identify the number of staff who currently hold Professional Engineer (PE) licenses, and specify the Engineering Firm License, Certificate of

Authorization, or other state-issued approval that permits the Firm to practice architecture and engineering (A&E). Include the license number(s) and the state(s) of issuance.” (Bold and

Underlining added for emphasis)

Please provide both the license number and State of

Issuance for all Employees, Engineering Firms and Subs if applicable.

Questions Received on 4/27/2026

30. For the Construction Inspection Services RFQ, Evaluation Factor 3 – Past Performance requires

CPARS. If CPARs are not available what should be provided in lieu of?

Provide relevant past performance for projects performed commercially as applicable for this RFQ.

31. Is there a PPQ available? Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) has been added as an attachment to the RFQ.

Questions Received on 4/29/2026

32. The amendment to this solicitation (SF 30) requires acknowledgment in Block 19 of the SF 1442. Please provide the executed SF 1442 for inclusion with our submission.

Reference to the SF 1442 has been removed from the SF

30. Please acknowledge the amendment itself.

33. To address the evaluation factors, do we duplicate sections E and F in section H or just provide added write ups?

Please follow the procedures as stated in the RFQ and SF

330.

34. In the Q&A document posted on 4/24, the Answer to

Question 25 states "The Additional Services defined in Section 2.1.3 are categorized as Other

Classifications (OC), with specific qualifications established on a case-by-case basis per individual

Task Order. Evaluation Factor 2 requires the submission of professional qualifications specifically for COTA, CI-I, and CI-II positions. Corporate or administrative roles cannot be defined as OCs and must be treated as indirect overhead costs rather than direct contract charges."

Evaluation Factor 2 requires resumes for the COTA, CI-I, and CI-II positions to evaluate technical competence.

Would you prefer resumes provided only for the

COTA, CI-I, and CI-II positions, or would you allow a firm to submit resumes for additional staff, such as

Corporate Contract Manager (CCM), hiring, and training?

Questions Received on 4/30/2026

35. We understand the back cover is excluded from the page count. Please confirm whether the front cover of submittal (different from the cover letter) is included in the 50-page limit.

Cover pages are excluded from the 50-page limit.

36. With the number of questions asked to date and additional information required (specifically Past

Performance forms), we would like to request an extension for the due date.

The response due date will not be extended.

37. Response to Question #35 stated that a cover page is excluded from the 50-page limit. However, Amendment No. 2 , paragraph 3.2.4, does not have that indicated. Do we go by what the question response is or by the updated RFQ in Amendment No.

2?

Please see RFQ paragraph 3.2.3.

38. Past Performance Questionnaire.

Does this form get sent to the references for each of the 10 projects identified in SF 330 Section F or just ones we choose?

Are we to indicate in our response which references we have requested for a performance review?

Please see RFQ pages 19 and 20, Evaluation Factor 3 –

Past Performance.

39. To address the 15 items for Evaluation Factor 3 (Q&A response #3), is it permissible to expand the one-page form of the SF 330 Section F to be 2 pages, as long as we consider them to be part of the overall 50-page count?

Follow the instructions in Attachment A.

40. In our questions submitted on 4-20-2026, I’ve reviewed the latest round of Q&As and did not see a response to Q1 below.

Q1. Font and Size Requirements

Section 3.2.4. We understand that the Evaluation

Factor responses require a minimum of 10 pt. Times

New Roman. Is it permissible to use smaller font sizes and font types for charts, maps, tables, organization chart, photo captions, Part H headings, and headers/footers?

No.

41. I submitted four questions on 4/15/26 but have not seen a response to my question #2. I have brought that question forward for your consideration. The other questions I submitted have been answered by responses to similar questions in the Q&A documents to date.

2. Are proposers allowed to recreate the Attachment A

- Evaluation Factors form for ease of incorporation?

Follow the instructions in Attachment A.

NOTE: All questions must be sent to the appropriate email address stated in the RFQ for them to be considered and answered. Unauthorized communication with Government employees may disqualify your response to the

RFQ.