B08_Government Answers to Industry Questions 13 MAY 2026.pdf

Question Number

Government Q&A Release to Industry Draft Solicitation Reference Industry Question Government Answer

1 26-Sep-25 Section M, 1.1

Referring to Section M, Paragraph 1.1, which states the Government intends to award to "all qualified firms": Is there an anticipated number of awards for this Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC), or is the intention truly to award a contract to every Offeror that meets the Minimum Technical Threshold Rating (MTTR) and other qualifications as outlined?

The Government intends to award to all offerors who meet the Minimum Technical Threshold Rating.

2 26-Sep-25 If an Offeror exceeds the minimum Highest Technically Rated Offeror (HTRO) points, does that mean the Offeror will be determined a MATOC qualified company?

If the Government's evaluation determines an offeror meets the MTTR, it will be qualified for the MATOC pool.

3 26-Sep-25

Will the Government require certified cost and pricing data since the draft Request for Proposal (RFP) states that all task orders will be competed and awarded FFP. Will the Government be omitting references to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Cost Accounting Standards clauses in the solicitation since it would appear they meet the exception at 48 CFR 9903.201-1(b)(15)?

The Government will not require certified cost and pricing data when applicable exceptions exist IAW FAR 15.403-1(b). The Government intends to include FAR Cost Accounting Standards clauses in the solicitation to account for scenarios where efforts are issued with a contract type other than Firm-Fixed- Price or if inadequate competition existed among at least two responsible offerors competing independently.

4 26-Sep-25 Section F

The draft Request for Proposal (RFP) does not include liability and other standard clauses typically included when FAR 52.211-12 (Liquidated Damages - Construction) is required.

By requiring the Contractor to address these risks, the cost to Government can significantly increase due to additional contingencies and/or insurance. Does the Government plan to include standard FAR liability clauses such as 52.246-23 Limitation of Liability, 52.246-25 Limitation of Liability – Services, 52.246-24 LOL High Value Items (and Alt 1), and 52.249-14 Excusable Delays?

FAR 52.246-23, 52.246-24 and 52.246-25 are not applicable to Construction and Architecture & Engineering Services contracts. FAR 52.249-14 Excusable Delays has been included in the revised draft RFP that will be made available to industry in the near future.

5 26-Sep-25 Section L, 2.2.2.2 Section M, 2.2.2.1

The draft RFP states, “…The Offerors shall receive points for the project provided in Subfactor 1 in which multiple subcontractors were used.” Please confirm that this should be “Element 1” and not Subfactor 1.

The evaluation criteria has been updated to correct the terminology in this section; the updated draft solicitation will be released via SAM.gov in the near future.

6 26-Sep-25 L Will the Government be revising the RFP to ensure the RFP reflects sequential numbering (e.g., the first section under Section 5 is 5.3 (instead of 5.1)?

The Government has updated the RFP to correct this issue. The updated draft RFP will be released to industry in the near future.

7 26-Sep-25 Who will manage the execution of projects post-award? Project Lead Joint Services will oversee execution of the effort following award in conjunction with Army Contracting Command - Rock Island overseeing contractual requirements.

8 26-Sep-25 PLJS is the owner, but who will process pre-bid RFI’s, approve submittals, support commissioning & red team reviews & prep for functional performance testing requirements?

PL JS will oversee commissioning and red team review, and will prepare for functional performance testing requirements. Army Contracting Command - Rock Island will process pre-bid RFI’s and approve submittals after consulting with PL JS technical personnel.

9 26-Sep-25 Solicitation, Section A and B

The Government has only listed Firm Fixed Price Contract Line-Item Number (CLIN);

however, in the draft Scope of Work sent out in February 2025, the Government was contemplating other contract types, to include Cost plus Incentive/Fixed Fee. Is the Government still planning to include other contract types, such as Cost plus incentive/fixed fee or Time and Materials CLINs?

The Government will maintain the ability to award fixed-price and cost-type actions depending on the project scope and complexity under the MATOC. The reference to only firm-fixed-price at the Contract Line Item Number within the solicitation is due to a contract writing system limitation; however, a narrative has been added within the RFP Sections A and B to clarify this.

10 26-Sep-25 SF-33, Part I, B

Since PHA requirements often evolve during design development and may require multiple iterations with regulatory agencies, will the Government ensure usage of cost-reimbursable pricing as the most appropriate for the PHA development phase – followed by FFP for certain well defined construction scopes with mature design and low uncertainty – to better manage the inherent scope uncertainties?

The Government cannot commit to contract type; contract type will be determined based upon project scope and complexity at the task order level.

11 26-Sep-25 SF-33, Part I, B Is the Government planning to include FAR 52.216-4 Economic Price Adjustment clauses tied to indices such as the Producer Price Index (PPI) given the potential for volatile material costs derailing budgets?

The Government has included the Economic Price Adjustment (EPA) clause in the base MATOC. The specific terms and items subject to EPA will be determined at the task order level on a case-by-case basis.

12 26-Sep-25 Section L, 5.4.3 through 5.4 11 Section M, 2.2.2.3 through 2.2.2.11

The draft RFP states, “The Offeror shall receive points for projects in which they were the Prime Contractor or a Major Subcontractor…” Please confirm that these projects do not have to be the same as those provided for Element 1.

The projects cited in subsequent elements do not have to be the same projects provided for Element 1.

13 26-Sep-25 L & M Can the Government clarify if there are any penalties for reusing projects across multiple elements. E.g., if Project XYZ is cited under both Element 3 and Element 5, will this result in fewer points than if two separate projects were cited?

A single contract reference may be submitted to fulfill multiple past experience elements if the reference adequately meets the criteria without penalty. Conversely, multiple contract references may be submitted to address applicable past experience.

14 26-Sep-25 Section L, 5.4 Subfactor 2 Section M, 2.2 Factor 1 Subfactor 2

Can a single contract reference be submitted and counted for multiple experience elements (e.g., a project involving energetic materials, hazardous waste, and environmental permitting) if it clearly meets the criteria for each respective element? Or, must each submitted contract reference be unique to only one specific experience element?

A single contract reference may be submitted to fulfill multiple past experience elements if the reference adequately meets the criteria. Conversely, multiple contract references may be submitted to address applicable past experience.

15 26-Sep-25 Section L, 5.4 Would ACC-RI consider extending Subfactor 2 – Prior Experience to projects that may not be 100% complete, but have achieved and can demonstrate completion of one or more of Elements 2 through 11?

The Government will only consider projects that have been 100% completed (completion meaning the project has been designed, built, commissioned, and accepted by the user).

17 26-Sep-25

The draft RFP states, “The Offeror shall receive points for projects in which they were the Prime Contractor or major subcontractor (performing at least 40% of the work) for a design-build, construction, and commissioning project…” Please clarify whether this is 40% of either the design, construction, or commissioning scope value (not all three scope elements), or 40% of the total constructed contract value (inclusive of all three scope elements).

The 40% threshold is for the total contract value for all scope elements.

18 26-Sep-25 L & M Is the Government open to lowering the 40% threshold so that companies with design experience may be considered that would otherwise have difficulty meeting the 40% threshold?

The evaluation criteria has been updated to include a separate design element. The 40% threshold for other applicable elements has remained unchanged.

19 26-Sep-25 L & M Is this a billion dollar bonding or 500 million or 750 million? What are you looking for in terms of a bond ability letter from the bidders? Will interim bonding capacity extensions be permissible during proposal validity periods?

Offerors must have the ability to bond at $200M for a single project and an aggregate capacity of $500M to be eligible for the MATOC pool. Documentation regarding approved bond capacity from the surety company is sufficient. The Government will allow interim bonding capacity extensions while proposal periods remain open.

20 26-Sep-25 Does the USG expect the bonding requirement to carry over to the final RFP? A bonding requirement will be included in the final RFP.

21 26-Sep-25 L Will the Final RFP reflect that non-U.S. projects will be allowed if they comply with U.S.

safety / export standards, as verified by Defense Attaché office?

The evaluation criteria has been updated to clarify when Outside the Continental United States (OCONUS) project references may be submitted (Factor 2 Elements 1-8, 11-13). The Government will not accept OCONUS projects for Factor 2 Element 9, Factor 2 Element 10 or Factor 3.

22 26-Sep-25 L, 5.4.8 (Element 8)

Referring to Section L, Paragraph 5.4.8, Element 8 - 'Contracts Involving the Use of Foreign Technology': We request that the last sentence of this element (Only domestic contract references may be utilized for this element.) be removed or clarified. The current wording of this sentence may inadvertently restrict the types of relevant major infrastructure projects that can be submitted, potentially excluding valuable experience.

Removing or clarifying this sentence would allow for a broader and more relevant demonstration of capabilities in major infrastructure.

Only domestic contract references are authorized for this element as the intent is to assess experience with integrating foreign technology into domestic facilities and compliance with all export/import laws and regulations.

23 26-Sep-25 L, 5.4.10, (Element 10)

Will the Government consider expanding the scope of this element to include experience at similar highly hazardous industrial or manufacturing facilities (e.g., chemical plants, ordnance facilities, nuclear facilities) that present comparable safety, regulatory, and operational challenges? Will the Government consider revising Element 10 completely to be inclusive of all Military Construction (MILCON) work/programs.

The Government has revised this element to reflect Prime Contractor or Subcontractor at Government- Owned Industrial Facility. The evaluation criteria does not restrict references based on the type of funding utilized for the project.

24 26-Sep-25 Will the Government be expanding the selection criteria beyond production to include the capabilities beyond mission support requirements to further include the infrastructure?

The evaluation criteria has been updated to include an element for utilities and infrastructure. The updated draft RFP will be released to industry in the near future.

25 26-Sep-25 Will the Government evaluate other projects that are relevant, but not ammunition centric? Project references are not required to be ammunition-centric, so long as they meet the criteria of the element they are being proposed under.

26 26-Sep-25 SF-33, Part I, B

Element 1 lists infrastructure disciplines but excludes natural gas / telecom interfaces.

Contractors with non-listed interfaces lose points despite equivalent complexity. Will the Government release an expanded range of relevant infrastructure disciplines, to include natural gas, steam, and telecom in the final RFP?

The intent is not to exclude specific infrastructure disciplines or types of projects. Element 1: Prime Contractor/Major Subcontractor Experience has been revised to include Natural Gas, Steam, and Telecommunications interfaces.

27 26-Sep-25

Will the Government consider expanding the eligible North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) Codes to include general construction codes in order to allow participation from additional qualified teams with relevant large-scale industrial and government facility experience?

The Government has updated the evaluation criteria to expand the eligible NAICS codes for applicable elements. This information was revealed in the Government's released of an updated HTRO Matrix on September 12, 2025 via SAM.gov.

28 26-Sep-25 L

It is unclear how Offerors can determine whether a NAICS code is "equivalent" to those specified in the DRFP. We request that the final RFP include a list of pre-approved NAICS codes, or instructions for how an Offeror can assess whether a NAICS code is sufficiently relevant to the MATOC's scope of work.

The Government has updated the evaluation criteria with expanded eligible NAICS codes for applicable elements. Please refer to the updated Highest Technically Rated Offeror Matrix released via SAM.gov on September 12, 2025.

29 26-Sep-25 M, 2.2.2.1 Element 1

Will the Government give the same consideration and importance as US Engineering Certifications to OCONUS professional engineering certifications, provided they are recognized by the relevant jurisdiction and demonstrate equivalent standards to US certifications, when evaluating the qualifications and experience of proposed personnel?

The Government seeks contract references and a description of the project, not the professional engineering certifications. An offeror will need to have an engineer on each project who is certified and permitted to certify/stamp drawings. If an offeror desires engineers from a foreign company to be permitted to sign off/stamp documents in the United States, the engineer will need appropriate certifications.

30 26-Sep-25 Under the definition of subcontractor – will the offerors be allowed to leverage a lead Designer of Record (DOR) role if a teaming agreement is provided as proof of commitment to the offeror team?

Yes, offerors may leverage the experience of a lead Designer of Record role as part of their proposed team if offerors have references that meet the evaluation criteria. The evaluation criteria has been updated to clarify the definition of an offeror, as well as add an evaluation element specific to design.

31 26-Sep-25 Will the Government consider including a definition of 'Offeror' so that it explicitly states that it encompasses the full proposing team, including the Prime Contractor and its key subcontractors.

The evaluation criteria has been updated to clarify the definition of an offeror. At the time of this Q&A attachment release, the definition of ‘Offeror’ includes the Prime Contractor tendering its proposal and the Prime Contractor's team of parent, affiliate companies, and subcontractors for the MATOC effort for whom the Prime Contractor possesses binding Letters of Commitment from major subcontractors (major subcontractor defined as performing greater than or equal to 40% of the contracted work based on total contract value). In the event of any inconsistency in definitions or information provided between this Q&A attachment and the subsequent release of the final RFP, the final RFP shall contain the final definitions and information.

32 26-Sep-25 L & M May Offerors be permitted to cite the performance of their subsidiaries and/or parent companies, provided that the Offeror (contractor) has access to and use of the same corporate personnel and resources?

Yes, offerors may cite the past experience of their subsidiaries, parent or affiliated companies, Joint Ventures, and major subcontractors for whom the Prime Contractor possesses binding Letters of Commitment.

33 26-Sep-25 L & M Will Offerors as part of a joint venture responsible for ≥40% of the work on a project be permitted to explicitly cite the project in its proposal? Yes.

34 26-Sep-25 Is there a limit to the number of subcontractors that can be included in a proposal to qualify for a MATOC award? No.

35 26-Sep-25 Can a Prime use a subcontract partner’s reference project contract?

Yes, an Offeror may use a subcontract partner’s reference project contracts except for project references reflecting achievement of small business subcontracting goals. The small business component may only reflect achievement of small business subcontracting goals related to the Prime Contractor.

36 26-Sep-25 Is the intent of the MATOC effort to allow bidding companies to perform as the prime on the program and not necessarily allow the GOCO operating contractor to be the prime and sub out work to companies like us?

It is the intent of the MATOC to establish a pool of qualified contractors who will then be eligible to bid on MATOC projects as the Prime Contractor at GOCO facilities.

37 26-Sep-25 Can you use the same contract example for multiple criteria?

Yes. However, note that Factor 2 Element 9, Factor 2 Element 10, and Factor 3 are specific to CONUS past experience whereas the other elements allow for OCONUS experience. Factor 3 Small Business also only applies to the past experience of the Prime Contractor whereas others relate to the offeror team.

38 26-Sep-25 Section L, 5.4 Would ACC-RI consider extending Subfactor 2 – Prior Experience to projects that were completed within fifteen years of the issuance of the solicitation?

The Government has updated the Request for Proposal (RFP) to reflect that past experience may include projects completed (completion meaning building/project is built, commissioned, and accepted by the user) within the past 15 years.

40 26-Sep-25 What is the estimated timeline for release of the Final RFP? The final RFP is planned for release in October/November 2025.

41 26-Sep-25 Is the Government considering Other Transactional Authorities (OTA) for better contracting on this type of project?

The Government is considering the use of Other Transactional Authorities (OTA) to execute industrial base modernization requirements; however, all task orders issued under this MATOC will be FAR-based.

42 26-Sep-25 Do you have any Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) requirements at these facilities? No.

43 26-Sep-25 Does the Government plan to offer or outline any MATOC IDIQ post-award plans for on-boarding (new) or off-boarding (under-performing) qualified performers?

No, the Government will not include options for on-boarding or off-boarding contractors under this Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC).

44 26-Sep-25 SOW, paragraph 1.4 Will the Government facilitate discussions with the Operating Contractor(s) to fully engage and support the MATOC Contractor at the proposal stage to ensure the requirements of PWS 1.4 can be met during program execution?

The Government is currently assessing the path forward regarding most effectively engaging Government-Owned Contractor-Operated (GOCO) Operating Contractors (OC) with MATOC Contractors.

45 26-Sep-25 Section L, 5.4.11, Environmental Permitting Section M, 2.2.2.11

Do provisional environmental permits or post-award permit modifications to existing permits for air or water due to a change in operations or to meet new local, state or federal regulations qualify, provided they were finalized before contract completion? Is the Government open to revising Element 13 to not only reflect environmental permits but to include modification of existing permits?

Factor 2 Element 13 has been updated to include modification of existing permits for air and/or water.

46 26-Sep-25 Are you open to submission of comparable private-industry projects in our response to this solicitation?

Yes, the Government does intend to allow for submission of comparable private-industry projects unless specifically stated otherwise in our MATOC evaluation criteria (such as Factor 2 Element 12 - Prime Contractor or Subcontractor at Government-Owned Industrial Facility).

47 26-Sep-25 L & M Will the Final RFP allow for a combination of design, build, and/or commissioning projects / contracts?

Yes, Government intends to utilize design-build or bid-build models, and reserves the right to use any other delivery method authorized by law and regulation.

48 26-Sep-25 SF-33, Part I, B Will the Army revise the SOW to include alternate contract types and fee structures for more complex modernization projects?

The Government reserves the right to select the contract type deemed most advantageous to the Government taking into consideration the complexity of the project as part of determining the contact type. The contract type for each project will be specified at the task order level. The draft RFP has been updated to reflect the Government's position and will be shared with industry in the near future.

49 26-Sep-25 Understanding there will be no ‘design-only’ work, is the RFP intended to solely be DB vs.

DBB?

The Government intends to utilize design-build or bid-build models, and reserves the right to use any other delivery method authorized by law and regulation.

50 26-Sep-25 What is the exact role or intent of the RFP? Is this Design-Build or Construction Services?

The intent of the GOCO Design, Build and Commissioning MATOC RFP is to solicit proposals in order to establish a pool of highly qualified contractors to execute design-build or bid-build projects at all seven GOCO locations.

51 26-Sep-25 What is the breakout going to look like between infrastructure work and munitions process manufacturing projects?

Task orders under the MATOC may include infrastructure and manufacturing process related projects;

however, a specific breakout is unable to be provided at this time.

52 26-Sep-25 When would you anticipate having the first project? Second quarter of Government Fiscal Year 2026.

53 26-Sep-25 What defines when PLJS will use the MATOC versus the operating contractor or USACE?

The Government's goal is to compete as many GOCO modernization projects as possible under the MATOC, however that does not preclude USACE or GOCO OC from receiving projects. The Government reserves the right to use the MATOC, work with the GOCO OC, or work with USACE.

54 26-Sep-25 Will projects include MILCON only or will it include SRM from the non-production line process?

Funding for project executed under this MATOC will be Procurement of Ammunition, Army (PAA), however scopes of efforts on this project will be inclusive of large new facility construction as well as smaller O&M type requirements.

55 26-Sep-25 Will the Government provide a project forecast with the final solicitation?

The list of projects/forecast is currently under review. This information may not be available for release with the final solicitation; however, the Government is committed to improving transparency in forecasting requirements.

56 26-Sep-25 Are projects tied to the ‘production process’ able to be offered on this MATOC? Yes.

57 26-Sep-25 Is the Government reviewing the same annual budget as reflected in a 2025-2029 budget slide with the largest spending anticipated in 2027 as presented during Industry Day in February 2025?

Those amounts were based upon the President’s Budget submission, dated March 2024. The Administration released its 2026 Department of War Budget in June 2025. The modernization program funding was increased to $1.08B. The new budget documents do not include estimates for funding levels in FY27-31, so we’re not able to validate out-year funding levels.

58 26-Sep-25 This is a high priority for the Army and it’s an expectation from industry that you are moving forward with those type of numbers as a minimum. Understanding the money circulates down from congress. Is it likely to see this investment increased?

This effort remains a high priority for the Army, Joint Program Executive Office Armaments & Ammunition, and Army Contracting Command - Rock Island. The potential exists for increased future investments under this MATOC.

59 26-Sep-25 Solicitation, Narrative A0001, 2(e) Will this allow awardees to recoup proposal costs? No, the Government will not reimburse offerors for proposal costs.

60 26-Sep-25 Will the Government consider revising the RFP to include both a large and a small project pool to create opportunity for small business participation for the MATOC IDIQ competition?

A separate small project pool will not be established under the MATOC; however, small business goals will be included with each task order to support small business participation.

61 26-Sep-25 Section L, Paragraph 6.3 Section M, Paragraph 2.3 Will the Government clarify how OCONUS projects will be reconciled with SB/SDB goal achievement?

The evaluation criteria has been updated to identify that only CONUS project references will be allowed for the small business factor. The updated draft RFP will be released to industry in the near future.

62 26-Sep-25 Due to the unique nature and complexity of the requirements anticipated under MATOC, will the Government reconsider the requirement for meeting specific SB/SDB goals under this MATOC, or consider removing it from the evaluation scoring?

The Government will maintain the requirement to achieve small business goals and encourages industry to provide feedback on what the small business percentages should be.

63 26-Sep-25 Section L, 2.3.1.2.7 Section M, 2.3.1

Will the Government consider allowing offerors to submit separate, relevant contract references for the Small Business Factor that specifically demonstrate their success in achieving small business goals, independent of the contracts used to demonstrate the overall team's technical experience?

The evaluation criteria has been updated to allow separate (CONUS) contract references for the small business factor.

64 26-Sep-25 Section L, 6.3 Section M, 2.3

What is the Government's overall strategy or broader expectation for small business participation on this MATOC?

The Government expects contractors to meet the small business goals outlined in the RFP and any subsequent task orders.

65 26-Sep-25 M

Factor 2 scoring, as described in M2.3.1, appears to award all-or-nothing points for small business goals. Under this interpretation / wording, contractors achieving 95% of their small business goals over the duration of a cited project would receive no credit, penalizing substantial compliance. Will the Government adopt proportional scoring (e.g., 100 points per each 25% averaged project small business goal tier attainment - 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%) to recognize partial compliance?

Only completed (completion meaning the project has been designed, built, commissioned, and accepted by the user) projects may be referenced, however the scoring criteria has been revised so more points may be earned via each eligible small business reference than provided in a previous version of the HTRO Matrix. The Prime Contractor may submit up to four (4) CONUS contract references demonstrating successful achievement of small business subcontracting goals for domestic projects within the prior 15 years. The Government will verify achievement of small business goals via satisfactory annual Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) ratings for the Small Business CPARS element for each year of the contract. These contract references may be the same but do not need to be the same as those provided for other factors. Contract references for the Prime Contractor’s subcontractors or affiliates will not be accepted.

66 26-Sep-25 L & M

How does the 10-year requirement apply to small business project references? Is the intention in L.6.3 to reiterate the existing / overarching 10-year recency window established in Factor 1, OR is there a unique requirement for Factor 2: Small Business that must be met?

The Prime Contractor may submit up to four (4) CONUS contract references demonstrating successful achievement of small business subcontracting goals for domestic projects within the prior 15 years.

The Government will verify achievement of small business goals via satisfactory annual Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) ratings for the Small Business CPARS element for each year of the contract. These contract references may be the same but do not need to be the same as those provided for other factors. Contract references for the Prime Contractor’s subcontractors or affiliates will not be accepted.

67 26-Sep-25 L & M Will both domestic and international projects be permissible for Factor 2, Small Business? Only domestic project references will be permissible for the small business factor.

68 26-Sep-25 Is a small business set-aside being offered as part of this effort? No.

69 26-Sep-25 Will commercial projects be eligible for submission under the small business factor? No.

70 26-Sep-25 Will small business goals be established at the program level or at the task order level? Baseline small business goals are established at the base contract level. These goals may be increased or further refined at the task order level depending on the project.

71 26-Sep-25 Will small business carry over to the final RFP? The small business evaluation criteria will be included in the final RFP.

72 26-Sep-25 Section M, 1.1

What recourse or clarification process is available to Offerors if there is a significant discrepancy between their self-score and the Government's assessed score? Will the Government provide a rationale or explanation for any corrections made to an Offeror's self-score?

The Government intends to award without discussions; evaluation findings will be provided to offerors in post-award debriefings IAW FAR 15.506.

73 26-Sep-25 M Will offerors receive pre-award debriefings on scoring corrections (adjustments) with an opportunity to submit supplemental documentation, should it be necessary to clarify or correct scoring?

The Government does not intend to provide pre-award debriefings regarding HTRO ratings or hold discussions prior to award. The Government intends to complete post-award debriefings in accordance with FAR 15.506.

74 26-Sep-25 Does the Government intend to conduct discussions prior to award of the MATOC? No.

75 26-Sep-25 4.5.6 The Government's RFP documentation stated “may require to maintain a site office within a certain radius of the facility.” Does this mean having job site trailers like a local footprint by the project leadership where the team is on site?

The scope has been updated to eliminate this requirement.

76 26-Sep-25 Will this contract be design-build or design-bid-build? There would be no design-only work procured under the MATOC. Projects will be design-build or bid-build.

77 26-Sep-25

Usually there is an initial design charrette which reviews a form of design that’s generated and started and a room datasheet that’s entered and we have a framework of what to base the bid. Is it likely you could work with an A&E services contract that’s been awarded for task orders?

The goal is to provide up to a 30% design in conjunction with this tool. However some projects may have a lesser developed design at the start. It would vary from project to project.

78 26-Sep-25 Regarding the types of competition in section 5.3.6, is this anticipated to be a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable or Best Value program?

Project complexity and risk will influence the method; generally best value trade off will be the approach.

79 26-Sep-25 Are there repercussions for failing to bid on every task order? The Government does not intend to establish minimum participation requirements at the task order level.

80 26-Sep-25 Will the Government allow MATOC contractors to partner on individual Task Order pursuits? No, MATOC contract holders will not be allowed to partner on task orders.

81 26-Sep-25

Can the Government provide any further insights into the anticipated task order award process? Specifically, will task orders generally be competitive, will there be a timeline of task orders released, what fair opportunity consideration procedures will be employed, and what are the typical expected response times for Task Order Request for Quotes (RFQs)?

The Government intends to compete task orders among all qualified MATOC holders using a best value tradeoff methodology. MATOC offerors will be given a reasonable opportunity to submit proposals for each task order. The expected response time may vary from project to project depending on scope and complexity. The Government encourages feedback from industry on optimal task order timelines and procedures to maximize efficiency of the task order process.

82 26-Sep-25 Does the Government anticipate that multiple task orders will be executed concurrently on any given site? Which entity will be required to deconflict these efforts?

Yes, it is possible that multiple task orders will be executed concurrently at any given site. Each contractor is expected to communicate and coordinate execution of their efforts to mitigate impacts associated with multiple projects ongoing at any given time. The Government will have the final decision regarding establishment of priority and coordination of execution of efforts funded by the Government.

83 26-Sep-25 SF-33, Part I, B

Given that contractors assume full risk for errors and omissions in government-provided site data under Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP), will the Government provide comprehensive geotechnical investigations and environmental assessments for each facility or consider using cost-reimbursable pricing during the site investigation phase?

The contract type for each project will be specified at the task order level. Physical data may be available depending on the complexity of the project or other factors. If physical data is available, it may be provided to offerors for informational purposes only. Offerors will be responsible for independent verification and assume all risks associated with its use. The Government will not be liable for data inaccuracies or the completeness of the information provided.

84 19-Dec-25 Attachment 4 - HTRO Self-Scoring Matrix

Please clarify bid-build is design-bid-build and provide a statement what is encompassed as design-bid-build. Industry will allow ECI and CM at Risk to be considered to design-bid-build.

The Government intends to utilize design-build or, to a lesser extent, design-bid-build models, and reserves the right to use any other delivery method authorized by law and regulation.

85 19-Dec-25 M Note to ensure Section M and L match the revised scoring matrix verbiage.

The Government has revised its factors and elements, and the solicitation documents have been updated to reflect these changes and mirror the updated Highest Technically Rated Offeror (HTRO) Self-Scoring Matrix.

86 19-Dec-25 Attachment 4 - HTRO Self-Scoring Matrix

Please provide definition of 100% completion. For Design services projects we recommend 100% complete mean design is 100% while construction could still be ongoing.

Relative to this Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) effort, completed means the project has been designed, built, and accepted by the user

87 19-Dec-25 Element 2 Please confirm relevant projects can be domestic (CONUS) or international (OCONUS).

The Government's updated solicitation documents and HTRO Self-Scoring Matrix clarifies whether contract references must be domestic and U.S. Territory projects or may be Outside the Contiguous United States (OCONUS) projects for each element.

88 19-Dec-25 Attachment 4 - HTRO Self-Scoring Matrix

100% completion only stated for Elements 1 & 2; is 100% completion required for all elements or just Elements 1 & 2? i.e. Can projects for other Elements be “in progress”?

No, each contract reference must reflect a completed project. Relative to this MATOC effort, completed means the project has been designed, built, and accepted by the user.

89 19-Dec-25 Attachment 4 - HTRO Self-Scoring Matrix

Please clarify if Elements 4 – 10 and Element 12 is “open” to either or both the GC and the AE providing information? Based on its current language it states 40% of construction value for sub contractors. Can A/E design firms not be considered for these elements as well?

Architect-Engineer (A/E) design firms can be considered for projects that include construction elements, but eligibility is strictly contingent upon a firm's ability to demonstrate relevant prior experience that goes beyond traditional design services.

90 19-Dec-25 M Please clarify if IDIQ programs are to be considered 1 program or if projects should be at the task order level.

Contract references for the factors and elements in this MATOC effort refer to contracts where work was performed and completed. Relative to contract structures where work is performed as a task order under an overarching base contract such as an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) or MATOC, contract references refer to work performed under a task order and not merely a base IDIQ or being included in a MATOC pool of contractors eligible for a task order.

91 19-Dec-25 M

Please clarify if contracts/projects from other Elements may be reused in other Elements or just contracts/projects from Element 1? In order to streamline efficiency we would advocate a project could be used over multiple elements as long as proper documentation is provided.

Contract references may be the same for multiple elements but do not have to be the same projects provided in any other elements in the HTRO Matrix.

92 19-Dec-25 L, M and Attachment 4 - HTRO Self- Scoring Matrix

If Elements 2 and 7 are required, please add them to Section L & M of the instructions and evaluation. Also please restructure Sections L & M so the order of the Elements match the updated Scoring Matrix.

The Government has revised its factors and elements, and the solicitation documents have been updated to reflect these changes and mirror the updated HTRO Matrix.

93 19-Dec-25 L, M and Attachment 4 - HTRO Self- Scoring Matrix

Element 9 and Element 10 on the updated Scoring Matrix specify domestic only. Section M also specifies domestic only for Elements 12 and 13. Clarify if only domestic projects are allowed for Elements 9 and 10 (per updated Scoring Matrix) OR if domestic projects are also only allowed for Elements 12 and 13 (as per Section M).

Domestic and US. Territory projects are allowed for Factor 2 Elements 9 and 10, and Factor 3 Small Business.

94 19-Dec-25 Element 2 This Element is only included on the updated Scoring Matrix, please include in Section L & M as well with any additional instructions and evaluation.

The Government has revised its factors and elements, and the solicitation documents have been updated to reflect these changes and mirror the updated HTRO Matrix.

95 19-Dec-25 Element 3

Question1: What type of documentation are they looking for? ISRs? Question2: If ISRs or other, is 5 pages per contract/project reasonable? We would recommend allowing flexibility in the proof to make it more efficient in response for page constraints. Is the front page of a signed agreement proof?

Yes, the information from an ISR is acceptable. The Government has revised its solicitation documents to clarify page limitations. The Government will allow Individual Subcontract Reports (ISRs) or the information contained in relevant ISRs, up to four (4) pages, to be attached to the Offeror's element documentation.

96 19-Dec-25 Element 3 Please restate this so it does not limit the maximum subs we could have managed on a project.

The Government is not limiting the number of subcontractors a contractor could have managed on a project to ten. If more than ten subcontracts were managed, the Offeror need not provide documentation for more than ten subcontracts that it managed for a project. The solicitation documents and HTRO Self Scoring Matrix have been revised to offer clarification.

97 19-Dec-25 Element 3

The Scoring Matrix and Section L only mention submitting documentation that identifies the number of subcontracts managed for each project. But, Section M refers to a 2-page description – is this in addition to the documentation? If so, how many pages are allowed, in total, for this Element?

The Government has revised its solicitation documents to clarify page limitations. The Government will allow ISRs or the information contained in relevant ISRs, up to four (4) pages, to be attached to the Offeror's element documentation.

98 19-Dec-25 Element 5 Assuming the intention was Element 1? The Government has revised its factors and elements, and the solicitation documents have been updated to reflect these changes.

99 19-Dec-25 Element 7 This Element is only included on the updated Scoring Matrix, please include in Section L & M as well with any additional instructions and evaluation. The Government's updated solicitation documents mirror the updated HTRO Self-Scoring Matrix.

100 19-Dec-25 Element 9 (M and Scoring Matrix) Per Section M, this is “Contracts Involving an Explosive Site Safety Plan (ESSP)" (ESSP is missing from the scoring matrix). Clarify if all projects in this section need to include “Explosive” site safety?

The Government's elements have been updated and no longer reference "Contracts Involving an Explosive Site Safety Plan" but rather reference "Site Safety Plans." The Government has revised its solicitation documents to reflect this change.

101 19-Dec-25 Element 9 Assuming the intention was Element 1? The Government has revised its factors and elements, and the solicitation documents have been updated to reflect these changes.

102 19-Dec-25 Element 11 (L, M and Scoring Matrix) Per Sections L & M, NAICS Codes 237110 and/or 237130 (or equivalent) are also allowed?

The Government has revised its solicitation documents to reflect that projects that meet the description of NAICS codes 2362 (Nonresidential Building Construction) or 2371 (Utility System Construction) are allowed.

103 19-Dec-25 Element 11 & Elements 1 & 2 Please clarify intent because the "uninterrupted integration into ongoing operations" is specifically mentioned as part of Element 2 for AE Design services and not in Element 1 which is for the GC as clarified by the NAICS codes.

The Government has revised its factors and elements, and the solicitation documents have been updated to reflect these changes.

104 19-Dec-25 Element 13 (L, M and Scoring Matrix) Per Sections L & M, NAICS Groups 237110 and/or 237130 (or their equivalent) are also allowed?

The Government has revised its solicitation documents to reflect that projects that meet the description of NAICS codes 2362 (Nonresidential Building Construction) or 2371 (Utility System Construction) are allowed.

105 19-Dec-25 Element 13 (M and Scoring Matrix) Are only 2 pages per project allowed in this Section, and not 5 pages per project as previously stated? The Government has revised its solicitation documents to clarify page limitations.

106 19-Dec-25 Draft RFP The Draft RFP does not contain a Conflict of Interest clause or COI mitigation. Is there concern that GOCO operators could have an unfair advantage in bidding task orders as they may have been involved with the development of the requirements?

The Government will ensure that Conflicts of Interest are properly mitigated at the Task Order level IAW Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 9.5.

107 19-Dec-25 Draft RFP Will the current AAP GOCO operators be permitted to submit proposals and be awarded a seat on the MATOC?

Yes, current Government Owned Contractor Operated Army Ammunition Plant operating contractors may submit proposals for this MATOC. A MATOC award will be made to all Offerors who present responsive proposals that pass all the requirements of Factor 1 – Mandatory Requirements, meet or exceed the MTTR for Factor 2 – Past Experience and Factor 3 – Small Business, and include the required materials identified in Volume 4 of Section L.

108 19-Dec-25 Draft RFP If so, how will OCI concerns be addressed? Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest will be addressed IAW FAR Subpart 9.5.

109 19-Dec-25 Did the Government shutdown affect the timeline for releasing the updated draft (pre-final) Request for Proposal (RFP), previously projected in October 2025, and Final RFP release projected for October/November 2025?

Yes. The Government is targeting release of the updated draft RFP in mid- to late-December 2025 and issuance of the final RFP in late February 2026.

110 16-Jan-26

Factor 2 - Element 1: Prime Contractor / Major Subcontractor Experience & Factor 2 - Element 3: Subcontract Management

Would it be possible to remove the restriction to submit the same four projects for Element 1 and Element 3? Removing this restriction would allow Offerors to choose from a broader range of projects to reflect their expertise.

The Government is willing to remove the requirement that Factor 2 Element 3 (Subcontract Management) contract references follow the same contract references identified in Factor 2 Element 1 (Prime Contractor / Major Subcontractor Experience) but as a result will revise the Factor 2 Element 3 requirement to reflect similar complexity of contract references as those identified in Factor 2 Element

1. The Government's goal is to evaluate an Offeror's overall experience and ability to perform the type of work that will be offered through the subject Multiple-Award Task-Order Contract (MATOC). The allowance for Offerors to use the same contract references should ease proposal burden.

111 16-Jan-26 Volume 3 - Factor 3 Small Business Could the Government please confirm that the CPARs is only needed to validate performance on small business goals?

Yes, the Contractor Performance Assessment Reports System (CPARS) will be used to validate performance on small business goals. However, a separate Contract Reference Data Sheet is also required to provide comprehensive details for each major contract. The Government will provide information regarding the detail of information that must be provided via Contract Reference Data Sheet.

112 16-Jan-26 Attachment 0001 – Statement of Work, Section 1.15

Has the Government considered how the Key Personnel requirements outlined in Section

1.15 will impact those awardees governed in employee-at-will states?

The Government is aware that at-will employment is the standard. However, the responsibility for recruiting, proposing, and retaining qualified Key Personnel remains with the contractor as a standard part of contract performance. If a replacement is needed, the contractor must promptly nominate a substitute with equal or greater qualifications.

113 16-Jan-26 Attachment 0001 – Statement of Work, Section 1.5

What requirements do the Operating Contractors have under their GOCO Contracts to support the requirements outlined in Section 1.5?

The Government will be working with the Operating Contractors to address collaboration with MATOC awardees at the base Government-Owner Contactor-Operated facility contracts. Further, the role of the Operating Contractor (OC) will be defined at the MATOC task order level.

114 16-Jan-26 Attachment 0005 - Government Answers to Industry Questions

Please confirm that the prohibition on partnering among MATOC holders does not constitute a prohibition on ordinary subcontracting.

There will be no prohibition on subcontracting including subcontracting with another MATOC contractor.

115 16-Jan-26 Volume 3 - Factor 3 Small Business

Regarding the "The Government will not consider projects that have not been 100% completed" requirement for achievement of small business goals, we note that this requirement may be a constraint for Offerors depending upon the Offerors' Small Business Plan structure and/or historical contract structure (for example, multiple contract orders or IDIQs). Will the government accept and evaluate Small Business Performance for those plans structured by Fiscal Year rather than project completion based? i.e. Comprehensive, master, commercial, etc.?

The Government’s requirement for 100% completed contract references remains firm. This is to ensure the evaluation is based on a definitive and final performance record from project initiation through completion.

116 16-Jan-26 Attachment 0002, Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors, Page 2; 2.2.5

Given the page limitations provided for the response, we respectfully request that 10-point Arial font be acceptable for standard text, ILO 12-point Arial.

The 12-point font requirement stated in the solicitation will be enforced to ensure fairness and legibility across all submissions.

117 16-Jan-26 Attachment 0002, Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors, Page 3; 2.4.1

The current page limit for the Cover Letter is 10 pages. In order to properly introduce our team (including critical/specialty trade partners) and approach, we request the limit be increased to 20 pages.

The Government intends to maintain the ten-page maximum Cover Page limitation.

118 16-Jan-26 Attachment 0001: Highest Technically Rated Offeror Self Scoring Matrix, Elements 4-13

To best account for the offering team's total capabilities, we suggest removing the 40% major subcontractor stipulation. This will allow us to present highly specialized subcontractor experience from team members that possess specific qualifications beneficial to the MATOC scope.

The Government intends to maintain the identified 40% threshold.

119 16-Jan-26 Attachment 0002, Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors, Paragraph 2.4.7

Paragraph 2.4.7 describes the requirement for a Cross-Reference Matrix to map the proposal to solicitation requirements. Does the Government have a prescribed Excel template or preferred format (PDF, etc.) for this matrix? Additionally, may we use landscape orientation for this specific matrix to improve readability?

The Government does not…