ESBD_480461_1768949107222_RFQ-OCP-COM-26-Addendum2.pdf
PDF 377 KB Posted
- Attached to
- COMMISSIONING SERVICES
- Solicitation number
- OCP-COM-26
- Issued by
- Travis County, Austin City, Texas
About this file
This is Addendum No. 2 to a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) issued by The University of Texas System Administration, Office of Capital Projects, for commissioning services. The RFQ, numbered OCP COM-26, was issued on January 20, 2026, and seeks to establish qualified vendors under an Indefinite Scope of Services Agreement to provide commissioning consulting services across multiple UT System locations. Responses are due February 5, 2026, at 2:00 PM, submitted to the Office of Capital Projects at 210 W. 7th Street, Austin, Texas 78701. The addendum clarifies that this solicitation establishes successful vendors for an indefinite scope agreement with no guaranteed minimum amount of work, and all services will be requested on an as-needed basis with future agreement on scope and fees. Multiple qualified firms will be selected to provide commissioning services across designated geographic locations, though no minimum number of locations must be covered by any single vendor, and qualified firms may be selected to serve all locations.
The addendum addresses ten key clarifications: HUB participation is not mandatory, but if subcontracting occurs, a Good Faith Effort to solicit a minimum of three certified HUBs is required with a 0.25% HUB goal; a Hubbing Subcontracting Plan (HSP) is a required submission element; the overall maximum contract value is indefinite with no specified contract amount; vendors currently holding other UT System agreements are not precluded from bidding and are not considered conflicts of interest; the prime consultant should serve as the primary contract point of contact, though subconsultants may handle day-to-day project interactions; and no minimum number of geographic locations must be covered by applicants. The file includes an acknowledgment checklist for addenda receipt that must be signed and submitted with proposals.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
ADDENDUM No. 2 Issued - January 20, 2026
REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
FOR
COMMISSIONING SERVICES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF CAPITAL PROJECTS
RFQ No.: OCP COM-26
RESPONSE DUE: February 5, 2026
2:00 PM
Prepared By:
Roberto J. Barrera, P.E.
Associate Director, Engineering- Building Envelope Office of Capital Projects
The University of Texas System 210 W. 7th Street
Austin, Texas 78701
RFQ NO. OCP COM-26 - ADDENDUM NO. 2 PAGE 2 OF 4 01/20/2026 ISSUANCE
REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
FOR
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE OF CAPITAL PROJECTS
ADDENDUM No. 2
The following information is issued to change, clarify, supplement, or further explain the above referenced RFQ. This information shall supersede and take precedence over the information contained in the RFQ in the event of a conflict.
Note - Any questions received on and after January 26, 2026, will not be answered during the solicitation phase.
Contact Kyle Hayes with UT System HUB Office (o: 512-322-3745 or khayes@utsystem.edu) for any questions regarding the preparation of the HSP.
Section 4.1 Section 4.1 TYPE OF CONTRACT is revised as follows:
Any contract resulting from this solicitation will be in the form of the Owner’s Services Agreement, Indefinite Scope of Services, for Commissioning Services.
In response to written inquiries, the following clarifications are issued:
Question #1: Is this RFQ Solicitation for a specific project or for multiple projects?
Response #1: This solicitation is to establish successful vendors under an Indefinite Scope of Services
Agreement for the UT System. As noted in Section 2.02 of the Draft Commissioning Services Agreement - No Minimum Amount of Work:
“Owner makes no representations regarding the amount or type of Services, if any, that Services Provider will be asked to provide to Owner during the term(s) of this Agreement. It is expressly understood that the Owner is under no obligation to request any Services from Services Provider and no minimum amount of work is required or contemplated under this Agreement. All Services requests will be made by the Owner on an as-needed basis, subject to future agreement on the scope of the work and the fee.”
Question #2: Does UT preclude a prime or subconsultant from bidding if they currently hold an agreement for another IDIQ with UT-Austin or any other UT institution?
Response #2: UT System OCP does not preclude a prime or subconsultant from submitting a response for consideration to the RFQ if they currently hold another agreement with a UT System Institution. We do not consider this a conflict of interest. However, the submitting vendor should confirm that if they have another agreement with a UT System Institution, that specific Institution does not have any questions or concerns if the submitting vendor is successful in obtaining a contract with UT System OCP for similar commissioning services. Note this solicitation is a Request of Qualifications (RFQ) and not a Request for Proposals (RFP) as this question implies with the word “bidding” above.
RFQ NO. OCP COM-26 - ADDENDUM NO. 2 PAGE 3 OF 4 01/20/2026 ISSUANCE
Question #3: What is the minimum HUB participation required under this RFQ?
Response #3: To clarify, HUB participation is not required for this solicitation. However, if the prime contractor elects to subcontract any portion of the Scope of Work, a Good Faith Effort (GFE) to solicit a minimum of three (3) certified HUBs (VetHUBs), if available, is required.
Per Exhibit H – Technical Services HSP-1.5.206, on page 3 at the top of the page, the stated HUB goal is 0.25%. In addition, the HUB Subcontracting Plan (HSP) on page 8 confirms the same requirement under Other Services – 0.25%.
Question #4: Is a HUB Plan required as part of the submittal package?
Response #4: Per section 4.9 of the RFQ, OCP has determined that subcontracting opportunities are probable, therefore an HSP is a required element of the RFQ response. It should be submitted under tab 2.8 of the response.
Question #5: Can we complete the Self-Performing Justification since a project has not yet been awarded?
Response #5: A justification is required if the vendor intends to self-perform all scope items outlined in
Section 1.3 of the RFQ. Please refer to the Instruction Sheet included as Page 1 of the HSP and review the requirements specified under Option 1.
Question #6: What is the anticipated RFQ contract amount?
Response #6: As stated in section 2.01 of Exhibit A OCP COM 26 Draft Commissiong Services
Agreement- The overall maximum value of this contract is indefinite.
Question #7: Section 2.10 – Location Services | Does the point of contact need to be from the prime consultant or can it be from a subconsultant?
Response #7: For contract items or proposals, the point of contact should be the prime consultant. For day to day interaction for any particular project, the point of contact can be a subconsultant.
Question #8: Section 2.10 – Location Services | Does the UT System intend to select three qualified firms for each location?
Response #8: As stated, we intend to have a minimum of three (3) qualified firms to provide commissioning services. To clarify, depending on the number of vendors that are selected, UT System anticipates that there will be a combination of multiple successful vendors that will be able to provide commissioning services in each of the general geographic areas shown in the RFQ.
Question #9: Section 2.10 – Location Services | Can a qualified firm be selected to provide services for all locations?
Response #9: Yes, a qualified firm can be selected to provide commissioning services in all locations.
Office location will be considered in each geographic location shown in the RFQ as local knowledge of the Campuses is desired.
Question #10: Section 2.10 – Location Services | Is there a minimum number of locations that a firm must cover under this RFQ?
Response #10: No there is not a minimum number of locations that a vendor must cover.
Copy to: All registered recipients of the RFQ (via OCP and ESBD website)
RFQ NO. OCP COM-26 - ADDENDUM NO. 2 PAGE 4 OF 4 01/20/2026 ISSUANCE
Acknowledgment of Addendum
ADDENDA CHECKLIST
Proposal of: _________________________________
(Proposer Company Name)
To: The University of Texas System, Office of Capital Projects
Ref.: RFQ OCP COM-26
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The undersigned Proposer hereby acknowledges receipt of the following Addenda to the captioned RFP (initial if applicable).
Note: If there was only 1 Addendum, initial just the first blank after No. 1, not all 7 blanks below.
No. 1 _____ No. 2 _____ No. 3 _____ No. 4 _____ No. 5 _____
No. 6 _____ No. 7 _____
Respectfully submitted, Proposer:______________________________
By:____________________________________
(Authorized Signature for Proposer)
Name:_________________________________
Title:__________________________________
Date:__________________________________
End of Addendum 2
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .