Attachment 8 - Questions and Answers 25 Sep 26.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 33 KB Posted
- Attached to
- FY 27 A-E IDIQ Solicitation
- Solicitation number
- FA561326R0004
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers document for the FY 27 A-E IDIQ Solicitation (FA561326R0004), containing 76 clarifications issued by the Government on 25 September 2026 regarding submission requirements, evaluation criteria, and eligibility rules for the architect-engineer contract opportunity.
The document addresses critical procedural matters including submission deadlines (proposals and Past Performance Questionnaires both due 8 October 2026 at 14:00 CET), submission method (electronic only via PIEE; no hard copies accepted), and PPQ requirements (submitted directly by client POCs to the Government, not included in proposals). Key Personnel resumes are limited to 2 pages each with a 50-page total limit for Section E, and must include Project Manager and discipline leads marked with asterisks in the SOW. Section F example projects must be completed design (100% design delivery) within the past three years; ongoing projects are ineligible unless design is fully complete. Past performance projects are evaluated separately within a five-year window. Professional qualifications of Key Personnel are scored by averaging years of experience across all key personnel, with additional points available for registration with professional associations, relevant credentials, and specialized training—though German professionals without Chamber of Engineers registration can still receive partial credit. The evaluation favors firms and subcontractors located within 400 kilometers of Ramstein AB, with exceptions only for ICD 705 specialists. Section F projects are evaluated individually on breadth and depth of represented disciplines, with projects demonstrating more relevant disciplines (architecture, civil, electrical, environmental, fire protection, security, structural, mechanical engineering, cybersecurity, and landscape architecture) receiving higher ratings. The solicitation permits submission of multiple resumes per discipline and allows non-key personnel resumes to be included in Section E; joint ventures are acceptable with the German partner satisfying location requirements. SF330 formatting may be customized provided all required fields and numbering remain intact, and alternative documentation is permitted for specified sections within stated page limits.
View the file
Other files
Show all 17
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
Sheet1
| Question # | Question | Answering Organization | Answer |
| 1 | Could you please clarify the required submission deadline and method for Past PPQs? Section L states that “all packages (including PPQs)” must be received by 14:00 CET on 8 October 2026, which could indicate that PPQs are to be included with the offeror’s proposal package. However, Section M states that completed PPQs are to be submitted directly by the client POC to the Government no later than the proposal due date, while Attachment 2 states a deadline of 18 October 2026 and instructs that completed PPQs not be returned to the contractor. Please confirm: a. the applicable PPQ submission deadline and b. whether completed PPQs should be submitted directly by the client POC to the Government and therefore should not be included in the offeror’s PIEE proposal package | 700 CONS | The PPQ submission deadline has been Amended on 18 September to match the package submission deadline, 8 October 2026 at 14:00 CET. Completed PPQs should be submitted directly by the client POC to the Government. PPQs should NOT be included in the offeror's PIEE proposal package. |
| 2 | The solicitation incorporates DFARS 252.236-7011, Overseas Architect-Engineer Services—Restriction to United States Firms, and also requires the A-E firm to be located in Germany or have a branch in Germany. Please confirm whether a U.S. A-E firm and a German A-E firm may submit as a joint venture, and, if so, whether the U.S. firm may serve as the lead/managing JV partner when the German JV partner satisfies the Germany-location requirement? | 700 CONS | This clause will be removed from the solicitation via Amendment. The A-E firm must be located or have a branch in Germany. A Joint Venture (JV) may submit a proposal and the German JV partner will satisfy the requirement. Ensure compliance with Attachment 4 - Section M - Source Selection Evaluation Factors - Phase 1 Procedures - Professional Qualifications. |
| 3 | For a U.S.-German joint venture, at the qualification submission stage, may the German JV partner’s USt-ID-Nr. be provided to satisfy the solicitation requirement, with the JV obtaining its own after contract award? | 700 CONS | Yes, a U.S.-German JV may submit the German JV partner's Ust-ID-Nr. to satisfy the solicitation requirement. Ensure compliance with Attachment 4 - Section M - Source Selection Evaluation Factors - Phase 1 Procedures - Professional Qualifications. |
| 4 | SF33, Item 9 states that sealed offers are to be submitted in an original and one copy, while Section L requires electronic submission through PIEE and states that no physical copies will be accepted. Please confirm that the qualification package is to be submitted electronically through PIEE only and that no hard-copy original or copy is required | 700 CONS | Packages are required to be submitted electronically through PIEE. No hard copies will be accepted. |
| 5 | Attachment 6_AE IDIQ SOW, page 3, Section 1.3 Scope of Work. Please confirm that the reference to "developing Request‑for‑Proposal (RFP) packages for design‑bid‑build projects" is intended to mean Design-Build RFPs. If not, can you confirm what it does mean and if DB RFPs are a potential scope under this contract? | 86 CES | In accordance with the Attachment 6_AE IDIQ SOW, page 3, Section 1.3 Scope of Work, the Government intends for it to be design-bid-build. |
| 6 | Attachment 1_Section L, Page 3, Section Page Limitations and Content Requirements, subsection 2. Minimum Project Information. Per the SF330 form requirements, we will provide a. number and title of example project, b. location (state/country), and c. customer client in boxes 20 and 21 of Section F. Do we need to duplicate this information in Box 24 of the Section F form? | 86 CES | No |
| 7 | RFI 1 – Acceptance of Previously Obtained PPQs Subject: Clarification Regarding Use of Previously Completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) The solicitation includes Attachment 2 – Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) and instructs offerors to provide PPQs in support of past performance submissions. We would appreciate clarification regarding the acceptability of PPQs that were completed and signed by clients for previous U.S. Government or commercial procurements. Question: May offerors submit previously completed client-signed PPQs, provided they were completed by the client representative responsible for the referenced project?Or is a new PPQ submission on the solicitation-specific PPQ form required for every project reference? | 700 CONS | Please refer to Attachment 4 - Section M, Source Selection Evaluation Factors - Phase 1 Procedures - Evaluation of Primary Selection Criteria - 5. Past Performance (c)(i) |
| 8 | RFI 2 – PPQ Submission Timing Subject: Clarification of PPQ Submission Deadline The instructions associated with the Past Performance Questionnaire appear to indicate that PPQs are to be transmitted electronically by the client point of contact. We seek clarification regarding the timing (18 Oct vs 08 Oct) of receipt of those questionnaires. Question: Can the Government confirm: 1. The due date by which PPQs must be received by the Government; and 2. Whether PPQs may be received after the offeror's proposal submission date, provided the proposal itself is submitted by the required closing date? | 700 CONS | The PPQ submission deadline has been Amended on 18 September to match the package submission deadline, 8 October 2026 at 14:00 CET. All PPQs must be received by 8 October 2026 at 14:00 CET. |
| 9 | RFI 3 – Eligibility of Ongoing Projects Subject: Clarification Regarding Ongoing Projects Section F requires submission of projects completed within the past three years. Question: May ongoing projects be submitted for consideration if the planning and/or design phases have been substantially completed and the services being evaluated under this solicitation have been performed, provided the project commenced within the prescribed timeframe? If so, please clarify the minimum level of completion required for such projects to be considered eligible for evaluation. | 86 CES | The design projects must have been completed within the last three years; that is, the client must have received the finalized 100% design. The start date of the design is irrelevant. This in accordance with the Attachment 4 - Section M - Specialized Experience and Technical Competence. |
| 10 | RFI 4 – Past Performance Recency Period Subject: Clarification of Past Performance Project Recency Requirement The solicitation references completed projects from the last three years. Question: Would the Government consider expanding the allowable past performance period to include projects completed within the last five years? Many architect-engineer projects of comparable size and complexity require long execution periods and remain highly relevant to the evaluation criteria despite having been completed more than three years ago. Alternatively, if the three-year period remains unchanged, can the Government clarify whether the completion date refers to: 1. Overall project completion; or 2. Completion of the architect-engineer design services associated with the project? This is particularly relevant because design services are often completed well in advance of construction completion. | 86 CES | It is not in the best interest of the Government to expand the project completion time beyond 3 years which is required for specialized experience and technical competence. Evaluation of Past Performance, evaluating 5 years, is separate from the project completion time requirement. |
| 11 | RFI 5 – Evaluation of Multidisciplinary Experience Subject: Clarification of Section F Project Requirements Section F requires submission of five relevant projects demonstrating qualifications and experience. Question: For evaluation of the five Section F projects, does the Government require that all disciplines be contracted and performed under a single project? Or may offerors demonstrate interdisciplinary experience through projects where certain disciplines were provided by subcontractors, affiliated offices, or teaming partners operating under the offeror's overall management and quality control responsibility? | 86 CES | Negative, they do not need to be under a single project. See Attachment 4 - Section M "The Government will evaluate each project based on the breadth and depth of disciplines represented. Projects that substantively incorporate a greater number of the identified disciplines will be considered stronger and will receive higher ratings." |
| 12 | RFI 6 – Location of Specialized Personnel Subject: Clarification of Location Requirements for Specialized Key Personnel The solicitation requires a broad range of specialized capabilities, including cybersecurity, ICD 705, HEMP, AT/FP, and other niche technical disciplines. Question: May personnel supporting these specialized disciplines be located outside Germany and still be proposed as key personnel, provided that the Project Manager remains located in Germany and the offeror maintains the required in-country project management, coordination, and delivery capability? | 86 CES | According to the SOW, the disciplines listed here do not constitute key disciplines. Only the lead of the key disciplines are considered key personnel. Aside from that, the proposed personnel may be located anywhere. Evaluation will be conducted in accordance with Section M. |
| 13 | RFI 7 – Request for Proposal Due Date Extension Subject: Request for Consideration of Proposal Due Date Extension To promote maximum competition and allow offerors sufficient time to obtain required past performance documentation, finalize teaming arrangements, and prepare responsive qualification packages, we respectfully request consideration of an extension of the proposal due date from 8 October 2026 to 22 October 2026. The requested extension would support the submission of more complete and higher-quality qualification packages without impacting the Government's ability to evaluate comparable information from all offerors. Question: Would the Government consider extending the proposal due date to 22 October 2026? | 700 CONS | At this time, it is not in the best interest of the Government to extend the solicitation due date. |
| 14 | Can current projects that are already 90% complete also be used as reference projects? | 86 CES | Negative. See question #9. |
| 15 | May letters of reference be submitted for reference projects that lack a CPARS rating, or is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) required? These are projects for the Corps that are being administered via the construction authority or LBIH. | 700 CONS | The PPQ is required for projects without CPARS assessments. Please refer to Attachment 4 - Section M, Source Selection Evaluation Factors - Phase 1 Procedures - Evaluation of Primary Selection Criteria - 5. Past Performance (c)(i) |
| 16 | Two submission dates are listed, October 8, 2026, and October 18, 2026; which is the correct one? | 700 CONS | The PPQ submission deadline has been Amended on 18 September to match the package submission deadline, 8 October 2026 at 14:00 CET. |
| 17 | Section M states that "Credentials of Key Personnel" and "Training of Key Personnel" will be scored based on percentages (≥75%, ≥50%, ≥25%). Please clarify how these percentages will be calculated. Specifically, are the percentages based on the proportion of proposed key personnel possessing additional credentials and training beyond minimum licensing requirements, or is another methodology intended? Additionally, what types of credentials and training will be considered for evaluation purposes? | 86 CES | Affirmative, the assumption that the percentages specifically refer to the proportion of proposed key personnel who possess additional qualifications and training beyond the minimum requirements for admission is correct. All job-specific qualifications and training that can be documented are taken into account. |
| 18 | Section M defines key personnel as the Project Manager and all individual discipline leads identified with an asterisk (*) in SOW Section 1.3. Please clarify the minimum resume submission requirements for SF330 Part I, Section E. Specifically, must offerors submit resumes only for the Project Manager and asterisked discipline leads, or may offerors include additional personnel to demonstrate team qualifications and specialized technical capabilities beyond the minimum key personnel requirements? | 86 CES | See question #36. |
| 19 | Section L requires submission of five interdisciplinary projects completed within the past three years, while Section M defines recent past performance as performance occurring within the last five years. Please clarify what is defined as "recent". Given the long duration and complexity of many DoD and overseas A-E projects, allowing submission of projects completed within the past five years would provide the Government a larger pool of relevant experience to evaluate, better align the specialized experience requirement with the defined past performance recency period, and allow offerors to demonstrate qualifications on larger, more complex projects that may have longer delivery schedules. | 86 CES | The five sample projects referred to in Section L are submitted and evaluated using SF330 Section F. For those projects, the three-year period was intentionally chosen. |
The past performance, as described in Section M is a separate evaluation factor. See question #10.
| 20 | Please clarify what constitutes a "completed" project for purposes of Section F project submissions. Does completion refer to completion of professional services, construction completion, beneficial occupancy, or another milestone? | 86 CES | See Question #9 |
| 21 | For evaluation of Section F projects, will the Government consider both prime contractor and subcontractor project experience? | 86 CES | Affirmative. Please review Section M - Section Specialized Experience and Technical Competence. The sample projects in Section F are intended to demonstrate the experience of the prime contractor and subcontractors as a team so that the government can evaluate them accordingly. |
| 22 | Please confirm whether 11" x 17" pages are permitted for the organizational chart submission and whether that would count as 1 or 2 pages. | 86 CES | Negative, in accordance with Section L. "Pages: For electronic documents not utilizing a SF330 sheet, a page is defined as one side of an 8.5" x 11" sheet (or closest metric equivalent) with at least 1-inch margins on all sides." |
| 23 | The solicitation indicates that Alternative Documentation (AD) is permitted for the Organizational Chart and Section H; however, the term is not defined. Please clarify the Government's intent regarding Alternative Documentation and identify page limits for AD. | 86 CES | Section L provides specific guidelines on this. See the section titled “FORMATTING AND PAGE LAYOUT REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTERNATIVE DOCUMENTATION” and the table in the section titled “PAGE LIMITATIONS AND CONTENT REQUIREMENTS.” |
| 24 | Section L states that use of the SF330 template and its default formatting is required. Please clarify whether firms may modify the SF330 layout for purposes such as incorporating graphics, adjusting column widths, reducing whitespace, or combining information, provided all required fields remain intact and readable. | 86 CES | As long as all required fields, including their numbering, are retained, the layout may be adjusted. Section L will be amended to clarify. |
| 25 | Are copies of the CPARS required to be submitted with the proposal? | 700 CONS | We will pull all CPARS information from the system. Copies of CPARS will not be accepted. |
| 26 | Section M states that firms, branches, and all subcontractors located within 400 kilometers of Ramstein AB will be evaluated more favorably. Please clarify whether all proposed subcontractors must be located within the 400-kilometer radius to receive full credit, or whether credit may still be awarded if only certain specialty subcontractors are located outside the radius. | 86 CES | To receive full credit, all proposed subcontractors must be located within a 400-km radius. The only exception is the ICD 705 SME. Please refer to Section M, 4. Location, for further details. |
| 27 | Is there an age limit for projects on resumes? Allowing older but still relevant projects to be cited outside of Section F would enable offerors to demonstrate the full breadth of individual experience. | 86 CES | There is no age limit for projects in Section E of SF330. |
| 28 | Attachment 4 – Section M, pages 2–3, Section 1, Professional Qualifications, subsections b and c. For many engineering disciplines in Germany, there is no mandatory professional license or registration equivalent to a U.S. Professional Engineer (PE) license in order to legally perform engineering services. In German design offices employing civil, electrical, or HVAC engineers, it is common for only certain senior engineers or office principals to be registered with a Chamber of Engineers, while other engineers performing the same professional engineering services are not individually registered. These engineers are equally qualified professionally but are not personally chamber members. Based on this, will a German engineer who demonstrates the applicable degree certificate (Diplom, Bachelor, or Master) as evidence of professional qualification, but who does not hold a voluntary Chamber registration, receive credit under this criterion? | 86 CES | Key personnel should be the heads of the individual disciplines. In light of this, the government expects these heads to demonstrate that they are registered their respective professional associations. They are acceptable even without registration, but they cannot receive points under the applicable evaluation criteria in Section M. |
| 29 | Attachment 4_Section M, page 2, Section 1. Professional Qualifications, subsection a. Please clarify how the 10-point Experience of Key Personnel score is calculated across the Project Manager and discipline leads. Are the years of experience averaged across those roles to determine the number of points? | 86 CES | Correct. The Government will calculate the average number of years of experience across the key personnel submitted and use this number to allocate points. Section M will be amended for clarification. |
| 30 | In Attachment 4_Section M, pages 2-3, Section 1. Professional Qualifications, subsections b-d. Please define what qualifies as “registration,” “credential,” and “training.” These terms are often used interchangeably across industry. Additionally, is this evaluated across all resumes provided or just the resumes for project manager and discipline leads requested? | 86 CES | Section M - Evaluation of Primary Selection Criteria for Professional Qualifications has been amended. |
| 31 | Attachment 4_Section M, page 3, Section 2. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence requests that Section F example projects be “completed within the past three years.” Please confirm that completion refers to AE design completion as this is an AE contract. If confirmed, please also verify that providing the construction company that built the project is only requested for projects that are also construction complete. | 86 CES | Confirmed. We do not require any information for the subsequent construction project as this is an A-E solicitation. |
| 32 | Attachment 4_Section M, page 3, Section 2. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence. Please confirm if Section G should identify only proposed key personnel from Section E who participated in the Section F projects. | 86 CES | Confirmed. Section F and Section G both refer only to the example projects (see headings). |
| 33 | Attachment 4_Section M, page 4, Section 4. Location. Please confirm that HEMP SMEs are also given a location exception to be located outside Germany considering the sensitive nature of the work, similar to ICD 705. | 86 CES | Negative. No location exception will be given to HEMP SMEs. |
| 34 | Attachment 4_Section M, page 3, Section 2. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence. Please confirm that the demonstrated experience of proposed teams working together will be evaluated in Section G. | 86 CES | Confirmed. |
| 35 | Attachment 1_Section L, page 2, Page Limitations and Content Requirements and Attachment 3_Submission Requirements Checklist. Please confirm that because there is no page limit on the Part II that offerors may provide more than one Part II for their firm to demonstrate relevant capabilities in other offices (e.g., non-local ICD 705 experience). We assume that this table outlines the minimum qualifications for the SF330 Part II. | 86 CES | Confirmed. |
| 36 | Attachment 6_A-E IDIQ SOW, pages 2-3, Section 1.3 Scope of Work. As indicated across the solicitation package, Project Manager and the asterisked disciplines are required for our Section E submission. Will relevant resumes beyond these disciplines be evaluated? | 86 CES | Yes. Section L and the Checklist will be amended to clarify: "Resumes of Key Personnel and other professionals that worked on the example projects including attachments of education, training, licensing, credentials, etc." |
| 37 | Attachment 6_A-E IDIQ SOW, Section 2.4 Secure Space Requirements. When required, the Contractor will provide CSSP services including an SSM, ICD 705 SME, and HEMP SME during the design phase. Please clarify that remote support with travel for required meetings, design reviews, and site visits is acceptable. | 86 CES | If any travel is required, it will be stated at the Task Order level. |
| 38 | Are PPQs (page 1) also due with the submission if the project has a CPARS? It is unclear when reading Attachment 1 - Section L 8 Sep 26, Attachment 2 - Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) 3 Sep 26, and Attachment 3 - Submission Requirements Checklist 8 Sep 26? | 700 CONS | In accordance with Attachment 1 - Section L - Page Limitations and Content Requirements - (1) Table - Past Performance Questionnaire. "Utilized only for projects submitted under Section F of the SF330 that do not reside within the CPARS database" |
| 39 | Are PPQs due by 8 October 2026 (solicitation due date as noted in Section 9, page 1 of the SF 33 ) or 18 October 2026 as noted in Attachment 2 - Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) 3 Sep 26? | 700 CONS | The PPQ submission deadline has been Amended on 18 September to match the package submission deadline, 8 October 2026 at 14:00 CET. |
| 40 | Per Attachment 6 - A-E IDIQ SOW 26 August 2026 26 Aug 26 pages 2 and 3 is the following an exclusive list of Key Personnel requiring resumes in SF330 Part I, Section E: Project Manager, Architect, Landscape Architect, Electrical Engineer, Civil Engineer, Structural Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, Fire Protection Engineer, and Environmental Engineer? | 86 CES | See question #36 |
| 41 | Per Attachment 6 - A-E IDIQ SOW 26 August 2026 26 Aug 26 pages 2 and 3 can additional resumes be submitted for personnel filling other specific discipline positions (for example Cost Estimator, SCIF Planning, Design and Construction /Intelligence Community Directive ICD 705 subject matter expert, Construction Inspection (Title II Quality Assurance), etc.) | 86 CES | See question #36 |
| 42 | Per Attachment 6 - A-E IDIQ SOW 26 August 2026 26 Aug 26 pages 2 and 3 is it acceptable to provide more than one person per discipline as long as the page limit is not exceeded? | 86 CES | See question #36 |
| 43 | Per Attachment 6 - A-E IDIQ SOW 26 August 2026 26 Aug 26 pages 2 and 3 can a person fill multiple disciplines? | 86 CES | If this person has the appropriate credentials and qualifications, then yes. |
| 44 | Section M para. 1.a. indicates that firms will be awarded 1 point per 3 years of experience of key personnel for a maximum of 10 points. Could the Government please clarify how this will be calculated. E.g. will a firm be awarded 10 points if the total experience of all key personnel, when added together, exceeds 30 years? Or will the Government calculate the average number of years of experience across the key personnel and use this number to allocate points? Or will the points be allocated based on the key personnel individual who has the minimum number of years’ experience from the team submitted? | 86 CES | See question #29. |
| 45 | Section M 1. para. c. suggests that points will be allocated based on the percentage of personnel who have a "credential". Please can you confirm what must be demonstrated for a member of key personnel to be counted as a "pass" for this requirement? E.g. a defined educational qualification or a minimum number of projects performing a similar role? | 86 CES | See question #30. |
| 46 | Section M para. 1.d. suggests that points will be allocated based on the percentage of personnel who have received "training". Please can you confirm what must be demonstrated for a member of key personnel to be counted as a "pass" for this requirement? A related degree? | 86 CES | See question #30. |
| 47 | Section M para. 3 indicates that there are 25 points available for Capacity - 10 of these are for the average number of employees of subcontractors. Does this mean that, if an AE does not submit any subcontractors in their SF330 Part II they are only eligible to be awarded up to 15 points for Capacity? | 86 CES | Section M, Capacity has been amended to clarify scoring. |
| 48 | Section L 2. indicates that the minimum information required for each project includes the AE's Title II QA. Information in the preceding table indicates that the 5 projects are required to show ability to perform Title I and other AE services. Please confirm that it is not required to show Title II services for each project. | 86 CES | Confirmed. |
| 49 | Section M para. 2 indicates that for all 5 project examples, the construction company that built the project must be provided. Please confirm that this is not required if projects are not yet under construction. | 86 CES | Confirmed. |
| 50 | Section L 2. indicates that projects must have been completed within the last 3 years. Please confirm if a project can be considered complete if all design CLINs are complete and outstanding tasks only relate to construction-phase services. | 86 CES | Confirmed. See also question #9. |
| 51 | Section M para. 1.b. indicates that up to 8 points will be awarded for registration (licensing) of key personnel for each specialty indicated with an asterisk in section 1.3 of the SOW. However, the majority of the listed key personnel disciplines are not subject to registration or licensing in Germany. Although it would be possible to list key personnel from elsewhere who are subject to registration requirements (e.g. US-based personnel), this does not seem to reflect the intent of the rest of the solicitation & SOW, which appears to prefer companies and key personnel to be located near Ramstein AB. Please clarify the requirement. | 86 CES | Section M will be amended to clarify this section. Even though there is no mandatory registration requirement in Germany, the government does prefer that personnel of key disciplines be members of a relevant professional association or organization. See also question #28. |
| 52 | In Section L, paragraph “Formatting Requirements for SF330”, bullet 1 states “Use of the SF330 template and its default formatting is required”. The section “Formatting and Page Layout Requirements for Alternative Documentation” indicates that AD (i.e. pages not using an SF330 sheet) is permitted only when specifically authorized. However, “Formatting Requirements for SF330”, bullet 2 states “Offerors may utilize these sections [sections of downloaded SF330 forms] to customize their SF330 submission, provided that all required information is included.” Please confirm whether offerors must use the SF330 template formatting, or if the format can be changed as long as all required information is included. Please clarify the extent to which the submission can be customized as indicated in bullet 2. | 86 CES | See question #24 |
| 53 | If formatting of the SF330 cannot be customized, but each project sample can be up to 5 pages, please confirm if the requirement is to submit page 3 of the SF330 up to 5 times per project, with all project information (other than block 24) repeated on each page, and continuation of the description in block 24. | 86 CES | See question #24. |
| 54 | Section M, para. 3 Capacity states “This assessment will consider the firm’s staffing levels, availability of key disciplines, and the organizational ability to manage multiple concurrent projects”. The allocation of points then takes into account number of employees in the firm’s local office, number of subcontractor employees, and any missing key disciplines. Please confirm that “organizational ability to manage multiple concurrent projects” is assessed solely on the number of employees of the local office and subcontractor, and that additional information demonstrating “organizational ability to manage multiple concurrent projects” is not requested in our SF330 and such information will not be assessed/count towards point score. | 86 CES | See question #47 |
We confirm that “organizational ability to manage multiple concurrent projects” is assessed solely on the number of employees of the local office and subcontractor, and that additional information demonstrating “organizational ability to manage multiple concurrent projects” is not requested in our SF330 and such information will not be assessed/count towards point score.
| 55 | Section M, para. 4 states “Firms and/or branch and all subcontractors located in Germany and within a 400 km radius of Ramstein AB will be evaluated more favorably than firms outside that distance, or firms with subcontractors outside that distance.” It goes on to state that there is an exception for firms/branches/subcontractors performing ICD 705. Please clarify if this means that, other than ICD 705 work, all disciplines must be covered by branches/subcontractors located within the 400-km radius . E.g. if one member of key (or non-key) personnel is located in a branch office outside of the 400-km radius, and all others are located in a branch office within this radius, would the offeror be awarded 5 points or 0 points? Please clarify the requirement. | 86 CES | This understanding is correct. In the example given, the bidder would receive 0 points. |
| 56 | Section L indicates that resumes for Key Personnel have a page limit of 2 pages per person, and that Section E has a 50-page limit. We understand there to be 9 Key Personnel roles (8 marked with an asterisk in the SOW, plus Project Manager). This totals 18 pages. Does this mean that offerors may submit more than one resume for the same Key Personnel discipline? If so, how does this affect scoring? For example, in the Professional Qualifications section, if two Civil Engineer resumes are submitted, would only the first Civil Engineer count towards all qualifications scoring? Or would both be considered for each item? Would submitting a Section E resume for one Civil Engineer who worked on 4 example projects and a second resume for a Civil Engineer who worked on the 5th example project be evaluated more favorably than submitting a resume only for the first Civil Engineer? | 86 CES | Professional qualifications are evaluated for all Key Personnel and other professionals that worked on the example projects. Please see amended Section M and SF330 Section E "RESUMES OF KEY PERSONNEL PROPOSED FOR THIS CONTRACT" |
See also question #36
| 57 | Section L indicates that resumes for Key Personnel have a page limit of 2 pages per person, and that Section E has a 50-page limit. We understand there to be 9 Key Personnel roles (8 marked with an asterisk in the SOW, plus Project Manager). This totals 18 pages. Please confirm if (and how) firms will be evaluated more favorably if resumes for non-key disciplines are submitted in Section E. | 86 CES | See question #56 |
| 58 | According to the Page Limitations and Content Requirements table, 2 pages are permitted for Section D. Can we use a larger page size, such as A3 for the Org Chart, and would a large size page count as 2 pages? | 86 CES | Negative. See question # 22. |
| 59 | Section M, Evaluation of Primary Selection Criteria (para 2, Specialized Experience and Technical Competence) state that each of the 5 projects can obtain a maximum of 4 points. Can you specify how these 4 points will be assigned (e.g., X point(s) if the project is supporting DoD requirements; X point(s) for a minimum of X relevant disciplines?). | 86 CES | See Section M, 2. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence "The Government will evaluate each project based on the breadth and depth of disciplines represented. Projects that substantively incorporate a greater number of the identified disciplines will be considered stronger and will receive higher ratings." |
| 60 | We understand that each project will be rated separately. Does this mean that - in theory - 5 projects covering the same 8 out of 9 relevant disciplines will score higher, overall, than 4 of these projects plus a fifth that that covers only the remaining discipline and/or other SOW services not listed in the "relevant disciplines" list of Section M? I.e. the projects are each rated individually rather than as a set? | 86 CES | Projects are evaluated individually; each project can be awarded up to 4 points. |
| 61 | Evaluation of Primary Selection Criteria (Section 2, Specialized Experience and Technical Competence) indicates that up to four points per project (=20 points max) may be assigned for Section F projects; 5 points for experience, 5 points for proposed teams with demonstrated experience working together, and 5 points for ICD; bunkers, AT/FP, Cybersecurity, HEMP etc. demonstrated in Section H. |
- Can you confirm the “proposed team” does not only refer to “prime and teaming partners” but also for staff members that have worked together if no teaming partners are used?
- For the 5 points assigned for U.S. military specific requirements, will one point each be assigned to the five examples listed (ICD705, bunkers, AT/FP, Cybersecurity, HEMP) or will other U.S. military requirements be rated and how? 86 CES 1. Confirm. The “Proposed Team” includes all the individuals listed in SF330. The evaluation considers whether these individuals have worked together on previous projects or whether the team has been newly formed and has never worked together before.
2. Section M, 2. Specialized Experience and Technical Competence has been amended to reflect 1 point per each of the listed specific requirements
62 Evaluation of Primary Selection Criteria (Section 5, Past Performance): Can you confirm the “Past Performance” rating is not limited to selected Section F projects and that no CPARS information needs to be submitted for this evaluation factor (only PPQs for projects which have not received CPARS)? 700 CONS Please refer to Attachment 4 - Section M, Source Selection Evaluation Factors - Phase 1 Procedures - Evaluation of Primary Selection Criteria - 5. Past Performance (f) "The Government reserves the right to obtain and utilize past performance information from any source available, including but not limited to CPARS" We will pull all CPARS information from the system. Copies of CPARS will not be accepted.
| 63 | Evaluation of Primary Selection Criteria (Section 5, Past Performance, (a) Screening Criteria): According to the screening criteria, recent is defined as performance occurring within five years of the date of the solicitation, except that ongoing projects must have begun no less than one year prior to the issuance of the solicitation. Would you consider the same criteria for submitted Section F projects, or are those limited to a three-year period? | 86 CES | See Question #10. |
| 64 | In the SOW there are 8 key disciplines, excluding Project Management. These are Architectural Services, Landscape Architecture, Electrical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Fire Protection Engineering, and Environmental Engineering. In Section M, it states that projects with a greater number of identified disciplines will be considered stronger and receive higher ratings. Relevant disciplines are Architecture, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Environmental Engineering, Fire Protection Engineering, Security Engineering, Structural Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and Cybersecurity. Please confirm that Landscape Architecture is relevant for Key Personnel but is not a relevant discipline for specialized experience and technical competence scoring. Conversely, please confirm that Security Engineering and Cybersecurity are relevant disciplines for Section F, but not Key Personnel. | 86 CES | In accordance with Section M, Landscape Architecture is a relevent disciplines and was accidently omitted. An amendment to Section M will add Landscape Architecture, and an amendment to the SOW will clarify the meaning of the asterisk. |
| 65 | Where the design & construction phase services for a facility were conducted over two separate contracts (e.g. one project taking the design to 35%, the second project completing the design to 100% and including construction phase services), can these combined into a single Section F project? | 86 CES | Yes, the two projects can be combined if they deal with the same subject and are completed to 100% design. The projects must also be clearly identified as such in Section F. |
| 66 | #2, says : Minimum Project Information REQUIRED (SF330, Part I, Section F, Block 24): to include a. Number and title of example project (match to SF330, Part I, Section G, Block 29), b. Location (State/Country), c. Customer/Client. Given that boxes 21and 23 contain the title of the project, location and customer, would it be fine to not duplicate the information by including it in Section 24 also? | 86 CES | See question #6. |
| 67 | Can we use PPQs that we have already received from our customers or do we need to re-request those PPQs in the format you provided? | 700 CONS | Please refer to Attachment 4 - Section M, Source Selection Evaluation Factors - Phase 1 Procedures - Evaluation of Primary Selection Criteria - 5. Past Performance (c)(i) |
| 68 | Will the responses provided during the presolicitation Q&A be binding for the individual task orders under the IDIQ contract even if corresponding clarifications are not incorporated into the solicitation documents? | 700 CONS | The Solicitation document may be amended to incorporate any changes deemed necessary by the Government after this question and answer period. Please submit proposals in response to the information provided in the solicitation for the IDIQ. Each Task Order will be awarded in accordance with the corresponding Task Order Solicitation. |
| 69 | Should proof of qualifications be included, and if so, in which section (due to page limits)? | 86 CES | See Question #17. |
| 70 | From our experience in the past and from the "Ramstein FRCS Cybersecurity Guideline”, IAW chapter 5.1 Cybersecurity Expertise and Chapter 9.3 Certificates “IAT Level II” is a requirement for A&Es and contractors in the cybersecurity discipline. Is this still valid? | 86 CES | Yes, the “IAT Level II” certificate is a requirement for A&Es and contractors in the cybersecurity discipline. |
| 71 | Can an interdisciplinary project that started in October 2025 and for which the 95% design was submitted in September 2026 be included in Section F, even though the 100% design for this project will only be submitted in October 2026? | 86 CES | The design project must be 100% complete at time of submission. See question #9. |
| 72 | Can you confirm that Section I is required for the submission even though it is not listed in Attachment 1 (Section L) and Attachment 3 (Submission Requirements Checklist) | 700 CONS | Section I of the SF330 is required. It can be located at the bottom of page 5 of the SF330. Please follow the SF330 Instructions. Section I. "Authorized Representative. 31. and 32. Signature of Authorized Representative and Date. An authorized representative of a joint venture or the prime contractor must sign and date the completed form. Signing attests that the information provided is current and factual, and that all firms on the proposed team agree to work on |
the project. Joint ventures selected for negotiations must make available a statement of participation by a principal of each member of the joint venture.
33. Name and Title. Self-explanatory"
| 73 | Can you confirm our understanding that “alternative documentation” means that no predefined form is required for these sections, while the page limits still apply? | 700 CONS | This understanding is correct. Please ensure compliance with the formatting requirements for alternative documentation as identified in Attachment 1 - Section L "FORMATTING AND PAGE LAYOUT REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTERNATIVE DOCUMENTATION". |
| 74 | Since PPQs are required for every Key Project and the Past Performance details in Section M also allow for ongoing projects to be considered, can you please clarify whether ongoing projects can be submitted as Key Projects in Section F, and which timeframe regulations apply? | 86 CES | PPQs are only required for projects without CPARS, see question #15. Only ongoing projects that have the design component completed, 100%, may be submitted. Please see question #71 for clarification |
| 75 | Can you confirm our understanding that credentials refer to the Certificates and Academic Degrees of the key personnel? Should the respective supporting documents be attached, and if so, in which section? Can you provide further details on how the percentages are determined? | 86 CES | See question #30 and #17. |
76 Can you confirm our understanding that “Training” refers to professional training and further education of the Key Personnel?
Should the respective supporting documents be attached, and if so, in which section?
Can you provide further details on how the percentages are determined? 86 CES See question #30 and #17.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .