Questions and Answers 16 Sep 2026.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 55 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA8137-26-R-0040
About this file
This file is a Questions and Answers document dated September 16, 2026, containing 151 clarifications to the Tinker AFB 2026 Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC) solicitation FA8137-26-R-0040. The Q&A addresses numerous proposal submission, evaluation, and compliance issues raised by prospective bidders during the RFI period that closed August 21, 2026. Key clarifications include: no bid guarantee is required for the base IDIQ award (only at task order level); CMMC Level 1 certification is required for initial award with potential higher levels for subsequent task orders; work samples for design-build projects have no page limit while other work samples are limited to 30 pages; for staffing documentation, page limits are 3 pages per person per position (not per position overall); personnel from teaming design subcontractors may be used for architects/engineers and the Design Program Manager position; Category 1 projects must be $1M-$5M or $5M-$10M with at least one project required per threshold; the minimum self-scoring threshold for small business is 8,190 points based on government expertise determination; and projects exceeding $10M threshold will be accepted for small business scoring despite initial matrix limitations. The document clarifies numerous inconsistencies between Section L (Instructions to Offerors), Section M (Evaluation Criteria), and appendices regarding project value thresholds, personnel sourcing, documentation requirements, and specialized construction categories (airfield, roofing, utility systems, fire protection, AT/FP measures, and road/parking/pavement). Submissions are to be emailed to AFSC.PZIOC.MACCworkflow@us.af.mil with a 30MB attachment size limit; proposals may be submitted in native Excel or PDF formats with future amendments addressing remaining naming convention and file organization inconsistencies.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 51 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
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 | Answer | |
| 1 | First, Block 13b on the SF 1442 shows that an offer guarantee is required. Since there's no pricing at the IDIQ level and the percentage blanks in 52.228-1 weren't filled in, we weren't sure if a bid guarantee actually needs to come in with the proposal. If it does, can you tell us the amount and what form you want it in? | No offer guarantee is required for the IDIQ. The clause was included so that it will flow down to the task order level and will be filled in for each individual order. |
| 2 | SF1442 Block 13, item b. indicates that an offer guarantee is required; however, there is not a requirement in Section L or M, or the Self-Scoring Worksheet, to provide an offer guarantee. Can the government please clarify if a bid guarantee is required with the initial proposal response? | No offer guarantee is required for the IDIQ. The clause was included so that it will flow down to the task order level and will be filled in for each individual order. |
| 3 | FAR 52.228-1 is included, but the percentage and maximum-dollar-amount fields are blank. Because the base IDIQ award does not appear to include an evaluated bid price, please confirm whether a bid guarantee is required with the base-contract proposal. If required, please provide the applicable percentage and maximum dollar amount. Please also identify where the bid guarantee should be included within our proposal package | No offer guarantee is required for the IDIQ. The clause was included so that it will flow down to the task order level and will be filled in for each individual order. |
| 4 | Bid Guarantee Required – what for the IDIQ submission is the guarantee for since no pricing required? Is a bid guarantee needed for the IDIQ submission? | No offer guarantee is required for the IDIQ. The clause was included so that it will flow down to the task order level and will be filled in for each individual order. |
| 5 | Paragraph c - what are the parameters for the Bid Bond? | No offer guarantee is required for the IDIQ. The clause was included so that it will flow down to the task order level and will be filled in for each individual order. |
| 6 | SF 1442, Item 13b states that an offer guarantee is required, and FAR 52.228-1 is included, but the percentage and maximum dollar amount are blank. Please provide the required bid-guarantee percentage or penal amount, acceptable form, and proposal-submission instructions. | No offer guarantee is required for the IDIQ. The clause was included so that it will flow down to the task order level and will be filled in for each individual order. |
| 7 | The SF-1442 and Page 75, 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee, indicate that a bid bond is required with our submission. Can the Government please confirm the amount we’re required to provide? | No offer guarantee is required for the IDIQ. The clause was included so that it will flow down to the task order level and will be filled in for each individual order. |
| 8 | RFP Page 76, FAR 252.204-7025, Notice of Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification Level Requirements (Nov 2025), does not contain the required fill-in identifying the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) level applicable to this solicitation. Can the Government please clarify the CMMC level required for this contract? [i.e., CMMC Level 1 (Self); CMMC Level 2 (Self); CMMC Level 2 (C3PAO); or CMMC Level 3 (DIBCAC)] | The initial IDIQ award only requires a CMMC Level 1 certification. Subsequent task orders issued against the IDIQ could require a higher certification level. |
| 9 | Section L, Paragraph 5.2.3.3, Certification for Safety Professionals, states: “The Offeror shall rate itself based on one or more of the safety staff assigned to this contract are certified safety professionals (i.e., certifications above and beyond minimum requirements in section STAFFING below).” However, the STAFFING section does not identify any minimum safety certification requirements, and Specification Section 01 35 26 has not been provided with the solicitation. Can the Government please clarify which safety certifications are considered “above and beyond” the minimum requirements and are eligible for the points available under this evaluation criterion? | Paragraph 5.2.3.3 refers the bidder to section STAFFING (5.2.4). Subsection 5.2.4.5, Site Safety and Health Officer refers the bidder the the SOW, specification 01 35 26, and USACE publication EM 385-1-1. The qualifications for the three levels of SSHO can be found in EM 385-1-1. Specification 01 35 26, Government Safety Requirements will be included in a future Amendment. |
Items that will meet this requirement include, but are not limited to: degree (Associate or above) in Occupational Safety or similar; or certificate programs for Safety Professional, Construction Safety Professional, or similar. Training used to fulfill the minimum continuing education requirements for Level 1 or 2 SSHOs may be utilized for this category.
10 Section L, Paragraph 5.2.3.4, Certification for Quality Professionals, states: “The Offeror shall rate itself based on one or more of the quality staff assigned to this contract are certified quality professionals (i.e., certifications above and beyond minimum requirements in section STAFFING below).” There does not appear to be a question here. Note that Specification 01 45 00.00 10 was inadvertently included in the solicitation, the updated specification 01 45 00 will be included in a future Amendment; the requirements are the same between the two specifications.
Items that will meet this requirement include, but are not limited to: degree (Associate or above) in Construction Science, Construction Management, or similar; or certificate programs Construction Quality Manager or similar.
11 We understand Specification Section 01 45 00, Paragraph 3.4.2.2, requires the QCM to have a minimum of five years of combined experience in specified positions, including at least two years of experience as a QCM, as well as familiarity with EM 385-1-1 and experience in hazard identification, safety compliance, and sustainability. Additionally, Paragraph 3.4.6 requires the QCM to have completed the Construction Quality Management (CQM) for Contractors course. Can the Government please clarify which quality certifications are considered “above and beyond” the minimum requirements and would qualify for the points available under this evaluation criterion? Additionally, please clarify whether completion of the CQM for Contractors course satisfies this criterion or whether a separate certification is required. Note that Specification 01 45 00.00 10 was inadvertently included in the solicitation, the updated specification 01 45 00 will be included in a future Amendment; the requirements are the same between the two specifications.
Completion of the QCM for Contractors course will not meet this requirement, as it is an established minimum. Items that will meet this requirement include, but are not limited to: degree (Associate or above) in Construction Science, Construction Management, or similar; or certificate programs for Construction Quality Manager or similar.
| 12 | Section L, Paragraph 2.2, Proposal Organization, Table 1 indicates paragraph number 5.3 for Certifications and 5.4 for Staffing. However, Section L does not have a corresponding paragraph number. Can the government please confirm whether these paragraph numbers should be 5.1.3 and 5.1.4, respectively? | The Paragraph 2.2, Table 2, should reference paragraph 5.1.3, Certifications and Licenses; and paragraph 5.1.4, Staffing. |
| 13 | Section L, Table 1- Small Business Pool Proposal Organization- Volume II Requirements: 5.3 Certifications: Providing certifications is of course no problem, however some of these certifications cannot be documented within the 2 page per position page limitation. For example, Section L, Paragraph 5.1.3.3 requirements to document the certifications for Safety Professionals could easily take up to 7-10 pages. Many certifications are one page certificates, and to document a safety professionals certifications the pages add up quickly- especially in order to meet he requirements of 01 35 26 and the EM-85-1-1 March 2024 edition. Can these page limitations be extended to 10 pages/position in order to document these professionals properly? | Section L, Paragraph 2.2, Table 2, Line 5.3. |
Section L, Paragraph 5.1.3.
-Certifications of the type requested in Section L and further expanded in the responses to contractor questions/RFIs can be documented in 2 pages. Only a single certification is required to receive points.
14 Section L, Tabe 1- Small Business Pool Proposal Organization- Volume II Requirements: 5.4 Staffing: Providing resumes and certifications is of course no problem for the required staffing positions as outlined in Section L, Paragraphs 5.1.4.1 through 5.1.4.7, however most of these certifications cannot be documented within the 3 page per position page limitation. Resumes themselves exceed 3 pages with the amount of experience our personnel have accumulated, let alone copies of their certifications for the positions they perform. Can these page limitations be extended to 15 pages/position in order to document these professionals properly? Section L, Paragraph 2.2, Table 2, Line 5.4.
Section L, Paragraph 5.1.4.
-For the positions of Contract Program Manager, Superintendent, and Design Project Manager, resumes demonstrating relevant experience are sufficient to meet the requirement and are limited to 3-pages.
-For the position of Quality Control Manager, required documentation will be a resume demonstrating relevant experience and certificate documenting completion of QCM for Contractors; total submission will be limited to 5-pages.
-For the position of SSHO, required documentation will be resume demonstrating relevant experience, certificate documenting required OSHA training, and documentation of required continuing education; total submission will be limited to 15 pages.
15 Would the government consider expanding the 3-page limit for each Staffing position to incorporate supporting documentation such as resumes, training records, and relevant certifications? Section L, Paragraph 2.2, Table 2, Line 5.3.
Section L, Paragraph 5.1.3.
-Certifications of the type requested in Section L and further expanded in the responses to contractor questions/RFIs can be documented in 2 pages. Only a single certification is required to receive points.
Section L, Paragraph 2.2, Table 2, Line 5.4.
Section L, Paragraph 5.1.4.
-For the positions of Contract Program Manager, Superintendent, and Design Project Manager, resumes demonstrating relevant experience are sufficient to meet the requirement and are limited to 3-pages.
-For the position of Quality Control Manager, required documentation will be resume demonstrating relevant experience and certificate documenting completion of QCM for Contractors; total submission will be limited to 5-pages.
-For the position of SSHO, required documentation will be resume demonstrating relevant experience, certificate documenting required OSHA training, and documentation of required continuing education; total submission will be limited to 15 pages.
16 Sections L and M refer to a “Project Management Professional certification as defined in SOW 3.1.2”; however, SOW paragraph 3.1.2.1 establishes experience requirements for the Contract Program Manager but does not identify a PMP certification. Does Category 6 require a current Project Management Institute-issued Project Management Professional certification? If not, please identify the acceptable credential. Section 6 Certifications/Licenses are in addition to the minimum requirements established in the SOW (and scored in a separate category).
The SOW reference was inadvertently included (it does not define PMP certification) and will be removed in a future amendment.
A current PMP certification issued by PMI is required to receive these points.
| 17 | What documentation will the Government accept to demonstrate that a work sample was at least 80 percent complete as of the solicitation date? Will the Government accept an approved progress schedule, invoice or payment history, schedule of values, contracting officer or COR certification, substantial-completion documentation, or a signed Statement of Facts? | The Government will accept any documentation that allows the Government to validate the 80% completion rate. The burden of determining what documentation to use, is up to the offeror. |
| 18 | Sections L and M require safety and quality certifications “above and beyond” the minimum Category 7 staffing requirements but do not identify acceptable credentials. Please identify the safety and quality certifications that will receive Category 6 credit. For example, will credentials issued by BCSP, ASSP, USACE, ASQ, or other nationally recognized organizations qualify? | For Category 6, Certification of Safety Professionals, items that will satisfy this category include, but are not limited to: degree (Associate or above) in Occupational Safety or similar; or certificate programs for Safety Professional, Construction Safety Professional, or similar. Training used to fulfill the minimum continuing education requirements for Level 1 or 2 SSHOs may be utilized for this category. |
For Category 6, Certification for Quality Professionals, items that will satisfy this category include, but are not limited to: degree (Associate or above) in Construction Science, Construction Management, or similar; or certificate programs for Construction Quality Manager or similar.
19 Section 1.6.6 Quality Control Personnel Certifications states “Submit American Concrete Institute certification for the following: a. CQC personnel responsible for inspection of concrete operations…” Can the government confirm if an ACI certification is required for the Quality Control Manager position proposed under Category 7? It is assumed that the question refers to specification section 03 30 00, Cast-in-Place Concrete.
ACI certification is not required for the basic contract.
Per the Statement of Work, Appendix B, specifications are included for reference only, and any specific requirements regarding additional qualification will be made at the Task Order Level.
20 Section 1.6.6.1 Quality Manager Qualifications “The quality manager must hold a current license as a professional engineer in a U.S. state or territory with experience on at least five (5) similar projects. Evidence of extraordinary proven experience may be considered by the Contracting Officer as sufficient to act as the Quality Manager.” Can the government confirm a PE license is required for the Quality Control Manager position proposed under Category 7, or if 10 years of relevant experience may be accepted in lieu of the license? It is assumed that the question refers to specification section 03 30 00, Cast-in-Place Concrete.
A PE license is not required for the basic contract.
Per the Statement of Work, Appendix B, specifications are included for reference only, and any specific requirements regarding additional qualification will be made at the Task Order Level.
21 The Statement of Work, Paragraph 3.1.2.4, requires the Design Program Manager to be a credentialed professional licensed in the State of Oklahoma. Our proposed Design Program Manager recently submitted an application for the required Oklahoma license; however, processing may take up to four weeks. Would the Government accept documentation confirming submission of the license application pending final approval? Design Program Manager must be a credentialed professional; Oklahoma licensure will not be required. This change will be reflected in a future amendment.
Oklahoma licensure will be required for any credentialed professional signing/sealing Issued for Construction (IFC) drawings.
| 22 | Section L requires a written statement explaining the offeror’s ability to obtain the resources needed to perform the contract, together with supporting evidence. Please identify acceptable forms of evidence, such as a bank letter, bonding-capacity letter, line-of-credit documentation, or other proof. | It is not the Government's intent to limit the acceptable forms of proof. The referenced forms would all be considered acceptable. |
| 23 | Section L defines the Project Management Professional by reference to SOW section 3.1.2, which addresses several key-personnel roles. May the individual holding the Project Management Professional certification fill any of the key-personnel roles listed in SOW section 3.1.2, provided the individual meets that role’s qualifications? | To receive the Category 6 points, the person(s) holding a PMP certification may be in any of the key positions described in SOW section 3.1.2 or 3.1.3. |
To receive category 7 points, individuals must met the role's qualifications as described in SOW Section 3.1.2 or 3.1.3.
Note: The reference to the SOW was inadvertently included (it does not define PMP certification) and will be removed in a future amendment.
| 24 | Will the Government accept the Project Management Professional certification of an individual proposed for the Construction Project Manager role described in SOW section 3.1.3.2? | To receive the Category 6 points, the person(s) holding a PMP certification may be in any of the key positions described in SOW section 3.1.2 or 3.1.3. |
| 25 | The CMMC clause and solicitation provision require the Contracting Officer to insert the applicable CMMC level, but the level appears blank in the solicitation. Please identify the CMMC level required for basic contract award and confirm whether any higher or different CMMC requirements will be established at the task-order level. | The initial IDIQ award only requires a CMMC Level 1 certification. Subsequent task orders issued against the IDIQ could require a higher certification level. |
| 26 | On July 13, 2026, The Department of War (DoW, formerly DoD) announced the immediate suspension of CMMC Phase II requirements (originally set to take effect November 10, 2026), along with all pending and future CMMC implementation milestones. Additionally, our understanding is Contracting officers were directed to amend active solicitations. Is it the intent of the Government to remove any Level 2 requirements, if any are included? | The initial IDIQ award only requires a CMMC Level 1 certification. Subsequent task orders issued against the IDIQ could require a higher certification level. |
| 27 | Section L is missing the “Instructions to Offeror Paragraph” 4.6.3.2 that is referenced in the Self-Scoring Matrix for the Full and Open Pool. Can the Government please provide details for the “Certifications for Credentialed Professionals,” including for the architect, civil engineer, structural engineer, mechanical/plumbing engineer, electrical engineer, fire protection engineer, and interior designer? | The paragraph describing submittal requirements for credentialed professionals (Section L), and evaluation criteria (section M) were inadvertently omitted. The necessary requirements will be addressed in a future amendment. |
| 28 | Can the Government please advise if the “Credentialed Professionals” and the “LEED Professionals” are required to be licensed in Oklahoma? | Oklahoma licensure will be required for any credentialed professional signing/sealing Issued for Construction (IFC) drawings. |
LEED certifications are not awarded on a state by state basis.
| 29 | Please confirm what documentation is acceptable to substantiate Certifications/Licenses under the applicable criteria, including whether proof of education/degree is sufficient where an educational qualification is required. | It is not the Government's intent to specify or limit the documentation used to substantiate licenses/certifications/education. Official documentation, i.e. issued by the licensure/certification/educational organization, that demonstrates successfully meeting the requirements of that organization to obtain said license/certificate/etc. will be accepted. |
| 30 | Please confirm whether a current NICET Level III or IV certification is acceptable documentation for the applicable Fire Protection certification requirement. | It is assumed that this question references the full-and-open scoring matrix, Section 3, Category 6. By definition (reference SOW, paragraph 2.3) a credentialed professional is a licensed engineer or registered architect. NICET certification does not meet this definition and will not be sufficient to claim the points. |
| 31 | Table 2 limits Certifications to two pages per position. Where the underlying certification/license documentation itself requires multiple pages, please clarify what documentation should be submitted to substantiate the claimed points and whether the complete certification documentation may exceed the two-page limitation. | Government believes this requirement can be met by providing a certificate issued by the licensure/certification organization and, where applicable, a wallet card, web printout, etc which demonstrates the license/certification is current. If certification documentation is more than two pages, print multiple pages per sheet to achieve the two page limit. |
| 32 | May offerors provide a company-certified Statement of Facts/personnel matrix identifying the employee, position, certifications/licenses and required experience, together with applicable supporting credentials, in lieu of full resumes to substantiate the Section 5.4 Staffing criteria? | Statement of Facts/personnel matrix will not be accepted. |
| 33 | For an ongoing work sample that is at least 80% complete but for which a final CPARS or other formal performance evaluation has not yet been issued, please confirm what alternative documentation is acceptable to substantiate percentage complete and past performance (e.g., client certification, interim performance evaluation, progress documentation, or other contemporaneous project record). | The Government will accept any documentation that allows the Government to validate the 80% completion rate. The burden of determining what documentation to use, is up to the offeror. |
| 34 | Is there an RFI period for this opportunity? My apologies if the due date for the RFIs is listed somewhere, I couldn’t find it. | The RFI period closed after 21 Aug 2026. The Government reserves the right to re-open the RFI period if needed. |
| 35 | Also, will there be a pre-proposal meeting held? If so, what is that date? | No pre-proposal meeting is planned. |
| 36 | Section L, Paragraph 1.9.3 states, “The Offeror shall submit each volume in electronic format via the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Solicitation module.” Section L, Table 1 provides required file names for Volume I and Volume III; however, no combined filename is provided for Volume II. Instead, Table 1 identifies file names for certain individual sections within Volume II but does not provide file names for all sections. Please clarify whether Offerors may submit Volume II as a single, combined PDF, or whether each section identified within Volume II must be submitted as a separate file. | Government recognizes that the naming convention is confusing. This issue will be addressed in a future amendment. |
| 37 | SF 1442, block 13, item a states that the Offeror is required to submit the original plus one copy. Since proposals are being submitted electronically through PIEE, can the Government please confirm that one electronic original is sufficient and that a separate copy is not required? | One electronic original is sufficient. Note that Amendment 2 updated the submission to the MACC Workflow Org Box at AFSC.PZIOC.MACCworkflow@us.af.mil. |
| 38 | SF 1442 and the public solicitation notice identify the proposal deadline using Central Daylight Time/local time, while Section L states Central Standard Time. Please confirm the controlling deadline and time zone. | Specific time has been removed from Section L. The deadline shall be as indicated on the SF 1442 and the solicitation notice on SAM.gov. |
| 39 | Clarification Deadline: Please confirm the deadline for submission of offeror questions and requests for clarification. | The RFI period closed after 21 Aug 2026. The Government reserves the right to re-open the RFI period if needed. |
| 40 | 1.9.3 Submission Format – * Does the MACC Workflow Org Box have a file size limit? * Will the Government accept Zip files? For example should offerors Zip Volume II when submitting? | The attachment size limit is 30MB. A DOD safe link may be provided upon request. |
| 41 | Since questions are due today, August 21, 2026, at 3:00 PM ET, and responses have not yet been provided to questions, will offerors have an opportunity to submit follow-up questions or requests for clarification based on the Government’s responses issued after the question deadline? | The RFI period closed after 21 Aug 2026. The Government reserves the right to re-open the RFI period if needed. |
| 42 | Amendment 0002 changed the proposal submission from PIEE to email. Can the government please advise of email size limitations so we can proactively prepare for the submission? Specifically, the items (e.g. Work Samples) required in Volume II – Technical Experience may result in large file sizes that may be difficult to transmit via email. | The attachment size limit is 30MB. A DOD safe link may be provided upon request. |
| 43 | My question is in regard to the Section L change in 1.9.3. Submission Format. The change references that the offeror will submit proposals to the “MACC Workflow Org Box” at AFSC.PZIOC.MACCworkflow@us.af.mil. (This looks like a simple email transmission (i.e., To: MACC Workflow Org Box, then providing the email)). I just wanted to verify if the “MACC Workflow Org Box” is or is not a solicitation module that requires us to upload to a solicitation module like PIEE. If it is a solicitation module, please provide the instructions on how to access the module. | This is not a solicitation module. It is an email org box. The attachment size limit is 30MB. |
| 44 | Please clarify the preferred submission format for Volume II – Technical Experience. Section L, Paragraph 2.2 Proposal Organization Table 1 for Small Businesses indicates separate file names for 4.3 Work Samples, 4.4 Self-Scoring Matrix, 4.5 Cross-Reference Matrix, 5.3 Certifications and 5.4 Staffing, which appears to indicate these sections should be submitted as separate files/attachments. However, Section L, Paragraph 1.9.3 appears to require submission by volume, stating that “The Offeror shall submit each volume in electronic format” and that “Offerors shall clearly identify each volume.” Please clarify whether the Government intends for the identified sections to be submitted as separate email attachments, or whether offerors may submit Volume II as a single, combined PDF containing all applicable sections. | Government recognizes that the naming convention is confusing. This issue will be addressed in a future amendment. |
| 45 | Please clarify whether offerors are required to submit the Self-Scoring Matrix and Cross-Reference Matrix in Excel format. Section L, Paragraph 2.2, Table 1 identifies the file names for the Self-Scoring Matrix and Cross-Reference Matrix with an .xlsx file extension. However, Section L, Paragraph 1.9.3 states that proposals shall be submitted in a format readable by MS Office Word, MS Office Excel, or Adobe PDF. Please confirm whether the Government requires the completed Self-Scoring Matrix and Cross-Reference Matrix to be submitted as native Excel (.xlsx) files, or whether offerors may submit these documents in PDF format. | A copy of the .xlxs Self-Scoring Matrix will be utilized by the source selection team during the evaluation of the contractor self-assessed score. The contractor may also include a PDF version of the scoring matrix. The Cross-Reference Matrix may be submitted in PDF format. This change will be addressed in a future amendment. |
| 46 | Please clarify the page numbering requirements for Work Samples. Section L, Paragraph 4.3.5 states that work samples shall be provided in their original format, that the original pagination of each document shall be retained, and that if the original documentation is not numbered, offerors shall add page numbers. The paragraph further requires offerors to combine all documentation for a given work sample into a single PDF and add a unique work sample identifier and page number to each page (e.g., “WS2 pg1”). However, Section L, Paragraph 1.9.2 requires that pages be numbered sequentially by volume, with each volume starting at page one. Please clarify whether Work Samples are required to retain the original pagination, include the additional WS-specific page numbering, and also be assigned sequential Volume II page numbers, or whether the WS-specific page numbering (e.g., WS2 pg1) is intended to satisfy the Volume II sequential page numbering requirement. | Government recognizes that the naming convention, page numbering, and file organization for Volume II is confusing. This issue will be addressed in a future amendment. |
| 47 | 5.1.1 Section 1, Categories 1-4: RELEVANT CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE Will the government raise the $5-$10M threshold to $5-$15M? Or accept one project that is a couple million over the $10M threshold? | For the Small Business Self Scoring Matrix (Appendix D) the Government will accept projects that exceed the $10M threshold. This change will be addressed in a future amendment. |
| 48 | Section L, Paragraph 4.3.1 states, “A maximum of 10 total work samples can be submitted for Category 1, with at least one (1) work sample provided for each specified threshold.” Attachment 2C, Section 2 – Design Experience, separately requires Offerors to submit experience as the Prime Contractor on Design-Build projects. | For Section 2, Category 5 on both the Small Business Self-Scoring Matrix (Appendix C) and the Full-and-Open Self-Scoring Matrix (Appendix D), the bidder may utilize project(s) that were submitted for Section 1, Categories 1-4. Work Samples for these projects must meet the requirements for both Sections 1 and 2. |
Utilize the Cross-Reference Matrix to identify Work Sample(s) being used for both sections.
| Please clarify whether the Design-Build project(s) submitted under Attachment 2C, Section 2 are separate from and in addition to the maximum 10 work samples permitted under Section 1. Specifically, please confirm whether an Offeror may submit up to 10 work samples for Section 1 plus one additional Design-Build work sample for Section 2, for a total of 11 work samples, in order to receive the maximum available points. | ||
| 50 | Section L, Paragraph 5.1.2.1 states, “The Offeror shall submit work samples and rate itself based on the number of projects over $1 million in total contract value requiring Design Build effort. However, Attachment 2C, SB Self Scoring Matrix, Section 2, Category 5 identifies the scoring range as “0-1 Projects.” Can the government please clarify whether the Prime Contractor is required to submit only one Design-Build work sample under Section 2 to receive the maximum available points? | Bidders must submit one Work Sample/Project for Section 2, Category 5 to receive points. |
As noted previously, Offeror may use Work Package submitted for Section 1 to meet the requirements of Section 2. Utilize the Cross-Reference Matrix to identify Work Sample(s) being used for both sections.
| 51 | Section L, Table 1- Small Business Pool Proposal Organization- Volume II Requirements: There is not a file name prescribed for the overall Volume II file. There are only file names prescribed for the individual components, I.E. Work Samples, Self-Scoring Matrix, etc. Shouldn’t there be a file name prescribed for the entire packaged volume such as “CompanyName_MACC_Vol2_TechnicalExperience”? Otherwise the way this is showing, the Government will be receiving individual parts of the volume without a unified title to tie them all together as a single package, which is what the instructions in Section L, Paragraph 1.9.3 suggest. We would suggest a prescribed volume name, with the individual components of that volume being prescribed named bookmarks within the document. Does the Government concur? | Government recognizes that the naming convention, page numbering, and file organization for Volume II is confusing. This issue will be addressed in a future amendment. |
| 52 | Section L, Table 1- Small Business Pool Proposal Organization- Volume II Requirements: 4.3 Work Samples- have a 30 page limitation. The supplemental documentation that we are required to provide to substantiate the scope, size, etc. of the project could easily surpass this if we have to include a copy of the SOW, any drawings, pieces of contract documents such as the SF 1442 or NTP documentation. Section L, Paragraph 4.3.4(1)(2)(3)(4) lists many required forms of documentation that will easily surpass 30 pages. For example, a SOW is easily 20+ pages, and the sections of the contracts required can be up to 15 pages. This doesn’t include subcontracts, schedules, invoices, etc., all of which are shown to be a requirement under this paragraph as documentation for work samples. All of this documentation can easily add up to over 100 pages per work sample. Can this be increased in order to provide the greatest level of detail as required under Section L, Paragraph 4.3.4(1)(2)(3)(4)? | Work Samples for a design-build project to be evaluated against the criteria in Section L, Category 5 will have no page limit. This change will be addressed in a future amendment. |
| 53 | Appendix C to Section L, Small Business Self-Scoring Matrix There appears to be a potential inconsistency in the calculation of the minimum score requirement in Appendix C to Section L, Small Business Self-Scoring Matrix. When entering self-scoring information for relevant experience and other applicable criteria, the scoring matrix assigns points to each individual line item, which are then totaled to determine the offeror’s overall self-assessed score. However, cell E123 identifies the minimum score required as 8,190 points. Based on our review, this figure appears to have been calculated by taking the maximum potential score available under all criteria and multiplying that total by 70%. This methodology appears inconsistent with the manner in which the scoring matrix actually establishes minimum qualifications. When the minimum quantities of projects and other parameters identified within the self-scoring matrix are entered, the resulting score is substantially lower. Depending on how the minimum requirements under each category are interpreted, the resulting minimum score appears to fall in the approximate range of 4,400 to 5,000 points, rather than 8,190 points. Accordingly, 8,190 points appears to represent approximately 70% of the theoretical maximum score, while the minimum scoring thresholds reflected by the individual criteria appear to represent approximately 43% of the maximum achievable score. If 8,190 points is intended to be the minimum qualifying score, please clarify the basis for applying a 70% multiplier to the maximum theoretical score rather than calculating the minimum score based on the minimum requirements established within the scoring matrix itself. As currently structured, the methodology could potentially exclude otherwise highly qualified small business concerns solely because the minimum score is derived from a different grading methodology than the scoring criteria themselves. We respectfully recommend that the Government review the calculation in cell E123 and confirm whether the 70% calculation is intentional. If not, we recommend that the minimum score be recalculated using the minimum requirements and corresponding point values established throughout the self-scoring matrix, thereby establishing a consistent and mathematically supportable minimum scoring threshold. Please advise whether the Government will review and, if appropriate, revise the minimum score calculation in Appendix C. | The government determined the minimum score based off of discussions and the expertise of the team members which would result in highly qualified participants. |
| 54 | Appendix C to Section L – Small Business Self-Scoring Matrix, Category 1a, Project Magnitude Category 1a of Appendix C references Section L, Paragraph 5.1.1.1.1 and identifies the following two project-magnitude categories: • Prime Contractor $1M to $5M Multiple Trades – 200 points per project. • Prime Contractor $5M to $10M Multiple Trades – 300 points per project. Section L, Paragraph 5.1.1.1.1 does not appear to separately identify these two project-magnitude categories. We therefore request clarification regarding the relationship between the requirements in Paragraph 5.1.1.1.1 and the scoring categories established in Appendix C. We also respectfully request that the Government consider whether the $5M-$10M experience category is necessary for the Small Business pool given the anticipated project magnitudes identified in the Government’s “Table 2 – Anticipated Project Magnitude Information.” Based on our review of that table, the anticipated workload is predominantly comprised of projects in the $0-$5M range: • FY 2026: 24 projects, approximately 87.5% between $0 and $5M. • FY 2027: 25 projects, approximately 88% between $0 and $5M. • FY 2028: 44 projects, approximately 86.4% between $0 and $5M. • FY 2029: 18 projects, approximately 94% between $0 and $5M. • FY 2030-2032: All identified projects are in the $0-$5M range. Based on the table, there appear to be approximately 149 anticipated projects across the seven fiscal years, with only two identified as exceeding $10M. We recognize that the experience requirements are intended to evaluate an offeror’s ability to successfully perform the anticipated work and that the Government may have legitimate reasons for establishing experience requirements above the predominant anticipated project magnitude. Nevertheless, given the projected workload, we respectfully request consideration of whether the Small Business pool could instead place greater emphasis on demonstrated experience within the $1M-$5M range. One potential approach would be to remove the $5M-$10M experience category from the Small Business pool and increase the number of projects that may be submitted within the $1M-$5M category, for example, from 1-5 projects to 1-10 projects. This would allow small business offerors to demonstrate a broader history of successful performance on multiple-trade projects within the magnitude that appears to represent the majority of the anticipated MACC workload. We believe this approach could provide the Government with meaningful information regarding an offeror’s depth and consistency of relevant experience while also providing small businesses with an opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities through multiple projects within the predominant anticipated project magnitude. Please advise whether the Government would consider removing the $5M-$10M project experience requirement from the Small Business pool. | Section L, Paragraph 5.1.1.1.1. Offerors shall submit projects within the two specified ranges, $1M-$5M and $5M-$10M. Number of projects to be submitted shall be as specified in the Small-Business Self-Scoring Matrix, Section 1, Category 1. |
Workload data beyond FY27 is very preliminary and likely to change; workload data is presented more as a representation of the projects to be executed in the future, rather than magnitude of projects.
The Government has considered the question and has chosen to keep the ranges and categories as is.
55 Section L, Paragraph 5.1.1.2, Category 2: Construction for the Department of War This paragraph states “The offeror shall utilize projects submitted for Category 1.” We understand that this means to utilize projects presented under Category 1 on Appendix C for Small Business Pool Self-Scoring. The question is, can we do this for all categories (2 through 5), or just for Category 2? The remaining paragraphs for Categories 3, 4 and 5 do not include this statement, so we need to verify what the intent is. Please clarify whether we can use projects from Category 1 amongst just Category 2, or amongst all categories. For both Scoring Matrices, the Government intent is that projects submitted for Section 1, Category 1 also be utilized for categories 2-4. This will be clarified in a future amendment
For Section 2, Category 5 on both the Small Business Self-Scoring Matrix (Appendix C) and the Full-and-Open Self-Scoring Matrix (Appendix D), the bidder may utilize project(s) that were submitted for Section 1, Categories 1-4. Work Samples for these projects must meet the requirements for both Sections 1 and 2. Alternatively, the Offeror may submit one additional Work Package for a Design Build project.
Utilize the Cross-Reference Matrix to identify Work Sample(s) being used for both sections.
56 Section L, paragraph 4.3.1 limits Category 1 to ten work samples and states that those samples will be used for subsequent categories in Section 1. Paragraphs 5.1.2.1 and 5.1.2.2 separately require a design-build work sample for Section 2, Category 5. May the Offeror submit a separate design-build work sample for Category 5 in addition to the ten Category 1 work samples, resulting in a maximum of eleven total work samples? Offeror may utilize a Work Sample submitted for Section 1, category 1; or a new Work Sample may be submitted.
Utilize the Cross-Reference Matrix to identify Work Sample(s) being used for both sections.
| 57 | Is Category 2 limited to projects over $1 million, as stated in Appendix C and Section M, or projects under $1 million, as stated in Appendix E? Please provide a corrected matrix identifying the controlling threshold. | Projects submitted to satisfy design experience for Small Business offerors must be > $1M. The matrix included in Appendix E is incorrect will be updated in a future amendment. |
| 58 | Please confirm that the maximum number of Category 1 work samples is ten, notwithstanding the reference in paragraph 4.5.1 to work sample identifiers WS1–WS14. | Maximum number of work samples for category 1 is limited to ten. |
| 59 | Please identify the controlling paragraph reference, Category 4 title, number of permitted projects, applicable project-value threshold, and point values, given the inconsistencies among Section L, Section M, Appendix C, and Appendix E. For example, Appendix E refers to up to two individual-trade projects, while Appendix C and Section M refer to one specialized-construction project per subcategory. Please provide corrected versions of the applicable matrices. | Section M and Appendix C are the correct governing documents, provide up to 1 project for each category of specialized construction. |
The matrix included in Appendix E is incorrect will be updated in a future amendment.
60 Section L states that Category 2 applies to projects executed for the U.S. Government, while Section M and Appendix C describe projects executed for the Department of War. Please identify the controlling scope. If limited to the Department of War/Department of Defense, please confirm that projects for all DoD agencies and military departments—including the Air Force, Space Force, Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Defense Logistics Agency—qualify. Projects that satisfy the category 2 are projects executed for DoW/DoD.
Projects executed for any DoW/DoD agency will satisfy the requirement.
| 61 | Section 4.3.3 permits qualifying work samples from a parent, affiliate, subsidiary, or joint venture, provided that the Offeror supplies at least five of the total work samples. Please confirm that at least five samples must have been performed by the proposing legal entity as prime contractor. If the Offeror submits fewer than five total work samples, is the Offeror prohibited from using any parent, affiliate, subsidiary, or joint-venture work samples? | The Government confirms that at least five (5) samples must have been performed by the proposing legal entity as prime contractor. The offeror is not prohibited from using a parent, affiliate, subsidiary, or joint-venture so long as at least five (5) of the samples were performed by the proposing legal entity as prime contractor. |
| 62 | Appendix E requests Government POC information “if necessary.” Please confirm whether a Government POC is optional when the submitted contractual documentation independently substantiates the claimed points. If a POC is provided, may the same Government individual validate more than one work sample? | Government POC is not required; Work Samples shall contain sufficient information to substantiate all points claimed on the scoring matrix. |
| 63 | For Category 3, must each of the two to four projects performed concurrently be one of the Category 1 work samples included within the ten-sample limit? Must each concurrent project independently satisfy a Category 1 dollar threshold and all general work-sample eligibility requirements, including prime-contractor status, award date, six months of performance, and 80 percent completion? | Projects for Category 3 must be from the 10 Work Samples submitted for Category 1. |
| 64 | Appendix C identifies Category 1 thresholds of $1 million to $5 million and $5 million to $10 million. Into which threshold should a project with a value of exactly $5 million be placed? Please also confirm whether the applicable project value is the current total contract or task-order value, including executed modifications, as of the solicitation date. | Projects valued a exactly $5M will be included in the $5M-$10M threshold. |
Value of the projects shall be based on the original award amount, not the current values including executed modifications.
| 65 | Would the government consider removing the 30-page limit for each work sample, or extending the limit to 50+ pages per work sample, to incorporate the contract documentation listed in Section L 4.3.4? | Work sample page limitation will remain at 30 pages. |
| 66 | Section L, Paragraph 5.1.1.2 / Section M, Paragraph 4.1.1.2 – Category 2: Please confirm whether Category 2 credit is limited to Department of War/DoD projects or includes projects performed for any U.S. Government agency. | Category 2 credit is limited to DoW/DoD projects. |
| 67 | Given the nuanced nature of the past performance requirements outlined in the Self-Scoring Matrix, is the government amenable to extending the cutoff for past performance to 10 years instead of 5? | The cutoff shall remain at 5 years. |
| 68 | Section 5.1.2.2 “Design Document Submission” references offerors needing to satisfy this requirement with a project “awarded on or after May 2021 and the project is at least 80% complete”. Was this intended to read “completed on or after May 2021”? Or is this the intention of the government? | The Government's intent is as written. |
| 69 | Section L states that a maximum of 10 total work samples may be submitted for Category 1 and that only Category 1 work samples will be reviewed for the other categories in Section 1. Please confirm whether the Section 2, Category 5 design-build requirement must be satisfied using one of those 10 Category 1 work samples or whether an offeror may submit a separate Category 5 work sample, for a total of 11 work samples across Sections 1 and 2. | Offeror may utilize a Work Sample submitted for Section 1, category 1; or a new Work Sample may be submitted. |
Utilize the Cross-Reference Matrix to identify Work Sample(s) being used for both sections.
70 If an offeror uses a Section 1 work sample to satisfy Section 2, Category 5, may the offeror submit a separate work-sample package for that same project, including a new cover sheet and supporting contract/design documentation, subject to the applicable 30-page limit? A Section 1 Work Sample that is also to be utilized for Section 2 will not be subject to the 30-page limit.
Utilize the Cross-Reference Matrix to identify Work Sample(s) being used for both sections.
71 Section L states that the offeror shall rate itself based on the number of projects over $10 million in total contract value requiring design-build effort, while Appendix C, Category 5 requires one prime-contractor design-build project over $1 million in construction cost. Please clarify the minimum and maximum contract-value requirements for the Category 5 project. The question appears to be referencing Section L, Paragraph 5.2.2. This paragraph is stating requirement for offerors in the Full-and-Open Pool; Appendix C is the Self-Scoring Matric for offerors in the Small Business pool.
Please refer to Paragraph 5.1.2 for requirements related to Appendix C.
| 72 | Please confirm whether the Section 2, Category 5 work sample may exceed $10 million in total contract value. | For offerors in the small business pool, projects exceeding $10M may be submitted. |
| 73 | Appendix C divides Category 1 projects into $1 million–$5 million and $5 million–$10 million thresholds. Will the Government revise the second threshold to greater than $5 million with no maximum value so that otherwise relevant projects exceeding $10 million may receive consideration? | For the Small Business Self Scoring Matrix (Appendix D) the Government will accept projects that exceed the $10M threshold. This change will be addressed in a future amendment. |
| 74 | To maximize the Section 1 score, an offeror would need 10 Category 1 projects with more than 10 trades, six of which would also need to satisfy the specialized-construction requirements in Category 4. Because Category 4 requires the specified specialized construction to comprise at least 60% of total project value, such projects are unlikely also to include more than 10 trades. Will the Government reduce the Category 4 threshold from 60% to at least 50% of total project value? | The specialized construction threshold will remain at 60%. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .