Attachment 1 - Final QnA.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 22 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA8903-25-R-0009
About this file
The file is a Question and Answer (Q&A) document for a Small Business Architect-Engineer (A-E) services solicitation for the renovation of Hangar 225 at Hill Air Force Base. The solicitation (FA8903-25-R-0009) is a total small business set-aside for NAICS code 541330 with a $25.5 million size standard, seeking a single contractor for an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with a $35 million total ceiling for Facility Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization (FSRM) Title I and Title II projects.
Key details include SF330 submissions due by 12:00 Noon Central Time on May 19, 2025, to be emailed to specific Air Force contracting officers. The Q&A document provides critical clarifications about proposal requirements, including guidance on teaming partners, key personnel, past performance submissions, and evaluation criteria. Notably, the prime offeror must be a certified small business, key personnel can be from the prime or teaming partners, and only specified engineering disciplines are considered teaming partners. The solicitation emphasizes the government's preference for minimizing teaming partners to reduce coordination risks.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| HILLHANGAR225 AESATOC SYNOPSIS - 13 MAY 2025-AMD 01.docx | DOCX document | |
| HILLHANGAR225 AESATOC SYNOPSIS-17 APR 2025-Clean.pdf | ||
| HILLHANGAR225 AESATOC SYNOPSIS - 17 APR 2025-Track Changes.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 1 - QnA.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
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/Comment | Document/Paragraph Reference: | Air Force Response |
| To confirm, the government would like Proposed Team narrative in Section F instead of Section H? | Page 5, Proposed Team | Synopsis will be updated. Proposed team should be in Section H - Special Contract Requirements. |
| To confirm, the government would like Business Relationship narrative in Section F instead of Section H? | Page 6, Business Relationships | Synopsis will be updated. Business Relationship should be in Section H - Special Contract Requirements. |
| Can we provide additional narrative along with our Past Performance ratings in Section H? | No additional narrative to support past performance submittals is allowed. | |
| On Page 8 where it states “that the Government considers that the larger the number of teaming partners used, the higher the risk of unsuccessful control and coordination by the Prime”, does this apply to subcontractors that are not fulfilling any key personnel as listed on Page 9 “Project Manager, Construction Inspection, Scheduler, Architect, Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, and Fire Protection Engineering.”? | Page 8, first paragraph after f. Title II Project and Historical Facility Title I Projects |
Page 9, Evaluation Method This only applies to teaming partners, not subcontractors. The Air Force considers "subcontractors" to be non-engineering firms, and thus we do not expect to see SF330's that include information about subcontracted, non-engineering services. Any engineering disciplines must be performed by the Prime or its proposed Teaming Partner. The Air Force considers "Teaming Partners" to be firms that perform Architectural or Engineering services that require professional licensure/stamped drawings, as well as Title II Construction Inspection. Work such as cost estimates, inspections, geo-tech, etc, would be considered a 'subcontractor' and not a teaming partner.
If a proposed Key Person works for a firm other than your proposed firm for that same discipline, then both the Key Person's firm and the proposed firm that is performing the work for that discipline are considered Teaming Partners and must include a teaming arrangement.
The Air Force will consider the extent of Teaming Partners proposed (for the architectural and engineering disciplines stated in the synopsis only) in its evaluation of Criterion 1 and Criterion 2.
Are services like cost estimating, surveying or environmental, when supported by a subcontractor, considered detrimental to the proposal? Page 8, first paragraph after f. Title II Project and Historical Facility Title I Projects
| Page 9, Evaluation Method | No | ||
| Does being a DOR on a DB project count as construction inspection when we provide “design reviews, quality assurance inspections, adherence to applicable specifications, construction schedule analysis, material submittal reviews, environmental submittal reviews, claim reviews, post-construction award services, and designer of record support.”? Or does it have to be a contract with the government directly on a DB or DBB project with a full time Construction Inspector? | Page 6, Project Experience | No, being a DOR on a Design-Build contract is not representative of relevant experience as an on-site Title II construction inspector. |
See definition of Title II Services in the synopsis. Note that "Title II Services include construction phase credentialed architectural and engineering support services that encompass a full range of disciplinary expertise and services to include on-site construction oversight assistance, design reviews, quality assurance inspections, adherence to applicable specifications, construction schedule analysis, material submittal reviews, environmental submittal reviews, claim reviews, post-construction award services, and designer of record support, and other standard construction submittal reviews. "Construction phase" means A-E services to provide Quality Assurance support (on the Government's behalf) for a separate construction project/contract, to include on-site inspection and oversight of construction activities to ensure adherence to technical specifications.
To confirm, if no subconsultants are considered key personnel, formal teaming arrangements are not required to be included within our SF330 submittal. Page 2, Prime Offeror Submission and Use of Teaming Partners Correct; if all key personnel are employed by the "Prime Offeror", no formal teaming arrangement is required for key personnel.
However, if you propose to use a teaming partner (to which a key person is not employed) but that you are using on your Criterion 1 Project submission, then you must submit a teaming arrangement IF SELECTED as the most highly qualified firm. Do not submit teaming arrangements with the SF330.
| To confirm, mentor protégé joint venture teaming agreements are not required to be included within our SF330 submittal as it is considered a prime entity. | Page 2, Prime Offeror Submission and Use of Teaming Partners | Correct |
| The RFQ lists this as an engineering led RFQ, with NAICS 541330, would an Architect led team be acceptable? | NAICS will remain 541330 as these are primarily engineering (not architectural 541310) services. |
However, as long as the Prime and its Teaming Partners have the appropriate registered or licensed architect or engineer for their disciplines, the Prime can be led by any Architect or Engineering Firm. Note that the Prime Offeror must be certified as a Small Business for NAICS 541330.
| The small business set aside is for certified firms only, would it be acceptable if a prime has a pending certifications such that they would have the certification by the time of the award | No. The Prime Offeror must be certified as a Small Business for NAICS 541330 at time of SF330 submission. | |
| Could the government please confirm if they want copies of past performance (PPQs, CPARS) in Section H or if they could be included within an Appendix? | Synopsis page 11, SF330, Part 1, Section H, Criterion (5) Past Performance | Past Performance documents can be provided in Section H, or as an attachment to the SF330 |
| We are an architecture firm classified under NAICS Code 541310 (Architectural Services). The solicitation is classified under NAICS Code 541330 (Engineering Services). If the project is reclassified under NAICS Code 541310, would you consider granting an extension of the due date to allow for the architect to collect qualifications from consultants and PPQs from past clients for the above referenced project? | NAICS will remain 541330 as these are primarily engineering (not architectural 541310) services.However, any Architect or Engineering Firm can propose so long as they are certified as a Small Business for NAICS 541330. |
SF330s are due at noon Central Time on May 23, 2025
| Is scanning allowed in Hangar 225? | This question is not related to the requirements of the synopsis, and will be addressed at the task order level as needed. |
| Can we provide more than the identified number of projects in each category? | No. Offerors are to adhere to the synopsis requirements. |
| Would it be beneficial to include Additional Staff (Value Added Services)? |
Historical Architect
RCDD
Sustainability Cybersecurity Communications Cost Estimator
| QC Manager | No. Only positions asked for in the synopsis will be evaluated. | ||
| Only one name per role? | Correct, while Critieria 4 does require at least two employees to be identified per each role, Criteria 2 must only include the professional qualifications for the identified LEAD key person for each required role. An individual may perform more than one Lead role if they hold the appropriate qualifications for those roles. | ||
| Should Table 1 match page 8 & 9? | No. Table 1 identifies the number of employees by discipline, in accordance with the SF330, Part II, block 9, that the Government requires to be identified to ensure offerors have the capacity to accomplish the work. On the other hand, the key personnel listed on pages 8 & 9 serve in lead positions, and will be evaluated based on their provided resumes to determine the most qualified team for this effort. |
| Possible to extend deadeline due to SAME JETC conference? | SF330s are due at noon, Central Time on May 23, 2025 |
| Can project descriptions be 2 pages? | No |
| Can Section H only be 2 pages or can we add more pages and information? | Follow the page guidelines provided in the synopsis for each criterion. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .