RFQ_FA489726R0008_ Runway Geotechnical Investigation.pdf

-Runway Pavement Geotechnical Investigation & Material Failure Analysis- Request for Qualifications

Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho Solicitation No. FA489726R0008

1. General Information

This is a public announcement for a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Runway Pavement Geotechnical Investigation & Material Failure Analysis in accordance with the Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (RFO) Subpart 36.202-4, Short Selection Process of Firms for Architect-Engineer Contracts, Defense and Department of the Air Force supplements, and the Brooks Act. Price proposals are not requested with this announcement and will not be considered.

This award is anticipated for Total Small Business Set-Aside (RFO 6.102-2/ RFO Part 19).

NAICS Code: 541330 - Engineering Services (Size Standard: $25.5 Million)

Product Service Code (PSC): C219- Architect and Engineering- General: Other

Response Date: 26 August 2026, by 2 PM Mountain Time (MT)

Target Award date: 14 September 2026

Points of Contact (POC):

Contract Officer: Mr. Caleb Ferch, caleb.ferch.1@us.af.mil

Contracting Officer: Ms. Taylor Inman, taylor.inman.1@us.af.mil

2. Description of the Requirement

The 366th Contracting Squadron (366 CONS) at Mountain Home Air Force Base (MHAFB), Idaho, is seeking qualification packages from highly qualified Small Business Architect- Engineer (A-E) firms to conduct a comprehensive Runway Pavement Geotechnical Investigation and Material Failure Analysis.

The runway pavement is experiencing progressive distress, including surface cracking, spalling, and pitting. The selected A-E firm will perform specialized testing and deliver a professional engineering evaluation report to identify the root causes of the distress—specifically assessing whether the pavement suffers from cyclic load fatigue, aggregate-cement binder bonding failure, or chemical degradation.

Key Scope of Work (SOW) Elements:

Field Coring Operations: Extract approximately 40 concrete core samples, 30 baseline plus 10 subset, (6 inches in diameter) from designated locations on the active runway. Cores must be drilled to the full depth of the rigid pavement slab (estimated to be between 16 and 18 inches).

Operational Logistics & FOD Control: Perform all field operations during off-peak night shifts to accommodate active airfield operations. Maintain strict control over debris, dust, and slurry, using vacuum recovery systems to ensure a 100% Foreign Object Debris (FOD) free environment.

Core Hole Restoration: Immediately patch all core holes utilizing an approved rapid-setting, high-strength concrete grout capable of reaching 3,000 psi compressive strength within 2 hours of placement, per UFGS 32 01 29.61.

Laboratory Testing Protocol:

- Base Structural Testing (All 30 Cores): Compressive strength (ASTM C42/C42M) and density/absorption/voids testing (ASTM C642). Flexural Strength (ASTM C496) to determine splitting tensile strength and flexural strength and corresponding flexural strength of the concrete slab.

- Advanced Petrographic & Durability Analysis (10 Core Subset): Petrographic Examination (ASTM C856), Density, Absorption, and Voids (ASTM C642), Air-void System Analysis (ASTM C457), Alkali-Silica Reactivity (ASR) Assessment (ASTM C1260/C15567), and Precision Carbonation Depth &pH Mapping (BS EN

14630/RILEM CPC-18R1).

3. Notice of Short Selection Process ( RFO 36.202-4)

Each potential contractor shall be evaluated in terms of its:

(1) Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services.

(2) Specialized experience, equipment, lab services, and technical competence in the type of work required.

(3) Capacity to accomplish the work and provide quick, overnight lab service and analysis.

(4) Past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules.

(5) Location in the general geographical area of the project.

As authorized, the Short Selection process for contracts not exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold (RFO 36.202-4) will be utilized. Mountain Home Air Force Base will provide one architect-engineer evaluation board composed of its members who, collectively, have experience in architecture, engineering, construction, and Government and related acquisition matters.

The selection board shall:

(1) Review the current data files on eligible firms and responses to the public notice.

(2) Evaluate the firms in accordance with the criteria listed.

(3) Hold discussions with at least three of the most highly qualified firms regarding concepts and the relative utility of alternative methods of furnishing the required services.

(4) Prepare a final selection list directly to the Contracting Officer determining, in order of preference, The final selection authorizes the Contracting Officer to begin negotiations, beginning with the most preferred firm in the final selection in accordance with RFO 36.202-3.

The report shall include a description of the discussions and evaluations conducted by the board to allow the Contracting Officer to review the considerations upon which the findings are based.

If there is a tie for score of the most qualified firm, a Request for Proposal will be sent to the firms that have tied and the winner will be decided based on lowest priced technically acceptable. If there is no tie, the Contracting Officer will proceed as usual and issue a Request for Proposal to the firm evaluated as the most highly qualified and begin negotiations.

If a mutually satisfactory contract cannot be negotiated, the contracting officer shall obtain a written final proposal revision from the firm and notify the firm that negotiations have been terminated. The contracting officer shall then initiate negotiations with the next firm on the final selection list. This procedure shall be continued until a mutually satisfactory contract has been negotiated. If unable to reach a fair and reasonable agreement after negotiating with the firms on the final selection list, the contracting officer must reject all bids and reissue the solicitation (RFO 36.202-3(b)).

4. Instructions.

To be considered for contract award, firms must file a Standard Form 330. The most current version is available for download at https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms/architectengineer-qualifications

Qualification files shall be submitted by email to POCs listed above in the General Information section. DoD SAFE may be used if technical issues prevent vendors from sending requested information via email, if coordinated with the Contracting Officer sufficiently in advance of the due date and time for submission. No other method will be used for submission. Upon submission, contact both POCs listed under the General Information section above for confirmation of receipt.

https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms/architectengineer-qualifications https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms/architectengineer-qualifications

Interested parties must submit a two (2)-page RFQ response and complete Standard Form 330 (all parts) and support documentation electronically to both POCs. Follow the instructions of the Standard Form 330 for generation of the support documentation and ensure the submitted information demonstrates the qualifications of the firm against the specific selection criteria listed below.

Total submission is limited to 2 pages of standard 8.5 x 11 with 1-inch margin. 10-point font minimum. Any pages submitted in excess of the two (2) pages will neither be reviewed nor considered by the Government. The Standard Form 330 itself does not count against the 2-page limitation.

Do not provide any pricing information.

5. Selection Criteria.

The selection criteria and points of each criterion are as follows:

(1) Professional Qualifications – 40 Points

(2) Specialized/Technical Competence – 20 Points

(3) Capacity – 20 Points

(4) Past Performance – 10 Points

(5) Location/Knowledge of Locality – 10 Points

Total possible points – 100

Professional Qualifications- Max 40 points.

Each firm will indicate the following design discipline(s): Geotechnical Engineer.

Complete in-house capability of the listed design disciplines is preferred. For points to be awarded for professional credentials of staff, personnel must be full-time, permanent employees of the firm. Resume submissions for key personnel are limited to these positions. Organizational charts showing other positions may include other professional disciplines or certifications, however only these will be used for evaluation purposes. Points will be given for each position (Point total for this section will not exceed 40 points).

□ 0 points – No registered personnel on staff.

□ 5 points - One or more Senior Geotechnical Engineer on staff.

□ 5 points - One or more GPR/Utility Technician on staff.

□ 5 points - One or more Concrete Core Drilling Technician on staff.

□ 5 points - One Principal Engineer or VP of Engineering on staff.

□ 5 points - One or more registered Geotechnical Engineers (PE) on staff.

□ 5 points - One or more Field Operations Manager/Lead Geologist on staff.

□ 5 points - One or more registered civil engineers (PE) on staff.

□ 5 points - One or more Lab Director and materials testing technician on staff.

Specialized/Technical Competence – Max 20 Points

The Government will evaluate the offerors’ Specialized Experience and Technical Competence solely based on review of the project profiles available in the SF-330s on file for each Offeror, including any SF-330 updates or supplements to SF-330s. Do not submit in the 2-page RFQ response any project profiles or other demonstration of specialized experience and technical competence.

For the purposes of this requirement evaluation, the Government will evaluate specialized experience and technical competence based on the offeror’s demonstration of recent and relevant project profiles in the SF-330, to include any supplements and/or updates. Recent will be considered completed within the last five (5) years. Relevant projects will demonstrate similar complexity and scope to this requirement, including performance of Architect and Engineering services that:

a. Utilized applicable building codes and Department of Defense (DoD) publications (UFCs, AFIs, etc.) to evaluate code and regulation compliance

b. Involved in Field Operations on runways and highways require heavy-duty, fast, and high-precision diamond core drilling setups capable of cutting through thick, heavily reinforced concrete (often 12 to 24+ inches deep) with minimal structural impact.c. Involved in coordination with FAA (Advisory Circular 150/5370-10H) or state Department of Transportation (DOT) project guidelines, marking target core locations based on project specifications.

d. Specialized experience/access to an accredited materials laboratory to evaluate physical and chemical properties of concrete core samples.

Specialized Experience in Core Drilling (Of the Points below, only one will be selected from):

□ 0 points - No experience in concrete core drilling and lab analysis of airfield or highway concrete pavements.

□ 5 points - Performed at least one geotechnical investigation including concrete core drilling and laboratory testing on military/commercial concrete pavements particularly runways, and highway pavements.

□ 10 points - Performed at least one airfield or highway concrete core drilling with lab analysis/test results within a 48-hour period.

Specialized Experience in Geotechnical Concrete Investigation or Studies (Of the Points below, only one will be selected from):

□ 0 points - No experience in geotechnical concrete investigations or studies.

□ 5 points - Experience in one or two geotechnical concrete investigations or studies.

□ 10 points - Experience in three or more geotechnical concrete investigations or studies.

Capacity- Max 20 Points

Confirm, in writing, that the offeror has adequate capacity, immediate access to required specialized equipment, and the capability to perform the work in this requirement.

Capacity is defined as the ability to accomplish Core sampling and complete lab analysis within 24/48 hrs. in accordance with the Scope of Work (SOW), avoiding multiple mobilization and demobilization phases, while ensuring sample results are received while our SMEs (on TDY) are on site.

Additionally, the offeror must demonstrate possession of or immediate access to the following specialized field equipment:

Heavy Trailer-Mounted Hydraulic Rigs for deep core drilling.

Industrial Diamond Core Bits for strength testing to 6 inches for comprehensive pavement depth verification and petrographic analysis.

Mobile Water-Pressure Trucks for wet-drilled coring to control silica dust and cool the bit; must have self-contained water tanks and vacuums to prevent slurry from running onto runway surface.

The Discussions period will both refine the Government’s estimated PoP and allow opportunity to demonstrate an offeror’s project timeline that exceeds or reduces that PoP. Offeror must not respond to the RFQ with estimated timelines or a specific recommendation of a PoP. Such information will be gathered during Discussions only.

Specialized Equipment Access (Max 10 Points)

□ 0 points - Failure to demonstrate possession or immediate access to the required specialized field equipment (Trailer-Mounted Hydraulic Rigs, 6-inch Diamond Core Bits, or vacuum-equipped Water- Pressure Trucks).

□ 5 points - Confirmed immediate access to some, but not all, of the required specialized field equipment.

□ 10 points - Clearly demonstrated possession or immediate access to all required specialized field equipment (including runway-safe vacuum trucks to prevent slurry runoff).

Capacity & Timeline Compliance (Max 20 Points)

□ 0 points - Offeror does not confirm the capacity to complete core sampling and lab analysis within the required 24/48-hour window, OR the offeror violated the RFQ instructions by proposing an estimated timeline/PoP in their initial response.

□ 5 points - Offeror confirms the capacity to meet the 24/48-hour window, but the proposal details raise minor risks regarding multiple mobilizations/demobilizations. No unauthorized PoP timelines were submitted.

□ 10 points - Offeror fully confirms and details the capacity to accomplish core sampling and complete lab analysis within 24/48 hours (ensuring SME alignment on-site) while successfully omitting unauthorized PoP recommendations.

Past Performance- Max 10 points

Past performance on contracts with government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, compliance with performance schedules.

The Government will evaluate the past performance of the firm on its three most recent and relevant from Section F. The firm may pre-identify what those contracts are with the submission.

DoD or other federal contracts using Contractor Performance Assessment Rating System (CPARS) categories: Quality, Schedule, Cost Control, Management, and Regulatory (see provided table below for definitions). Past performance questionnaires may be used if CPARS assessments do not exist provided they utilize the categories and ratings below. Each category will be rated with one of the following: Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory (see provided table below for definitions and scores). Based on the ratings that have been assigned to each category, scores will be averaged, providing an average score between 0 and 4. Points will then be assigned based on this average score.

Category: Definition:

Quality Quality reflects the Contractor's management of the quality control program, as well as the quality of the work itself. Questions which should be addressed are as follows: Has a quality product been provided? For example:

- Ability to maintain quality control

- Ability to address and review comments

- Independent Technical Review

- Whether plans are coordinated with specifications

- Coordination between disciplines

- Compliance with design criteria

Schedule The timeliness of the Contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or affect the schedule variance).

Cost Control The Contractor's effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract or order cost. For contracts or orders where task or contract sizing is based upon contractor-provided person hour estimates, the relationship of these estimates to ultimate task cost should be assessed. In addition, the extent to which the Contractor demonstrates a sense of cost responsibility, through the efficient use of resources, in each work effort should be assessed.

Management The integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract or order, specifically the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the Contractor's history of reasonable and cooperative behavior (to include timely identification of issues in controversy), customer satisfaction, timely award and management of subcontracts.

Regulatory Compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract/order relating to applicable regulations and codes. Considering aspects of performance such as compliance with financial, environmental (example: Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act), safety, and labor regulations as well as any other reporting requirements in the contract terms and conditions.

Rating: Definition: Point Value:

Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government's benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective.

Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government's benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The Contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the Contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

Example Calculation

Project #1 Project #2 Project #3

Quality Exceptional (4) Exceptional (4) Satisfactory (2)

Schedule Very Good (3) Very Good (3) Marginal (1)

Cost Control Satisfactory (2) Very Good (3) Satisfactory (2)

Management Marginal (1) Exceptional (4) Marginal (1)

Regulatory Unsatisfactory (0) Very Good (3) Satisfactory (2)

Project Average 2 3.4 1.6

Past Performance Score = 2.33

□ 0 points – 0.0 < Past Performance Score < 2.0

□ 0.5 points – 2.0 < Past Performance Score < 2.1

□ 1 points – 2.1 < Past Performance Score < 2.2

□ 1.5 points – 2.2 < Past Performance Score < 2.3

□ 2 points – 2.3 < Past Performance Score < 2.4

□ 2.5 points – 2.4 < Past Performance Score < 2.5

□ 3 points – 2.5 < Past Performance Score < 2.6

□ 3.5 points – 2.6 < Past Performance Score < 2.7

□ 4 points – 2.7 < Past Performance Score < 2.8

□ 4.5 points – 2.8 < Past Performance Score < 2.9

□ 5 points – 2.9 < Past Performance Score < 3.0

□ 5.5 points – 3.0 < Past Performance Score < 3.1

□ 6 points – 3.1 < Past Performance Score < 3.2

□ 6.5 points – 3.2 < Past Performance Score < 3.3

□ 7 points – 3.3 < Past Performance Score < 3.4

□ 7.5 points – 3.4 < Past Performance Score < 3.5

□ 8 points – 3.5 < Past Performance Score < 3.6

□ 8.5 points – 3.6 < Past Performance Score < 3.7

□ 9 points – 3.7 < Past Performance Score < 3.8

□ 9.5 points – 3.8 < Past Performance Score < 3.9

□ 10 points – 3.9 < Past Performance Score < 4.0

Location - Max 10 Points

The Government will evaluate the proximity of the offeror’s key field and engineering personnel to Mountain Home AFB to ensure rapid mobilization, minimized travel delays, and immediate response capabilities for airfield pavement testing.

Points will be awarded based on the physical office location or primary residence of the specific full-time staff members proposed for the following four (4) critical project positions. Each position can only be counted once, for a maximum of 2.5 points per position:

Field Operations Manager / Lead Geologist (Responsible for immediate runway site safety and coordination)

Concrete Core Drilling Technician (Responsible for operating the physical rigs on the airfield)

Registered Civil Engineer (PE) or Geotechnical Engineer (PE) (Responsible for immediate field decisions/oversight)

GOR/Utility Technician (Responsible for utility clearance/marking target core locations prior to drilling)0 point per staff member - 300 miles and greater radius from base.

Location (Max Total of 10 Points, Max Points per Position is 2.5 Points)

□ 0 points per staff member - Greater than 300 miles radius from base. Personnel are located outside of practical daily commuting distance; high risk of mobilization delays.

□ 1.25 points per staff member - 100 miles to less than 300 miles from base. Personnel are within regional driving distance (e.g., eastern/northern Idaho, neighboring states), allowing same-day travel but limiting immediate emergency response.

□ 2.5 points per staff member – Less than 100 miles from base.

Additional Information.

Questions regarding this notice must be submitted via email to both:

Contracting Officer: caleb.ferch.1@us.af.mil

Contract Specialist: taylor.inman.1@us.af.mil

Reference the solicitation number and title in the email subject line.

Qualifications must be submitted by email no later than 2:00 PM local (Mountain), August 26, 2026.

Attachments:

(1) Scope of Work plus attachments

(2) Standard Form 330