Attachment 0010 - NCR MATOC QA A0001.pdf

Q # RFP Reference

SOW Reference (Indicate if MATOC or SEED Project SOW is being referenced)

Question/Comment Government Response

Q.1 L.3.10 L.3.10 states "All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date, and RFP number in the header.". For clarification, may the date and page number be placed in the footer instead, to avoid overcrowding the header?

L.3.10 has been revised as follows; "…All pages of each volume shall be be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date, and RFP number in the header and/or footer.

Q.2 L.5 If the Offeror is an Alaskan Native entity may it utilize past performance of its sister companies?

L.5 has been revised as follows: "The Offeror shall provide past performance information regarding recent and relevant Government contracts/task orders of the Prime Offeror and/or any legal associated affiliate(s) of the Prime Offeror, if the Prime Offeror is able to successfully demonstrate meaningful involvement by the associated affiliate(s) in the proposed effort. The Prime Offeror and/or any legal associated affiliate(s) shall provide a summary referencing the past performance contracts/task orders cited to include the associated tasks from the NCR MATOC SOW represented by each cited project. M.5.1.1 has been revised as follows: "The Prime Offeror and/or any legal associated affiliate(s) of the Prime Offeror, if the Prime Offeror is able to successfully demonstrate meaningful involvement by the associated affiliate(s) in the proposed effort, will be assessed, evaluated, and provided a past performance rating....."

Q.3 L.5.1.1.2 Would the Government allow CPARS in lieu of obtaining Past Peformance Questionnaires? Many clients will not complete a PPQ if a CPARS exists. If allowed, should the CPARS be emailed to the Contracting Office POCs, or included in the Volume II proposal and excluded from page count?

Past Performance Questionnaires shall remain a requirement of the NCR MATOC RFP IAW L.5, Volume II; FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE.

Q.4 L.5.1.1.2 Would the Government allow previously completed Past Peformance Questionnaires in lieu of obtaining new questionnaires from clients? If allowed, should the Offeror email the evaluations to the Contracting Office POCs, or include them in the Volume II proposal and exclude them from the page count?

Current Past Performance Questionnaires shall remain a requirement of the NCR MATOC RFP IAW L.5, Volume II; FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE.

Q.5 L.4.1.2.1

L.4.1.2.1 states: "Offerors shall provide evidence of a Performance Bond and Payment Bond in the amount proposed for the Seed Project, with any additional bonding requirements requested with future task order request for proposals." Since P&P bonds are issued upon contract award, does this requirement indicate that a bid bond is needed instead?

L.4.1.2.1 instructs Offerors to provide evidence of a Performance Bond and Payment Bond in the amount proposed for the Seed Project.

Bid bonds are not required under this Request for Proposal because it is a Request for Proposal and not an Invitation for Bid.

ATTACHMENT 0010 - NCR MATOC RFP QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

KO: Danette Wilson (danette.d.wilson.civ@army.mil) CS: Amy Hahka (amy.k.hahka.civ@army.mil)

Q.6 SF1442 and

Section K Please advise in which volumes the SF 1442 and the Section K representations and certifications should be submitted.

L.3.8, Table 1: COMPLIANCE MATRIX PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION AND PAGE COUNT, has been revised as follows: Cover Letter, Must Include: Signed SF 1442 and all SF 1442 Amendments (excluded from pg. count). Representations and Certifications (excluded from pg. count) already existed under this section within Table 1.

Q.7 Section L, paragraph L.5.1

MATOC

Paragraph L.5.1 states, "Offerors shall provide a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) Government contracts / task orders that demonstrate successful past performance within the last seven (7) years of issuance of this RFP, valued at $1,000,000 or greater..." Can the government please clarify if "contract" refers to a contract for a single project or if it is acceptable for offerors to submit an IDIQ-type contact encompassing multiple task orders as a "contract"?

A single contract and/or an IDIQ-type contract is acceptable, as long as performance has been within the past seven (7) years of issuance of the NCR MATOC RFP, and the value is $1,000,000 or greater. If the Offeror is providing an IDIQ-type contract as a reference, the Task Order number will be required in addition to the IDIQ Contract number, and each Task Order provided as a reference shall be valued at $1,000,000 or greater .

Q.8 N/A N/A Will the Seed Project be awarded as a Task Order under the MATOC? Yes, the Seed Project will be the first Task Order award under the MATOC.

Q.9 Section L: L.4.1.1;

Section M: M.4.1.1

Page 32, 5.1.11 Would a Bachelor's Degree in Project Management for the Project Manager be acceptable?

IAW NCR MATOC SOW, Attachment 0001, 5.1.11; "The Project Manager shall have an accredited Bachelor's Degree in Engineering, Architecture, Construction Management or a related Civil, Structural, Mechanical, or Electrical field with a minimum of 10 years of experience managing multiple construction projects."

A Bachelor's degree in Project Management does not provide coursework comparable to engineering, architechture, or construction management, therefore, it does not meet the related field requirements for hte Project Management position above.

Q.10 Section L: L.4.1.1;

Section M: M.4.1.1

Page 34, 5.4 Could the Superintendent also serve as the Site Safety and Health Officer? No. The Superintendent and SSHO roles must remain separate.

Q.11 Section L:

L.5.1.1.1M.5 For Joint Venture Offerors, will past projects that were performed under a previous Joint Venture that had the same entities as the current JV be acceptable?

If the JV members of the current JV have previous past performance as members of a different JV, yes that can be used as long as it is within the time constraints called out in Section L, and the JV Members will be performing under the NCR MATOC in some capacity.

Q.12 Section C:5.3.4 Would an Associate's Degree in Architecture be considered acceptable for the Project Superintendent?

IAW NCR MATOC SOW, Attachment 0001, 5.3.4; " The Project Superintendent shall have an accredited AS degree in Construction Management or a related Civil, Structural, Mechanical, or Electrical field with a minimum of 5 years of construction experience on multiple projects totaling over $1 million." No, an Associate's Degree in Architecture is not acceptable.

Q.13 Can the PM and QC hold a masters degree accredited with a US University? Is that acceptable for personnel qualification requirements?

IAW NCR MATOC SOW, Attachment 0001, 5.1.11; The Project Manager shall have an accredited Bachelor's Degree in Engineering, Architecture, Construction Management or a related Civil, Structural, Mechanical, or Electrical field with a minimum of 10 years of experience managing multiple construction projects. IAW NCR MATOC SOW, Attachment 0001, 5.2.9, the QC Manager shall have an accredited AS degree in Construction Management or a related Civil, Structural, Mechanical, or Electrical Field with a minimum of 5 years of specialized experience as a project/job inspector or qualify control specialist in a constrtuction environment on multiple projects. The PM and QC can hold masters degrees, however, the Government will still need evidence of the above in order to determine acceptability.

Q.14 Section L. Para

L.1.5 N/A

Section L.1.5 requires proposals be valid for 180 days from the date of RFP close. The RFP closing date is 24 April 2026, and the anticipated ordering period begins 30 July 2026. If the evaluation period extends beyond 180 days, will the Government request extensions of proposal validity, and will Offerors be permitted to update pricing at that time?

If the proposal validity date needs to be extended beyond 180 days, the Government will notify all potential Offerors within the competitive range, should a competitive range be determined, to request an extension of proposal validity and allow those Offerors the opportunity to update pricing at that time.

Q.15 Section L, Para

L.3.3 N/A

Section L.3.3 requires Offerors to be a certified Small Business with active SAM registration and a CAGE Code at time of proposal submission, award, and for the duration of the contract. Please clarify the specific small business ceritification required - is self-certification in SAM sufficient, or does the Government require additional SBA certification to be provided under a specific program (e.g., 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB)?

This solicitation is a total small business set-aside (SBSA), with no specific socio-economic certification required. Small business self-certification in SAM is acceptable.

Q.16 Section L, Para L.3.8, Table 1

MATOC SOW, Section

Table 1 states a 75-page limit for Volume I (Technical Capability Approach). Please confirm whether resumes for key personnel (Sub-Factor 1A) are included within the 75-page limit or are excluded as appendices. Additionally, please clarify whether the organizational chart required under Sub-Factor 1C counts against the page limit.

Section L.3.8, Table 1, Volume I - Factor 1: Technical Capability Approach, has been revised to include Key Personnel Resumes (excluded from pg. count). The organizational chart required under Sub-Factor 1C shall count against the page limit.

Q.17 Section L, Para L.3.8, Table 1

N/A

The Cover Letter is limited to 2 pages and must include Representations and Certifications (excluded from page count). Please confirm that the Representations and Certifications referenced here are those completed in SAM per DFARS 252.204-7007, Alternate A, and not a separate document required reproduction in the proposal.

The Representations and Certifications (excluded from page count) requested as part of the Cover Letter content of the proposal are those reps and certs completed in SAM.

Q.18 Section L, Para

L.3.10 N/A

Formatting requires Arial or Times New Roman 12-point minimum font, single-spaced paragraphs, and 1-inch margins. Please confirm whether headers, footers, and page numbers are excluded from the in-inch margin requirements given the 0.5-inch 'From Edge' specification for headers and footers.

Headers and Footers are excluded from the 1-inch margin requirements.

Q.19 Section L, Para

L.4.1.2.1 Seed Project SOW (Attachment 0004)

Sub-Factor 1B requires Offerors to detail how they plan to staff, permit, and complete the Seed Project with a schedule. Please clarify whether the Government has a required completion date or not-to-exceed period of performance for the Seed Project, and whether the schedule should be presented in a specific format (e.g., Gantt chart, CPM network diagram).

Attachment 0004, Seed Project SOW, provides the number of days the project should be complete within (see pg. 2 of Attachment 0004). Attachment 0001_SOW Attachment 1.7 Project Schedule provides the format to be utilized.

Q.20 Section L, Para

L.4.1.3.1(b)

MATOC SOW

Sub-Factor 1C requires Offerors to describe systems and/or tools for tracking schedules, costs, and deliverables across all active TOs. Please clarify whether the Government requires or prefers specific project management software or systems (e.g., Procore, Primavera PG, MS Project, RMS), or whether the Offeror may propose any system that meets the functional requirements.

The Offeror may propose any system that meets the functional requirements.

Q.21 Section L, Para

L.4.1.3.1(c)

MATOC SOW, Section 5, (Paras 5.3.1, 5.3.3, 5.4.1)

The Resource Allocation Plan must address how the Project Superintendent and Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO) will be assigned to each TO. NCR MATOC SOW Paragraphs 5.3.1 and 5.4.1 state that both the Project Superintedent and SSHO must be listed in the technical proposal as part of each Task Order, and paragraph 5.3.3 requires the Project Superintendent to be present at the Installation performing daily superintendent duties while the Contractor has active construction TOs. Please clarify whether SSHO may serve across multiple concurrent TOs at difference installations, provided daily on-site presence requirements are met, or whether separate individual;s are required for each active TO.

The SSHO must serve across multiple concurrent TOs at different installations. This key personnel position is 1 FTE IAW the NCR MATOC SOW.

Q.22

L.4.1.3.1(d)

MATOC SOW, Section 5 (Paras 5.2.2, 5.2.7, 5.2.9)

NCR MATOC SOW Paragraph 5.2.2 requires the QC Manager to be present on-site and perform daily inspections while the Contractor has active construction TOs, and Paragraph 5.2.7 states the QC Manager shall have no other role. Given that the MATOC covers seven (7) geographically dispersed installations with potentially concurrent TOs, please clarify whether a single QC Manager is expected to rotate among installations with active TOs to satisfy the daily on-site inspection requirement, or whether the Government expects separate QC personnel at each active installation. Additionally, does the Government require the Offeror's QMS to be ISO 9001 certified or equivalent?

The QC Manager must serve across multiple concurrent TOs at different installations. This key personnel position is 1 FTE IAW the NCR MATOC SOW. The requirements for the QC Manager can be found within Attachment 0001 - NCR MATOC SOW , paragraphs 5.2 through 5.2.9.

Q.23 Section L, Para

L.5.1 N/A

Offerors must provide 3-5 Government contracts/task orders within the last 7 years, valued at $1,000,000 or greater, relevant to the NCR MATOC SOW. Please clarify: (a) Is the 7-year lookback calculated from the RFP issuance date (13 March 2026) or from the proposal due date (24 April 2026)? (b) Does the $1,000,000 threshold refer to the total contract/TO value or the value of work performed by the Prime Offeror?

IAW RFP Section L.5.1, Offerors shall provide a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) Government contracts / task orders that demonstrate past performance within the last seven (7) years of issuance of this RFP, valued at $1,000,000 or greater , relevant to the tasks described in the NCR MATOC SOW.

The $1,000,000 threshold refers to individual projects (contracts / individual task orders) completed by the Prime Offeror.

Q.24 Section L, Para

L.5.1 N/A

The past performance requirement specifies Government contracts/task orders only. Please confirm whether contracts performed as a key subcontactor are considered Government contracts for this purpose.

Only references performed under a Government contract / task order, will be considered during the past performance evaluation of this solicitation.

Q.25 Section L, Para

L.5.1.1.2 N/A

The Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 0003) must be completed and emailed by the Government technical representative to the Contracting Office by the proposal due date. Given the typical difficulty in obtaining timely responses from Government references, will the Government accept questionnaires received after the proposal due date? If not, what is the consequence if a reference fails to submit the questionnaire despite the Offeror's best efforts?

The Government will not accept PPQs submitted after the date and time specified for proposal submission of the NCR MATOC.

Q.26

L.6.3 N/A

Cost/Price supporting information must be submitted in MS Excel format only, and PDF or flat files will not be considered adequate. Please confirm that the Cost/Price narrative itself may be submitted in MS Word format, and that only the pricing spreadsheets (Attachments 0002 and 0006) must be in Excel.

IAW RFP Section L.6.3; "The Cost Volume proposal narratives, including any Basis of Estimate (BOE) sheets provided in support of the proposed price, shall be provided in files that are in MS Excel or MS Word compatible."

Q.27 Section M, Para

M.1.1 N/A

Section M.1.1 states awards will be made to technically acceptable proposals with the lowest evaluated price, and the Government anticipates up to thirteen (13) MATOC holders. Please clarify the award methodology. Will the Government rank all technically acceptable proposals by price and award to the lwest 13, or is there a different competitive threshold? If fewer than 13 technicaclly acceptable proposals are received, will all aceptable proposals receive award?

IAW M.1.1; "To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" must be achieved for the Technical Capability Approach Factor (to include all Sub-Factors), and the Past Performance Factor. If any Technical Sub- Factor is rates less than "Acceptable" it will render the factor unacceptable and therefore unawardable." IAW M.1.1.1.1; "The Government anticipates awarding up to thirteen (13) FFP, IDIQ contracts. The Government reserves the right to increase the number of MATOC holders, or make no award at all, should that be in the best interest of the Government."

Q.28 Section M, Para

M.4.1.2.1 Seed Project SOW (Attachment 0004)

Section M states the Seed Project sub-factor will be evaluated for acceptability based on evidence of bonding, staffing, permitting, and a schedule. Please clarify the minimum level of detail required to achieve an 'Acceptable' rating for the schedule—does the Government expect a detailed Critical Path Method (CPM) such as a Primavera P6 schedule, a summary-level milestone schedule, or a bar chart?

The template provided at Attachment 0001, NCR MATOC SOW, Attachment 1.7;

Project Schedule, shall be utilized.

Q.29 Section M, Para

M.6.1.2 Seed Project SOW (Attachment 0004)

The total evaluated price is based on the Seed Project FFP proposal per Attachment 0006. Please confirm that future task order pricing (NTE rates from Attachment 0002) will not be evaluated as part of the MATOC award price evaluation, and clarify how balanced pricing (FAR 15.404-1(g)) will be assessed when only the Seed Project pricing is evaluated.

Attachment 0002 (NCR MATOC Rate Sheet - NTE) must be submitted as part of your proposal in response to the NCR MATOC RFP. Future Task Orders (TOs) will be competed amongst eligible MATOC Holders once requirements become known.

TOs will be competed on a lowest price technically acceptable methodology.

Pricing will always be evaluated at the task order level, specifically for balance IAW FAR 15.404-1(g).

Q.30 Section A, Para 2, Section L, Para L.3.3

N/A

The RFP is solicited as a total SBSA under NAICS 236210, Industrial Building Construction, with a $45,000,000 size standard. The work described includes SRM, renovation, repairs, and minor construction or real property. Please confirm the NAICS code is 236210 and not 236220, Commercial and Institutional Building Construction, given the nature of the facilities involved.

The NAICS Code for this requirement is 236210, Industrial Building Construction.

Q.31 Section I, FAR

52.228-15l Section I, Para L.4.1.2.1

MATOC SOW

Sections L.4.1.2.1 and M.4.1.2.1 require Offerors to provide “evidence of a Performance Bond and Payment Bond in the amount proposed for the Seed Project” as part of proposal submission and evaluation; however, consistent with FAR 52.228-15, such bonds are typically furnished after contract award rather than at the proposal stage. Accordingly, please clarify whether this requirement may be satisfied by submission of a signed surety letter (with Power of Attorney attached) or a bid bond demonstrating the Offeror’s bonding capacity to support the proposed Seed Project amount, and additionally confirm the bonding requirements applicable to future MATOC task orders.

IAW M.4.1.2.1, "….To be considered acceptable, Offerors must provide evidence of a Performance Bond and Payment Bond in the amount proposed for the Seed Project…..." The requirements for Performance and Payment Bonds will be provided in each future Request for Task Order Proposal.

Q.32 Section M, Para

M.3.1 N/A

Section M.3.1 reserves the Government's right to employ AI tools to assist in proposal evaluation, including summarizing content and identifying compliance. Please clarify what AI tools will be used and if the outputs from those AI scans will be shared with Offerors during any clarifications or discussion exchanges, and whether Offerors should take any speific formatting measures to ensure their proposals are accurately parsed by AI tools.

IAW M.3.1.1; "…The Government reserves the right to employ AI as a tool to assist in the analysis and review of Offeror proposals. AI tools may be used to support tasks such as summarizing proposal contyent, identifying compliance with request for task order proposal / solicitation requirements, and highlighting areas of potential strength, weakness, or risk." The Government is not at liberty to provide what specific AI tools may or may not be utilized, nor are there any specific formats Offerors shall submit proposals in to be "accepted" by AI. AI is simply a tool that the Government may utilize to aid in the evaluation process. AI will not replace the Government's sole responsibility for all inherently Governmental functions and the Government will not delegate decision-making authority to any AI tool during the evaluation process.

Q.33 Solicitation SF

1442-front page Block 13

Given the magnitude and complexity of the proposal effort, including the requirements associated with the Seed Project, please consider extending the proposal due date to May 11, 2026, to allow Offerors siffucient time to prepare comprehensive and compliant submissions.

The closing date and time of the NCR MATOC RFP remains unchanged. Closing Date: April 24, 2026; Closing Time: 2:00 pm CT

Q.34 Seed Project What is the expected magnitude of the seed project?

Please review Attachment 0004 - Seed Project SOW for the expected magnitude of the Seed Project.

Q.35 MATOC What is the expected aggregate bonding capacity required?

Performance Bonds and Payment Bonds will be required with each Task Order requirement as requirements become known. Specific bonding requirements will be provided within the future Request for Task Order Proposal. The Performance Bond and Payment Bond requirement in the NCR MATOC solicitation is provided in RFP Attachment 0008, Section L.4.1.2.1 and RFP Attachment 0009, Section M.4.1.2.1.

Q.36 MATOC Can the past performance be as key subcontractor or does it have to be as prime?

IAW L.5, "The Offeror shall provide past performance information regarding recent and relevant Government contracts/task orders of the Prime Offeror and/or any legal associated affiliate(s) of the Prime Offeror, if the Prime Offeror is able to successfully demonstrate meaningful involvement by the associated affiliate(s) in the proposed effort. The Prime Offeror and/or any legal associated affiliate(s) shall provide a summary referencing the past performance contracts/task orders cited to include the associated tasks from the NCR MATOC SOW represented by each cited project."

Q.37 Seed Project Can the superintendent be a three hat position? No. Please see response to Question #10.

Q.38

NCR MATOC

Solicitation

NCR MATOC How long should the proposal be valid for? RFP SF 1442, Block 13(d) states 14 days. Is that acceptable?

IAW L.1.5; The Offeror's proposal shall be valid for 180 days from the date of RFP close. RFP SF 1442, Block 13(d) has been revised from 14 days to 180 days.

NCR MATOC Q&A