Questions and Answers for Synopsis W9128F25RA067 Updated 26Jun2025.pdf
PDF 88 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W9128F25RA067
About this file
This file is a Questions and Answers document for Synopsis W9128F25RA067, updated on 13, 24, and 26 June 2025, related to an Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) for Architect-Engineer (AE) Services for the Omaha District, US Army Corps of Engineers. The document addresses several key inquiries, including clarification on professional engineer registrations, page limit requirements for SF330 submissions, and joint venture documentation.
Key answers include: West Consultants, Inc. from San Diego, CA is the incumbent contractor; Professional Engineers must be registered in the state of the project; SF330 Part II and Past Performance Submittals do not count toward the 75-page limit; Project Managers must be registered Professional Engineers, while Engineer-in-Training is acceptable for junior staff; and Joint Ventures must provide documentation for government evaluation. The synopsis has been updated to remove references to email submissions and clarify professional registration requirements.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Synopsis Hydro IDC Updated 26 June 2025.docx | DOCX document | |
| Questions and Answers for Synopsis W9128F25RA067 Updated 24Jun2025.pdf | ||
| Synopsis Hydro IDC Updated 24 June 2025.docx | DOCX document | |
| Questions and Answers for Synopsis W9128F25RA067 Updated 13Jun2025.pdf | ||
| Questions and Answers for Synopsis W9128F25RA067.pdf | ||
| Synopsis Hydro IDC.docx | DOCX document |
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
Questions and Answers for Synopsis W9128F25RA067
Updated 13 June 2025, 24 June 2025 and 26 June 2025
Question: Will you please share the incumbents?
Answer: West Consultants, Inc. in San Diego, CA is the incumbent contractor this requirement.
Question: Also, is a P.Eng considered acceptable in terms of "professional registrations"? We have P.Eng's in Canada to fill the unique items in the solicitation. Wondering if we can show them and if they would be recognized as "registered".
Answer: The projects that will be completed under this award will be in the United States and the Professional Engineer must be registered in the state of the project.
Question: Do the SF330 Part IIs required for each participating office count against the page limit?
Answer: Part II of the SF 330 and Past Performance Submittals will not count towards the 75 page limit.
Question: The first bullet point clearly states that Project Managers must be registered as a
Professional Engineer or Architect. However, the second bullet point refers to Senior Engineers needing “professional registration” without specifying whether this must also be a P.E. or R.A., or if other credentials—such as an Engineer-in-Training (E.I.T.) or Certified Floodplain Manager
(CFM)—might meet the requirement.
Answer: The synopsis has been updated to correct the second bullet to remove Senior Engineers and changed to Professional Engineer. Engineer-in-Training would be acceptable for the junior staff.
Question: The RFP instructs that JVs shall submit “identification of the party who can legally bind the joint venture. Facsimile and email submissions will not be accepted.” Can you please clarify what’s meant here? Is the District requesting a hard copy of this Identification, separate from the electronically submitted pdf?
Answer: The synopsis has been updated to remove the word ‘email’. Joint Ventures shall provide the documentation listed within the synopsis for the government team to evaluate.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .