Document
Submission for OMB Review; Architect-Engineer Qualifications (SF-330)
Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Regulatory Secretariat Division has submitted to OMB a request to review and approve an extension of a previously approv...
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. OMB Control Number, Title, and Any Associated Form(s)
9000-0157, Architect-Engineer Qualifications, SF-330.
B. Need and Uses
This clearance covers the information that offerors must submit to comply with the following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requirement:
Standard Form (SF) 330, Architect-Engineer Qualifications. As specified in FAR 36.702(b), an architect-engineer firm must provide information about its qualifications for a specific contract when the contract amount is expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT).
Part I—Contract-Specific Qualifications.
The information on the form is reviewed by a selection panel composed of professionals and assists the panel in selecting the most qualified architect-engineer firm to perform the specific project. The form is designed to provide a uniform method for architect-engineer firms to submit information on experience, personnel, and capabilities of the architect-engineer firm to perform along with information on the consultants they expect to collaborate with on the specific project. Part I of the SF 330 may be used when the contract amount is expected to be at or below the SAT, if the contracting officer determines that its use is appropriate.
Part II—General Qualifications.
The information obtained on this form is used to determine if a firm should be solicited for architect-engineer projects. Architect-engineer firms are encouraged to update the form annually. Part II of the SF 330 is used to obtain information from an architect-engineer firm about its general professional qualifications.
The SF 330 accomplishes the following:
- Expands essential information about qualifications and experience data including:
♢ An organizational chart of all participating firms and key personnel.
♢ For all key personnel, a description of their experience in 5 relevant projects.
♢ A description of each example project performed by the project team (or some elements of the project team) and its relevance to the agency's proposed contract.
♢ A matrix of key personnel who participated in the example projects. This matrix graphically illustrates the degree to which the proposed key personnel have worked together before on similar projects.
- Reflects current architect-engineer disciplines, experience types and technology.
- Permits limited submission length thereby reducing costs for both the architect-engineer industry and the Government. Lengthy submissions do not necessarily lead to a better decision on the best-qualified firm. The proposed SF 330 indicates that agencies may limit the length of a firm's submissions, either certain sections or the entire package. The Government's right to impose such limitations was established in case law (Coffman Specialties, Inc., B-284546. N-284546/2, 2000 U.S. Comp. Gen. LEXIS 58, May 10, 2000).
The contracting officer uses the information provided on the SF 330 to evaluate firms to select an architect-engineer firm for a contract.
C. Annual Burden
Respondents:
402.
Total Annual Responses:
1,608.
Total Burden Hours:
46,632.
D. Public Comment
A 60-day notice was published in the
Federal Register
at 91 FR 30304, on May 22, 2026. A comment was received; however, it did not change the estimate of the burden.
Comment:
The respondent recommended updates for the SF 330 form, aiming to modernize the form and reduce administrative burdens without fundamentally altering the form's core purpose. Key recommendations include publishing an official editable Microsoft Word version to support collaborative workflows, updating outdated contact information blocks, and adding essential date information such as proposal due dates and amendment acknowledgments. The respondent asserts that the recommended revisions would improve form clarity, ensure consistency for federal selection boards, and better reflect contemporary industry practices.
Response:
The FAR Council appreciates the feedback received. The revisions to the SF 330 recommended by the commenter would require rulemaking. The respondent will have the opportunity to provide feedback when proposed changes to FAR Part 36 are published for comment soon as part of FAR Case 2026-010, Revolutionary Federal Acquisition Regulation Overhaul parts 14, 28, and 36.
Janet Fry,
Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy.
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain