47QFSA26R0003_QuestionAndAnswer04_09_2026.pdf

Solicitation Number: 47QFSA26R0003

Note to Offerors: Please provide the specific paragraph reference using the Section/Sub-Section numbers in the solicitation.

PART # PARAGRAPH # PARAGRAPH TITLE QUESTION GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

SOLICITATION COVER LETTER 9 SUBMISSION OF QUESTIONS

Will the Government please deconflict the Proposal Due Date of April 27, 2026 and Deadline for Questions Date of April 29, 2026 and provide correct dates for both? See Amendment 01.

RFP M.2 Pass/Fail Elements

Section K references DFARS 252.204-7021 and “Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Maturity Level 1.”

Quesiton: Because DFARS 252.204-7021 is associated with Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) requirements rather than CMMI, can the Government clarify whether offerors are required to demonstrate CMMC Level 1 or CMMI Level 1?

This is changed to CMMC Level 1.

See Amendment 02. \

ATTACHMENT K

OFFEROR QUESTION AND ANSWER (Q&A) TEMPLATE

Template Version 09-26-24 Page 1 of 8

PART # PARAGRAPH # PARAGRAPH TITLE QUESTION GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

47QFSA26R0003_AttCPriceTemplate

Base Period, Option Period 1, and 52.217-8 6-months tabs Cells F8 and G8

The Base Period, Option Period 1, and 52.217-8 6-months tabs have an extra row under the Company Information/Points of Contact (POC) section as the Price Summary Tab, resulting in Cells F8 and G8 having #REF! errors. Question: Will the USG correct the file to reflect the source cells on the Price Summary Tab?

An updated pricing sheet is included in Amendment 02.

47QFSA26R0003_AttCPriceTemplate All Input Tabs Row E (Labor Category)

The Labor Category row has drop down choices that are determined by the Data Validation feature in Excel.

There are no choices when selecting the drop down and the file does not allow the Offeror to type in specific labor categories. This results in the file giving the Offeror an error that states, "This value doesn't match the data validation restrictions defined for this cell." Question: Will the USG correct the file to have the desired labor categories in the drop down menu or the Offeror correct the error?

An updated pricing sheet is included in Amendment 02.

RFP M.2 Pass/Fail Elements

In section M.2 (c) the Government identifies a requirement for Seciton 508 Compliance. Question: Will the Government please clarify what level of Section 508 compliance is expected, especially given that the work is primarily maintenance and may not involve deliverables typically requiring such compliance?

Anything involving technology deliverables must be Section 508 compliant.

Template Version 09-26-24 Page 2 of 8

RFP H-3 Para H.5 Security Requirements

Para H.5 states, Ensure security support included, but is not limited to, packing classified information, mailing and receiving classified material, implementing emergency procedures for protection of classified information, security checks, and internal security controls for protection of classified material and high value pilfer-able property.

However, there is no requirement in this solicitation for it to be a classified contract nor for contractor staff to possess security clearances.

Question: Can the government clarify any classified information requirements?

The Government does not quite understand the question. Please be more specific.

47QFSA26R0003_AttGProjectStaffing Plan(PSP)Template

Option Period Tabs

Security Clearance Level, Duty Station Location, OASIS+

Columns

The Base Period tab appears to have the all necessary requested data for the staffing plan; however, the subsquent Option Period tabs have additional columns that are mapped with #REF! errors because source data isn't included on the Base Period Tab. Additionally, the Fifth and Sixth Option Period Tabs have optional columns for OASIS+ Task Orders only which differs from all the other Option Period tabs. Question: Will the USG update the staffing plan to rectify all #REF! errors and remove any columns that are not applicable for offerors for this RFP?

An updated pricing sheet is included in Amendment 02.

Template Version 09-26-24 Page 3 of 8

47QFSA26R0003_RFPSolicitationCov erLetter 1 and 2

Submission Deadlines and Instructions

The first paragraph and paragraphs at the bottom of the letter reference the Request for Proposal (RFP) multiple times. However, under Submission Deadlines and Instructions, the language states, "Each proposal shall contain Two Parts in accordance with the instructions specified in RFQ Section L.4." in addition to another "in accordance with RFQ" under a) and b). Question: The cover letter references both “RFP” and “RFQ” (e.g., Section L.4 instructions). Can the Government confirm whether this procurement is conducted under FAR Part 15 (RFP) or FAR Part 13/16 (RFQ), and clarify which instructions govern proposal preparation?

This is an RFP, FAR Part 15 acquisition.

47QFSA26R0003_RFPSolicitationCov erLetter

Submission of Questions Emails and Signature Block

Joseph Loersch is listed as the Contracting Officer (signature block) and Contracting Specialist (question section). Question: The solicitation lists Joseph Loersch as both the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist. Please confirm the correct roles and identify the warranted Contracting Officer for this procurement.

Joe Loersch is the Contracting Officer. Kimberly (Grace) Nelson is the Contract Specialist.

Template Version 09-26-24 Page 4 of 8

47QFSA26R0003_RFPMAG26_29Co rrosionControl

Part IV - Section M M.1 Method of Award

M.1 states, “All evaluation factors other than price, when combined, are more important than price. Award may be made to the offeror whose proposal is determined to be the best value for the Government. The Government will not make an award at a significantly higher overall price to achieve superior non-price features that, in the Government’s judgment, are not substantial. While price is not expected to be the controlling factor in the selection of an offeror, the degree of importance of price as a factor could become greater if, in the Government’s judgment, the proposed’ non-price features are less distinguishable.”

Question: Can the USG clarify how it will determine whether a price premium is justified relative to technical merit?

The Government will not use a predetermined mechancial or mathematical formula to conduct its best-value tradeoff. The Government will determine wheteher a price premium is justified through a reasoned conclusion based on a qualitative assessment performed according to the solicitation's terms.

The Government will appropriately document the rationale for the best-value decision.

Template Version 09-26-24 Page 5 of 8

47QFSA26R0003_RFPMAG26_29Co rrosionControl

Part IV - Section L & M

L.6 Submission of the Written Technical Proposal (Part II) and

M.5 Technicla Evaluation Factors

M.5 states, "The technical proposal evaluation factors are in the following order of importance, Factor 1: Key Personnel and Project Staffing, Factor 2: Technical Approach, and Factor 3: Corporate Experience. All three technical factors combined are more important than price. The Government will combine the results of the written to arrive at a rating for the technical evaluation factors as a whole.

Question: Will the USG assign strengths/weaknesses at the sub-element level within each factor, and how will those roll up into the overall rating?

The Government will evaluate each factor in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. The individual elements under each factor are not subfactors and will not be rated individually. Instead, they are areas the Government will examine when determining the factor-level rating according to the terms of the solicitation. In conducting its evaluation, the Government will assign findings, which essentially serve as a roadmap for the Government in reaching and documenting the factor-level rating.

There is no mechanical or mathematical formula for this process. Assigning a factor-level rating is a matter of qualitative judgement.

Template Version 09-26-24 Page 6 of 8

Template Version 09-26-24 Page 7 of 8

Template Version 09-26-24 Page 8 of 8

Q&A