70B01C26R00000114 Carrizo Cane Eradication Texas_Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 29 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 70B01C26R00000114
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers document for Solicitation 70B01C26R00000114, which addresses common inquiries and clarifications regarding the Carrizo Cane Eradication and Management contract for Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The solicitation seeks a single prime contractor to treat approximately 1,951 miles of invasive vegetation along the Texas-Mexico border across three sectors: Rio Grande Valley, Laredo, and Del Rio/Big Bend South, with a base year plus three option years.
The contract uses firm-fixed-price (FFP) unit pricing for treatment services, with mobilization costs priced separately by sector as lump sums. All required licenses and credentials, including pesticide applicator licenses, aquatic application certifications, and FAA qualifications for aerial/drone applications, must be obtained prior to contract award. Work Orders will specify treatment types, acreage, access routes, and site-specific information, with all fixed unit prices binding throughout contract performance regardless of Work Order quantity, location, acreage, or access conditions. The Government will provide all environmental clearances and real estate authorization prior to Work Order execution; the contractor is responsible only for necessary operational permits and licenses. Inspection standards require 100 percent work quality to pass acceptance, with corrective retreatment at contractor expense if quality thresholds are not met. Key personnel for the base year include one Senior Program Manager, one Analyst, and one Junior Program Manager/Quality Control person located full-time in Laredo, Texas (Monday through Friday availability). Additional key personnel positions may be directed by the Government. Environmental monitoring personnel will be Government-furnished. Wage determinations apply to the specific county where work is performed. This is an initial award with no guaranteed minimum acreage or Work Order volume, and no single estimated acreage for initial Work Orders has been provided.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 70B01C26R00000114 Carrizo Cane A00002_.pdf | ||
| Updated Carrizo Cane Attachment 1- PWS_9.3.26.pdf | ||
| Appendix E_ Cane BMP List_Jan2026_TX_Cane_BMPs_ (3).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 70B01C26R00000114 Carrizo Cane A00001.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - Price Sheet - Option 2.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 2 - Price Sheet Base Period.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 3 - Wage Determination Hidalgo.txt | TXT text file | |
| Attachment 2 - Price Sheet - Option 3.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 70B01C26R00000114 Carrizo Cane.pdf | ||
| Attachment 5 - Sample Work Order Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 2 - Price Sheet - Option 1.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 1- Performance Work Statement.pdf | ||
| Attachment 3 - Wage Determination Val Verde.txt | TXT text file | |
| Attachment 4 - Question and Answer.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 3 - Wage Determnation Webb.txt | TXT text file |
Show all 15
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
Sheet1 70B01C26R00000114 Carrizo Cane Eradication Texas
| Questions | Answers |
| Block 10 of the SF 1449 identifies NAICS 562910 but does not specify the applicable size standard. NAICS 562910 has two standards: the general $25M average annual receipts standard for 'Remediation Services,' and a 1,000-employee standard under the 'Environmental Remediation Services' exception (SBA footnote 14). Please confirm which size standard applies to this procurement for small business eligibility purposes. | $25M |
| Given the scope and geographic breadth of this requirement, spanning three sectors and up to 1,951 miles of border, combined with the Labor Day holiday falling within the question period and the depth of technical, management, and pricing detail called for under the Best Value evaluation criteria, would the Government consider extending the proposal submission deadline to September 25, 2026? Additional time would allow Offerors to submit a more robust, fully developed response that best reflects their capability and technical approach. | No |
| Would the Government be willing to accept an alternative proposal? | No |
| Would the Government be willing to commit to a minimum guarantee in terms of acreage per year? | No |
| PWS Section 16.1.2 references a minimum basic quality of 90 percent while also stating that a 100 percent work quality percentage is required to pass inspection. Appendix A states that a minimum basic quality of 100 percent is required. Please clarify the applicable acceptance threshold for Work Order inspection and the threshold at which corrective treatment or retreatment at the Contractor’s expense will be required. | 100% |
| For proposal planning purposes, can the Government provide its anticipated number, approximate acreage, geographic distribution by sector, and expected timing of Work Orders during the Base Year and Option Years? The Contractor acknowledges that no quantity of Work Orders is guaranteed. | All requirements are contingent on Real Estate and Environmental clearances. |
| Please clarify the anticipated or required turnaround time between the Government’s issuance of a Work Order request, Contractor submission of the Work Order response, Government authorization, and required commencement of field activities. | Monthly to Quarterly work plans will be built off clearances and schedules built to fall with monthly or quarterly deliveries. |
| In addition to treatment boundaries, GIS data, and access distance, please clarify what site-specific information the Government anticipates providing with each Work Order request for purposes of developing the Contractor’s work plan and price, including known terrain, access limitations, staging constraints, treatment restrictions, and existing site conditions. | Access routes, maps for treated areas and specific treatments will be called out for each work Order. |
| The PWS identifies recurring treatment as potentially necessary for Carrizo cane control, including repeated mechanical treatment during the growing season and treatment over multiple years. Please clarify whether planned follow-on treatment cycles will be separately authorized and compensated through subsequent Work Orders or are expected to be included within the original treatment unit price. Please also distinguish planned follow-on treatment from corrective retreatment required as a result of failed Government inspection. | All Work Orders will be price according to to description of service being requested by the government. All stipulations will be included if required and necessary. |
| Please clarify the timeframe and inspection methodology the Government will use to determine achievement of the required 80 percent stand following seeding, and how establishment failure resulting from conditions outside the Contractor’s control, such as drought, flooding, or other extreme weather, will be addressed. | Reseeding and establishment will be the contractor’s responsibility to obtain it. Full establishment will be determined once reseeding has reached a seeding stage. |
| Please clarify the division of responsibility between the Government and Contractor for environmental compliance associated with individual Work Orders. Specifically, will CBP complete necessary environmental reviews and identify threatened and endangered species, critical habitat, cultural resources, and avoidance areas prior to Work Order performance, or will the Contractor be responsible for any surveys, environmental review, permitting, or agency coordination? | The government will provide all Real Estate and Environmental clearances prior to any work order being executed. Contractor is only required to have necessary permits and licenses necessary to complete the required work being requested. |
| Appendix A references environmental monitoring personnel and procedures for observations of sensitive resources. Please clarify whether required environmental monitoring personnel will be furnished by the Government or are required to be provided by the Contractor under applicable Work Orders. | Government furnished |
| The PWS states that a minimum 5-foot buffer will be provided for chemical wiping/rolling applications and subsequently states that no buffer is required for herbicide wiping applications. Please clarify the required buffer for wiping applications. | If buffers are required it will be defined in the description of work being requested by the government |
| Please clarify whether pesticide applicator licenses, aquatic application credentials, FAA qualifications associated with aerial/drone application, and other treatment-specific licenses or certifications must be held at the time of proposal submission, at contract award, or prior to performance of a Work Order requiring the applicable treatment. | All required license and credentials are required prior to an award. |
| Where riprap is authorized for bankline stabilization and engineering requirements under CBP TIDS apply, please clarify whether the Government will furnish the required engineering/design or whether engineering services are the Contractor’s responsibility under the applicable Work Order. | Engineering doesn’t apply to this contract. |
| The RFP requires the Program Management/Key Personnel FFP to include office space in Laredo, Texas, while PWS Section 19.0 does not identify Laredo as the required duty location for the Senior Program Manager. Please confirm whether the Senior Program Manager must be physically based in the Laredo office on a full-time basis or may be based elsewhere provided the Contractor maintains the required Laredo presence and the Senior Program Manager remains available to support contract and Work Order requirements. | Sr. Program Manager and Analyst can be offsite, but Project Engineer/Jr. Program Manager and Quality Control/Safety Manager must be located in Laredo. |
| Please clarify whether the Junior Program Manager/Quality Control personnel and three sector Analysts are expected to be dedicated full-time to the contract throughout each Base and Option Year regardless of active Work Order volume, or whether the Contractor may scale their level of effort based upon active Work Order requirements while maintaining availability. | Key Personnel are required full time for base and executed options. Only one Analyst is required for this contract. Scale up on key personnel will be approved by government CO/COR. SOW will be updated to reflect only one Analyst. |
| PWS Section 19.0 identifies sector-specific Junior Program Manager and Quality Control positions, while Factor 2.D requests resumes for a Senior Program Manager, Project Engineer/Junior Program Manager/Quality Control/Safety Control Manager, and three Analysts. Please clarify the required number and configuration of Key Personnel and identify which roles may be performed concurrently by the same individual. | For Base Year only the following will be required: 1. Sr. Program manager, 2. Analyst, 3. Laredo: Jr, Program Manager/Quality Control Person. Additional key personnel will be added at the direction of the government and work load. |
| Please clarify the minimum requirements for the required Laredo, Texas office space, including whether a dedicated Contractor facility is required and whether the Government requires specific personnel, minimum staffing levels, or operating hours at that location. | Sr. Program Manager and Analyst can be offsite, but Project Engineer/Jr. Program Manager and Quality Control/Safety Manager must be located in Laredo and available M-F. |
| The PWS states that Work Order pricing shall include access distance and references applicable GSA mileage reimbursement rates. Please clarify which mobilization and access costs are intended to be calculated using GSA mileage rates and which transportation, equipment mobilization, or access costs are expected to be incorporated into the applicable fixed unit treatment prices. | Pricing sheet is flat rates by sector, no milage limits |
| The PWS recognizes that seasonal roads may be impassable for several days following weather events. Please clarify how schedule impacts and additional mobilization/remobilization resulting from Government-recognized site inaccessibility will be addressed when such conditions are outside the Contractor’s control. | These events will be delt with during daily tag ups to avoid conflicts with schedules and mobilizations. |
| Factor 1.B instructs Offerors to refer to “Appendix E, Best Management Practices (BMP) document” and identify training programs and certifications supporting individual BMPs. Appendix E does not appear to be included in the solicitation documents provided. Please provide Appendix E or identify the BMP document Offerors are required to address in their Factor 1 response. | Appendix E will be added to the documents attached on sam.gov |
| Please clarify whether Factor 3 Corporate Experience may include relevant projects performed by proposed subcontractors or teaming partners, or whether submitted examples must have been performed by the prime Offeror. | Must be Prime Contractor and/or subcontractors/JV |
| Factor 2.D requires letters of commitment for each Key Personnel position. Given the differing presentation of Key Personnel between Factor 2.D and PWS Section 19.0, please clarify the positions for which individual resumes and letters of commitment are required. | Letters of Commitment will be required for base year employees noted in line 23 of Questionnaire |
| Does the government anticipate a need for contractors to provide security services at the Laredo office and/or work sites to ensure staff safety due to the nature of the locations of the work? Will CBP provide any security services on Work Orders? | The government will not provide any security, contractors are responsible for their own equipment and personnel. |
| Solicitation pages 37-38, Factor 4 – Price, require Offerors to complete Attachment 2 – Price Sheet for the Base Period and each of the three Option Periods and state that the Offeror's overall price proposal will be evaluated using the completed pricing sheets. The solicitation does not provide estimated quantities by treatment type/unit-price item for those performance periods. Please clarify whether the Government will provide estimated quantities by treatment type/unit-price item for the Base Period and each Option Period. If not, please clarify how the Government will evaluate the reasonableness of individual fixed unit prices where actual Work Order quantities are unknown. | Pricing is applied by Unit; ex per/Ac., etc |
| PWS Section 6.0 on page 2 states that Work Orders will identify access distance to the project area, that Work Order pricing submissions shall include access distance, and that the Contractor shall use the applicable Government mileage reimbursement rates. Please clarify whether mileage is a separately reimbursable Work Order cost or whether Offerors must incorporate travel/mobilization into the applicable fixed unit prices in Attachment 2 – Price Sheet. | mobilization cost are separate in pricing sheet |
| PWS Section 8.1, page 3, identifies 36 CFR 261.52 as “Attachment 5,” while the solicitation materials identify Attachment 5 as the Sample Work Order Form. Please confirm whether a separate attachment containing the referenced fire-prevention requirements is missing. | Offeror must have a fire prevention plan |
| PWS Section 16.0 on page 5 states that each quadrant "shall be evaluated for compliance with all contract specifications as stated in Section C that pertain to that individual treatment". The solicitation is organised in Sections I, II and III and contains no Section C. Please identify the document and section intended by this reference. | Removed from SOW |
| PWS Section 16.1.2 on page 6 states that "A minimum basic quality of 90 percent is required", and Section 16.1.3 on the same page treats work quality below 90 percent as unsatisfactory. The Acceptable Quality Level paragraph appears again in PWS Appendix A on page 13, requiring 100 percent in both places. Both versions also require a work quality percentage of 100 percent to pass inspection. Please clarify the single governing inspection standard, and confirm whether "minimum basic quality" is a different measure from the "work quality percentage" defined at PWS Section 16.1.1 on page 6. | 100% requierd |
| PWS Section 16.1.2 on page 6 and PWS Appendix A on page 13 both state that acceptance of work is based on compliance with "all Schedule B Specific Tasks that correspond to the treatment". Please identify the document, attachment, page or sheet containing the Schedule B Specific Tasks used for inspection and acceptance. | it will be based off Work Order Description |
| PWS Section 19.1, page 8, states that the Analyst must acquire Government clearance through a Background Investigation (BI). Please confirm that each proposed Analyst is required to possess a favorably adjudicated BI at the time of proposal submission. | Yes |
| PWS Appendix A, Treatment Types, on page 13 states that each project must include a minimum of one treatment from the mechanical and soil stabilization categories to meet the desired outcome and contract requirements. Please clarify whether every Work Order/project is required to include both a mechanical treatment and a soil-stabilization treatment, or whether the Government will select the applicable treatment category or categories based on site conditions and treatment objectives. | Minimum of one, not both. It will be based off work Order descriptions |
| PWS Appendix A on page 17 states that seeding requirements include watering until at least an 80 percent stand has emerged and that water sources are the sole responsibility of the Contractor. Please clarify whether water acquisition, transportation, storage, and application are included in the applicable fixed unit prices or may be separately priced on individual Work Orders. | Price separately by work order |
| PWS Appendix A, Mechanical Treatment Options Including Soil Stabilization, on page 15 states that efforts repeated every 21 days during the growing season may be required for at least a three-year period to attain satisfactory control. Please clarify whether each repeated treatment will constitute separately ordered and compensated Work Order effort or whether all required repeat treatments are included within the original unit price for the initial treatment. | Contractor is only responsible for what is written in the individual work order |
| Attachment 3 – Wage Determinations includes separate Service Contract Act wage determinations for Webb County; Hidalgo County; and Edwards, Kinney, Real, Uvalde, and Val Verde Counties. PWS Section 4.0 on page 1 defines the work locations by sector as Rio Grande Valley, Laredo, and Del Rio/Big Bend South rather than by county. Please provide a crosswalk identifying the applicable wage determination for each county in which work may be ordered under each sector and clarify which wage determination applies if a Work Order is issued for performance in a county not covered by the wage determinations included in Attachment 3. | Wage determination applies to the county where the work is performed. Each sector might spread across multiple counties. |
| Solicitation page 36, Factor 1, directs offerors to refer to Appendix E, Best Management Practices (BMP) document, and to list credentials indicating which BMP each supports. The PWS contains only Appendix A and Appendix B, and no Appendix E appears in the solicitation package. Please clarify the Best Management Practices against which offerors should map their credentials for this element. | ENV Team, Appendix E attached |
| Solicitation page 38 states that the fixed unit prices proposed in Attachment 2 will be binding throughout contract performance and that no amount of Work Orders is guaranteed. PWS Section 4.0, page 1, states that the specific locations of individual projects will be provided by map with each Work Order. Because the location, quantity, acreage, and site/access conditions associated with future Work Orders are not known at the time of proposal submission, please confirm whether the fixed unit prices proposed for each Base or Option Period are required to apply to all Work Orders issued during that period regardless of the quantity, acreage, project location, access conditions, or size of the individual project. | Yes they are |
| Throughout the solicitation, there are varying definitions for the key personnel as noted below: |
| • | Solicitation pages 25 and 37 require key personnel meeting the qualifications defined in the PWS Section 19.0. The key personnel defined are: |
| o | Senior Program Manager |
| o | Project Engineer/Junior Program Manager/Quality Control/Safety Control Manager |
| o | Three (3) Analysts |
| • | PWS Section 19.0, page 7 requires key personnel as follows: |
1. Senior Program Manager
2. Analyst
3. Laredo Junior Program Manager/Quality Control Person
4. Del Rio/Big Bend South Junior Program Manager/Quality Control Person
5. Rio Grande Valley Junior Program Manager
6. Rio Grande Valley Quality Control Person
| • | PWS Section 19.1, page 7 defines the key personnel qualifications for the following: |
| o | Senior Program Manager |
| o | Project Engineer/Quality Control/Junior Program Manager and Safety Managers (note that Safety Managers is listed separately and plural) |
| o | Analyst..."This individual will be required for each sector..." |
Please confirm that the eight (8) key personnel required for this proposal are as follows:
| • | Senior Program Manager (1) | |
| • | One analyst per sector (total of 3) | |
| • | Laredo Junior Program Manager/Quality Control Person/Project Engineer (1) | |
| • | Del Rio/Big Bend South Junior Program Manager/Quality Control Person/Project Engineer (1) | |
| • | Rio Grande Valley Junior Program Manager/Project Engineer (1) | |
| • | Rio Grande Valley Quality Control Person (1) | See answers to questions 23 & 24 |
| The confidence rating definitions on solicitation page 38 are textually identical. High, Some and Low Confidence each state that the Offeror "will be successfully perform the required effort with little or no Government intervention." As award is to the Offeror with the highest technical rating and no price/technical tradeoff, please clarify the criteria that distinguish the three ratings. | All the ratings have definitions under the evaluation methodology that distinguish the difference between the three ratings. | |
| Attachment 2 provides unit pricing for aerial application by drone, fixed-wing aircraft, and helicopter but does not provide separate line items for mobilization and demobilization of this equipment. Please clarify whether all mobilization and demobilization costs associated with aerial application are to be incorporated into the applicable per-acre fixed unit prices. | Yes, its on the pricing sheet | |
| If a Joint Venture is acceptable, please clarify how the Joint Venture should be identified within the proposal and submission documents, including whether the proposal should be submitted in the name of the Joint Venture entity and whether the Joint Venture must have its own UEI, CAGE Code, and active SAM.gov registration. |
It should be the Joint Venture Entity with supporting documentation that JV is valid.
| Please confirm whether the Government intends to make a single contract award under Solicitation No. 70B01C26R00000114, or whether the Government anticipates making multiple awards to more than one offeror. If multiple awards are contemplated, please clarify whether awards may be divided by geographic sector, treatment methodology, work-order category, or other basis. | One award for everything |
| The PWS Key Personnel listing identifies a Senior Program Manager, one Analyst, and sector-specific Junior Program Manager/Quality Control personnel; however, the qualification standards state that an Analyst is required for each sector. Please clarify the exact number and positions of Key Personnel the Offeror is required to propose and include in the Firm-Fixed-Price Program Management/Key Personnel CLIN. | See answers to questions 23 & 24 |
| The PWS states that water sources are the sole responsibility of the Contractor. Please clarify how the actual cost of water is to be priced under individual Work Orders. Should purchased water be included within the applicable treatment/unit price, priced as a separate reimbursable or material item, or otherwise incorporated into Work Order pricing? | Incorporated into the Work Order |
| PWS Section 6.0 references GSA mileage reimbursement for access distance to project areas. Should that be priced as its own line somewhere in Attachment 2, or is it assumed to be embedded in the Mob-Demob and per-day/per-acre rates? | Milage is not considered in the fixed price Mobilization cost, it is Lump Sum cost for each sector |
| For Factor 3 (Corporate Experience), may a proposed subcontractor or joint-venture partner's experience be submitted as one of the up to 3 examples, or must all examples be the prime offeror's own past performance? | Yes |
| May a firm submit its own proposal as the prime Offeror on this solicitation while also being named as a subcontractor or teaming partner in a different Offeror's proposal? If there are any restrictions on a firm's participation in more than one proposal (as prime, subcontractor, or teaming partner), please clarify. | Yes, there is no limitation |
| Can you confirm whether drones manufactured in China (such as DJI models) are permissible for use under this contract, or whether only NDAA-compliant or “Blue UAS-listed” aircraft will be accepted? | Only materials purchased to stay with the government are required to follow USA purchase guidelines |
| Is there an estimated acreage for the initial work order? | No |
| Should our drone rate include application services only, or also herbicide and other materials? | Service only, materials are separate cost |
| What application volume per acre is anticipated? | Determined by Applicator and approved by COR at the time of application |
| Will pre- or post-treatment aerial mapping be required? | One map of service provided |
| May mobilization or a minimum billable acreage be priced separately? | Follow Pricing sheet guidelines |
| Section 19.1 of Attachment 1 (Performance Work Statement) lists six Key Personnel positions (Sr. Program Manager; Analyst, one per sector; Laredo Jr. Program Manager/QC; Del Rio/Big Bend South Jr. Program Manager/QC; Rio Grande Valley Jr. Program Manager; and Rio Grande Valley Quality Control Person). Elsewhere in the solicitation (e.g., HSAR 3052.215-70 Key Personnel or Facilities clause) only three roles are listed (Senior Program Manager; Project Engineer/Junior Program Manager/Quality Control/Safety Control Manager; and Analysts (3)). Please confirm which list of Key Personnel positions is authoritative for proposal submission and evaluation purposes. | See answers to questions 23 & 24 |
| Attachment 5, provided as the 'Sample Work Order Form,' contains CLIN categories (e.g., CLIN 1 - Fences and Gates, CLIN 2 - Roads and Bridges, CLIN 3 - Drainage & Grate Systems, CLIN 4 - Lighting - Electrical-Tucson and CLIN 4 - Lighting - Electrical-Yuma) and pricing data that do not correspond to this Carrizo Cane Eradication and Management requirement. The workbook's hidden 'Lists' reference tab also contains Arizona/California Border Patrol station and sector codes (e.g., AJO, BMGR, CAG, Yuma-AZ, Yuma-CA, SON, TUC) and references entities (e.g., 'KBR', 'Cerrudo') unrelated to this procurement, indicating the form originates from a Tucson/Yuma sector contract. Please confirm whether this is the correct Work Order Form for this solicitation or whether a corrected, Carrizo Cane-specific version will be issued by amendment. | Carrizo cane Only |
| Performance Work Statement Section 3.0 (Scope of Work) and the Factor 1 evaluation criteria in Section IV reference an 'Appendix E, Best Management Practices (BMP)' document that Offerors are instructed to use when identifying training programs/certifications in their technical proposal. This Appendix E was not included among the solicitation attachments. Please provide Appendix E or confirm where it may be obtained. | ENV Team, Appendix E attached |
| PWS Section 16.1.2 (Acceptable Quality Level, within the main body of the PWS) states 'a minimum basic quality of 90 percent is required,' while the Acceptable Quality Level language repeated in Appendix A (Technical and Reporting Requirements) of the same PWS states 'a minimum basic quality of 100 percent is required.' Please clarify which minimum basic quality percentage governs acceptance of work under this contract. | 100% |
| PWS Sections 16.1.2 and Appendix A both reference acceptance of work based on compliance with 'Schedule B Specific Tasks' corresponding to each treatment type. No document titled 'Schedule B' was included among the solicitation attachments. Please provide Schedule B or clarify where the specific task/compliance criteria referenced by this term can be found. | Appendix A has all the treatments |
| Attachment 2 (Price Sheet), Summary tab, ties the Program Management/Key Personnel firm-fixed price line item to 'Office Space in Laredo TX (Ref PWS paragraph 19.0)' for all four performance periods. However, PWS Section 19.1 assigns Key Personnel (Jr. Program Manager/QC positions) to the Del Rio/Big Bend South and Rio Grande Valley sectors in addition to Laredo. Please confirm whether office space/facilities are required only in Laredo, or whether offerors should also account for facilities/office presence in the Del Rio/Big Bend South and Rio Grande Valley sectors within their Program Management pricing. | See answers to questions 23 & 24 |
| Attachment 3 includes Wage Determinations for Webb County (Laredo sector) and Val Verde, Edwards, Kinney, Real, and Uvalde Counties (Del Rio/Big Bend South sector), and Hidalgo County (Rio Grande Valley sector). The Rio Grande Valley sector and the Del Rio/Big Bend South sector, as commonly defined by U.S. Border Patrol, encompass additional counties beyond Hidalgo and the Val Verde-area counties listed (e.g., Cameron, Willacy, Starr, and Zapata Counties in the Rio Grande Valley sector; and Terrell, Brewster, Presidio, and Maverick Counties further west and south in the Del Rio/Big Bend South sector). Please confirm whether the Wage Determinations provided are intended to apply contract-wide to all work performed within each named sector regardless of county, or whether additional county-specific Wage Determinations will be issued for areas not explicitly covered. | Wage determination applies to the county where the work is performed. Each sector might spread across multiple counties. |
| Block 15 (Deliver To) of the SF-1449 and PWS Section 4.0 state that specific project locations will be provided via a map with each individual Work Order, and Section I.2 (Delivery Schedule) of the base solicitation lists delivery dates as 'TBD' for both schedule line items. Please confirm no additional overall delivery schedule or master list of initial project locations exists beyond what will be furnished with individual future Work Orders. | Correct |
| PWS Section 20.0 is captioned '20.0 32.0 HEALTH AND SAFETY,' which appears to be a numbering or drafting error. Please confirm the correct section number and title, and confirm whether any cross-reference elsewhere in the PWS or solicitation depends on this section number. | 20 |
| Is there a way to learn which firms are interested in this opportunity to explore teaming opportunities? | No |
| Im inquiring on previous award amount for this please? | This is an initial award, there are no previous awards specifically for this requirement |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .