Attachment -4 QA FA302226Q0327 Unaccompanied Housing Wi-Fi.pdf

Requirement Questions and Answers

Requirement Name Unaccompanied Housing Wi-Fi

Notice ID FA302226Q0327

Question: Our NAICS code is not 517112 because we are not a wireless telecommunication carrier. Our code is 517111 - Wired Telecommunications Carrier. Does this disqualify us from submitting a proposal?

Answer: This does not disqualify an offeror from award consideration.

Question: There is a requirement in the SOW to power all equipment via POE. Can we use power outlets in the dorms if needed? What about in common areas including the pavilions?

Answer: That is not a problem. The selected quoter is authorized to use power outlets in the dorm or common areas.

There is power in the pavilions that can be accessed.

Question: We would like to know if this is a brand-new contract OR if there is (was) an incumbent performing these services.

If not brand new, could you please provide the current / previous contract number?

Answer: This is a new contract. The contract marks a shift from the previous "user-pay" model, where Airmen paid Sparklight directly for internet service without any government oversight or service level guarantees.

Question: The solicitation cover sheet's F.O.B./delivery address block lists Building 998 (Fire Department), Building 385 (Civil Engineer Squadron), and Building 932 (Network Control Center). The Statement of Work (Section 2.1) identifies the actual work locations as Buildings 547, 550, 555, 541, and 552. Can the Government confirm that Buildings 547, 550, 555, 541, and 552 are the correct and complete list of locations for this requirement, and that the cover sheet address block is not intended to add or substitute locations?

Identifying Information

Answer: Buildings 547, 550, 555, 541 and 552 are the only locations for UEQ Broadband needed. Buildings 541 and 552 are outdoor pavilions.

Question: The cover sheet narrative states the requirement covers "3 outdoor pavilions," while SOW Section 2.1 lists only two outdoor pavilions (Buildings 541 and 552). Is there a third pavilion location that should be included in the scope, or should offerors rely on the SOW's list of two pavilions?

Answer: We only have two outdoor pavilions.

Question: The cover sheet narrative also references "3-day rooms" in addition to "94 dorm rooms." Could the Government clarify what "3-day rooms" refers to, or confirm this is a typographical artifact that can be disregarded?

Answer: Day rooms are common areas through-out Building 547 where airmen can congregate. The office where the Airmen Dorm Leader works is not part of the Day room layout.

Question: The cover sheet references equipment "up to 73 modems, up to two Wi-Fi repeaters and up to seven 24-port switches," while SOW Section 2.4.2.4 establishes a performance-based requirement (signal saturation of - 65 dBm or better) rather than a fixed bill of materials. Please confirm these quantities are budgetary/planning figures only, and that the actual required equipment count will be determined by each offeror's engineering design to meet the stated coverage and performance standards.

Answer: Modems and repeaters were equipment descriptions / planning assumptions. They are not intended to direct how broadband is delivered. Quoters should provide their best option to deliver reliable broadband service to all UEQ members.

Question: Related to the above: does the term "modems" in the cover sheet equipment list refer to wireless access points (APs), or to separate broadband/cellular modem devices distinct from the APs referenced in SOW Section 2.4.2.4?

Answer: Modems and repeaters were equipment descriptions / planning assumptions. They are not intended to direct how broadband is delivered. Quoters should provide their best option to deliver reliable broadband service to all UEQ members.

Question: SOW Section 2.3.1 requires "100 Mbps download and upload speeds per user." Can the Government confirm whether this is intended as (a) a simultaneous, per-concurrent-user guaranteed throughput, or (b) an aggregate network/backhaul capacity benchmark sized to the expected resident population, consistent with standard FCC broadband benchmark usage?

Answer: To ensure a high quality of service, the network must be engineered to deliver a standard of broadband internet access to each paid hook-up that meets or exceeds current industry benchmarks. While historical guidance referenced older Federal Communications Commission (FCC) thresholds, modern market research indicates that standard commercial offerings regularly advertise speeds of 200 Mbps to 300 Mbps (symmetric). Quoters are expected to provision and manage aggregate backhaul and local distribution infrastructure such that individual user connections can achieve the minimum 100 Mbps download and upload speeds under normal operating conditions.

The Government confirms option (b). The requirement is intended as an aggregate network/backhaul capacity benchmark sized to the expected resident population, rather than a simultaneous, guaranteed

100/100 Mbps throughput dedicated to every individual concurrent user at all times.

Question: The solicitation form's "percentage_setaside" field indicates "100%," while a separate field on the same form states this is an "unrestricted, full and open solicitation." Can the Government confirm the correct competitive/set-aside status of this procurement?

Answer: This solicitation is full and open competition.

Question: The electronic pricing schedule included with the solicitation package contains no pre-populated CLIN structure (no CLIN numbers, descriptions, quantities, or units). Should offerors propose their own CLIN structure (for example, one CLIN per contract year, consistent with the 1 base + 4 option year period of performance), or does the Government intend to issue a defined CLIN structure prior to the offer due date?

Answer: Price schedule was updated with option years. The quoter may add supplemental CLIN if required (e.g.

one-time charges)

Question: We were unable to locate a FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation clause, or any other stated evaluation factors, relative weighting, or technical-volume page limit, in the Clauses attachment or cover sheet. Can the Government confirm the evaluation methodology (e.g., lowest-price technically-acceptable or a best-value tradeoff) and any page limit that applies to the technical volume?

Answer: Clauses on this solicitation have been updated to reflect FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation clause. The evaluation will be technical capability and price.

Question: Is there existing internet/ISP service or backhaul infrastructure already in place at any of the five buildings that a contractor could potentially leverage or would need to work around, or is this a build from scratch including new carrier/circuit service?

Answer: This is a new contract. The contract marks a shift from the previous "user-pay" model, where Airmen paid Sparklight directly for internet service without any government oversight or service level guarantees.

Question: SOW Section 2.4.3.1–2.4.3.2 makes the contractor solely responsible for preparing the Authority to Operate (ATO) package and DODIN waiver package and submitting it to the CAFB Wing Cybersecurity Office.

Can the Government provide an estimated review/approval timeline for this process, and confirm whether ATO/DODIN approval is a prerequisite to beginning installation, or can installation proceed in parallel with the review?

Answer: The Authority to Operate (ATO) is not a prerequisite to beginning installation. Installation can proceed in parallel with the review. Provided the quoter submits a complete, compliant, and timely package within 10 days of award, any delay in the Wing Cybersecurity Office's review shall constitute a Government-Delay.

The quoter shall be granted a day-for-day schedule extension for the network integration phase of the project, at no fault or penalty to the quoter. Any deficiencies noted by the Wing Cybersecurity Office prior to ATO need only be rectified after identification to gain ATO.