RFI Question Set - 2.pdf

1) Do you want us to submit a cross-reference matrix for each volume? If so, does it count against stated page counts?

a. If used, it counts against page total

2) Will the USG consider changing the submission date from 1 Dec to 5 Dec so we're able to finish our proposal submission without sacrificing our Thanksgiving holiday weekend?

a. Due to various factors, the government will be moving the submission date for this solicitation to December 8th.

3) All ITO attachments call for DUNS Numbers, however we are using Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) numbers now. Do you want us to provide DUNS Numbers or replace them with UEI numbers?

a. Both are acceptable.

4) Table 2.3 shows Volume II Past Performance as having Unlimited Pages but the Title Page and Team List states (Not Included in 30 Page Limit). If there is a page limit, what specific sections are counted against the 30-page limit?

a. As stated in the table 2.3 Volume I 30 page limit applies to the Technical aspect of the proposal.

5) Is the contract narrative described in para 4.3.2 included in the PPIF or is this a different section as listed in table 2.3?

a. This is a different section as displayed in table 2.3.

6) In regards to the PWS, what are the current vehicle requirements? Types of equipment and numbers of each type? What are the current usage reports for each type?

a. Stake-bed Truck x 2, Forklifts x 2, Pannel Van x 1, Pick-up Truck w/Camper shell x 1

7) In regards to the PWS, what are the forklift requirements, specifically in regard to the fork length, telescoping reach/ elevation, fuel type, and capacity?

a. The current contractor is utilizing a propane for a standard 4K Forklift. Forklifts must have OSHA Standard safety Requirements

8) In regards to the PWS, how many laptops do we need to provide as CFE? Please provide minimum hardware and software performance requirements and capabilities.

a. Government provides all the IT assets

9) The listed Solicitation due date listed is not the same as the SAM published due date. Block 8 on the SF 1449 states the due date is 31 Oct 2026, and SAM has 1 DEC 2025 posted.

a. Noted, this will be corrected when the submission date is changed.

10) In regards to the PWS, you have Government Observation listed as 2.2, yet you have Quality Assurance also listed as 2.2 and Service Summary Items as 2.3. Please update the numbering sequence in Section 2 to clarify accurate paragraph numbering sequence.

a. Agreed that was a numbering error, should be 2.3 as you cited

11) The PWS states that services may be required outside normal duty hours, and on-call personnel are required. What are the historical afterhour requirements by hour and section?

a. Munitions and weapons vault personnel have after-hours support but we do not have current history on how many hours a year. Approx 30 hours Munitions, Appox 30 Hours MRSP, Mobility Bags/weapons

12) In regards to the PWS, for afterhour, weekend, or holiday requirements, will a reimbursable CLIN be authorized if requirements are not known or episodic based on weather, power, or other unforeseen instances or will an equitable adjustment be considered for excess requirements?

a. No reimbursable

13) In regards to the PWS, the contractor is required to transport munitions. What is the maximum weight of the material being transported?

a. Nothing more than using a ¾ Ton flatbed truck.

14) In regards to the PWS, can the government clarify if only the Quality Control Plan (PWS para 1.8) is required for Sub-Factor 3 or is this requirement in addition to the offeror articulating their understanding and approach to executing all PWS requirements in PWS Section 1? Will the execution of specific tasks be evaluated?

a. Yes, we do inspect specific tasks and Subfactor-3 is for your Quality Control Plan that supports the whole of the PWS

15) The Collective Bargaining Agreement has a sliding scale of leave allocation based on the seniority of employees. Can the government provide a list of incumbent employees in order to inform the narrative for how all tasks will be accomplished when considering the amount of employee leave to plan for? This information will impact the offeror ability to provide a realistic price and coverage plan to perform all tasks as required, while also giving the incumbent contractor an unfair advantage.

a. For question about the CBA please contact the personnel that have signed and agreed to it for any specific details.

16) The labor categories are listed, but do not have job descriptions to determine how that employee may be utilized. Can we get the job descriptions to fully understand how each labor category may be employed?

a. Customer

17) Are each labor category listed on Attachment A of the CBA currently supporting this contracted effort?

a. Customer

18) Does the entire teaming agreement need to be included in Volume II or is the first and last page, with the Annex A showing the workshare sufficient with signatures and dates?

a. The most complete information that can be provided should be provided.

19) Are the vehicles included in the contract effort required to leave the installation?

a. No, they don’t leave the installation

20) What are the base requirements to be compliant with all installation and airfield vehicle policies?

a. Munitions Folks require flightline driver license to access Egress facilities to deliver munitions

21) Is there an incumbent currently performing this work? If so, please provide the name of the contractor and the contract number.

a. The prior contract is FA810120C0013, fulfilled by Data Monitor Systems, Inc.

22) Can the government please provide historical workload data for all positions?

a. Please see appendix-1 of the PWS

23) Will the government be providing all equipment necessary, to include computers, workstations, etc. for contractor personnel to accomplish these tasks?

a. Yes, except for vehicles, PPE and office Supplies.

24) Can the government please provide all updates in red or a highlighted font within the amended solicitation to clearly demonstrate the exact changes made?

a. Further updates to the Solicitation and attachments will be highlighted.

25) Can the government please ensure that all questions provided to the government are responded to? We understand that some may appear to be duplicates between vendors, however this ensures all questions are accounted for.

a. Relevant questions will be answered and distributed in a combined format.

26) In order to best reference in our proposal response, can the government please confirm the official contract title for this procurement?

a. Base Supply and Munitions

27) Can the government please confirm the solicitation number for this opportunity as the PWS and the solicitation list two different numbers?

a. Solicitation number FA810126R0001 is most current

28) In relation to section 1.15, what make, model, and year is currently being utilized on the incumbent contract?

a. N/A, the offeror is expected to procure their own vehicles to accomplish the mission.

29) To ensure stability, is the government wanting vehicles to be at least 2024 and newer?

a. The government does not have a vehicle age preference only that the mission is accomplished.

30) Offerors were given numerous points of contact (Gerald Mosley, Samuel Nemargut, Robert Kipler) – is it acceptable for all to be contacted when necessary?

a. Offerors are to contact each Gov PoC in accordance to the section in which they are listed.

31) Will Offeror’s acknowledgment within their proposal of any amendments meet the criteria for “confirmation upon submission”?

a. This should meet the criteria.

32) Is one (1) point of contact for each team member sufficient to meet this requirement?

a. At least one point of contact for each team member is sufficient.

33) Can the government please confirm that proposals may be submitted via DoD SAFE and do not need to be submitted in a physical form?

a. DoD SAFE is the preferred method for Solicitation submissions, verbiage outlining other methods are contingent to extenuating circumstances.

34) The table does not align with the Volume Organization parameters in Section 3.2.2. Will the government please adjust the table to align with the items required in each volume, as stated in Section 3.0 of the ITO (i.e., Subfactors One, Two, and Three)?

a. The table has been adjusted.

35) The table does not include the Table of Contents, List of Tables and Figures, or Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms for the Past Performance Volume. Are offerors permitted to provide these items? If so, will the government please amend the table to include this requirement?

a. The Table of Contents, List of Tables and Figures, and Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms in Volume I should be sufficient for all subsequent Volumes.

36) An asterisk is included in the row for Past Performance Information Form (PPIF), within the Page Limit column. Can the government please clarify what this is supposed to indicate?

a. There is nothing indicated by this.

37) Should a Title Page, Team List, Table of Contents, List of Tables and Figures, and Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms be included in the Price Volume, as they are not currently listed in the table? If so, will the government please amend the table to include this requirement?

a. These documents should be part of the overall proposal and set up according to the instructions in Table 2.3

38) A Team List is included twice for the Contract Documentation volume. Was this purposeful?

If not, will the government please amend the table?

a. A team list is to be provided as stated in Table 2.3.

39) How many levels of subparagraphs are offerors expected to delineate within the table of contents? If offerors delineate each heading (excluding text copy), would this be sufficient?

a. Offerors are expected to exercise their best judgment.

40) ITO, Page 5 of 29, 2.2.15 Indexing, “Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.” Can the government please further clarify what they intend this requirement to look like in offerors’ proposals?

a. Related sections of the offerors’ submission should be organized via indent hierarchy to denote related topics in a manner similar to the following:

Chapter Subchapter Paragraph

Subparagraph Section Subsection

41) Is there currently an incumbent providing services to this requirement.

a. Currently services are being provided by Data Monitor Systems, Inc.

(FMHJNPNGRTL5) under contract FA810120C0013.

42) Are workers in place to perform this work, supply, munitions, de-ice, training, mob bags.

This used to be performed by military/ the CE contract?

a. Employees working for the above incumbent are currently in place.

43) Are other Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business bidding.

a. Yes, this requirement is not sole source.

44) ITO, Page 5 of 29, 2.3 Page Size and Format, “Page line spacing shall be 1.5 lines.” Will the Government allow single-spacing instead of 1.5-line spacing?

a. Offerors will comply with formatting requirements as stated in the ITO.

45) ITO, Page 5 of 29, 2.3 Page Size and Format, “Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than Arial 12 points.” May offerors also use Times New Roman Font throughout the proposal?

a. Offerors will comply with formatting requirements as stated in the ITO.

46) ITO, Pages 7-8 of 29, 3.2.3 Subfactor One and 3.2.4 Subfactor Two. An Organization Chart is requested within each subfactor. Can the government please clarify if (a) this was purposeful, and (b) what the difference between the tables should be?

a. Unless deemed necessary by the offeror, one subfactor chart should be sufficient for these sections.

47) ITO, Page 8 of 29, 4.1.2, “Along with the information required in this paragraph, the offeror shall submit a consent letter (Attachment 1.4) executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the offeror so the offeror can respond to such information.” Is this document required if no adverse information for past performance exists for the prime or subcontractors?

a. Yes a consent letter is necessary. If no adverse past performance information is submitted, that is to be stated in the document.

48) ITO, Page 3 of 29, Table 2.3 Proposal Organization & ITO, Page 8 of 29, 4.1.2, “Attachment

1.6 Commitment to Perform as Proposed Letter. This letter shall be executed and signed by the Prime contractor and each Subcontractor. The letter states that, in the event a contract is awarded to the Prime Contractor, the Prime Contractor and Subcontractor (to include teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners) commit to joint contract performance as described in the proposal.”

This letter is not specified within the Proposal Organization (Table 2.3). Where should Offerors include this letter? And will the government please amend the table to include this requirement?

a. Table 2.3 has been updated.

49) ITO, Page 9 of 29, 4.2.1, “Offerors shall not follow-up with respondents to ensure they have completed the questionnaires.” Can the government please clarify why offerors are unable to follow up with their own customers to confirm receipt and completion?

a. It is not appropriate for vendors to follow up with respondents. If a follow up is required this office will accomplish as necessary.

50) ITO, Pages 8-10 of 28, 4.0 Factor 2 Past Performance & ITO, Page 3 of 29, Table 2.3 Proposal Organization. Can the government please clarify if offerors should follow the order specified in the Proposal Organization table or within the Past Performance section?

a. Offerors are to follow table 2.3 except where otherwise noted in relevant sections.

51) ITO, Pages 8-10 of 28, 4.0 Factor 2 Past Performance & ITO, Page 3 of 29, Table 2.3 Proposal Organization. Will the government please amend the table to ensure the order of these sections align?

a. Table 2.3 and Factor 2 Past Performance of the ITO align sufficiently.

52) ITO, Page 10 of 29, 4.3.3 Organization Structure Change History & ITO, Page 3 of 29, Table

2.3 Proposal Organization. Please confirm this is the “Roadmap” referred to in the Proposal Organization Table?

a. All references to a roadmap should be consistent with section 4.3.3.

53) ITO, Page 10 of 29, 4.3.3 Organization Structure Change History, “Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc.” If no changes of this type have occurred, are offerors expected to simply acknowledge this section and confirm that they have not undergone an acquisition, merger, etc.?

a. An acknowledgement would be sufficient.

54) ITO, Page 10 of 29, 4.3.3 Organization Structure Change History, “If subcontractor experience is submitted for consideration as part of the proposal, the offeror should include a commitment signed by offeror and subcontractor certifying that if a contract is awarded resulting from the proposal, the parties commit to joint performance as proposed. If the signed commitment is not fully executed by both parties and provided with the Past Performance Proposal, subcontractor references will not be evaluated or considered.” Is the commitment letter in addition to the consent letter required? If so, where should this be included as it is not listed in the Proposal Organization Table?

a. This is in addition to the consent letter and should be included as an attachment to section 3.2.2.

55) ITO, Page 10 of 29, 4.3.3 Organization Structure Change History, “Proposal documentation should include a copy of the signed arrangement such as documented affiliation, a copy of the teaming agreement, a copy of the joint venture agreement, etc.” Is a fully executed/signed teaming agreement mandatory at the time of proposal submission, or will the letter of commitment from proposed teammate(s) be acceptable for evaluation purposes, with the final teaming agreement executed prior to or upon award?

a. A letter of commitment from the proposed will be acceptable.

56) ITO, Page 10 of 29, 4.3.3 Organization Structure Change History, “Proposal documentation should include a copy of the signed arrangement such as documented affiliation, a copy of the teaming agreement, a copy of the joint venture agreement, etc.” If a signed teaming agreement is required at proposal submission, what minimum content/provisions must it contain to satisfy this requirement?

57) ITO, Page 10 of 29, 4.3.3 Organization Structure Change History, “Proposal documentation should include a copy of the signed arrangement such as documented affiliation, a copy of the teaming agreement, a copy of the joint venture agreement, etc.” If the signed teaming arrangement documentation is required, where should this be included as it is not listed in the Proposal Organization Table?

58) ITO, Page 12 of 29, 5.4.4 Service Contract Labor Standards (SCLS), “It is the responsibility of the offeror and the subsequent contract awardee to comply with the SCLS Wage Determination (WD) rates.” Will the government please provide the applicable WD for this opportunity?

a. Wage Determinations will be added following the release of this RFI document.

59) ITO, Page 12 of 29, 5.4.4 Service Contract Labor Standards (SCLS), “Provide general information regarding any CBAs applicable to this acquisition.” Is a CBA applicable to this opportunity? If so, please provide a copy of the current CBA in place.

a. The relevant CBA will be added following the release of this RFI document.

60) ITO, Pages 14-15 of 29, 6.1.1 Solicitation/Contract Form, “The "original" copy should be clearly marked under separate cover.” Can the government please clarify the meaning of “‘original’ copy” in this section? Is it a blank copy in addition to a signed copy?

a. Should multiple versions of the Solicitation/Contract Form exist due to various signatures or legacy/reference document indicators. In this case, “Original” indicates the solicitation prior to any changes.

61) ITO, Pages 14-15 of 29, 6.1.1 Solicitation/Contract Form, “The "original" copy should be clearly marked under separate cover.” Please provide additional information as to what constitutes the “separate cover.”

a. “Separate Cover” is a catch-all term for any method by which the document can be denoted as different from the original. A digital file name, document title name, etc.

62) ITO, Page 15 of 29, 6.1.2, “Supplies or Services and Costs/Prices (Section B) Completed pricing information in attached Pricing Matrix of the model contract, not in Section B.” As currently written, it appears Section B is still a submission requirement. Should offerors include a blank version of Section B or replace it with the Pricing Matrix? Clarification or removal of this statement would be greatly appreciated.

a. Information that, for whatever reason, cannot be included in the Pricing Matrix, must be included in Section B.

63) ITO Attachments. As long as all information is still included in the same order, are offerors allowed to alter the forms provided to include on their company’s layout/formatting (excluding PPQ)? This would also allow offerors to expand upon answers (such as I and J for ITO Attachment 1.2)?

a. Offerors are discouraged from significantly altering the forms provided unless absolutely necessary.

64) ITO Attachments. If offerors cannot alter the forms, will the government please provide editable forms for offerors to complete?

a. Offerors are discouraged from significantly altering the forms provided unless absolutely necessary.

65) Evaluation Factors for Award, Pages 3-4 of 11, 2.2 Factor 1 – Technical, “The rating definitions for Subfactors 1 and 2 are as follows…” As there are 3 Subfactors for the Technical Volume, will the government please amend this statement to include the evaluation criteria for Subfactor 3: Quality Control Plan?

a. The three subfactors for the technical volume are covered in section 2.2.1. through

2.2.3. verbiage has been altered for clarity.

66) Evaluation Factors for Award, Pages 3-4 of 11, 2.2 Factor 1 – Technical, Table 2.2.1 Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method. As this is a best value solicitation, will the government please amend the scale being used to review the Technical Volume to include a range or points scale? As currently written, this solicitation indicates a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable evaluation, which drastically changes the responses the government will receive.

a. It is the government’s stance that offerors should be able to provide sufficient information for a reasonable award determination without a points scale.

67) PWS, Page 5 of 53, 1.6.1.1, “At least one year of experience working in base-level general supply or equivalent function in a managerial capacity. Experience must be within 12-18 months currency prior to award of contract.” Will the government please amend this to be “prior to solicitation release” as offerors the contract award date is unknown?

a. The government intends to award this contract approximately April 2026 please utilize this information accordingly.

68) PWS, Page 5 of 53, 1.6.1.1, “At least one year of experience working in base-level general supply or equivalent function in a managerial capacity. Experience must be within 12-18 months currency prior to award of contract.” Will the government please increase the 12-18 month requirement to three (3) years as this experience would still be relevant and capable of being used?

a. No.

69) PWS, Page 6 of 53, 1.7.3. As this is a firm fixed price contract, how should offerors price Emergency or Special Event Services?

a. Please provide your best estimate. Workload data is that there hasn’t been much Emergency or Special Event services. I can’t remember anytime where this support was needed or required

70) PWS, Page 6 of 53, 1.7.4. As this is a firm fixed price contract, how should offerors price Other Requirements Services? These are outside the normal duty hours and may cause overtime.

a. Duplicate as the answer above.

71) : PWS, Page 6 of 53, 1.7.4, “On-call personnel on holidays and after normal duty hours shall respond within one hour of notification.” Can the government please clarify if “respond” means to arrive at the facility or to acknowledge the request?

a. Arrive at the Facility

72) PWS, Page 7 of 53, 1.7.5. How would these requirements be issued and will the offeror have the opportunity to adjust pricing to account for services spanning 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?

a. No, this is a requirement that the contractor must cost for, but again there has been no requirement to date.

73) PWS, Page 7 of 53, 1.9.1 Qualification and Training Standards, “The Contractor shall establish and publish qualification and training standards in Contractor regulations.” Can the government please clarify if offerors are expected to submit “Contractor Regulations” upon award? If so, what items are required within this document?

a. Yes, upon award and the Contractor shall develop training records according to the requirement in the PWS but Contractors should develop their own Training Plan and not the governments.

74) PWS, Page 14 of 53, 1.17.12, “The Contractor shall appoint, in writing, a primary and alternate person to manage War Reserve Material Program in accordance with AFI 25-101.” Can the government confirm if these are two (2) additional positions?

a. No, they are not additional positions but additional duties or tasks that must be performed.

75) PWS, Page 15 of 53, 1.19.1, “This plan shall be submitted with the Contractor’s proposal and will be further validated by the Base Safety Office.” The Safety and Health Plan is not listed as a requirement within the proposal. Can the government please clarify whether this should be included and revise the proposal instructions accordingly?

a. Please include it in the proposal and it will be evaluated by Safety Office once Contractor is awarded.

76) PWS, Page 17 of 53, 1.21.2, “Have on hand at all times, expendable and compatible materials or equivalent for hazardous material spill containment and cleanup; as a minimum, absorbent material shall be enough to clean up any reasonable, foreseeable spill. Clean up all spilled material if possible.” Will the government please provide a list of the items required for hazardous material spill containment and cleanup?

a. Government will provide for all Hazmat cleanup materials

77) PWS, Page 17 of 53, 1.21.2, “Have on hand at all times, expendable and compatible materials or equivalent for hazardous material spill containment and cleanup; as a minimum, absorbent material shall be enough to clean up any reasonable, foreseeable spill. Clean up all spilled material if possible.” How should offerors price these items into the TEP?

a. Government will provide for all Hazmat cleanup materials

78) Throughout the PWS, the government references a range of Labor Categories (i.e., Records Manager, IT Equipment Custodian, Alternate Custodian, Facility Manager, Alternate Facility Manager, Building Custodian Grounds Keeper, Installation Manager/Precious Metals Recovery Program Manager, Security Manager, War Reserve Material Program Primary, War Reserve Material Program Alternate, Environmental Point of Contact). Are these each separate labor categories or duties that may be assigned to FTEs?

a. No, these are duties and responsibilities that the Contractor will do. These are not labor categories

79) Considering there are 28 PWS task areas, some of which are information and not truly tasks for the contractor to complete, can the government please specify which task areas should be mapped to the past performance references?

a. No, the contractor should be aware of the tasks within this PWS.

80) Will the Government consider hosting a site visit to enable non-incumbent Offerors to gain a better understanding of the facilities and current operating environment?

a. Yes,

81) If a site visit is not scheduled, can the Government provide facility images or layout diagrams to support proposal development?

a. No

82) Will the Government accept CPARS evaluations in lieu of the required Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) form?

a. Yes

83) Please provide updated staffing information reflecting current contractor manning levels by function to aid in workload validation and pricing accuracy.

84) Are flight-line driver certifications (AF Forms 2293 and 483) required before contract start, or may they be completed during transition?

a. They can complete through the transitional period.

85) Please provide average annual munitions throughput data (receipts, issues, inspections, shipments) to validate proposed labor mix and workload assumptions.

86) The PWS references performance surveillance via a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) but does not define Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) or specific performance thresholds. Will the Government provide the QASP or identify the AQLs applicable to each functional area (Base Supply, Munitions, Deicing)?

a. We can provide if requested through the CO

87) Will the Government provide a list of Contractor Furnished Vehicles to enable proper costing of resources?

a. No, the government does not provide vehicles, please see question #6

88) Paragraph 6.1.2 states that “Completed pricing information in attached Pricing Matrix of the model contract, not in Section B.” Please confirm that Offerors should only complete the Pricing Matrix and not include the “Supplies or Services & Prices or Costs” schedule found on Pages 3– 6 of Solicitation – FA810126R0001.pdf.

a. Please refer to Question 62.

89) Will the Government consider a two-week extension to the proposal due date?

a. Due to extenuating circumstances, an extension is being considered.