ATCALS_Solicitation QandA.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AIR FORCE SUSTAINMENT CENTER (AFMC)

HILL AIR FORCE BASE UTAH

CUI

Questions and Answers

Notice ID FA8201-26-R-0007

Air Traffic Control and Landing System Equipment Infrastructure Upgrade

Below are the questions received regarding the aforementioned solicitation that is currently active on

SAM.gov. This is currently a live document that will be updated with any and all questions received for this solicitation. The final day to email inquiries for this solicitation is 22 APRIL 2026 at 1200 MDT.

Once the final question has been added to this document it will longer be consider a live document.

Notice of this change will be stated below.

Current Document Status: Final Document as of 16 APRIL 2026 at 1330 MDT

1. 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?

o It is a new requirement. Although we have had similar contracts for infrastructure upgrades, it is new work and not a renewal.

2. What is the estimated value for this project?

o We cannot disclose the value

3. Do you have a copy of the plan holders list?

o We do not have a plan holders list

4. Do you have any union requirements?

o There are no union requirements

5. Given that this requirement is being solicited as a commercial service, will the government offer some type of commercial interim payments or other type of progress payment structure? If so, can you please provide the language of the payment clause?

o Progress payments or interim payments will NOT be offered.

6. It was discussed in the site visit that there is the possibility to encounter unexpected underground utilities or other unexpected interferences such as environmental related issues during excavation.

How would the government handle this situation contractually given that the standard “differing site conditions” clause present in many construction services is not included?

o From base comm perspective, there’s a good chance that the contractor will run into old cables. In these instances, contractor should contact base comm, we will identify what the cable is and provide contractor instructions on how to proceed. If something unexpected occurs, for which the contractor should incur additional costs, they should work that issue through the COR and get permission to incur costs, prior to proceeding.

7. Does the government anticipate that FCI and/or CUI category information will be necessary to be provided to the contractor under this contract and will a specific CMMC certification level (for

ex. Level 1 or Level 2) be required for this contract given it is a commercial service?

o Do not anticipate any CUI/FCI information

8. Can the government clarify what it expects in the technical proposal referenced in the evaluation factors document? For example, is a full written Contractor Statement of Work (CSOW) covering the entire government Statement of Objectives expected, or something less than this which demonstrates capabilities to meet those objectives? Are there any page limitations or other requirements for the technical proposal?

o Contractor should provide a SOW that describes how they plan to accomplish this

9. Will the government expect a free zone to be set up for contractor site access on the airfield or will the contractor be allowed to receive flight line badge access so that no free zone will be required for execution of the project?

o Free zone shouldn’t be required, govt will arrange for flightline access to project area

10. Will the government provide radios to ensure any required tower communications can be maintained during the project if required?

o Radios will be available for sign out from Base ops, procedures for doing this will be outlined after award during “kick-off”

11. What airfield gate will the contractor access the site through and how will daily access be maintained by the contractor?

o Northend will be accessed via the B-680 gate, govt will get them and access badge.

For midfield and south end, contractors will be allowed to sign out TACAN gate key

12. Where does the government anticipate allowing the contractor to stage equipment and materials for the project?

o Base comm has a securable laydown yard (close to B903). Can work with CE real property if a closer laydown yard is required

13. Will the government sponsor contract badges for base access on this project?

o Yes if needed

14. Given the 12 month period of performance, will the government allow adequate time for material lead times, air field controlled area badges or free zone establishment, flight line driver training, etc. before actual mobilization and excavation/installation is expected to begin? For. example these variables may take several months before mobilization could occur, however the overall 12 month period of performance could still be met.

o Yes

15. What level of controls will be required for the contractor to manage access to Bldg. 1 and the tower during installation?

o Govt will provide access/escort in these locations

16. In section 2.1.4 of the SOO the government mentions that the most stringent environmental requirements shall be enforced. Does the government anticipate a SWPPP may be required given the level of ground disturbance and that this may involve installation of BMPs such as silt fence installation near the excavation on the airfield? Does the government anticipate any issues for airfield operations if BMPs like silt fence are required for SWPPP compliance?

o SWPP not needed. Would most likely only need inlet protection on storm drain inlets and keeping the spoil piles on upgradient side of the trench so any erosion would flow into the trench. Most of the area is open drainage so the spoil pile needs to stay on the opposite side of the trench of that drainage swale.

17. Does the government anticipate any dewatering concerns in the SWPPP approval process when pumping existing manholes as described in the SOO?

o This should not be an issue as it would still be stormwater and can be pumped to grassy areas for infiltration.

18. Can the government confirm that an approved environmental protection plan will not be required for this project?

o I don’t believe this is required

19. Is the government aware of any environmental issues in the site area such as contaminated soils that may be encountered and could affect environmental compliance requirements for the project?

o Received the following guidance from CE (JARROD D. CASE, PE, DAF, Environmental Engineer, AFCEC/CZRW - Hill AFB):

It appears proposed trenching will be outside of the current estimated areas of PFAS contamination in soil. I have the following recommendations:

1.Conduct some soil sampling. Sampling is the only way to determine whether or not the project area is contaminated with PFAS. The area of the project has not yet been fully investigated for PFAS contamination. In accordance with Air Force guidance, sampling is recommended to inform project planning and execution. The sampling results will help to determine what, if any, additional requirements and procedures apply for the proposed work. Please see the “Guidance for Military Construction Projects Encountering Historical

Environmental Releases” (ASW/EIE Memo dated 8 Jan 2026) and the “Best Management

Practices for Addressing Contaminated Soils on Military Construction and Facilities

Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization Projects” (SAF/IEE Memo dated 4 Mar

2025) for additional guidance and information.

2.The potential for encountering PFAS contamination in soil likely increases as you move

“west” from the red proposed trenching lines towards the estimated PFAS areas.

Recommend minimizing or avoiding vehicle/equipment traffic or ground disturbance in these areas “west” of the red trenching lines.

3.Soils removed during excavation or trenching should be placed back in the hole in the same area they are removed from. Any excess soils that need to be removed from the site should be sampled and tested for PFAS (at a minimum*), using Air Force approved methods. Based on the results, the soils should be handled/disposed of properly in accordance with Air Force policy and regulatory requirements, following coordination with

Base Environmental (POC: Karl Nieman, 75 CEG/CEIE, 801-777-5788, jochim_karl.nieman.1@us.af.mil) and Environmental Restoration (POC: Jarrod Case, AFCEC/CZOM, 801-777-3943, jarrod.case@us.af.mil). *Testing may also need to be done for additional contaminants to meet disposal requirements.

4.All monitoring wells should be protected from damage.

5.Groundwater in these areas is also known to be contaminated with PFAS. Based on the proposed scope (i.e., shallow trenching/excavation min 36”), it is assumed that groundwater will not be encountered as part of this project. Please contact the Environmental

Restoration POC for additional review/evaluation of the project and recommendations, if any groundwater is encountered.

Provided drawings (PFAS North Runway, PFAS South Runway) showing current estimated areas of PFAS contamination in soil and groundwater monitoring well locations

20. Will the government give the contractor a reasonable time to complete a site investigation and determine proper scheduling, communications installation/test planning, environmental controls and safety controls prior to expecting mobilization? If so, what timeframe would the government consider reasonable for this site investigation and planning phase?

o We will leave this up to the contractor, they can provide an overall schedule, not concerned with the timeline for investigation/planning, as long as the project can still be completed withing the 12 month POP

21. In SOO paragraph 2.2.11.1, the government describes that existing drawings (butterfly/cable diagram) may not be available and if so, the contractor will be responsible to provide new drawings of existing infrastructure updated with as built information for the new installations.

Can the government clarify the extent of existing infrastructure it expects to be documented for existing drawings that do not exist? Can the government provide information on how many existing drawings that do not exist and need to be created?

o Govt will provide PDF copies of existing site and MH butterfly drawings as requested, will require contractor to indicate route used for new conduits and identify what ducts were used in existing manholes on butterfly drawings

22. In SOO paragraph 2.2.12 the government requires a draft test plan be provided NLT 10 days after award. Would the government consider adjusting this requirement so that a draft test plan be required NLT 30 days prior to mobilization rather than 10 days after contract award?

o Yes