Questions from Industry.pdf

Consolidated Questions and Answers HT001426QE030

Interpretation and Translation Services BPA

Fort Campbell, KY

Q1: (Technical) — PWS Part 3, paragraph 3.1.2 PWS 3.1.2 requires that interpreters use a "land-line based telephone connection (i.e., no cellular or wireless telephones)." Current commercial over-the-phone interpretation platforms operate over fixed broadband rather than analog copper lines. Does a dedicated, hardwired broadband connection from a private, fixed interpreter workstation with cellular and wireless connections prohibited satisfy this requirement?

Answer Q1: Yes. A dedicated, hardwired Ethernet broadband connection from a secure, private workstation where wireless and cellular connections are disabled satisfies this requirement. Cellular connections and unsecured Wi-Fi remain strictly prohibited.

Q2: (Technical) — PWS paragraph 1.4, Note, and PWS Part 2, paragraph 2.4 PWS 1.4 states the contractor must have "application compatible equipment with system used at BACH," and PWS 2.4 identifies the Government-furnished equipment as a Video Translation iPad Pro 10.5-inch 64GB. Does BACH currently use a specific video interpretation application or platform to which the contractor's service must connect? If so, please identify it. If not, please confirm the contractor may deploy its own iPadOS-compatible application on the Government-furnished devices.

Answer Q2: BACH does not mandate a proprietary Government video interpretation platform. The PWS has been updated to reflect that the iPad given by BACH has the mandatory software that the vendor will be using to perform the services required. The contractor is not required to bring their own equipment.

Q3: (Price) — FAR 52.222-48 and FAR 52.222-51 The solicitation includes FAR 52.222-51 and the certification at FAR 52.222-48, but no Service Contract Labor Standards wage determination is attached. Please confirm whether the Service Contract Labor Standards apply to this requirement and, if so, provide the applicable wage determination.

Answer Q3: There is no applicable Wage Determination for requested services under this BPA in the area of Fort Campbell.

Q4: (Price) — PWS Part 3, paragraph 3.3, and BPA paragraph 3, Pricing PWS 3.3 states that in general two interpreters are required for assignments lasting more than two hours, for assignments requiring detailed or technical interpreting or captioning, and for general audiences lasting more than 1.5 hours. The pricing table provides a single hourly rate per on-site service line. Please confirm whether the offeror's quoted hourly rate is to be applied per interpreter assigned, or per assignment regardless of the number of interpreters required.

Answer Q4: The quoted hourly rate applies per interpreter-hour. For assignments where PWS 3.3 mandates two interpreters, the Government will be billed for the billable hours performed by each authorized interpreter.

Q5: (Price) — BPA paragraph 3, Pricing The pricing table includes separate line items for "Holiday Pay" (10 hours per year) and "Short-Term Notice Pay" (10 hours per year). Please clarify whether these are to be priced as standalone all-inclusive hourly rates, or as premium amounts to be added to the applicable base service line rate.

Answer Q5: These line items are to be priced as standalone, all-inclusive hourly rates covering the full cost of the service provided during those specific conditions. They are not additive premiums.

Q6: (Price) — BPA paragraph 3, Pricing, and PWS Part 4, Estimated Workload Data To support accurate pricing, please provide actual historical usage by service line for the most recent 12 to 24 months. Additionally, please identify the incumbent contractor, if any, and the current awarded unit pricing.

Answer Q6: Over the past 12 months, BACH utilized an average of approximately 700 minutes of telephonic interpretation per month. Historical on-site, VRI, and written translation volumes have been nominal to zero under the previous mechanism, as services are expanding under this BPA. See Answer Q30 for incumbent contractor identification and Answer Q33 regarding pricing.

Q7: (Technical) — PWS paragraphs 3.2, 1.7.3, and 3.3 PWS 3.2 and 1.7.3 state that on-site interpretation shall be provided within two business days of request. PWS 3.3 states that on-site services shall be provided with a minimum notice of twenty-four hours / one business day. Please clarify which standard governs.

Answer Q7: Two (2) business days advance notice is the governing standard for regular, non-emergency on-site interpretation requests. Paragraph 3.3 is amended to align with PWS 3.2 and 1.7.3. For urgent/emergency requests, see Answer Q10.

Q8: Could you provide historical utilization by language and service type, particularly for telephonic interpretation, on-site interpretation, video interpretation, ASL, and written translation?

Answer Q8: Under the prior contract vehicle, utilization was essentially restricted to telephonic interpretation averaging 700 minutes per month. Approximately 70% of this historical demand was Spanish, with the remaining 30% divided among Korean, German, Arabic, Russian, and American Sign Language (ASL). On-site, video remote interpretation (VRI), and document translation represent new or expanded service requirements for this BPA; prior workload metrics are not available for those specific modalities.

Q9: Which languages have historically represented the highest volume under this requirement, and approximately what percentage of total utilization is Spanish?

Answer Q9: Historically, Spanish accounts for approximately 70% of total language service calls. Other recurring languages include Korean, German, Arabic, and French.

Offerors are required to maintain access and capability for all languages categorized under Common and Uncommon Languages in the PWS.

Q10: For on-site interpretation, what are the expected response times for regular requests and short-notice/emergency requests?

Answer Q10: Contactor shall provide on-site services for language with a minimum notice of twenty-four (24) hours/two (2) business day after language is requested.

Situations of emergencies, Contactor shall provide on-site services for language within two (2) hours after language are requested.

Q11: The PWS states that contractor equipment must be compatible with systems used at BACH. Could the Government identify any specific technical, platform, connectivity, or equipment requirements vendors must meet for telephonic and video interpretation?

Answer Q11: The PWS has been updated to reflect that the iPad given by BACH has the mandatory software that the vendor will be using to perform the services required. The contractor is not required to bring their own equipment.

Q12: Are there any minimum qualifications, certifications, background checks, credentialing requirements, or security requirements for interpreters and translators beyond those stated in the PWS, particularly for personnel working on-site at BACH facilities?

Answer Q12: All personnel performing on-site must be eligible for unescorted installation access under Fort Campbell security regulations (e.g., passing NCIC-III background screening, presenting a REAL ID-compliant credential, and having no disqualifying felony records). Interpreters assigned to clinical encounters must possess proven competency in medical terminology (e.g., CMI, NBCMI, CCHI, or equivalent documented training/testing). ASL interpreters must hold RID (Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf) certification, BEI certification, or equivalent state credential.

Q13: Does the Government permit the use of machine translation or generative AI for written translation services? If permitted, are there any restrictions concerning patient information, PHI, HIPAA, DoD information-security requirements, or cloud-based AI platforms?

Answer Q13: No. The use of automated machine translation (MT) or Generative AI is strictly prohibited for clinical, legal, and vital patient-facing translation documents.

All translations must be completed and reviewed by human linguists to ensure medical accuracy, patient safety, and HIPAA/DoD privacy compliance.

Q14: For written translations, are there specific turnaround-time requirements for standard, urgent, and emergency requests?

Answer Q14: There are no expedited turnaround times for urgent and emergency requests. The standard turnaround time requirement is two (2) business days.

Q15: For American Sign Language and other sign-language services, should vendors assume that assignments may be performed either on-site or remotely by video, or are those services expected primarily on-site?

Answer Q15: The Government reserves the right to designate either on-site or Video Remote Interpretation (VRI) based on clinical evaluation, patient preference, and operational necessity at the time the call order is initiated.

Q16: Can the Government confirm whether the technical evaluation is limited to the technical description of Telephonic Translation/Interpretation Services requested on page 1, or whether offerors should provide a technical narrative covering all services in the PWS?

Answer Q16: Offerors must submit a comprehensive technical proposal addressing all service modalities identified in the PWS: Telephonic Interpretation, On-Site Interpretation (spoken and ASL), Video Remote Interpretation, and Written Document Translation.

Q17: Can the Government confirm that award will be made to the lowest-priced offeror receiving an “Acceptable” technical rating, assuming the price is determined fair and reasonable?

Answer Q17: Yes, award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements, is rated Technically Acceptable, and offers the lowest total evaluated price (LPTA).

Q18: The Instructions require offerors to submit a completed PDF of FAR 52.212-3 Alt I and 52.209-7, but the fill-in text of 52.212-3 Alt I does not appear to be included in the solicitation. Should offerors rely on their active representations and certifications in SAM.gov, or will a separate 52.212-3 Alt I fill-in document be provided?

Answer Q18: Offerors may rely upon their current, active Representations and Certifications registered in SAM.gov. Offerors must affirm in their submission that their SAM.gov registration is active and accurate as of the date of submission, and provide a completed copy of FAR 52.209-7 if applicable.

Q19: The BPA references “Block 3 of the form 1449,” but no SF 1449 is included in the package. Is there an SF 1449, or other cover/offer form, that must be signed and returned with the offer?

Answer Q19: The first page of the1449 is not included in the package. The date that is entered on Block 3 of the form 1449 will be done at time of award.

Q20: The pricing table uses a single “Cost per Hour” column, but several line items are measured per minute or per word. Please confirm the unit of measure for each line item and how offerors should enter unit prices so that the “Estimated Total” is calculated correctly.

Answer Q20: The unit of measure will be cost per minute/word, with Unit being EA. The table for pricing has been amended to reflect the change. Offerors must populate unit prices according to the specified unit of measure on the pricing table.

Q21: Should offerors submit a single set of firm-fixed unit prices for the entire five-year ordering period, or separate pricing for each of the five years? The BPA notes annual price reviews; please confirm whether price escalation is permitted and how it will be handled.

Answer Q21: Offerors shall submit separate unit prices for each of the five (5) ordering periods (Base Year plus four 12-month ordering periods). Annual escalation is permitted and must be incorporated into the proposed unit rates for each respective year. Annual price reviews will be conducted against the awarded BPA rates.

Q22: Will a total estimated ceiling or not-to-exceed value be established for the BPA, and will individual call/order dollar limits be specified?

Answer Q22: A BPA Master Dollar Limit and a BPA Call Limit will be established once the award is made based on the awardee’s pricing.

Q23: Does the Service Contract Labor Standards statute apply to this requirement, and if so, is a Department of Labor Wage Determination applicable?

Answer Q23: Please see Answer Q3.

Q24: Please confirm the authoritative submission deadline. Page 1 states 10:00 AM EST on September 9, 2026, while SAM.gov lists 10:00 AM EDT. Since September is within Daylight Saving Time, please confirm whether the intended cutoff is 10:00 AM Eastern Time (EDT).

Answer Q24: The cut-off for submissions is 10:00AM EST and has been extended to September 17, 2026.

Q25: Could you confirm whether the BPA structure allows an award to multiple vendors covering different languages, or whether a single awardee must cover the complete language need?

Answer Q25: The Government intends to award a single BPA to one qualified contractor capable of fulfilling all language, modality, and administrative requirements.

Q26: How many interpreters are currently supporting this work?

Answer 26: Because current support is supplied primarily via an on-demand commercial telephonic platform, there are no full-time dedicated contractor personnel stationed at BACH. Service is call-driven.

Q27: Is there an average amount of time where interpreters are needed?

Answer 27: Telephonic interpretation encounters historically average between 12 and 18 minutes. In-person clinical appointments generally range from 30 to 90 minutes.

Q28: Do you have a smaller list of the common languages you want interpreted or will it be the general list: Chinese, Arabic, Mandarin/Chinese, and French?

Answer 28: The general list provided in the PWS stands. Offerors must be capable of providing all languages listed under Common and Uncommon Languages in the PWS.

Q29: Would that same list of common languages be used for the foreign sign language requests as well?

Answer 29: Yes. While American Sign Language (ASL) represents the vast majority of sign language needs, capability for foreign sign languages will follow the PWS structure when requested

Q30: Is there a current incumbent?

Answer 30: Yes, the current incumbent is Green Translations, LLC.

Q31: Is this BPA intended to establish a new contract vehicle for BACH, or to continue, replace, or renew an existing Interpretation and Translation Services contract?

Answer Q31: This requirement is a competitive follow-on (re-compete) to replace an expiring BPA.

Q32: Who is the current incumbent contractor providing interpretation, translation, transcription, and related language services to BACH and its outlying clinics?

Answer Q32: Please see Answer Q30.

Q33: If available, can the Government provide the incumbent contractor’s current pricing or rates for the services covered under this BPA?

Answer Q33: Detailed line-item rates are proprietary business data and are not releasable. Historical total award values and order numbers are matters of public record (see Answers Q41 and Q45).

Q34: Will the Government accept proposals for only a portion of the required services, such as document translation and/or remote interpretation, or must vendors propose all services identified in the PWS?

Answer Q34: Proposals for partial services will not be considered. Offerors must quote on all line items and demonstrate capability across all required service categories.

Q35: Does the Government require vendors to provide all languages identified in the PWS Language Chart, or may vendors submit a proposal for a subset of the requested languages based on their available resources?

Answer Q35: Vendors must provide all languages listed in the PWS. Proposals offering only a subset of languages will be evaluated as Technically Unacceptable.

Q36: Can the Government provide the estimated annual volume or historical usage for each service category, including telephonic interpretation, on-site interpretation, video interpretation, ASL/foreign sign language, document translation, and transcription?

Answer Q36: Please see Answer Q6, Q8, and Q43.

Q37: What is the Government’s estimated annual spend or anticipated value for the services under this BPA?

Answer Q37: Please see Answer Q22.

Q38: Will vendors be permitted to propose remote-only services, such as telephonic and video interpretation, without providing on-site interpretation services at BACH and its outlying clinics?

Answer Q38: No. Proposals offering remote-only services without on-site capability will be deemed non-compliant and Technically Unacceptable.

Q39: We have reviewed SAM.gov and noted that the submission due date is Sep 09, 2026 10:00 am EDT. Could you please confirm if this date is correct and if there have been any updates or amendments that may not have been posted yet?

Answer Q39: This is the first amendment and the solicitation deadline will be extended to 17 September 2026, 10:00AM EST.

Q40: Please provide incumbent(s) and incumbent(s)’s rates.

Answer Q40: Please see Answers Q30 and Q33.

Q41: Please provide historical spend.

Answer Q41: Under task order W81K0426FA197, total obligated spend was approximately $10,660 over a 12-month period for limited telephonic services. This new BPA expands scope to include on-site, VRI, and written translation.

Q42: Please provide historical volumes per service category.

Answer Q42: Historical usage averaged approximately 700 minutes of telephonic interpretation per month. No baseline volume exists for on-site, VRI, or written translation under the preceding contract.

Q43: Please provide breakdown by language (either in units of measurement, or %) for each category (Telephonic Interpretation, On-site Language Interpretation, On-site American Sign Language, On-site Video Translation Interpretation, Translation). Re breakdown by language, please separate, at the very minimum, Spanish and All Other.

Answer Q43: There is no current service outside of Telephonic Translation, of which approximately 70% of which is Spanish, with the remaining 30% being all other languages combined (primarily Korean, German, Arabic, and Russian).

Q44: Please provide breakdown for On-site Foreign Sign Language.

Answer Q44: This will be a new contractual service, so historical data is not available.

Q45: Please provide the historical task order.

Answer Q45: Historical task order number: W81K0426FA197

Q46: What pain points are you looking to address that you did not have fulfilled by your current language service provider?

Answer Q46: There are no performance deficiencies with the incumbent contractor.

The Government is establishing this BPA to consolidate comprehensive modalities (on-site, VRI, telephonic, and document translation) under a single flexible ordering agreement.

Q47: Are offerors to submit a technical description of Telephonic Translation Services (p.1), or the Translation Services (as per Section 2. Evaluation Factors: 1. Technical - Factor 1, p.

25)? We understand that the former refers to services over the phone, and the latter to written document translation. Please confirm what is required.

Answer Q47: The technical proposal must cover all interpretation modalities (telephonic, on-site, VRI) and document translation services outlined in the PWS.

Q48: Is telephonic interpretation pre-scheduled or on demand? As per 1.7 Administrative specifications (p. 5): For telephonic service, the Contractor will confirm the start and end lime of the service call with the BACH staff. As per PART 3, 3.0 SPECIFIC TASKS, 3.1 REQUIRED SERVICES: 3.1.3. (p.6): Contractor must have available on-demand, over-the-telephone interpreter services 24 hours per day, 7 days a week, and 365 days a year. The industry standard is to differentiate pricing between the two; pre-scheduled is billed by the hour and on demand by the minute. Minimums, cancellations, after hours and rush charges apply to pre-scheduled only. If both are required, please provide two separate CLINs

Answer Q48: Telephonic interpretation is strictly on-demand (24/7/365) and is billed on a per-minute basis with no minimum duration per call.

Q49: Please explain what is meant by On-site Video Translation Interpretation (p. 3).

Answer Q49: "On-site Video Translation Interpretation" refers to situations where an interpreter is physically on-site at BACH or an outlying clinic, facilitating video interpretation to a remote patient or off-site specialist. Standard remote video interpretation (where the interpreter is remote and patient/provider are at BACH) is categorized as Video Remote Interpretation (VRI).

Q50: Is video remote interpretation, or VRI, required? If yes, is video remote interpretation, or VRI, pre-scheduled or on demand?

Answer Q50: Yes, VRI is required. VRI is primarily pre-scheduled (minimum 24 hours advance notice). However, offerors possessing on-demand VRI capabilities should describe them in their technical proposal.

Q51: Please explain Document Transcription/Translation (p. 3). Document transcription is transcription of audio or video files while document translation is translation of written text.

The industry bills for transcription by the minute, and for translation by word. If both are required, please provide two separate CLINs.

Answer Q51: The primary requirement is written document translation billed per word.

Audio/video transcription will not be evaluated as a routine separate line item; if transcription is occasionally required prior to translation, it will be handled as an equitable bilateral modification under an individual call order.

Q52: For translation services, do you require desktop publishing, or DTP? DTP is the formatting and typesetting of translated text to match the original design layout. DTP also routinely includes preparing "un-translatable" or non-editable documents for translation. If DTP is required, where are vendors to list pricing for DTP? The industry standard is to charge for DTP by the hour. If required, where are vendors to list their DTP rates?

Answer Q52: Standard formatting is considered integral to written translation and must be included in the per-word rate. Complex graphic reconstruction / specialized DTP is not anticipated; no separate DTP CLIN is established.

Q53: Where are vendors to list their minimums, cancellation policies, after-hour charges and rush fees?

Answer Q53: All pricing terms must conform to the BPA Schedule of Supplies/Services. On-site interpretation incorporates a standard two-hour minimum billable duration (see Answer Q55). Cancellations made with less than twenty-four

(24) hours' notice for scheduled on-site interpreters are eligible for payment of the two-hour minimum. Rush fees, after-hours rates, and holiday rates must be captured exclusively in the designated CLINs on the revised Pricing Schedule. Unilateral vendor commercial fee schedules not incorporated into the pricing table will not be accepted.

Q54: Will the Government consider remote service delivery if an onsite interpreter is not available?

Answer Q54: If the contractor demonstrates good-faith, documented attempts to secure an on-site interpreter but is unable to locate one, the contractor may propose immediate VRI or telephonic substitution subject to advance approval by the BACH Contracting Officer's Representative (COR). Consistent failure to fulfill on-site assignments may be grounds for termination for cause.

Q55: Please confirm the minimum for onsite assignments. As per 3.3 SPECIFIC DUTIES/TASKS THE CONTRACT EMPLOYEES SHALL PERFORM (p. 8): The 2-hour minimum does not apply if the assignment was scheduled for less than 2 hours. The industry standard is to bill the minimum of 2 hours for onsite assignments.

Answer Q55: PWS Section 3.3 is updated: The Government confirms a standard two (2) hour minimum billing threshold for authorized on-site interpretation assignments.

Q56: Are offerors required to submit Certifications and Representations included in RFQ (as per Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors - Commercial Products and Commercial Services, p. 25)? If yes, please specify which ones for offerors with active registration in SAM.gov.

Answer Q56: Offerors with active SAM.gov registrations must submit the FAR 52.212-3 paragraph (b) statement certifying their electronic SAM reps and certs are current, complete, and accurate, along with any solicitation-specific fill-ins (including FAR 52.209-7 and FAR 52.222-48 if applicable).

Q57: Are offerors to submit a copy of their SAM Entity Information?

Answer Q57: Yes. Offerors shall submit a current PDF copy of their SAM.gov "Entity Record" summary verifying active registration and CAGE code.

Q58: How many files, volumes, etc. does the Government expect offerors to submit? Are files to be submitted separately or merged into one file?

Answer Q58: Offerors shall submit electronic proposals via email by three (3) different files: Signed amendment acknowledgments, SAM entity validation, and required representations/certifications; Technical Quote: Technical narrative demonstrating capability to fulfill all PWS tasks, quality control plan, platform compatibility, and personnel qualifications (Redacted of pricing); and Price Proposal: Completed Attachment 1 Pricing Schedule