Questions and Answers Amendment 2.pdf

RFP/SOW

Reference Question Government Response

1 Class Estimates

What is the purpose of this attachment, and why is this attachment included? It appears to include specific rates and not ranges.

The purpose of this attachment is to give offerors an estimate of the number of classes at each training location and provide the MTS Program ceiling value available for all periods until consumed.

2 Class Estimates Can the classes be assigned/conducted in alternate Regions/bases as student demand requires?

Yes, after discussion and concurrence with Contracting Officer Representative.

3 PWS

Can the minimum student enrollment be reduced to 2 at locations where the student demand is lower?

Yes, after discussion and concurrence with Contracting Officer Representative. On case by case basis.

Section L, Paragraph 3.2.1 b.

If a Vendor is registered in SAM.Gov and their certifications are up t date what is required to satisfy the Representation and Certification criteria?

Yes, in this case the offeror will need to indicate in volume I that their SAM.gov is up to date.

Section L, Paragraph 2.1

Is the intention of this requirement for the proposer to submit complete analysis of all costs and show in detail the process used in developing their cost/prices including ODC costs?

Yes, the information will be used to conduct a price reasonableness evaluation in accordance with section 7.2 of Section M of the solicitation. The ODC amount is provided by the government and does not require any breakdown from the offeror.

Section L, Paragraph 2.3

Can the font size pertaining to graphics and other items like tables and figures be a smaller font size no smaller than 9 pts?

Please for 12 point font or higher. Proposals must be legible.

Attachment 5, Wage Determinations

Considering there are 39 different WD guidelines for the counties within the various locations why is there only 8 specified in Attachment 5? Secondly are we required to use the all WDs in determining the pricing for labor on the contract in all locations?

Offerors must comply with WD rates for every location in attachment 2 Training Locations and attachment 3 Class Estimates. The government provided a sampling of WD rate locations but did not provide every location.

8 PWS

Does a vendor have the ability to import course schedules via an integrated API or CSV upload into the CNIC N35 system of record (RMI External Enrollment Traffic / Motorcycle Safety Program Risk Management System)?

No, needs to be created in MUST module of RMI

9 PWS

With respect to course scheduling, does the Navy dictate course frequency, class size, and calendar structure, or is scheduling at the discretion of the approved vendor based on demand and operational considerations? Additionally, is there a prescribed minimum or maximum student count per course iteration, or may vendors structure class sizes within established safety and curriculum standards?

Approved vendor proposes the schedule to COR for Period of Performance. Minimum and Maximum class sizes are outlined in SOW. Max class size is 6 for BRC/ARC, minimum class size is 3.

10 PWS

Is there any restriction on the use of indirect administrative personnel (e.g., answering phones, preparing spreadsheets, filing documents) in support of contract performance?

No

11 PWS

How are required documents such as liability waivers coordinated with students? Are these processed through the CNIC N35 system, or managed separately by the vendor?

Additionally, will the vendor have the ability to download a roster of registered students from the system? If so, will that roster include student email addresses for authorized follow-up communication?

Liability waivers are processed by the vendor. The vendor will have ability to download rosters with email addresses for students.

12 PWS

Are satisfaction surveys distributed to students following course completion? If so, are these administered by the Navy program office, or by the vendor?

Vendor

13 PWS

Is there an approved list of motorcycle manufacturers or specific models that must be utilized under this contract?

No

14 PWS

Are vendors required to use a specific Motorcycle Safety Foundation (MSF) curriculum (e.g., 3WBRC 5x10, eP1 x 11, etc.), or is there flexibility provided the curriculum meets DoD and Navy standards?

Vendor must use approved curriculums for training by the Navy Safety Command. MSF and meet applicable state licensing requirements Refer to section 4.0.3 of SOW/PWS.

15 PWS

With respect to course completion and close-out procedures, what specific data is required to be entered into the CNIC N35 system? For example, are written and/or riding evaluation scores required to be entered? If so, is there a defined timeframe within which this data must be submitted following course completion?

Complete all required fields for course in CNIC's system of record, RMI. No specified time frame for closing out the course.

Reference PWS

Section 4.2.6

Can the Government confirm that the Government is solely responsible for obtaining and maintaining all training range certifications (e.g., RERP certifications), and that the contractor is not required to obtain or maintain range certifications under this contract?

Government obtains and maintains motorcycle range certifications.

Reference PWS

Section 4.2.7

PWS Section 4.2.7 states that 'The Contractor may utilize alternative MSF certified ranges in the execution of this contract.'

When a Navy training range is unavailable due to maintenance, mission conflicts, or other factors, is the contractor required to utilize an alternative MSF certified range to ensure training is delivered, or is this utilization at the contractor's discretion?

Please clarify whether alternative range usage is mandatory or optional when Government ranges are unavailable.

No, Contractor must request through COR to utilize any alternated MSF certified range and contract modification must be approved to reflect the change in location.

Reference PWS

Section 4.0.2

PWS Section 4.0.2. requires instructors to be certified by the Motorcycle Safety Foundation (MSF) or equivalent and courses to be in compliance with OPNAVINST 5100.23G

(ACN-1).

Can the Government confirm that there is no requirement under this contract for the contractor to address state-specific curriculum requirements or state-specific instructor certifications, such as the California Motorcycle Safety

Program (CMSP)?

Is MSF certification and compliance with OPNAVINST 5100.23G (ACN-1) sufficient to meet all training requirements at all installations, including those in

California?"

Refer to Section 4.0.2 and 4.0.3. Contractors must meet OPNAVINST M5100.23 and any requirements to teach courses relating to state licensing requirements.

Reference Section L - Instructions, Conditions & Notices, Section

1.7

The solicitation was released on 18 February 2026 providing only 8 calendar days until proposal due date of 25 February 2026.

The solicitation also indicates that questions are due no later than 7 calendar days prior to the proposal due date, leaving offerors with only 1 day to review the solicitation and develop meaningful questions without a guarantee of a response as the instructions state that for questions submitted within 7 Calendar days...that

"offerors are not guaranteed a response"

Given the above statements and timelilnes,we assess there is insufficient time for offerors to (1) thoroughly review the solicitation, (2) develop and submit meaningful questions, (3) receive Government responses, and (4) incorporate those responses into their proposals.This timeline will materially affect the quality and responsiveness of proposals received.

We respectfully request that the Government extend the proposal due date by a minimum of 14 calendar days and allow additional 2 days time for offerors to review the solicitation and submit questions. This will allow adequate time for questions to be submitted, answered, and incorporated into proposals.

This extension would enable offerors to submit more accurate and responsive proposals benefitting the government.

The solicitation was originally posted on February 5, 2026 giving ample opportunity to ask questions prior to the question deadline. These questions and answers will be provided by an amended solicitation along with other changes. Due to the other changes an extension to the solicitation will be provided.

20 PWS

Would the instructors come to the Naval Base and Teach the classes? Are the motorcycles provided at all the basses if needed in the training?

Yes, instructors teach the classes on base. The contractor is responsible for providing motorcycle training bikes. See section 4.1.2 of the PWS.

21 Q&A I think I understood in the Q & A that Navy personnel can go to a school, but it has to be approved by the CO/COR, correct?

Yes, Navy personnel go to the motorcycle training provided by the Navy under the motorcycle contract. The COR doesn't approve each indivivdual training request submitted by Navy personnel. See PWS section 4.0.1

22 PWS

I see that you will accept 3-6 people to be trained, but if it is at a school, the class size can be up to 12. Is that something that you are ok with?

The PWS has a Table with the instructor student ratio requirements. The student to instructor ratio is an important component to success of the program, and shall follow the following maximum requirements. Training locations are located on Navy installations. See Section Section 4.1.2 of the

PWS.

Section M - Price

Evaluation

Section L/M requests offerors to price the government's estimated class load; however the government intends to issue multiple awards for this work.

It is unclear how task orders will be divided among this, and contractors maybe unable to accurately project the cost of each course for each location given the need for specific equipment, management, and other overhead costs that need to be accounted for to accurately price support for each location.

Would the government consider excluding price as an evaluation factor at the IDIQ level based on FAR 15.304(c)(1)(ii)(A), given that further price competition will be required at the task order level.

Offerors should provide a maximum/celing price for each training class in the proposal. If awarded a MAC the price provided will Firm Fixed Priced at the basic contract level.

Prior to issuing a solicitation at the Task Order level during the solicitation process the government will provide a break down of the class numbers and locations specific to the task order. At this time, offerors should provide their best price per training session. The government will evaluate pricing for each training session at the basic contract level and award on the initial offer. In accordance with Section 3.1 of Section M, of the solicitation the non-cost factors when combined are significantly more important than Price.

Section L – Cost/Price

Realism; Section M

– Price Evaluation

Section L states that a cost/price realism analysis will not be performed, while Section M states that the Government will evaluate the offeror’s total evaluated price to determine price reasonableness.

Given that this is now a Multiple Award IDIQ contract under FAR 16.505(b), and task orders will be competed among MAC holders, can the Government clarify:

(a) Whether evaluated prices at the IDIQ level will establish binding unit prices for task order pricing; and

(b) Whether price competition will occur again at the task order level?

Price realism and price reasonableness are two different things. Realism assesses whether a proposed price is unrealistically low, which could indicate a lack of understanding of the requirement. Reasonableness ensures that the proposed price is not too high and represents a fair value to the government. (a) If an offeror is selected for award their proposed prices will be used as a ceiling price on their basic contract level. (b) At task order level offerors will provide their best pricing without exceed their price offered.

4.4 Subfactor (2)

Management Approach

Given the government's change from a single award IDIQ to a multi-award IDIQ can the government clarify their requirements for Management Approach?

Under a multiple award approach the governments strategy for organizing and awarding task orders may impact the contractor's approach for Management. Additionally, the government has not requested a task order management approach.

Can the government clarify their expectations for the contractor to address both management of the IDIQ and Task Orders issued under this requirement, and how those sections will be evaluated?

The government updated Section 4.4 of Section M of the solicitation to clarify sub-factor (2) Management

Approach/Staffing Plan.

Section M – Price Evaluation; MAC

Ordering Procedures

With the amendment revising the acquisition to a Multiple Award IDIQ (MAC), and given that task orders will be competed among awardees pursuant to FAR 16.505(b), we respectfully request clarification regarding the role of price in the MAC-level evaluation.

Rationale: Task orders may vary by region, class mix, travel requirements, surge conditions, and ordering cadence. Cost efficiencies may not be fully realizable or predictable at the base IDIQ level (i.e., It is difficult to project how the government will craft orders and understanding of costs, efficiencies, corporate overheads, equipment, etc.).

In light of this, would the Government consider removing pricing as an evaluation factor considering that price competitiveness would be assessed at the Task Order level.

limiting the MAC-level price evaluation to a determination of price reasonableness only, and assessing competitive pricing at the task order level where scope, geography, and performance conditions are more clearly defined?

We believe this approach would enhance meaningful price competition while ensuring the Government receives best value at the point of performance execution.

At the basic contract level the offerors maximum/ceiling price per training requirement will be established. At the task order level the government will develop and provide a spreadsheet with the number of training sessions required at task order level by locations and regions. A travel not to exceed plug-in amount will be provided during the task order solicitation process for contractor to use on their quotations. Contractors can propose lower pricing amounts than the amounts established at the ceiling level for task orders. The pricing evaluation factor will not be removed from the first level of the evaluation process.