Questions & Answers.pdf

Request for Proposal (RFP) #: RBAA 2027-045 Project Title: Law Enforcement Ammunition

Date Due: Tuesday, November 17, 2026, at 2:00 PM MT

Questions and Answers

Q1: Extension (RFP 1.E) Will the State grant a two-week extension of the question deadline (10/28) and the proposal deadline (11/17)? Answers will prompt follow-up questions and change how Offerors price.

A1: No. The State intends to adhere to the Schedule of Activities published in the solicitation.

All deadlines remain unchanged.

Q2: Existing price agreements (RFP 1.A; Exhibit D §2)

State Purchasing & Contracts Office price agreements for Ammunition-Law Enforcement run through 7/31/2027, at least one with a renewal option. Is this Contract intended to replace them, take precedence, or run alongside them with agencies choosing?

A2: Contracts awarded as a result of this solicitation are intended for independent purchasing from this solicitation. Purchasing entities will have the discretion to determine which cooperative price agreement best meets their operational, budgetary, and delivery requirements.

Q3: Items to propose (RFP 1.A; Exhibit A SOW 3.C.iii)

If this Contract runs alongside the existing Ammunition-Law Enforcement price agreements, which already list those manufacturers’ best-availability LE items, does the State want those items proposed again, only items not listed, or something else?

A3: Offerors should submit pricing for all items listed in Exhibit B that they are capable of supplying, including any items that may currently be available on other existing price agreements

Q4: Cooperative scope (RFP 1.A.i; Exhibit D §2)

Will the State let the Contractor extend the Contract to cooperative Purchasing Entities at its discretion? Serving every agency in the state at these terms on one price sheet raises every price; discretion lets CDPS and CSP be priced separately.

A4: No. Contractors may not elect to serve cooperative Purchasing Entities on a discretionary basis. As established in the RFP, this is a statewide cooperative procurement; awarded terms and Exhibit B pricing must be honored for all eligible participating entities, including state agencies, institutions of higher education, and political subdivisions (cities, counties, law enforcement agencies, and school districts).

Q5: FFL requirement (RFP 2.C.i.a) Section 2.C.i.a requires an FFL for commercial distribution of ammunition. Federal law requires a license to manufacture or import ammunition, not to sell it. Will the State accept a manufacturer’s authorized distributor letter in place of an FFL?

A5: Yes. The State acknowledges that federal law requires a Federal Firearms License (FFL) for manufacturers and importers, but not solely for non-importing domestic distributors. In lieu of an FFL, an Offeror that is a non-manufacturing distributor may submit an official, verifiable Manufacturer’s Authorized Distributor Letter on manufacturer letterhead confirming the Offeror is an authorized commercial distributor of the proposed product lines. Offerors who are manufacturers or direct importers must still provide their active

FFL.

Q6: Pricing impasse (RFP 1.G.i; Exhibit D §3.C, Price Modifications)

If a price adjustment under Section 1.G.i is declined, or extension pricing cannot be agreed, what is the Contractor’s remedy? As written, the State may decline the adjustment and still extend the Contract at the existing price under Exhibit D 3.C.

A6: Price adjustment requests must be fully supported by market documentation (e.g., commodity index adjustments or direct manufacturer price notices) and must be mutually agreed upon in writing by the State. If the State and the Contractor cannot reach mutual agreement on a requested price increase, the State reserves the right to not exercise the option to renew/extend the Contract and may re-solicit the goods in accordance with the Colorado Procurement Code.

Q7: Contract term (RFP 1.F.i; Exhibit D §3.C)

Will the State revise the term to one year, 1/1/2027 to 12/31/2027, with up to four one-year extensions by mutual written agreement and pricing agreed for each? Mutual agreement resolves any pricing impasse; terms over one year are not standard.

A7: No. The State will not revise the base term. The initial contract term will be two (2) years, expiring December 30, 2028, with the State reserving the option to renew for up to three (3) additional one-year periods, not to exceed five (5) total years. Pricing terms remain subject to Section 1.G.i.

Q8: Price adjustments (RFP 1.G.i; Exhibit D Price Modifications)

Would the State amend Section 1.G.i and the Price Modifications section to allow a price adjustment supported by a manufacturer price justification letter, in place of the commodity and PPI/CPI standards? Distributor cost is the manufacturer’s price.

A8: The State will accept a formal Manufacturer Price Justification Letter as supporting documentation for an annual price adjustment request, provided it is issued directly by the manufacturer and details the specific factory cost increases across the affected product lines. However, all requested adjustments must be submitted at least sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of the current contract term, and require formal written review and mutual agreement via State Contract Amendment before taking effect.

Q9: Acceptance period (Appendix A 2.D)

Will the State reduce the 180-day proposal acceptance period in Appendix A 2.D to 90 days? 180 days adds up to six months of fixed pricing before the term starts.

A9: No. The State will not reduce the 180-day proposal acceptance period. In accordance with

Colorado Procurement Rule R-24-103-201-11(d), this period is necessary to ensure adequate time for evaluation, scoring, demonstrations or discussions (if required), and formal contract execution.

Q10: Minimum order (RFP 3.D)

Will the State revise the minimum order in Section 3.D from one box to one manufacturer case? Freight on one box often exceeds the box price and goes into every unit price; a case is also the smallest unit that meets the outer case rule in 3.H.ii.

A10: Yes. Section 3.D is hereby amended to reflect a Minimum Order Quantity (MOQ) of one

(1) full manufacturer case per line item. Purchasing entities ordering smaller quantities must round up to the nearest whole case.

Q11: Pre-approved equals (RFP 3.E)

Will the State allow Offerors to list in Exhibit B pre-approved equivalent part numbers per item (same manufacturer, caliber, grain, bullet type, casing) that may ship in place of the primary part number? Lead times vary by part number, not load.

A11: Offerors may submit secondary or alternative manufacturer part numbers for identical loads (same caliber, grain weight, bullet profile, and brass casing) on Exhibit B, clearly designating them as alternate part numbers with identical pricing. When an order is placed, the purchasing entity retains final authority to decide whether the alternative part number is acceptable based on immediate availability.

Q12: Delivery date (RFP 3.F; Exhibit D §15.A)

Will the State confirm the delivery date is the ETA quoted and accepted on the Purchase Order, and that if missed the remedy is cancellation under 3.F.v, not breach or cover damages? Lead times on LE ammunition often exceed 90 days.

A12: The delivery date shall be the ETA agreed upon and accepted on the issued Purchase

Order. If a vendor cannot meet the accepted ETA, the purchasing entity may cancel the PO without penalty. While an isolated cancellation due to unavoidable manufacturing delays does not automatically constitute a contract-wide default, a demonstrated pattern of repeated failure to meet accepted delivery commitments or failure to provide accurate availability data constitutes non-performance and may result in formal default and termination for cause under Exhibit D, Section 15.

Q13: Lot requirement (RFP 3.H.iii)

Will the State strike Section 3.H.iii, the single manufacturing lot requirement?

Manufacturers do not guarantee lot assignment on distributor orders and deliveries can arrive in more than one lot, so the requirement is impractical and priced as risk.

A13: Section 3.H.iii will not be stricken; however, the State clarifies that single-lot fulfillment is required whenever order volumes allow. If a large order cannot be fulfilled from a single manufacturing lot due to factory allocations, the Contractor must notify the purchasing entity prior to shipment. Shipments containing mixed lots must clearly separate, block, and label the distinct lots on all packaging and packing slips.

Q14: Freight on each order (RFP 3.B.i, 3.B.iii)

Would the State amend Section 3.B.i to allow actual freight on each order, approved with the quote, in place of freight in the unit price? Unit-price freight must cover unknown destinations, order sizes, and these terms, so every agency overpays.

A14: Standard freight and shipping costs for regular orders must be incorporated into the firm unit pricing in Exhibit B (FOB Destination, Freight Prepaid and Allowed). SOW Sections 3.B.ii and 3.B.iii apply only to exceptional logistics, such as high-volume multi-pallet orders requiring specialized carrier equipment or specific accessorial fees (e.g., liftgate requirements at rural or non-dock locations). Any such supplemental freight charges must be fully itemized on the pre-order written quote and agreed to in writing by the purchasing entity prior to Purchase Order issuance.

Q15: Allowed freight charges (RFP 3.B.ii, 3.B.iii; SOW 3.C.ii)

Section 3.B.ii allows actual freight above an unstated threshold, and SOW 3.C.ii bars charges not listed in Exhibit B, which has no freight field. Will the State define which freight charges may be approved under 3.B.iii and the threshold for them?

A15: Routine delivery for standard parcel and LTL case orders (FOB Destination, Freight

Prepaid and Allowed) must be fully built into the unit box/case pricing submitted on Exhibit B. Additional freight accessorial charges may only be billed if: (1) an order requires dedicated multi-pallet freight exceeding standard pallet weight limits, or (2) specialized site access fees apply (such as residential or remote drop-off, liftgate delivery at non-dock facilities, or inside delivery). In any such circumstance, all additional freight fees must be explicitly itemized on the pre-order quote and approved in writing on the ordering entity's Purchase Order prior to dispatch. SOW 3.C.ii will be interpreted to permit these pre-approved accessorial fees.

Q16: Backorder notice (RFP 3.F.iv) Would the State consider striking Section 3.F.iv, the 24-hour backorder notice?

Manufacturers do not guarantee availability at order and production schedules change, so a backorder can arise days after the order, once the 24-hour window has passed.

A16: Section 3.F.iv is clarified as follows: Offerors are expected to disclose all known inventory constraints or manufacturer backorders at the time a quote is requested. If a product goes on backorder after PO transmittal, the Contractor must notify the ordering agency in writing within twenty-four (24) hours of becoming aware of the manufacturer backorder or production delay. The notice must specify the reason for the delay and an updated delivery estimate.