The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Document
| Section |
| Question |
| GOV Answer |
| SOW_HAAW182012_30Mar2026.pdf |
| 1.4.2 |
| During the site visit it was discussed that some standards from referenced documents may be waived at the discretion of the BCE, and IAW the project specification. in 1.4.2 of this section it states the most stringed standard will apply. This could create an unfair advantage to a system that is not in compliance with the applicable standards that could be delivered at a lower cost over a system that would be in compliance. Please clarify if the specification will be overriding the cited standards. |
| All RFIs and responses will be posted for all bidders to see. Please submit any DoD code that you want considered for exception as it meets NFPA. |
It is not common for DoD Code from the UFC to be overridden and unlikely to happen on this project. However, we are aware that there are some items that were missed in original construction that meet NFPA code but not DoD Code. Those will require a separate contract to resolve. What was discussed on site was vendors asking about placing new antenna wire in conduit and painted red per UFC. The existing antenna wire is not in conduit and this project will not resolve that issue since contractors are anticipated to reuse the existing wire and antennas.
The intent is to not restrict bids by calling for replacing in kind and restricting to only use of a Motorola based solution. The existing cards and radios at the building level are functioning, they have just reach their end of life and we can no longer get annual maintenance performed by a regional vendor. An upgraded version of what the FARS is using will meet the needs of the Government provided it can be maintained by a local company, has a modern/user-friendly GUI, and can be shown to meet all the new UFC cybersecurity requirements for Facility Related Control Systems.
| General |
| General |
| Is it helpful for the Government if contractors involved in this project already have CMMC Level 2 certification for handling of CUI data? |
| This is not a bid evaluation factor. All information used in the contract is only for the purposes of this contract. Any information provided by the Government for this Solicitation or Contract if awarded is not for the vendor to further distribute without written authorization from the 174 ATKW Base Civil Engineer. |
| SOW_Attch 9.3 UFGS_28_31_32_Digital_Com |
| 2.5.10.1 |
| During the site visit it was discussed that the desire was to minimize battery backup to NFPA Minimums, the requirement currently indicates 48 hours of backup. It was also identified that both the primary and redundant receiving stations have auto start generators which under NFPA 72 10.6.7.4.1 would only require 4 hours of battery backup. Please clarify what the minimum requirement for the primary and redundant will be either 4 hours of battery backup or 48 hours? |
| 24-hrs for the Transceivers at the Building level is adequate. 4-hours at the primary and redundant receiving station is adequate. The Work station the Fire Alarms desk (FA Desk) and BDOC can have it's own UPS. If the Primary (FA desk) and Redundant Server (BDOC) fits inside the FA Desk and BDOC as the previous server towers did, meaning a separate workstation is not required, than a single UPS for 4-hours is acceptable. |
| SOW_Attch 9.3 UFGS_28_31_32_Digital_Com |
| 2.5.10.1 |
| As a follow-up to the previous questions, please confirm that all of the central equipment (alarm notification screens receivers, monitors, accessories, etc.) shall be included in the central backup battery calculations |
| See previous response. |
| SOW_Attch 9.3 UFGS_28_31_32_Digital_Com |
| 2.5.10.1 |
| This section of the specification requires a rack for the battery backup, however during onsite discussions there seemed to be a preference for no rack if possible for the battery backup. Please confirm what will be allowed. |
| Small Server Rack or Server Cabinet is acceptable. It shall fit in the spaces shown. There is not much data being sent from the Buildings even if more alarm points are configured onto the existing cards. |
| SOW_Attch 9.3 UFGS_28_31_32_Digital_Com |
| 3.3.6 (a) |
| During the site visit it was discussed that if a source did not require two frequencies to operate that the second one could be left unused. However this requirement requires training on switching frequencies. Assuming that training on switching frequencies would not be required if the system does not need two frequencies to be compliant IAW NFPA 72. |
| The Government needs to have the ability to switch between the two approved frequencies using Government radio maintenance staff. If the lowest bid requires both frequencies to operate, then both frequencies can be used. The previous system only required one frequency. Only recently was a second frequency allotted for the existing Fire Alarms Reporting System (FARS). |
| SOW_Attch 9.3 UFGS_28_31_32_Digital_Com |
| 28 31 33 |
| This section requires the capability to " Query building fire alarm system status." Please confirm the intent is the ability to determine the current actual status at any building by having the central query the transmitter for its current status at anytime. |
| The FARS should be able to poll the transmitter at least every hour to confirm the FACP is still able to communicate to the FA Desk and BDOC. |
| SOW_Attch 9.3 UFGS_28_31_32_Digital_Com |
| 2.4.8 |
| Please confirm that each transmitter zone input will require a physical "Zone Disconnecting Means" or if a logical means such as through the central receiving system to either temporarily disable, or mark a facility as under test is preferable or acceptable. |
| Temporary disabling from the Fire alarms desk or BDOC is acceptable as long as it sis highlighted in the event log and notifies the Operator via some sort of pop up that a zone is in test mode or disconnected. |
| Please confirm that any monitoring system, such as the parts for displaying alarms, maps, graphics, history provided as part of this scope that integrates with the radio receiver must be listed for use together by a recognized NRTL IAW the UFC's and NFPA 72 |
| Local maps are only to be provide by the 174 Civil Engineering Squadron. I do not know how various manufacturers would have access the maps, integrate in to the entire kit described in the RFI and tested by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory without local authorities consent. At this time, I do not see a authority to distribute maps to a vendor or Third Party Nationaly recognized testing laboratory for a specific fire alarms reporting system. |
| General Install |
| Are there any known issues with Lead paint, or lead abatement that will be required for the planned transmitter locations |
| No known issues. |
| SOW_HAAW182012_30Mar2026 |
| 3.2.4 |
| Please confirm that proof of over the air radio encryption capability as required here can be achieved by including the appropriate NIST Certificate (FIPS 140-2) and NRTL certificates showing current compliance as part of the bid package. |
| paragraph 3.2.4 clearly states " Encrypting transmitters is not required as part of this contract, only using transmitters compatible to have future encryption capabilities without increasing the number of enclosures." |
| During the site visit it was mentioned there may be deficines in the current base MNS system. Is future integration, or replacement of the current MNS system a desired or future capability need? Paticularly as long term-costs savings can be achieved by avoiding duplication of cossts. |
| A follow on contract to resolve lesser fire safety deficiencies more holistically is a possibility. |
| SOW_HAAW182012_30Mar2026.pdf |
| 3.5.3/General install |
| During the site visit it was discussed that existing coax could be utilized for a cost savings please confirm that not placing the existing coax in conduit will be acceptable, even if that would not meet the current UFC requirements. |
| Placing the existing coax cable in conduit is not part of this SOW. |
| Solicitation General |
| Given the timeframe of RFIs due on Friday the 17th, please extend the due date for proposals to 15 days from answer date to allow the responses to be digested and proposals be updated |
| Extending is up to the Contracting Officer; the funds set aside by NGB are to resolve the failed FARS. A more holistic review of UFC discrepancies is a future contract. |
| SECTION 28 31 32 & 28 31 33 |
| (section 2.9.5, and section 1.3.2 g) |
| During the site visit it was discussed concerning the bases ability to program and make changes to the system without a manufacturer or distributors representative. Please confirm the intent is to have a system that the base staff can perform functions without a manufacturer or distributors labor such as; adding and programming new units both at the central and in the field, making changes to units, unit numbers, zone or point descriptions and providing overall system maintenance while continuing to receive support from the manufacturer. |
| The specific example given on site was the we do not want to have to call out a vendor to change the name of a room. The training goals are listed in the SOW to include changing the frequency. Maintenance Software and/or laptop is to be provided under this contract (SOW paragraph 3.7). Systems or components that are unsupported or about to be unsupported from the manufacturer (i.e. going obsolete or unsetting) shall not be considered. |
| SOW_Attch 9.2 UFGS_28_31_33_Radio Type |
| 1.3.2 (f) |
| During the site visit there was some discussions that the Government intended to have a complete system that would not immediately require maintenance or upgrades. As part of it is it the Government's intent to not procure a system that would require monthly, annual, or ongoing maintenance costs from non-base personnel even going beyond 24 months? |
| Routine ITM taskers are expected; the vendor will need to prove that the components are not going obsolete, sunsetting or the Government will need to buy software patches or subscriptions for 24 months after commissioning. |
| SOW_Attch 9.3 UFGS_28_31_32_Digital_Com |
| 3.2.1 |
| Some existing systems currently have wiring co located with power and coax in gutters and raceways. Do we need to relocate if reusing existing wiring |
| Do not install the conductors for the fire alarm reporting system in conduits, junction boxes, or outlet boxes with conductors of lighting and power systems. |
| SOW_Attch 9.3 UFGS_28_31_32_Digital_Com |
| 3.3 |
| Limited space in equipment rooms, can we remove existing system and install new transceiver in its place. |
| Yes, however, the new transceivers must fit and not require the relocation of other building system components. |
| SOW_Attch 9.2 UFGS_28_31_33_Radio Type |
| 3.2.1 |
| Some existing systems currently have wiring co located with power and coax in gutters and raceways. Do we need to relocate if reusing existing wiring |
| Do not install the conductors for the fire alarm reporting system in conduits, junction boxes, or outlet boxes with conductors of lighting and power systems. |
| SOW_Attch 9.2 UFGS_28_31_33_Radio Type |
| 3.2.6.1 |
| Does this require 3 separate conduit pathways from FACU to BT-X for alarm, supervisory and trouble |
| Provide connection to protected premises fire alarm control units in accordance with NFPA 72 and as specified. |
| SOW_Attch 9.2 UFGS_28_31_33_Radio Type |
| 3.3 |
| Limited space in equipment rooms, can we remove existing system and install new transceiver in its place. |
| Yes, however, the new transceivers must fit and not require the relocation of other building system components. |
| General Install |
| Please provide the under-desk heights for the fire station and BDOC |
| approx. 27 inches to the inside bottom of the counter in the FA Desk; approx 27.5 inches to the bottom of the counter in BDOC. Anything taller than 26 inches may have clearance issues and will have to go somewhere else. |
| General Install |
| Please provide drawings of the Fire Station and BDOC |
| Provided for the purposes of this Solicitation only; further distribution is not authorized. |
| Section 28 31 32 |
| appears to require a Third-Party/Independent QFPE for commissioning and final certification, while Section 28 31 33 allows a Third-Party Independent Reviewer, QFPE, or NICET IV Designer. Please confirm whether a NICET IV Fire Alarm Systems professional is acceptable for commissioning oversight and final certification, or whether a QFPE is mandatory. |
| NICET IV Fire Alarm Systems professional is acceptable. Shop drawings submitted shall be stamped and signed by a NICET IV or QFPE qualified professional in the submittal phase. |
| Does the NICET IV and/or QFPE need to be on-site during all installation activities, or will a supervisory role be acceptable |
| On-site is typical since the installer, QCM and Commissioner will be validating that the system meets code and properly installed. How often depends on the NICET IV or QFPE. Deviations or code conflict shall be noted in the Commisoning report which are normally documented in the AF3000 submittals and QC reports and reviewed prior to Commissioning. |
| What will be the government's accepted/ Approved cutover approach to avoid continuity of protection as dictated in the specification |
| minimal Fire Watch period for the respective buildings. There is a Primary UHF currently in use and a Secondary UHF currently not in use. If Fire Watch is required for the cutover milestone, it needs to be coordinated in advance and reflected in the project schedule and all project schedule updates. |
Frequency Allocation - The spec references primary and spare frequencies but doesn't provide them. Please provide the following to confirm:
| What are Primary and Secondary frequency assignments? |
| Our fire frequency is in the range of 400 and 419.9775. The radio equipment must be capable of programming frequencies with a resolution of at least 0.0001MHz (100Hz) to ensure the exact assigned frequency can be entered |
| Can the secondary frequency be utilized to provide initial configuration, start-up, programming, etc. as a possible cutover alternative |
| YES |
| Is the secondary frequency assignment currently operational or is there an approval process to activate if used for initial configuration and testing before cutover? Who do we contact for activation? |
| Operational; both Frequencies have been approved by the Frequency Manager. The Frequency Manager has the authorization documents on file and can be provided post-award as they are CUI documents. The Frequency Manager will be part of the AF3000 Materials Submittal review and approval. |
| Who is responsible for validating the provided hardware/equipment that will meet Section 25 05 11 requirements and performing the Cybersecurity Vulnerability Scan |
| The Contractor QCM is responsible for documenting which STIG and what the configuration is the manufacturer and/or system configuration team did to meet the STIGs. For example, Firewall and Network configuration and patch management is accomplished during the installation and preliminary testing prior to Commissioning. Once the Contractor QCM validates the STIGs are met as part of the Commissioning of the system and notifies the Contracting Officer, Maj Peirson via email that the system is ready for Government QA checks. |
Contractors or manufacturers may choose to run their own scans/automated tools to ensure the DISA STIGs are correct before notifying the Government the system is ready for Government acceptance. The 174th Attack Wing Information System Security Officer for Facility Controls validates all appropriate STIGs FARS by review or automated scans. Common scans are STIG Viewer or SonarQube.
The Government is not responsible for QC. Validation the STIGs are met is part of the configuration process. The minimum action could be an Unsatisfactory CPARS should Contractor QCM found to have not verified the STIGs were configured per DoD requirements resulting in the Government having to repeat the Government QA, STIG scans, or other means to confirm applicable STIGs have been met.
The full library of STIGs, covering hundreds of products and systems, is publicly available through resources like the DISA STIG Library and STIGHub, which provide downloadable guides and updates cyber.mil+1. https://www.cyber.mil/stigs/downloadsOrganizations
External Storage:
| Please clarify the storage type required - NAS device, Desktop Storage device, USB Drive. |
| USB Drive is only acceptable as a Backup to the Primary storage. Back up storage is required and should be separate from the Primary Server to avoid catastrophic failures like power surges, lightning strikes. |
| What are the minimum requirements for the storage device NAS device |
| Use the manufacturers recommend methods for redundancy to fully back up the servers. Different manufacturers accomplish this a few ways. There are many Commercial-Off the shelf solutions for small stand-alone networks like the Hancock Field Fire Alarms Reporting System that can be configured to meet DoD requirements. There are only 38 FACPs that will be on this network. The solution should match the scale of the existing number and outputs of the FACPs. I recommend matching your stand-alone networks accordingly. Historical solutions, other ANG bases configurations and recent market research has found servers and storage devices the size of computer towers have met or exceeded DoD requirements. Small server cabinets are also acceptable. |
| DODIN Switch - is there a preferred manufacturer and model of switch to be provided if one is needed for the installation? Please provide as necessary |
| The approved list can be found at https://aplits.disa.mil/processAPList.action |
| Based on the secondary frequency (if approved for use for configuration & commissioning), can you verify that the existing antennas are capable of transmitting both frequencies simultaneously without interference |
| Existing antennas are only transmitting one frequency |
| Are there any special frequency/installation/testing special considerations and/or requirements with respect work being conducted in the armory building |
| The Army National Guard calls all their facilities and offices “Armory.” There are no special requirements for Facilities #101, 27th Brigade Armory. The Air National Guard Ammunition facilities are referred to as “MSA” or “Munitions Storage Areas” which are facilities 801-805. Even though existing FARS transmitters are currently located in Mechanical rooms or protective cabinets with the MSA facilities compounds, validated intrinsically safe radios from a Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance (HERO) review from the manufacturer are required. Access to these previous mentioned facilities was offered by the Government during the Vendor Site Visit |
| Is 48-hour standby battery capacity for transmitter and interface devices required at each subscriber unit, or will a 24-hour battery back-up be sufficient |
| 24-hours is sufficient. |
| Are the Planner Laptop (3.7 in SOW document) and the Configuration and Maintenance laptop (called out in spare parts) required in the specifications to be provided as two separate laptops, or can one laptop be allowed to serve both |
| one laptop that can do both is acceptable as long as Government Facility Maintenance Staff do not have to off site training to operate either. |
| Are supervising station printers required as indicated in the specification as none were identified during the site survey |
| Yes, a printer is required |
| Are all trainings to be recorded per specification and if yes, will the government be providing the recording equipment or is the vendor responsible |
| Recording is required and to be provided by the contractor |
| Per the radio installers' qualifications requirements, are the three project references and their respective points of contact required |
| Installers and those supervising the installation must qualified and the Prime Contractor shall provide a way for the Government to easily verify their credentials. |
| Will the technicians NICET II, NICET III, or NICET IV certification be acceptable certificates for the radio equipment installation |
| Vendors are not allowed to install a product they have never installed before, not been trained on, and are not familiar with. Contractors shall prove they know how to install the transmitters and interface cards prior to the award of the contract. Manufacturer certificates and/or references from the manufacturer on the manufacturer’s letter head is common. |
| If needed, where new enclosures are to be installed, will the requirement for providing two coats of weatherproof coating be enforced or is this not needed as the devices are located indoors |
| Enclosures shall be protected the cards, transmitters and electronics from the environment hazards they are installed within. All existing FARS cards and radios are in enclosures mounted inside mechanical rooms or communication rooms. Several examples were shown during the site visit. |
| Section 2.8.10 |
| Primary Power directs the vendor to provide a separate circuit breaker for each transceiver for automatic switchover in the event of a power loss: |
| Are these breakers already installed on the existing system, and can they be re-utilized for the new equipment |
| Yes; installers can use the same power source the existing system uses |
| If they do not exist, will this requirement be enforced for this project |
| see previous response |
| Can the GeoBase Data files for the server graphics be provided to the vendor prior to equipment being on-site or not |
| Geo-base data will only be provided after the award of the contract. As with all DoD contracts, the contractor shall document how and where geo-base data is used, stored, and copied as with and DoD drawings. Once provided by the Government, the Geo-base data is only eligible to be used on his contract and not provided to any third-party entity without written approval from the 174th Attack Wing Base Civil Engineer. |
| Please clarify if the existing installed radio units utilize any or all of the PLC outputs for as part of a sequence of operation in the event of an alarm condition |
| The existing transmitters are Motorola Land Mobile Radios and simply passing the information to the Fire Alarms desk. The information that is being received to the Fire Alarms Desk was provided in the solicitation. The alarm sequence of operation is handled by the Fire Alarm Control Panel not the transmitter. Replacing the Fire alarm control panel is not in scope of this contract. |
| Quality Control (sow document) with respect to the USACE Construction Quality Control Course |
| The web link was checked on 17 July 2026 on a non-government computer and found to load as expected. If the example link from the Portland District isn’t offering classes, try another USACE District like Buffalo or Great Lakes. The link https://www.lrd.usace.army.mil/construction-quality-management/ looks like there are some offered for $0. Also search for NAVFAC who is an equivalent to USACE CQC course. |
| Is the pdf link provided (2020 CQM Student Study) to be used / referenced by contractors in lieu of taking the course online or on-site |
| Not in lieu of the course. The certificate is only awarded by the USACE after completing the class. |
| If no, please provide access and schedule information needed to meet the specification |
| the schedule varies by USACE District and is provide on the USACE website found by an open-source search. |
| With respect to submittals requirements 4.9.17 and 4.9.18, can the QFPE and/or NICET IV approved project personnel provide the Reviewing Official Letters for compliance with these requirements or is a third-party vendor required |
| A Third-Party letter from a properly credentialed QFPE or NICET IV that has reviewed the installation, testing and Commissioning is required |
| If third party is required, do you have a list of approved third party organizations that you can provide for us to meet these requirements |
| This is part of the Contractor Quality Control Plan. There are many QFPE and Fire Alarms vendors with NICET IV certified personnel in the Syracuse area. |
| Per the SOW document, are vendors required to complete the AT Level I Awareness Training, iWatch Training, and OPSC Training as indicated? REPSONSE: It is based off the security threat at the time of the award. The Contracting Officer will let you know during the post-award kick-off meeting |
| The Contracting Officer will let you know during the post-award kick-off meeting |
| If yes, please provide location and schedule information as needed to meet the AT Level I 10-day calendar deadline |
| it is an Anti-Terrorism Level 1 course that is a self-paced computer-based training. |
| Would installing a Fiber Network to all Simplex Fire Alarm Panels be acceptable |
| Unfortunately, not currently. The existing Authority to Operate and cybersecurity risk management is just for radios. Moving to a fiber backhaul could happen in the near future on a case-by-case basis |
| Is there any information available for the existing fiber network |
| Yes, but only a viability study. The 174th Communications Squadron has conducted testing in the last few years confirming open multi-mode fiber for both transmitting and receiving with minimal loss. A repeat of the test can done ONLY if the Air National Guard authorizes funding and a future contract to make fiber the primary backhaul to the Fire Alarms desk. In short, radio transmitters will be the Primary backhaul and only radios will be part of the Commissioning of the new Fire Alarms Reporting System (FARS). |
| If existing cables and antenna are to be used where possible, please identify which building numbers currently utilize external antennas on the current Moscad system |
| All buildings with transmitters utilize external antennas for the existing MOSCAD system. The existing antenna cables and antennas are working at the time the SOW was written. Some vendors still prefer to use their own antennas, and the Government does not intend to be so restrictive by refusing to allow new external antennas. |
| For the buildings utilizing external antennas, please confirm that these existing antenna cables currently possess lightning arrestors and in-line surge suppression devices on the cables between the existing MOSCAD and the antenna |
| The existing antenna cables currently possess lightning arrestors and in-line surge suppression between the existing MOSCAD box and the antenna. |
Department of the Army National Guard