FSGA Responses to Industry Questions.pdf

FORT STEWART FFS – ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RPP) ISSUED 16 JULY 2026.

Questions

1. Attachment O shows estimated hours. Are these minimum hours expected?

No, they are not strict mandatory minimums, but they represent the Government's baseline expectations. The hours identified in Attachment O represent the Government’s estimated labor hours required to meet the baseline Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements. While these estimates serve as the benchmark for technical acceptability, they are not rigid minimum floors.

In accordance with the RFP (Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors—Commercial Products and Commercial Services), offerors may propose a staffing approach that deviates (above or below) from the Government’s baseline estimates for CLINs 0003 through 0007. To deviate from the baseline, offerors must provide a detailed supporting narrative in their technical proposal that:1. Explains the specific departure from the Government's baseline hours.2. Proves how the proposed approach (e.g., cross-utilization, reach-back support, or part-time personnel) successfully meets or exceeds all PWS requirements.3. Identifies potential performance risks and details specific mitigation strategies.

Regardless of whether an offeror aligns with the Government's baseline estimates in Attachment O or proposes an approved deviation, the successful awardee is contractually bound to fully perform all PWS requirements utilizing their proposed and accepted labor mix and pricing structure.

2. Attachment O shows an increase in estimated hours during the option periods.

Please explain the basis for the increased hours in the option periods.

The increased hours in the ordering periods are due to the base period covering 11 months, while the subsequent ordering periods cover a full 12 months.

However, the Government will only compensate the contractor for actual hours worked.

3. For purposes of determining the required FTE count, should offerors use gross annual hours of 2,080 per FTE, or should FTEs be calculated based on productive hours after accounting for leave, training, holidays, and other non-productive times?

Offerors are responsible for proposing a staffing solution that is sufficient to meet all contract requirements, performance standards, operating hours, and workload. Staffing levels should be based on the offeror's technical approach and demonstrated ability to successfully perform the required services. For pricing and staffing purposes, offerors should use applicable productive hours identified in the CAP SUMMARY tab of Attachment H - FSGA Staffing Matrix for purposes of determining required FTE count for each respective building/location. Offerors remain responsible for ensuring that their proposed staffing is sufficient to maintain uninterrupted contract performance throughout the period of performance without additional cost to the Government, unless otherwise authorized by the contract.

4. Are any of the DFACs currently closed or operating under reduced service levels?

DFACs 110 and 19225 are operational while 12902, 13102, 13302 are currently closed.

5. CLIN X0008 shows an amount for ODC Consumables and Cleaning Supplies.

Can these amounts be adjusted?

Yes, the amounts for ODC Consumables and Cleaning Supplies under CLIN X0008 can be adjusted and reallocated internally based on actual requirements, provided that the total cumulative billed amount does not exceed the overall Not-To-Exceed (NTE) ceiling established for this CLIN.

Please ensure that all purchases remain allowable, allocable, and reasonable in accordance with the contract terms, and continue to provide the necessary supporting documentation with your invoices.

6. We understand that Building 110 is currently supported under a Dining Facility

Attendant (DFA) contract. Upon award of this solicitation, does the Government intend to terminate the existing DFA contract and transition Building 110 to Full Food Service (FFS) under this requirement?

The Government will execute an administrative modification to the existing Dining Facility Attendant (DFA) contract to de-scope and remove Building 110.

Concurrently, the upcoming Full Food Service (FFS) contract will incorporate the following designated facilities:

• Building 110 (FFS)

• Building 19225 (FFS)

• Building 12902 (FFS)

• Building 13102 (FFS)

• Building 13302 (FFS)

7. How will the invoice be billed and what will it look like? Can you provide a sample invoice?

See attachment: WAWF Invoice Billing Process Memo Sample

8. The solicitation establishes not-to-exceed productive labor hours for each labor category under the CLIN structure. However, certain staffing levels derived from the CLIN hours appear insufficient to satisfy the staffing and operational requirements contained in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). For example, the Headcount labor category appears to provide approximately one employee per shift, while PWS requires performance of functions that appear to require two personnel during meal operations. Similarly, the labor hours allocated for the Cook labor categories also appear to raise questions regarding whether the staffing contemplated by the CLIN schedule is sufficient to fully satisfy the PWS requirements.

Please clarify whether offerors are expected to strictly price and perform within the labor hours identified in the CLIN schedule, or whether offerors are expected to propose whatever staffing levels are necessary to fully satisfy all PWS requirements, even if those staffing levels exceed the labor hours established in the CLINs.

The Government’s estimated labor hours under the CLIN structure are baseline projections developed from historical execution data and real-world operational observations. However, the Performance Work Statement (PWS) defines the absolute standard of performance. Offerors are responsible for proposing a staffing solution that fully satisfies all PWS requirements. If an offeror’s technical approach requires staffing levels or labor hours that deviate from the Government’s baseline estimates to meet the PWS, the offeror may propose a deviation (including proposing additional hours).

Any proposed deviation must be accompanied by a comprehensive narrative within the technical proposal that:1. Detail the specific departure from the Government's baseline hours.2. Provide a thorough technical rationale demonstrating how the proposed approach meets or exceeds all PWS requirements.3. Include a risk assessment identifying potential operational risks and specific mitigation strategies.

As this is a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) acquisition, offerors must balance technical acceptability with price competitiveness. The successful awardee will be contractually held to the performance standards of the PWS within their proposed and accepted pricing structure.

9. The solicitation includes two separate Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs):

one for Fort Stewart (FSGA) and one for Hunter Army Airfield (HAAF). Because the solicitation combines work at both installations into a single procurement, please clarify which CBA(s) offerors should use in developing their pricing.

Should the applicable CBA be applied based on the location where the work is performed, or does the Government intend for a single CBA to apply to all work performed under this contract?

Contractors are required to apply the appropriate Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) based on performance location: the HAAF CBA applies to all work executed at Hunter Army Airfield, while the FSGA CBA applies to all work executed at Fort Stewart.

10. Can you please provide a seniority list for the CBA?

The Government does not possess the seniority list. Offerors should rely on the information provided in the solicitation.

11. I cut and pasted from the PWS below. I am confused about CLIN 8 and the responsibility of the contractor. What is included in the set amount in CLIN 8?

I want to make sure that I do not calculate items needed for the contract that the Contractor supplies twice (once in my calculations per building and again in the government set clin 8).

“Attachment A page 19

3. CONTRACTOR FURNISHED ITEMS AND EQUIPMENT

3.1 Except for those items specifically stated as Government-furnished, the Contractor shall furnish everything required to perform this contract, including but not limited to: office equipment, office supplies, cleaning supplies, etc. The

Contractor shall maintain a sufficient quantity of on-hand materials and supplies to perform all work required under this contract. Any failure on the part of the Contractor to provide sufficient quantities and quality of supplies and materials within the specifications of the contract shall not be cause for reduction in any service or performance. For informational purposes, typical supplies are listed in Attachment E - Sample Materials List.”

CLIN 8 is intended to cover contractor-furnished supplies and equipment required to fulfil the contract. Attachment E is provided as a representative list and is not all-inclusive. Offerors are responsible for furnishing all supplies, materials, and equipment necessary to meet the PWS requirements. Offerors should not duplicate costs between CLIN 8 and other CLINs.

PWS paragraph 3.1 has been updated to clarify consumables/ODC CLINs and uploaded along with solicitation amendment 0003.

12. Attachment B - Service Schedule Tab indicates Bldgs. 12902, 13102, and 13302 only serve 2 meals per day with MREs at lunch. The operating hours show 0430- 1930. Do the facilities stay open during the MREs. does FFS Contractor manage, distribute, or on any way have contact with the MREs? For management hours, are managers requires to be on duty at the Dining Facilities during the times marked MRE as the meal services are for Breakfast and Dinner?

Operating hours will vary based on the mission;

The operating hours identified in Attachment B reflect the overall hours of operation for the dining facilities. For facilities serving MREs at lunch, the contractor shall perform only those duties specifically identified in the PWS and Service Schedule. The contractor is not responsible for the management, distribution, or accountability of MREs unless expressly required by the PWS.

Contractor management are required to be present only during hours and activities for which contractor performance is required under the contract.

13. CLIN 0007AK – DFAC Building 110 – Position: Admin. The solicitation allocates

1,850 hours for this position over the 59-month ordering period, which equates to approximately one hour per day. Additionally, no Admin labor hours appear to be allocated for the NCOA Dining Facility. The PWS requires numerous administrative and food service management functions, including the use of the

Army Food Management Information System (AFMIS) for food ordering, inventory management, planning, and accountability.

Please clarify whether the Government intends for these administrative and AFMIS responsibilities to be performed by other labor categories by other labor categories or whether the labor-hour allocations for the Admin position should be revised to support the required PWS functions.

The government noted an administrative error on CLIN 0007AK. The line item quantity has been corrected to read 18,251. Please see the attached revised Request for Proposals (RFP).

14. Order of Precedence Between LPTA and R-SA Priority Amendment 0002 provides that award may be made either to the LPTA offeror or to the SLA under Randolph-Sheppard Act priority, if the Government determines the SLA can perform at a "reasonable cost, with food of a high quality comparable to that currently provided." Could the Government clarify how these two standards interact - specifically, whether R-SA priority can result in award to the SLA at a price above the LPTA offer, and if so, what methodology will be used to determine that the SLA's price is "reasonable"? This clarification would help offerors better understand the basis for award as they prepare their proposals.

The Randolph-Sheppard Act (RSA) priority takes precedence over the LPTA evaluation standard. The RSA priority is a statutory exception to the open competition requirements of the Competition in Contracting Act. As such, the standard FAR provisions regarding "fair and reasonable" competitive pricing are not the determining factor for the SLA’s proposal. Yes, the RSA priority can result in an award to the SLA at a price higher than the LPTA offer. Regarding the methodology for determining "reasonable cost": per Department of Education regulations (34 CFR § 395.33(b)) and established precedent, if the SLA's proposal is evaluated and placed within the competitive range, the SLA is legally deemed to have demonstrated the ability to operate the facility at a "reasonable cost with food of a high quality." In that scenario, the contract is expected to be awarded to the SLA regardless of whether their offer is the lowest priced.

15. Applicability of the Secretary of War's Directive on Food Service Priority On July 11, 2025, the Secretary of War requested that the Department of Education exempt DoD dining facility operations from Randolph-Sheppard Act priority. On December 23, 2025, the Department of Education published a Federal Register notice determining that continued blind-vendor priority for Army dining facilities "adversely affects the interests of the United States." Given this determination, could the Government confirm whether the evaluation approach.

Subsequent to the December 23, 2025 Federal Register notice, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued an Opinion and Order on July 31, 2026 vacating (canceling) the Secretary of Education's determination to limit the Randolph-Sheppard Act (R-SA) priority for Army dining facilities. Because the Court declared the exemption void, the R-SA priority remains in effect and the solicitation evaluation approach has been revised accordingly to reflect that priority.

16. Revised Schedule B / Schedule of Supplies-Services To support accurate pricing, we request that the Government issue a revised Schedule B (Supplies/Services and Prices/Costs) that aligns the CLIN/SubCLIN structure with the Government's minimum staffing levels in Attachment O.

The government noted and corrected a clerical error in CLIN 0007AK in the solicitation document.