Attachment_0006_-_Industry_Questions_and_Answers_v3.pdf

Question 1: Attachment 0003, Paragraph L.3 states that the List of Points of Contact who were sent a questionnaire will be excluded from the page limitation count. What questionnaires are being referred to here? (Reference: Attachment 0003, Instructions to Offerors, Paragraph L.3)

Answer 1: No questionnaires were sent. Please ignore this statement. Paragraph L.3 will be revised accordingly.

Question 2: Are we correct in assuming the “cover sheets” mentioned in Attachment 0003 Paragraph L.3.5 are the same as the “front cover” mentioned in Attachment 0003 Paragraph L.3.4.1? (Reference: Attachment 0003, Instructions to Offerors, Paragraph L.3)

Answer 2: Cover sheets and front covers are the same.

Question 3: With respect to the e-mailed proposals mentioned in Attachment 0003, Paragraph L.5, is there a file size limitation for attachments? (Reference: Attachment 0003, Instructions to Offerors, Paragraph L.5)

Answer 3: There is no file size limitation. However, it is up to the offeror to ensure the proposal is received by the Government before closing. A large file may cause delays or be undeliverable.

Question 4: The PWS, in Paragraphs 1.3 and 4.1, requires the contractor to keep leased vehicles in “like new” condition at all times. Attachment 0003, Section L.6.2, requires offerors to “demonstrate that they have the resources and/or the ability to keep NTVs in like new operating condition for all four countries.” PWS Para 1.2 defines “like new” as follows: “Like new Condition: Vehicle looks new, is in excellent mechanical condition and needs no reconditioning. The vehicle has a clean title history and will pass any tests required per host nation law (i.e. safety or emissions). The engine compartment, interior, and exterior are clean and free of any wear or visible defects.”

PWS Para 1.2 also uses the “like new” term in the definition of unscheduled maintenance: “Unscheduled Maintenance: Maintenance that is not scheduled but is required to correct deficiencies and to restore the vehicle or equipment to like new condition.” However, PWS Para 7.0 requires the contractor to replace vehicles if the mileage surpasses 100,000 kilometers or if the vehicle model year is 5 years older than the calendar year. Is the contractor required to keep leased vehicles in “like new” condition at all times, ensuring the vehicle not only always looks new but is also always free from any wear whatsoever? It appears that this requirement for 100% like new vehicles 100% of the time conflicts dramatically with the 100,000 km and 5 year usage limitations, especially since the leased vehicles will be used to support military missions in extreme climates in desert Gulf countries. (References: Performance Work Statement, Paragraphs 1.3 and 4.1, and Attachment 0003, Instructions to Offerors, Paragraph L.6.2)

Answer 4: The contractor shall ensure all vehicles are in like new condition at all times.

Slight wear and tear is expected, but the contractor shall ensure all vehicles are in safe, operable condition and do not have damage beyond normal wear and tear. Vehicles shall be replaced when they are more than five years older than the model year (i.e. a 2018 vehicle may have been made in 2017, but will not need to be replaced until January 1, 2023) or have over 100,000 kilometers, regardless of their condition or delivery date.

Question 5: PWS Para 3.1 requires the Government to return vehicles with half a tank of fuel. What fuel level is required when the contractor first makes delivery of vehicles?

What fuel level is required when the contractor returns vehicles after maintenance?

(Reference: Performance Work Statement, Paragraph 3.1)

Answer 5: The contractor shall deliver vehicles with at least a half tank of fuel. The contractor shall return vehicles picked up for maintenance with at least as much fuel as was in the vehicle when picked up. The PWS will be revised accordingly.

Question6: The force protection package specified in PWS Para 6.4 requires a safe mount. Would the Government please clarify what is a safe mount? (Reference:

Performance Work Statement, Paragraph 6.4)

Answer 6: The contractor shall provide a safe that matches the PWS requirements, or alternatively a mount allowing the Government to install a safe of that size in the vehicle.

Question 7: With respect to the PWS Para 7.0 requirements to replace vehicles based on mileage and age, do vehicles require replacement at 100,000 km or the 5 year age point – whichever comes first? Or, must a vehicle reach both thresholds (100,000 km and 5 years of age) before the Government requires replacement? (Reference:

Performance Work Statement, Paragraph 7.0)

Answer 7: The contractor shall replace a vehicle meeting either threshold, whichever comes first.

Question 8: With respect to the PWS Para 7.0 requirement to replace vehicles whenever they are 5 years older than the calendar year, if the age requirement is calculated based on each vehicle’s model year, does this mean, for example, that vehicles with a 2013 model year or later are acceptable for delivery any time in calendar year 2018? If not, would the Government please clarify the time calculation for this requirement? (Reference: Performance Work Statement, Paragraph 7.0)

Answer 8: Delivery dates have nothing to do with mandatory vehicle replacement. For example, if a contractor delivers a 2015 model in 2018, they shall replace it in 2020. If a contractor delivers a 2015 model in 2019, they shall replace it in 2020. If a contractor delivers a 2018 model in 2018, they shall replace it in 2023. If a contractor delivers a 2018 model in 2021, they shall replace it in 2023.

Question 9: Attachment 0004, Para M.10.1 discusses task order competitions. When a task order requirement arises, does the Government contemplate a single task order award (one awardee) for each performance country, or could contemporaneous requirements in a single country be split amongst multiple task order awardees?

(Reference: Attachment 0004, Basis for Award, Paragraph M.10.1)

Answer 9: Attachment 0005, Historical data has been provided as a reference. Each Task Order Competition will only include one country and requirements will be split among different customers in every country and competed amongst all the BPA holders.

Each Task Order competition will have one awardee. This is subject to change and specific instructions will be provided with each Task Order competition.

Question 10: Supplemental Documents. Should the Executive Summary be included as part of the Volume l Technical document or provided as a separate document?

(Reference: Attachment 0003 Instructions to Offerors, Section L.3. Standard Proposal Instructions)

Answer 10: The executive summary is a separate document from Volume I, Technical.

Question 11: Supplemental Documents. Should the Signed Solicitation/Signed Amendments be included as part of the Volume l Technical document or provided as a separate document? (Reference: Attachment 0003 Instructions to Offerors, Section L.3.

Standard Proposal Instructions)

Answer 11: The solicitation and all amendments are separate from Volume I, Technical.

Question 12: As per the above, if the Executive Summary and Signed Solicitation/Signed Amendments are to be provided as separate documents, should they be combined under one filename entitled “Supplemental Information” or should they be 3 separate, individually titled files? (Reference: Attachment 0003 Instructions to Offerors, Section L.3. Standard Proposal Instructions)

Answer 12: The solicitation and all amendments may be combined. The executive summary shall be a separate document.

Question 13: What type and level of proposal information is required to earn an “Acceptable” rating with respect to “skill”? To ensure we have a clear understanding of what it takes to be technically acceptable in this area, would the Government please define “skill” in sufficient detail as to distinguish it from experience and management expertise. (Reference: Attachment 0004, Basis for Award, Paragraph M.8.4)

Answer 13: A skill is the ability to perform a required task with the appropriate expertise that will achieve a desired result IAW the specifications indicated by the PWS.

Question 14: Coaster & Rosa Buses have discontinued 25 passenger bus. The new specification is 22 passenger seating. Request to kindly make necessary amendments to the pricing sheet to reflect 22 passenger instead of 25 passenger bus.

Answer 14: PWS will be updated to reflect the change in bus availability.

Question 15. Can the Mileage restrictions of 100,000 KMS be increased for the BUS Category? The reason being the high cost of investment in a bus and the fact that a bus is built/designed to operate for many more KMS & years than a regular sedan, SUV category vehicle.

Answer 15: The bus mileage requirement cannot be changed, as reliability issues have been seen on buses in previous contracts.

Question 16: Toyota Hiace has discontinued the 15 passenger van. The new specification is 12 passenger seating. Further, Chevy Express is also discontinued.

Request to kindly make necessary amendment to the pricing sheet to show 12 passenger instead of 15 passenger van.

Answer 16: Other makes and models of 15 passenger vans are available, or may become available with changes in the marketplace. Vans seating 12 passengers may fit the description of CLIN X008XX – 10 passenger van.

Question 17: Certain territories have restrictions on the type of vehicles available in the local market such as Jordan where full size sedans are not available for lease. In such instances can we provide alternatives like a Mid Size SUV?

Answer 17: Offerors shall price all CLINs keeping market conditions and availability of that particular vehicle in mind. A search on Kayak shows full-size sedans being available for rental in Jordan. For individual task orders, BPA holders may propose alternative solutions with equal or greater specifications which will be accepted only in the circumstance that other offerors cannot provide what the customer is requesting.

Acceptance of alternative solutions will be at the customer’s discretion.

Question 18: We are currently an incumbent of a NTV contract, can we include the contract name and number in the redacted version of the technical proposal without disclosing our name. Would that be acceptable?

Answer 18: Providing the name of the requirement is acceptable. Do not provide the contract number.

Question 19: On Ramp Procedures under section A-7.1. - The solicitation is proposing through the On Ramp procedures to add additional contractors to the pool of leases in Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar and UAE. This On Ramp procedure may be implemented at any time by reopening the competition and utilizing the same basis of award established in the initial CENTCOM NTV Solicitation W52P1J-17-R-0062. Our concerns with this procedure are as follows-

At the initial stage of the Solicitation all vendors are expected to submit a Firm Fixed Price for 7.5 years (base + option years). During this period there are a number of unknown variables which have to be estimated if not guesstimated for e.g. the purchase price of the Vehicle, currency fluctuations, cost of labor, new proposed taxes imposed by the government, bank financing costs, government fees and charges, fuel costs, geopolitical situation in GCC countries etc. At the initial stage of the solicitation all vendors will have to consider the above mentioned unknown variables in determining their price which is fixed for 7.5 years. Now assuming the USG introduces an On Ramp procedure after a year or two to add additional contractors to the pool of leases in Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar and UAE. In this round the new vendors proposing their prices would have the following advantages – lesser number of years to price thereby reducing uncertainty, clearer understanding of how the existing contract is performing thereby giving an edge in terms of better planning, elimination of many uncertainties for e.g.

Value Added Tax is to be introduced in all GCC countries shortly, the new vendors would have a better understanding of the tax rates and structures by then. All this gives an unfair advantage to a new vendor when compared to the vendors selected in the initial stage.

In order to avoid/eliminate this unfair advantage we propose the following :- At the initial stage short list 8 vendors, however award the initial contract to only 4 vendors. The other 4 vendors would be on standby should the USG decide to introduce an On Ramp procedure. This would bring the following advantages - a) a level playing field to all vendors b) quicker activation of the On Ramp procedure as the vendors are already selected and on standby.

Answer 19: The on-ramp procedures ensure a level playing field as contractors can adjust their price downward at the task order level.

Question 20: The criteria for Off ramping a vendor is vague and not very precise. For e.g. there may be a vendor who has operational capabilities in only one or two of the four countries and may choose to only participate in Task Orders originating for those countries thereby considerably enhancing the chances of success in one or two locations as his focus is only on those countries. In such a scenario while the vendor is on paper meeting the criteria set and will avoid off ramping but in reality has circumvented the off ramping criteria. This will also lead to an unfair advantage to a vendors who have invested resources in all four locations who will be losing out as their costs may be higher than a vendor operating in just a couple of countries. Just like this example there will be many other similar situations. It is hence advised to have a very precise criteria for off ramping a vendor as this would act as a deterrence to vendors and more importantly bring about a level playing field to vendors how have the infrastructure to perform in all locations concurrently.

Answer 20: A vendor who is proposing for task order awards in only select locations may be off-ramped, as there is a requirement for offerors to have the logistical capability to provide vehicles in all four countries, even if it requires subcontracting or partnering.

Question 21: Is there any time frame within which the questions have to be submitted?

Answer 21: The Government intends to post answer to questions every Thursday. This includes September 14, September 21, and September 28. This is subject to change.

Question 22: In the current NTV contract there is a Tow Truck CLIN. Has the requirement been dropped now?

Answer 22: The consolidated NTV requirement does not have a CLIN for a Tow Truck.

Question 23: In the current NTV Contract, traffic fines and damage claims have not been paid for years together. Would this be the case for this Contract too? This is big factor which would affect pricing.

Answer 23: Funds for damages will be added to each task order at the time of award.

The funds added may not be enough to cover all damages that may occur. Contractors shall invoice for damages on a monthly basis.

Question 24: In reference to points 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 in the Performance Work Statement document (Attachment 0001) pertaining to special requirements on vehicles – these modifications are practically not feasible for short term hires such as daily/monthly. In such a case, how are we to price here?

Answer 24: The Government recognizes that the prices for certain modified vehicles for a short team lease may be excessive. Offerors are to price accordingly, assuming adequate notice is given to have the vehicles prepared. Daily and monthly leasing

CLINs X002AF, X004AE, X004AG, X004AH, X005AE, X005AG, and X005AH have been removed from Attachment 0002 – Price Matrix for all four countries.

Question 25: PWS Ref.4.3/4.3.1 – Delivery. While Pt 7.0 of the PWS specifies that the vehicle that surpasses 100,000 will be replaced, the overall PWS does not specify mileage and model restrictions of the vehicles at the time of delivery/ Vehicle Acceptance criteria.

Answer 25: Vehicles must adhere to the same standards throughout the life of the contract. The standards for vehicles being delivered are not more strict.

Question 26: PWS Ref.6.6 - Tow Package Feature Kindly provide the Specification of the Tow Pintle for e.g. Class Type III / IV against relevant CLIN

Answer 27: The hitch must be rated for the maximum the vehicle is rated for. For example, if a vehicle’s towing capacity is 10,000 lbs, it shall have at least a class IV hitch. If a vehicles towing capacity is 5,000 lbs, it shall have at least a Class III hitch.

Question 28: Value Added Tax (VAT) is set to be introduced in all Gulf Cooperation Countries (GCC) effective Jan 1, 2018. We are currently unaware of the tax rates for all other countries. New taxation laws are also scheduled to be introduced across the GCC over the next few years and details of such taxation plans have not been made public yet. In such a scenario how are we supposed to estimate a price? As a suggestion, can we submit prices excluding VAT and bill the USG separately when the VAT/other taxes are announced?

Answer 28: All proposed prices shall be inclusive of all taxes.

Question 29: There is a trade and people to people embargo currently imposed on Qatar by some GCC Countries. This has restricted the movement of vehicles, nationals & residents from other GCC countries to and from Qatar. This would also affect obtaining gate passes in the Military Camps in Qatar. How does the USG intend to solve this logistical problem?

Answer 29: The USG is not aware of any badging issues due to the embargo in Qatar.

We will research further and post an update if there is an issue.

Question 30: 5. Ref: Solicitation Page 3 of 85 - A-7/A-7.1/A-7.2 The USG intends to have on-ramp/off-ramp procedures, the purpose of which among others is to have adequate competition in each country. While the on ramp procedures for addition of Contractors (BPA) for new countries is understandable, there is a major flaw if new vendors (BPA Contractors) are added to the pool at a later date in the existing countries namely Kuwait, Qatar, Jordan and UAE after the current BPA is awarded.

The reason is that, we the contractors are bidding in OCT 2017 based on the current market conditions to include prices of vehicles, cost of manpower, operation cost and other overheads such as real estate rates, taxes etc. Whereas when you a add new vendors (BPA Contractors) at a later date say end of 2018 or 2019 or any time during the life of this contract the new vendor will have an opportunity to understand the realistic market conditions at that point of time, especially more recent vehicle prices, labor costs, maintenance costs, real estate prices, and applicable changes in operating costs to include direct and indirect taxes such as VAT which will come into effect at a later date. As such including new vendors to the BPA pool for the existing countries at a later date is not fair and justified for the rest of the BPA contractors performing with operating costs and prices estimated and submitted in OCT 2017 when the current bid is submitted and awarded.

Answer 30: The prices that are established during the award of the BPAs are ceiling prices. The on-ramp procedures ensure a level playing field, as contractors can adjust their price downward at the task order level.

Question 31: In Q&A #3 the Government states “there is no file size limitation” while also instructing offerors that “a large file may have delays or be undeliverable.” This information appears contradictory. Is it possible for the Government to provide more guidance on maximum file sizes, per email and per email attachment, since offeror notifications of delays or non-delivery are typically not immediate? (Reference:

Amendment 0002, Attachment 0006, Industry Questions and Answers, Q&A #3)

Answer 31: The Government will inform the offeror when proposals are received.

There are no specific file size limitations. If an offeror is concerned that their file may be too large, we suggest they submit the proposal early and have a backup plan, send in multiple emails (numbering each email 1 of 3, email 2 of 3, email 3 of 3, etc) or simply find a way to make it smaller.

Question 32: In Q&A #4 the Government affirms the requirement for all vehicles to be “in like new condition at all times.” However, the Government also states “Slight wear and tear is expected,” which conflicts with the RFP’s definition of like new which requires the contractor to ensure the “engine compartment, interior, and exterior are clean and free of any wear or visible defects.” “Slight wear and tear” appears to contradict with “free of any wear or visible defects.” Would the Government please provide additional guidance with respect to this requirement? (Reference: Amendment 0002, Attachment 0006, Industry Questions and Answers, Q&A #4)

Answer 33: The definition of like new condition has been updated on Attachment 001, Performance Work Statement.

Question 34: In Q&A #8 the Government states: “For example, if a contractor delivers a 2015 model in 2018, they shall replace it in 2020.” Can the replacement (based on age) take place anytime in calendar year 2020 or must it take place no later than January 1, 2020? (Reference: Amendment 0002, Attachment 0006, Industry Questions and Answers, Q&A #8)

Answer 34: As stated in answer four, the vehicle must be replaced no later than January 1.

Question 35: What type and level of proposal information is required to earn and “Acceptable” rating with respect to “skill”? (Reference: Amendment 0002, Attachment 0006, Industry Questions and Answers, Q&A #13)

Answer 35: As stated in Attachment 0004 – Basis for Award, Offerors must clearly and fully demonstrate that they have the ability and relevant experience to successfully perform.

Question 36: In Q&A #17 the Government states: “Acceptance of alternative solutions will be at the customer’s discretion.” Are offerors, in response to this RFP W52P1J-17- R-0062 solicitation, permitted to price vehicles that do not have the minimum specifications for one or more CLINs or will the Government reject offers that do not meet 100% of the minimum specifications for 100% of the CLINs? (Reference:

Amendment 0002, Attachment 0006, Industry Questions and Answers, Q&A #17)

Answer 36: As previously stated, the customer may accept alternative solutions if the vehicles have equal or greater specifications. This will always be at the customer’s discretion.

Question 37: Paragraph L.3 lists documents that will be excluded from the proposal’s maximum page limitations. Would the Government please add an offeror’s Compliance Matrix from the list of excluded documents? (Reference: Attachment 0003, Paragraph L.3)

Answer 37: No, this will be included in the 80 pages for the Technical Volume.

Question 38: Paragraph A-7.2, which discusses Off-Ramp Procedures, states a contractor will be off-ramped by the Government not exercising the next available option period if a BPA holder does not propose on a Request for Task Order Proposals. If, for example, a contractor wins a Jordan task order but does not propose on a subsequent Kuwait RFTOP, would the Government not exercise the next available Jordan task order option period as well as the higher-level BPA’s next available option period, or would they permit the continued use of Jordan task order options only? Using the same example, would the BPA holder who refuses to bid on the Kuwait RFTOP be permitted to bid on new RFTOPs which occur after the Kuwait RFTOP but prior to the time for exercising the BPA option period? (Reference: RFP Paragraph A-7.2)

Answer 38: There will be a large number of RFPs for all four countries. An offeror who does not bid on one RFP will not be off-ramped. An offeror refusing to bid for an entire country may be off ramped. A contractor who is off-ramped will not have any current requirements terminated simply for being off-ramped and may still be extended available options if it is in the best interest of the Government.

Question 39: Paragraph L.6.1 states: “The offeror must detail and break out by CLIN how it intends to provide all NTVs listed for each of the four countries, whether owned, subcontracted, procured or any combination thereof.” Would the Government please provide additional definition for the words owned, subcontracted and procured? For example, for the purposes of this proposal effort, what’s the difference between “subcontracted” and “procured?” Also, does “owned” mean the offeror already has the vehicle in their fleet at the time of this W52P1J-17-R-0062 proposal submission or does it simply mean the offeror intends to own the vehicle during performance of any resultant task order? If the offeror doesn’t currently own the task order vehicles but plans to purchase them and take title of the vehicles in support of any awarded task orders, should the offeror indicate both “procured” and “owned” in its proposal? Any additional clarity would be helpful to ensure the correct information is conveyed to the Government. (Reference: Attachment 0003, Instructions to Offerors, Paragraph L.6.1)

Answer 39: Procured in this paragraph simply means a way the contractor obtains vehicles in order to lease to the Government. The Government does not stipulate how the contractor does this. If an offeror intends to purchase vehicles and lease them to the Government, they simply need to state their plan as such.

Question 40: Paragraph L.6.4 requires offerors to demonstrate compliance with “other international requirements . . .” Would the Government please provide clarification as to what types of “other international requirements” offerors need to address in their proposals to earn an “Acceptable” rating for this item? Is it possible to provide some examples? (Reference: Attachment 0003, Instructions to Offerors, Paragraph L.6.4)

Answer 40: In regards to “other international requirements”, we simply need the offeror to demonstrate that they are knowledgeable in the requirements of doing business in Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE.

Question 41: PWS 9.2 – Unlike in the US, throughout the Middle East there is exclusive distributor arrangement for each make per country/region. Vehicles may be maintained regularly and exclusively in distributor’s service center for warranty, quality and control purpose. Exception can be made if the distributor authorizes the particular contractor (vendor). Therefore, submission of 3 quotes for damage repairs from different dealers for the same car is not feasible since most cars will be under warranty or otherwise service contracts with the respective distributor. Kindly confirm if award winning vendor’s own repair quote (if authorized) or distributor’s will suffice.

Answer 41: For warranty work, no quotes are required as the Government will not be paying anything. However, non-warranty work should be able to be completed at a variety of workshops. If outside repairs void warranties, an English copy of the warranty policy must be provided.

Question 42: PWS 11. Each CLIN vehicle description has example of acceptable range, brief requirement, equivalent models and engine horsepower capacity. Whilst the common vehicle description is number of cylinders and engine sizes, there is no reference to number of cylinders or engine size defined; therefore the equivalent models indicated are helpful. However, these also include varying ranges of car classes and horsepower not necessarily meeting the horsepower indicated due to change in manufacturer’s production line. Moreover, horsepower description itself is a variable technical feature which can vary on different makes/models as well as within same type of vehicle across different model years. Kindly confirm that complying with equivalent models indicated alone is acceptable.

Answer 42: Horsepower ratings are more useful than engine size or number of cylinders due to rapid changes in the automotive industry, i.e. smaller engines with turbochargers to improve fuel efficiency. The specifications provided are at the low end of horsepower ratings for each vehicle category.

Question 43: PWS 11- CLIN 008, 009, 012 and 013. Automatic transmission on commercial vehicles other than V8 is not common in the Middle East. Instead, manual transmission is commonly available with local distributors for popular makes. Request consideration of revising the vehicle description for these CLINs to both manual and automatic transmission (when available).

Answer 43: A large percentage of American drivers do not know how to drive a manual transmission. Therefore, automatic transmissions are preferred any time they are available. For individual customer requirements, an offeror can propose a vehicle with a manual transmission, as long as the deviation from the requirement is noted in the proposal. If vehicles matching the requirement are not available from any of the BPA holders, the customer may choose to accept such a vehicle.

Question 44: Attachment 3 Instructions to Offerors. L6.1- Submission of technical specification of proposed NTVs and capacity. Kindly confirm if there is any minimum capacity to qualify. Also, will vendors with higher capacity get ratings benefit?

Answer 44: There is no initial minimum capacity. However, failure to bid on future task orders may result in a contractor being off-ramped. The technical ratings are acceptable and unacceptable, with no preference being given.

Question 45: Kindly provide quantity estimates that will be awarded during initial 90 days in each country.

Answer 45: Providing numbers for the initial 90 days is difficult, as the exact award date is not known. Attachment 0005 – Historical Data has been updated to include dates of delivery.

Question 46: RFP A6.6. Transition period. Kindly advise lead time that would be allowed for delivering the vehicles from date of issuance of task orders.

Answer 46: All Task Order RFPs will include a required delivery date. The Government intends to have all delivery dates 30 days after date of award. However, this will not be possible for all customers.

Question 47: RFP A6.1- It is understood as per this clause and block 10 of front page that the proposed contract is unrestricted and open competition. Kindly advise whether or not that there is preference or benefit for Minority Owned, Service-Disabled Veteran- Owned Business, Small Company Businesses or other such special category US based contractors.

Answer 47: This is an unrestricted full and open competition.

Question 48: Task order winning vendors during base year if succeed in winning task orders during option years for same requirement/set of vehicles then will USG allow transfer/rollover of vehicles from one task order to another - as long as vehicles are within acceptable age/mileage ?

Answer 48: Moving vehicles from one task order to another is acceptable, as long as the vehicles meet all requirements.