Exhibit D Solicitation Questions and Answers W911RX24R0011.pdf

III Armored Corps Agricultural Sanitation and Washing Services

W911RX-24-R-0011

Question List Q1: I am writing to inquire if a site visit is available for the III Armored Corps Agricultural Sanitation and Washing Services opportunity (Notice ID:

W911RX24R0011). If a site visit is possible, please provide details on the schedule and any requirements we should be aware of.

A1: There will not be a site visit for this requirement. This requirement is for a Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) and does not have any actual requirement to conduct a Site Visit. Once the MATOC’s are awarded (not more than 5), the MATOC holders will compete for requirements. Each requirement will have its own PWS, Wage Determination, and Exhibit A, Equipment list for that particular requirement. Task Order requirements MAY have a Site Visit but may not.

Q2: Could you provide information on whether any site visits are planned for this solicitation? If so, we would like to know the schedule and any specific requirements for attendance.

A2: See Answer A1 above.

Q3: Are there any additional forms or certifications beyond those listed in the solicitation that we should be aware of?

A3: HAZMAT Certified personnel have been added to the PWS in 1.6.12. Special Qualifications or Certifications.

Q4: I just have some questions on the service address you provided. Can you verify this is the location where the services will be provided?

A4: This requirement is for a Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) and does not have an actual requirement with an address, yet. Once the MATOC’s are awarded (not more than 5), the MATOC holders will compete for requirements. Each requirement will have its own PWS, Wage Determination, and Exhibit A, Equipment List and performance address for that particular requirement. For this requirement, FT Cavazos was selected as the location purely for uniformity purposes. All Vendors will use the FT Cavazos Wage Determination to determine prices.

Q5: Is Joint Venture (JV) allowed to bid on this project? If Allowed, shall both companies create a joint venture account in SAM or JV agreement letter between both companies is sufficient?

Question List A5: Joint Ventures are required to enrollment into System for Award Management. A Joint Venture agreement letter is not sufficient.

Q6: Referring to the basis for the award, is it going to be the best value or LPTA?

A6: The basis of award is Lowest Price Technically Acceptable. IAW FAR 15.101-2, the evaluation factors and significant subfactors that establish the requirements of acceptability were set forth in the solicitation; the Solicitations shall specify that award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. (Solicitation Pg 58; (para 2)).

The FAR Provision 52.212-2 (Pg. 58) is Amended to read “award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors.”

Q7: All IV parts of the proposal be one volume or four separate volumes?

A7: Per the Instructions to Offerors, the proposal will be submitted in four separate volumes.

Q8: Page 16 of the Performance Work Statement states:

4.2.5.1 The government requires automobile liability insurance written on a comprehensive form of policy. Insurance policies covering automobiles operated on the installation shall provide coverage of at least $200,000 per person and $500,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $20,000 per occurrence for property damage.

4.2.5.2 Contractors are required to comply with applicable Federal and State workers’ compensation. Worker’s compensation and employer’s liability coverage of at least $100,000 shall be required. The contractor shall maintain bodily injury general liability insurance coverage written on the comprehensive form of policy of at least $500,000 per occurrence.

Question List While XXXX does 100% of the administrative management work, the subcontractor does 100% of the work described by the PWS. Can this insurance requirement be met through the subcontractor?

A8: The Government contracts with Prime Contractors and does not have privity with Sub-Contractors. Additionally, see Question/Answer #26 and/or FAR 52.219-14(e)(1) for Limitations on Subcontracting.

Q9: Do we have a confirmed quantity of the vehicles/containers for each location?

A9: This requirement is for a Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) and does not have an actual requirement with actual quantities, yet. Once the MATOC’s are awarded (not more than 5), the MATOC holders will compete for requirements. Each requirement will have its own PWS, Wage Determination, and Exhibit A, Equipment List and performance address for that particular requirement. For this requirement, FT Cavazos was selected as the location purely for uniformity purposes. All Vendors will use the FT Cavazos Wage Determination and Exhibit A, Equipment List (Notional) for quantities and to determine prices. Quantities are identified in the first column of Exhibit A.

Q10: Will the vehicles have a designated washing station?

A10: This requirement is for a Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) and does not have an actual requirement with actual quantities, yet. Once the MATOC’s are awarded (not more than 5), the MATOC holders will compete for requirements. Each requirement will have its own PWS, Wage Determination, and Exhibit A, Equipment List and performance address for that particular requirement. There are not designated washing stations for Agricultural Sanitation on installations. At the Task Order-level, a site will be determined, and the Task Order Awardee will be required to establish the lanes for sanitation.

Q11: Are there any available photos of the vehicles/containers or other items that will require the service for the 5 locations?

A11: Photos of the equipment will not be provided. The equipment is standard Army -issued vehicles and equipment.

Question List Q12: What is the equipment list and Virkon square footage estimator? It's my first time seeing this. Can you explain how to use it, and what purpose it serves?

A12: The Exhibit A, Equipment List (Notional) is a document that lists the required equipment by type, size, and quantity. There are columns for Unit price and Total LIN Price. The Tab titled Virkon Estimator is removed.

Q13: Can the questionnaire's deadline be extended by a couple of days? Is this the only way to illustrate past performance?

A13: Referencing the Past Performance Questionnaire, the deadline for submission was changed in Amendment-1 (published 17OCT24) to coincide with the Solicitation Closing Date. Contractors may illustrate Past Performance within their Proposals in addition to submitting the Questionnaires.

Q14: Is every section/part of the pricing sheet to be completed?

A14: Yes. All applicable sections/parts of the pricing sheet should be completed.

Q15: Will there be a minimum number of units requested in a given task order? In an effort for us to come up with a single unit rate.

A15: Specifics for each requirement will be established at the Task Order-level, dependent on the requiring activities’ organizational equipment and location.

Q16: Is 10-day notification guaranteed?

A16: While 10-days is ideal, mission critical timelines do not always afford this timeline.

Q17: Since we are bidding on each task order, and we have the right to reject any task order? Are we able to adjust pricing?

A17: The current requirement is a MATOC. You are currently competing to be awarded one of the MATOCs (up to five). Task Orders will be competed amongst the MATOC Awardees, and only, the MATOC Awardees. MATOC Awardees are not required to bid on every Task Order. This requirement is using a Notional set of equipment for uniformity and comparative purposes. Each Task Order will be different by location, Question List number of vehicles, Period of Performance, etc. Therefore, pricing will be different at the Task Order-level.

Q18: Is there an anticipated schedule or historical data related to the deployment of units and the numbers deployed for each location?

A18: No. Historical data will not be provided referencing deployed units. However, the numbers and types of equipment located in Exhibit A are typical for one iteration of services. However, due to the unique organizational equipment the list provided is an example of equipment that could be included in each organizations request.

Q19: Will there ever be an instance that multiple bases would ever be serviced at one time?

A19: Yes, it is possible for multiple locations to have active Task Orders simultaneously.

However, that would be out of the norm. US Army missions assigned to III Armored Corps will dictate the size/scope, frequency, and location of the subsequent Task Orders. MATOC holders are not required to compete for every Task Order. A submission of “No Offer” will be acceptable.

Q20: Will the selected contractor work with the identified bases to develop a schedule not to create overlap.

A20: Each requirement will be competed at the task order level and will identify organization equipment list, location, timeline and schedule.

Q21: How would we calculate the estimated crews without estimated quantities?

A21: Quantities are identified in “Column O” of each Tab of Exhibit A. Requests for Task Order Proposals (RTOPs) will be issued to the MATOC holders. Each RTOP will be a unique requirement tasking into account the organization’s location, equipment, timeline and schedule.

Q22: If this is being quoted as a firm-fixed, why do you need the cost data being requested? Or is the cost data only applicable to those companies who use cost plus model for pricing?

A22: The MATOCs and subsequent Task Orders are/will be Firm-Fixed Price (FFP).

The data requested in Exhibit B, Price Table Workbook is required for ALL submitted

Question List Offers. The data is requested for evaluation and comparative purposes to determine balanced pricing, sub-contracts, etc.

Q23: There were items related to MATOC or construction project are these included in the proposal in error?

A23: This solicitation is for a Multiple Award Task Order Contract requirement. As stated in the Solicitation, the Government plans to award up to five Contracts from this solicitation. However, the Government reserves the right to award less than five or none at all if it is in the Government’s best interest.

Q24: Will the total $ amount determine the winner?

A24: The Contract(s) will be awarded on the basis of Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable (LPTA). The lowest priced offers that are determined technically acceptable, not to exceed five, will be eligible for an award. As stated in the Solicitation, the Government reserves the right to award less than five or none at all if it is in the Government’s best interest.

Q25: Is this contract eligible for direct award to 8(a) company.

A25: This requirement is not eligible as an 8(a) Direct Award. The requirement is set-aside as 100% Small Business. 8(a) Entities are eligible and encouraged to submit offers. The requirement is a Multiple Award Task Order Contract. There will be a maximum of five awards.

Q26: How much of the contract is the Prime Contractor required to execute?

-Small Business Set Aside requires the prime contractor perform 51% of the services with only 49% subcontractor use.

A26: IAW FAR 52.219-14(e)(1), “Services (except construction), it will not pay more than 50 percent of the amount paid by the Government for contract performance to subcontractors that are not similarly situated entities. Any work that a similarly situated entity further subcontracts will count towards the prime contractor's 50 percent subcontract amount that cannot be exceeded. When a contract includes both services and supplies, the 50 percent limitation shall apply only to the service portion of the contract”

Question List

Q27: If we are subcontracting under a PC does the PC have to be present during the job?

A27: Although the Prime Contractor (PC) is not required to be on-site full-time, the PC maintains ALL responsibility for what happens or fails to happen with the Contract. The Government does not have privity with Sub-contractors (SC). See question and answer #26 above.

Q28: How much notice will we be given for each site opportunity?

A28: The intent is to provide a minimum of 10-days’ notice to the eventual MATOC holders to compete for the Task Order requirements. However, mission critical timelines do not always afford this timeline.

Q29: Does the fixed price mean the initial bid is what will be paid no matter which location we perform services? Ie. Cavazos and Colorado pay the same no matter how many pieces are involved.

A29: No. Task Orders will be competed amongst the MATOC awardees. Prices will vary by location, due to SCA Wage Determinations, and by numbers and types of equipment.

Q30: Do we have to be Hazmat certified or will the GC cover that requirement?

A30: PWS para 1.6.12 was updated to reflect HAZMAT certification is required to oversee vendors operations.

Q31: Do we have to reclaim the solution/water after spraying it on the items and washing it off? And if we have to reclaim, who will advise XXX Company on where to dispose of it?

A31: IAW Attachment-1, PWS para 5.1.4 (Pg.18) “Contractor shall collect, contain, remove, and properly dispose of the Virkon-S rinsate, or agricultural sanitation chemical blend rinsate, in accordance with all federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations, guidelines and industry standards, manufacturer's recommendations and specifications.”

Question List

Q32: What licenses does XXX Company need and what licenses will the GC be providing?

-The Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining all required licenses and permits to perform disinfecting work on a Federal installation and be insured in accordance with FAR requirements?

-The Contractor shall complete AT Level I Training within 30 calendar days after contract start date.

A32: See updated PWS paragraph 1.6.12 and 5.2.5.

Q33: Insurance. Does the PC provide the workers compensation policy mentioned in the solicitation?

- Worker’s compensation and employer’s liability coverage of at least $100,000 shall be required. The contractor shall maintain bodily injury general liability insurance coverage written on the comprehensive form of policy of at least $500,000 per occurrence.

A33: Yes. The Government contracts with Prime Contractors and does not maintain privity with sub-contractors.

Q34: Exhibit B spreadsheets…Is this required for the opening bid or is it required to be completed on site?

A34: Exhibit B, Price Table Workbook is required as part of ALL offers submitted for this Multiple Award Task Order Contract per the Instructions to Offerors. It will not be required at the Task Order level.

Q35: Will the contract awardees resulting from this solicitation be expected to directly compete with the MICC Fort Campbell contract vehicles for the same services?

A35: The intent of this Solicitation is to align all III Armored Corps AGSAN requirements under this (these) MATOC(s). Once awarded, III Corps units will submit AGSAN requirements to their local MICC Office (Riley, Cavazos, Carson, etc.). The local MICC offices should utilize this MATOC, where the requirement would be competed among the MATOC Holders and only the MATOC holders. However, Statute, Regulations and

Question List Polices do not prevent the Contracting Officer from seeking contracting solutions outside of this MATOC.

Q36: Will the determination of which contract vehicle to utilize be at the discretion of the contracting officer? For example, could Contracting Officers XXX, XXX, and XXX choose to use the MICC Fort Campbell contract vehicles instead of the one resulting from this solicitation?

A36: The intent of this requirement is for all III Armored Corps Units to procure AGSAN requirements through their local contracting offices utilizing this established MATOC.

However, the FAR allows for Contracting Officer discretion on selecting procurement solutions.

Q37: Will the authority to issue task order calls be delegated to contracting officers at the various MICCs, or will it be administered centrally by MICC Fort Riley by the PCO?

A37: That determination has not been made. MICC-Riley has requested to maintain administration of the MATOCS but has not received a definitive answer. That determination will be made prior to award. If MICC-Riley does not maintain administration, the Office/Agency conducting administration will be identified on the MATOC awards.

Q38: We respectfully request that the contracting office consider extending the definition of "recent" past performance from three to five years. This adjustment would better reflect the market's conditions, offer a more comprehensive evaluation of contractors' capabilities, and increase the competition in this solicitation.

A38: The definition of Past Performance will not be extended from three years to five years. Although, the FAR/DFARS does not specify a specific range, our office (MICC- Riley) typically uses three years. More importantly, the three-year range includes COVID and the current marketplace conditions. Five years would include Pre-COVID, which is a completely different operating environment and marketplace.

Q39: This presents a contradiction, as the solicitation describes an approach that allows for tradeoffs between price, technical approach, and past performance

Question List (best value), while also specifying an evaluation process that focuses exclusively on the lowest price and technical acceptability (LPTA).

We respectfully suggest clarifying the evaluation criteria to resolve this inconsistency, as the current language suggests conflicting methodologies for awarding the contract.

A39: Any reference to the words “best value” does not refer to Best Value Trade Off method of evaluating. It merely means the best value to the Government. The requirement is being evaluated utilizing the Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable (LPTA) method IAW FAR 15.101-2. The FAR Provision at 52.212-2 (Pg. 58) is amended to state “Award(s) will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors.

The Contracting Officer will not document the file pursuant to 15.304(c)(3)(iii).

Therefore, Past Performance is an evaluation factor for this lowest price technically acceptable source selection.

Q40: We have yet to identify the government provision of material handling equipment, transportation between the unit motor pool, the cleaning and washing location, the sanitization site, and the clean yard to park the equipment before loading. Would the contractor have to account for its price (factor 1) for furnishing such equipment and drivers and operators to provide these services?

A40: This requirement and subsequent Task Orders are for Agricultural Sanitation only, at a site determined by the Government. The Government is responsible pre-washing the equipment and getting the equipment to and from the Sanitization site.

Q41: As such, we would like to demonstrate our price reasonableness and its balance in a method that will require a customization of the given Price Table Workbook and ask the contracting officer permission to do so.

A41: The Contracting Officer DOES NOT allow for Exhibit B, Price Table Workbook to be altered from the issued format. Doing so may inadvertently cause a proposal to be determined technically unacceptable. The purpose of the standard format is to ensure that all Offers are evaluated against the same standard.

Q42: We believe the agency may benefit from more competitive pricing by breaking this CLIN into more refined categories, such as a CLIN for light utility https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-15#FAR_15_304

Question List vehicles (which will include light transport, command and control, surveillance, ambulance, and others) and a dedicated CLIN for medium and heavy wheeled equipment.

This approach would allow proposals to differentiate the different HMMWV flavors from much larger wheeled vehicles that require substantially more cleaning resources rather than bundling all wheeled vehicles under the same price.

A42: Acknowledged. Each RTOP will have the specific requirements with the equipment segregated by categories that are useful to the Customer for tracking purposes. Exhibit A structure remains unchanged, except for removing the 1st Tab, for this requirement.

Q43: Exhibit C – Performance Assessment Questionnaire has a deadline of 7 Oct 24; can we get an extension or waiver for this?

A43: Amendment-1 (published 17OCT24) extended the deadline for Exhibit C- Performance Assessment Questionnaire to the Solicitation Closing date and time.

Q44: Are sections A-D of solicitation W911RX24R0011 supposed to be submitted in Part-I?

A44: Section A will be addressed on the SF33, e.g. Amendments, and/or in Part I of the Proposal. Section B is addressed on Exhibit B. Sections C and D are unused.

Q45: Based on the figures provided, it appears that the total rolling stock is 623 units (when adding the quantities in Column A or Column O of the "INPUT-BCT Rolling" sheet in Exhibit A). However, the piece count in the "NP Input— VIRKON—Hazmat Rollup" sheet reflects 603 units. This discrepancy may indicate an error, and we believe the correct piece count should be 623. Kindly confirm this and, if necessary, provide an amended Excel sheet for accurate pricing.

A45: Exhibit A (TE1) Equipment List (BCT Notional) is updated. The Virkon Estimator Tab is removed. Quantities in the BCT Rolling and BCT Containers remains unchanged and are identified in “Column O” of each Tab. ***Note that each subsequent RTOP will be unique based on the organization’s equipment list. ***

Question List Q46: The PWS outlines both washing and sanitation as part of the task order.

Could you please confirm that both services are required for this notional pricing?

A46: Vehicles will be pre-washed by the Government prior to sanitation, as outlined in PWS para. 5.2.4.

Q47: The PWS does not specify the availability of material handling equipment or linehaul services. Can you clarify if the notional pricing is expected to provide both equipment and operators for MHE and linehaul? Additionally, we would appreciate clarification on the distance between loading and drop-off points and how many linehaul segments would be required (e.g., motor pool to wash rack, wash rack to sanitation site, etc.), as this impacts the logistics.

A47: See Answer to Question Q. 40.

Q48: The "INPUT-BCT Rolling" sheet includes non-rolling stock items such as helicopters and Abrams tanks. From our experience, these items are unlikely to be cleaned at the same location. Given that Fort Cavazos units often require cleaning and sanitizing operations at multiple locations simultaneously, can you provide clarity on how many locations will be necessary for cleaning and how many for sanitizing the equipment?

A48: Locations, number of sites, and type/quantity of equipment will be determined at the Task Order-level, based on the organization’s unique mission requirements and equipment list. Also, see answer to Q46.

Q49: Could you please confirm whether the agency will provide drivers and operators for government-owned equipment during this task order?

A49: Agency/Army units will provide operators for government-owned equipment during any task order. The Contractor will not operate any Government-owned equipment.

Q50: As part of the pricing, can you confirm if engine and battery removal will be required per AFPMB Technical Guide No. 31 (TG31), specifically page 14, section 7.3.1? Should engine removal be required, please indicate whether it is the

Question List contractor’s or the government’s responsibility to provide cranes for engine extraction.

A50: IAW Armed Forces Pest Management Board Technical Guide No. 31, battery removal is required and will be a contractor requirement.

Engine removal is only required for Abrams tanks and Bradley IFV/CFV vehicles and will be the government agency’s responsibility.

Q51: Could you please confirm whether aircraft sanitation should be conducted using Virkon-S or Calla 1452 as the approved disinfectant?

A51: Agricultural sanitation chemical blend as specified in Armed Forces Pest Management Board Technical Guide No. 31, and the locally assigned Veterinary Corps officer and Border clearance policies and procedures will dictate which chemical solution will be used for aircraft. Historically, IIIAC aviation units use Virkon-S due to aircraft fuselage paint sensitivity. This will be identified in the subsequent RTOPS.

Q: 52: We noted that the evaluation of the Quality Control Plan (page 55, section

3) asks for both the approach to quality control and the submission of the full QCP. Given that combining the QCP with the staffing and management plans may exceed the 30-page limit, we respectfully request clarification from the contracting officer.

A52: The potential length of the Quality Control Plan (QCP) was not considered when establishing page limits in the Instruction to Offerors. The QCP may be submitted as an annex/enclosure to Part III- Technical Approach, that does not count against the page limit. Addendum to 52.212-1, Instruction to Offerors is amended.

Q53: “... possibly streamlining the relationship between Element 1 (Management Approach) and Element 2 (Staffing Approach). Both sections are vital and well thought out, though we noticed that certain aspects of staffing overlap with the management approach. …We observed that Element 1 requires evaluating the management approach, while Element 2 focuses on the staffing approach. We noticed that several components of the staffing approach are also included under the management approach, leading to potential redundancy in evaluation.”

A53: The Government acknowledges the overlap between the Management Element and the Staffing Element. The Management element may address Staffing as a sub-

Question List set, but primarily its addressed in the Staffing element. Addendums to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors and FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation- Commercial Items are amended to add additional elements, e.g. Resource management, Risk Management, and Compliance. The Staffing element remains unchanged. Offerors are not restricted from providing additional elements of their proposal, as long as the page limit is maintained.

Example: Contingency Planning is not specifically identified in the Management Element. If an Offeror wants to discuss their Contingency Planning concepts, it is acceptable, as long as the page limits are maintained.

Q54: Could you kindly provide the incumbent's details and the previous contract award number for reference?

A54: This requirement is for a new Multiple Award Task Order Contract(s). There is/are no incumbents. Previously, AGSAN requirements were solicited on the GPE as stand-alone requirements or against a BPA from another office. A search of SAM.gov would provide the details.