RFP Questions and Answers ID04200024 December 23 2020.pdf

LOCATION REFERENCE QUESTION/COMMENT ANSWER

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Section 3.3.1.6, Pg. 100 AND Attach 09 PPQ 3.2.3.1, Pg. 95

The only reference to resumes in the RFP is in Table 1, under Volume II - Technical, which lists resumes as outside the page limit. Is the Government requiring the inclusion of resumes in order to be rated Technically Acceptable to "demonstrate that employees have the training, experience, and qualifications to instruct and/or manage the services for which they will be responsible" ?

Yes - Only Resumes for Training Cadre

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Section 3.3.1.6, Pg. 100 AND Attach 09 PPQ

RFP Section 3.3.1.6 states "The completed questionnaires are requested to be received by the Government POCs identified in the PPQ form no later than 30 calendar days after issuance of this solicitation." This would be December 23; however, in Section 2 of Attach 09 the Instructions to Respondents indicate 12 24 20 as the date when completed questionnaires are to be returned to the Government. Please clarify which date is correct?

Will be Changed to January 9, 2021

RFP Section B.2 Contract Line Item (CLINs) Structure, CLIN 0005, Pg. 10

CLIN 0005 ("NET Training CONUS") includes OCONUS items/courses. Is this correct? Will be Corrected to just CONUS

RFP Section B.2 Contract Line Item (CLINs) Structure, CLIN 0006, Pg. 10

CLIN 0006 ("NET Training OCONUS") includes CONUS items/courses. Is this correct? Will be Corrected to just OCONUS

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Section 1.8, Pg. 87

Electronic Submission Procedures list Microsoft Word as the submission format for text, and .pdf as the submission format for signed documents. Volume I - Qualifying Criteria and Volume III - Past Performance will contain information in both formats. Would the Government accept the entirety of Volumes I & III in .pdf format, so that Offerors can combine all elements into one file to be uploaded to AASBS, rather than Offerors having to submit multiple file attachments in different formats for the same volume?

Yes

RFP Section B.1, Pg. 5, and ITO Sections 1.8, Pg.87

Part B says "The contractor shall provide their pricing in Attachment 06 (LOM V22.3) and shall fill out and sign the SF1449 cover page and upload through the GSA business system portal, ITSS (https://portal.fas.gsa.gov/web/guest)." Section 1.8 says "Proposals shall be submitted electronically in the required file formats within the GSA AASBS Portal." Would the Government please confirm that the latter (AASBS) is the correct GSA portal for proposal submission.

This should be the same portal

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Section 2.1, Table 1 Pg. 88

Table 1. Proposal Submission Requirements lists "Technical Capability" as the title for Volume II (Factor 1). However, all other RFP references to this volume identify the title as simply "Technical." Would the Government please clarify which title is correct?

Vendor may use either.

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Sections 2.1, Table 1 (Pg. 88) & 3.3.1.3, PPIS (Pg. 97)

Section 3.3.1.3 states, "Offerors shall submit three (3) PPIS" and "PPIS for each contract is limited to three (3) pages," which totals up to nine (9) pages for PPIS.

Table 1. Proposal Submission Requirements cites a 20-page limit for Volume III-Past Performance, with all other elements of the volume EXCEPT the Summary Page (Consent Letters, Organizational Structure Change History, and Finalized CPARS) being excluded from the page limit.

Removed PPIS page limit

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Section 2.2.1, Pg. 89

Would the Government consider Arial 10 an allowable font size for tables and graphics? Yes - (only for tables and graphics - the main body of the document should remain Times NR 12)

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Sections 3, Table 2 (Pg. 91),

3.2.2 (Pg. 94), & 3.2.4 (Pg.

95)

Table 2. Proposal Content and Section 3.2.2 lists the Title of Factor 1, Subfactor 3 as "Quality." Section 3.2.4, however, identifies Subfactor 3 as "Quality Control Plan." Would the Government please clarify the correct title for Factor 1, Subfactor 3?

The correct title is Quality

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Section 3.1.1.vi, Pg. 92

The Roman numerals listed as a subset to Section 3.1.1 do not include any instructions for item "vi" (that item is blank). Would the Government please clarify if this is simply misnumbering, or if text is missing?

This is misnumbered. Removed.

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Section 3.2.3.2, Pg. 95

Would the Government consider excluding the Training Plan from the page limit for Volume II, in order for Offerors to provide a more detailed plan?

No

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Section 3.3.1, Pg. 96

The ITO states, "Each Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated IAW the evaluation criteria identified in Part E Evaluation of Commercial Items (Oct 2014, Tailored)." Would the Government please provide the clause for "Part E Evaluation of Commercial Items (Oct 2014, Tailored)"?

See Page 103 FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation Commercial Items (October 2014)

RFP Attachment 1

SOW

4.1 Does the Government have a specific Learning Management System (LMS), or attributes, for the NET Video?

No - Draft video submission will be reviewed by PMO for edits/revisions

RFP and SOW CDRLs A003 and A005 Note delivery of data right without restriction

Question: Will the successful Contractor be provided access to the current CASEVAC Sets a contract award to develop the Video, Training and Maintenance Materials and to deliver the required CDRLs? In some cases, where commercial products are delivered and the operator manuals of those products are provided as part of the manual (appendix) or as a reference to the manual / material, the contractor will not be able to override commercially asserted copyrights associated with the vendor supplied materials. Requests that the USG revise the statement above (within the CDRLS) to indicate (excepting commercially provided manuals and/or training material).

Yes. With that in mind, if the successful contractor proposes any substitute items that are not Name Brand Only, then the contractor is responsible for updating the schematics to capture those items, if applicable. We require a file with all of the manuals as part of the respective CDRL. The unrestricted data rights are for those items provided to the vendor as GFI and subsequently updated under this contract. The unrestricted data rights are not intended to strip existing commercial data rights.

The data rights associated with this CDRL are owned by the Government in their entirety and without restriction.

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Section 2.1, Pg. 88

The only specific reference to drawings for Volume II - Technical is in Table 1, which lists "Drawings" as outside the page limit. Is the Government requiring the inclusion of drawings/diagrams in order to be rated Technically Acceptable and, if so, exactly which "drawings" are required?

"Drawings" as in the wire-schematics are not required; if proposing a substitute item, must ensure that the item in question has dimensions that are within available storage space as it pertains to kitting. Vendor may use drawings in their write-up of the salient characteristics for the proposed substitute item

RFP Paragraph 3.3.1.2 Please confirm that the Summary Page detailed in paragraph 3.3.1.2 is requiring an offeror to describe the proposed role of the offeror and each subcontractor, etc. on major or critical aspects of the TCCC CASEVAC contract as opposed to their role(s) in the contracts being used as past performance references or as requiring a Summary Page for each PPIS.

Confirmed

RFP Table 1. Paragraph 2.1 Proposal Submission Requirements

Specifies a 20 page limit for Volume III Past Performance. Paragraph 3.3.1.3 (Past Performance Information Sheets) states “PPIS for each contract is limited to three (3) pages.”

Given the Summary page, three pages for each of the three required PPIS’s, and the fact that the Organizational Structure Change History and the Client Authorization Letters are not included in the page count, paragraph 3.3.1.1 (Volume Organization) does not appear to allow any room for the remaining ten pages allowed by paragraph 2.1. Please provide clarification on which section the additional page allocation for Volume III Past Performance can be included in. Removing the three page limit from each PPIS and allowing the 20 page volume limit to govern would seem to be an effective cure.

Removed PPIS page limit

RFP 3.3.2 Table 3 Table 3 Relevancy Criteria Table references para 3.3.1.8 in each Relevancy description. The RFP does not contain paragraph 3.3.1.8. Question: Does the government intend to provide the referenced para 3.3.1.8?

Correction 3.3.1.7

RFP 2.1 Proposal Submission Requirements; 3.2.3.1 Subfactor 2

The submission instructions reference inserting resumes in the past performance volume without providing purpose or a reference to any other proposal document. Question: Will the government clarify the requirement for resumes in the Contractor’s proposal response?

To validate Training Cadre

RFP CLIN 0005 NET Training CONUS contains OCONUS pricing slots and CLIN 0006 NET Training OCONUS

Question: Does the government intend for the offeror to price as indicated, or will the government update CLIN 0005 and 0006?

Price as indicated - One (1) price CONUS and OCONUS for each respective class size (7/14/21/28)

RFP Attach 06 The government uses a “plug” number for Estimated Spiral Development/ECP CLIN on the Estimated Contract Ceiling Tab. Question: Should the offeror use $1,050,000 as a plug number for CLIN 0008

Yes

RFP CLIN 0001 thru 0004 Can the Government provide typical task order quantity so that we can evaluate the most economic ordering quantity for our procurement, production, and delivery processes? How many Sets should the contractor expect per task order and how many task orders per contract year?

No this is to establish an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Contract (IDIQ) since the quantities and frequency of ordering are not known.

RFP CLIN 0005 & 0006 Question: Can the government provide the number typical number of training events per contract year (CONUS & OCONUS), to include addressing the potential for overlapping training events?

Historically, the program has averaged 10-12 training events per year. This does not mean this will be the future requirements as they are unknown.

RFP Page 96, 3.3 Volume III Past Performance is indicated as Factor 1. Please confirm that this is in fact Facto 2.

Confirmed

RFP Page 96, 3.3.1 At the conclusion of the paragraph, it is indicated that "Volume II shall contain the following:". Please confirm that this is in fact Volume III.

Confirmed

RFP Page 99, 3.3.1.3 Please confirm that bullet #16 (narrative, management, and problems encountered) is not considered to be part of the PPIS itself.

It is part of the PPIS and we removed the 3 page limitation

RFP Past Performance Pg. 97 Can offerors provide Past Performance References (PPIS) from their subcontractors or are ofYes. Offerors can provide Past Performance of their subcontractors for up to 2 submissions but at least 1 has to be of the offeror.

RFP Tech Volume Pg. 88 “Certification Letters” are referenced but there does not seem to be any further references to what is required for these certification letters. Drawings – what drawings (if any) are required to support the technical response? Drawings – what drawings (if any) are required to support the technical response?

Certification Letters for example proof of ISO 9001.

RFP Past Performance Is there a template/required information for the consent letters being provided by subcontractNo. The consent letters is to allow the Gov to release adverse past performance of a subcontractor to the offeror (prime).

RFP Section 3.3.1.3 Is there a preferred/required format for the PPIS The required content is delineated and the format is up to the offeror.

RFP Pg. 108, 2.2.5 This paragraph does not indicate a Subfactor number, please confirm that this is in fact Subfactor 4.

Confirmed

RFP Section B.2 Contract Line Item (CLINs) Structure

CLINs 0001 and 0007 include the notation "supplies/services" next to the Item No. Would the Government consider adjusting these CLINs to "supplies," not "supplies/services" as currently written? This impacts the use of the invoicing instructions at the bottom of Section

3.2 on Pg. 26 for FFP services invoices.

Yes. Award Document will reflect Supplies

RFP Section B.2 Contract Line Item (CLINs) Structure clin 0002, P.7

Schedule B, CLIN 0002 - Mobility Kit does not list Mobility Meds; however, Mobility Meds do appear on the pricing sheet. Would the Government confirm Offerors are in fact intended to price this, and will Part B be amended to reflect same?

Yes. Award Document will include Meds in the CLIN descriptor

RFP Instructions to Offerors, Section 3.3.2, Table 3, Pg. 101

Table 3. Relevancy Criteria Table. There does not appear to be a Section numbered 3.3.1.8.

Are the relevancy definitions in the table intended to reference "similarity of procurement" as listed in 3.3.1.7?

Should read 3.3.1.7

RFP Page 96, 3.2.5 Delivery is indicated as Subfactor 3. Please confirm that this is in fact Subfactor 4. Confirmed

Other How will updates to equipment and training be handled? Will the updates flow from the contractor to USSOCOM or from USSOCOM to the contractor?

The Gov't Program Management Office will work closely with the awardee on all proposed changes to the Program of Record (PoR). This partnership allows for Pre-Plan Product Improvements as well as vendor recommendations for spiral development.

Other Please confirm that items are not required to be on an offeror’s GSA schedule? This does not appear to be a requirement, but given that the contract is being managed by GSA we wanted Government feedback.

Confirmed

Other Given the intervening holiday season, would the Government consider granting an extension of 2-3 weeks to ensure industry has adequate time to provide competitive bid solutions for th Government to consider?

Due to the urgency of the requirement, and the length of the pre- RFP posting with little change to the final RFP, the Gov't will not grant an extension of 2-3 weeks. In addition, the Gov't accounted for the holidays when posting the RFP for an additional fifteen days beyond the required thirty day requirement. An extension through 9 January 2021 will be granted.

Government Supply Sources

Question: Does the government intend to include FAR 51.101 Contractor use of Government Supply Sources or issue a letter of authorization to use Federal Supply Schedules/Sources for procurement of materials?

Not at this time

Government Documents

3.2.1 and 3.2.3 Question: Does the Government intend for the contractor to use the most current guidelines dated November 2020?

Yes

Attachment 6 Appendix A

Replace Parts CLIN Tab LOM LOM REF# 21-25: calls out 1 each. The OEM P/N calls out a pack of 10. The NSN calls out 1 box. Attach 4 The engineering diagram calls out 1 with a picture of a bundle and drawing o 1pc. Question: Which Document takes Precedence?

We only want one (1) each in our configuration. It is the government's understanding that the previous contractor purchased the items in a pack of 10 and managed their inventory appropriately. As this is a non-name brand only item, you may substitute this item as an each part number, if you choose to (assuming one is available). The bundle in the image is of one (1) of each respective item

Attachment 6 Appendix A

Replace Parts CLIN Tab LOM LOM 74.3, 74.7, and 74.11: In the engineering schematics, only 74.3 is called out and it calls out a quantity of 15; The spreadsheet calls out 9pcs for 74.3, 3pcs for 74.7, and 3pcs for

74.11. The OEM Part Number that is called out is 306501 which is a case of 200 catheters.

The NSN is 6515-01-390-9654 calls for a package quantity of 200 as well. Based on this data and the previous question on LOM 21-25, this could mean that we need to provide 9pcs, 15pcs, 200pcs, or up to 3,000pcs per kit. Question: Which Document takes Precedence?

The CASEVAC Set is complicated grouping of items, sub-assemblies, and kits; as such the List of Materials (LOM) and Wire Schematics can often be difficult to correlate identically to one another. As it pertains to the 18 gauge catheters, there are total of five (5) IV bundles that are created in each respective Circulation Pouch Modular Insert. Each of these bundles contains three (3) catheters; for a total of fifteen (15). Each of the respective LOM Reference numbers then correlates to an occurrence of a specific IV Fluid that is allocated to the respective Circulation Pouch: 74.3 shows a total of nine (9) as there are three (3) Plasma-Lytes; 74.7 and 74.11 show a total of three (3) each as there are one (1) each Sodium Chloride and Ringers, respectively (9+3+3=15).

The 200 count item was the last known qty purchased by the

Attachment 6 Appendix A

Replace Parts CLIN Tab LOM LOM 44.6 and 44.7 call for 1 each in the BID Qty field; however, the engineering schematics and the configuration quantity call for 3 each. Will the Government clarify if the contractor should use BID Qty or Engineering Configuration QTY?

All replacement parts are to be bid at one (1) each so that replacement parts can be procured individually as needed. In the example you reference you will notice that the 44-Light Extrication Kit consists of 44.1 - 44.10; you will take the respective configuration quantities in to consideration when pricing 44 as an individual item. The price listed for 44 will then be rolled up into the total price of the Extraction Kit

Attachment 5 CDRL A005 – Provisioning Parts Listing

The PPL shall be in accordance with paragraphs 3.4.3 and 5 of DS84. (The DS84 does not appear to be available via open source and is referenced within the DID). Question: Will the US Government provide access to DS84 or provide the relevant paragraphs so that the paragraphs can be evaluated and effort properly priced. Alternately, will the USG delete the requirement to adhere to DS84?

We will out the DS84 from the DID requirement upon award?

Attachment 06 Appendix A

Kits seem to be counted three times in the TEP. For example, an entry in cell N2 of the “Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN” tab gets summed into cell N715 of that same tab and goes into CLIN X007 of the TEP. That same cell gets added to cell M2 of the “Base Configuration” tab, gets summed into cell M16. That value gets transferred to cell E5 of the SETS KITS Modules tab which gets summed in cell E3 then both E3 and E5 are summed int cell E37. It is then transferred into CLIN X001-X004 of the TEP. Question: Is this the Government’s intent?

It is counted the appropriate number of times, one as a replacement item, one as part of a module and another as part of a kit. It is available for procurement in any of those configurations.

Attachment 06 Appendix A

The Configuration Quantity does not always match the Bid Quantity. For example, on the “Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN” tab LOM 13, the Configuration Quantity is 2 but the bid quantity is 1. Question: Would the Government please confirm that offerors should bid quantity 1 of that item.

From a replacement part perspective, all items should be bid as a qty of 1. In order to build a particular kit, an item may be used in multiple quantities - that is the configuration qty.

Attachment 06 Appendix A

None of the LOMs which end in C are included in the “Base Configuration” tab. Question:

Can the Government please confirm that is correct?

This is correct; The "C" represents the Coyote color pattern. The Base Configuration captures the Multicam color pattern. For pricing purposes, the government is aware that Multicam textiles typically cost more than Coyote. That said, the government is willing to accept the higher of the two prices for fully assembled kits; hence the use of only "M" in the pricing roll up

Attachment 06 Appendix A

LOMs 83, 86, 996, and TBD are not included in the “Base Configuration” tab. Question:

Can the Government please confirm that is correct.

Confirmed

Attachment 06 Appendix A

On the “Base Configuration” tab, both LOMs 158 and 159 have the same formula.

Question: Can the Government please adjust the formula for LOM 159 to reference cell N460 on the “Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN” tab.

Formula reference adjusted

Attachment 06 Appendix A

The part number provided below is from the current incumbents. Will the Government please provide the OEM part number? Product Nomenclature: Monitor Vitals, O2 Sat, Cardiac Output - Corp RAD 57 unit with SpO2, PR, PI, PVI, SpHb and SpOC

This is an assemblage of the items listed below. The offeror would be the new OEM/Supplier of the part number

Attachment 06 Appendix A

Please confirm the total is 1570 for Estimated Contract Ceiling\Estimated Annual Total Kit Purchases and Extended Values\Y6 (OP 1)\ Estimated Total Kits

Confirmed

Attachment 06 Appendix A

Will the Government please confirm part numbers for LOM Items 100, 100.1, 100.2, 100.3 and 100.4 provided are from another manufacturer, Verathon, Inc.

C-MAC part numbers adjusted

Attachment 06 Appendix A

On the Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN Tab, LOM Reference numbers 114.4 and 114.5 are part of the power infuser configuration. The power infuser is currently not available and no pricing is being requested for that configuration; however, these two pieces have not been color-coded as not available. Does the Government require pricing for these two Power Infuser parts?

Same as row 64

Attachment 06 Appendix A

On the Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN Tab, there appears to be two different types of medical gloves required based on the description; however, the part numbers and manufacturer are the same for all descriptions. Does the Government want the same gloves for all glove items, or are LOM Ref #’s 69.4, 150.4, 152.1, 179.4, and 181.3 intended to be a different glove? Traditionally these are a thicker exam glove (Digit Care Corp, PN DFR12- 4T, Digitcare® Defender T™ DFR12-T). In Addition, the box of gloves under LOM Ref# 133 state brand name, where none of the individual gloves are brand name required. Is this correct?

Descriptions all reflect - Nitrile Gloves Black

Attachment 06 A LOM Attachment 02 GFE and Services that are

Tab: Net Matrix & TEP In Attachment 02. The Government indicates it will fund “Transit of Training Equipment to/from Contractor storage facility.” Question: Will the cost be Cost Reimbursable, FFP or T&M? Where does the government intend for the contractor to account for those costs?

It does not. The government will coordinate the shipments directly prior to, and at the completion of, each NET Course as applicable.

Attach 5 All CDRLs

Will the USG consider revising CDRL submission dates to coincide with kit and/or NET delivery task orders versus contract award so that the contractor has the ability to recover cos on the CDRL efforts since many of the CDRL developments are consequential?

No

Attach 06 Appendix A LOM

"Base Configuration" Tab LOM Ref# 55 & 56 are associated with the M-1 Module; however, on the "Base Configuration" tab they are being rolled up into the pricing for the M-2 Module and not the M-1 Module. Could the Government please clarify to which module these two items should be priced and allocated?

Reference corrected

Attach 06 Appendix A LOM (Multiple Tabs)

Multiple Tabs On the Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN Tab, Row 647 is not available to be priced separately as a replacement part. Would the Government consider removing this line from the pricing sheet provided, or should Offerors enter "N/A" in that line?

Enter N/A

Attach 06 Appendix A LOM

Replacement Parts Tab The EZ-IO T.A.L.O.N. has several OEM Part Numbers. Could the Government please provide the correct part number desired for inclusion in the program?

As stated, there are multiple part numbers available for this particular item. The part number listed in the current document is the part number for a unit of issue "EACH". The offeror can provide an alternative part number should they be required to order a bulk pack from the OEM; however, the items must still be priced at the unit of issue "EACH" level to allow for accuracy within the fully kitted solution.

Attach 06 Appendix A LOM

Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN & Base Configuration Tabs

LOM REF# 159 (zip ties) is Row 460 on the "Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN" tab. On the "Base Configuration" tab, Row 165, the formula carrying over the cost if that line items is =$J$165*’Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN ‘!N459. That is the incorrect reference for the zip ties. The correct formula is =$J$165*’Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN ‘!N460. Could the Government please correct this on the Excel pricing file?

Reference corrected

Attach 06 Appendix A LOM

Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN & Base Configuration Tabs

Row 713 on the "Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN" tab is the Kitting for the S-1 Meds module. In row 177 of the "Base Configuration" tab, the formula carrying over the cost if that line items is =$J$180*’Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN ‘!N466. That is the incorrect reference for the kitting line of the S-1 meds. The correct formula is =$J$180*’Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN ‘!N713. Could the Government please correct this on the Excel pricing file?

Reference corrected

Attach 06 Appendix A LOM

SETS_KITS_Modules Tab The sum formulas for Columns E and G the SETS_KITS_Modules tab are incorrect. Could the Government please correct these formulas?

Row 37 formulas have been updated

Attach 06 Appendix A LOM

Appendix A Replace Parts CLIN Tab

The following products are manufactured by SunTech with current part numbers provided below. Could the Government correct these products on the LOM?

- LOM Ref 995.30: Tempus Blood Pressure Cuff - Large Adult Cuff Long (31-40cm) PN 98-0600-08

- LOM Ref 995.33: Tempus Blood Pressure Cuff - Adult Cuff Long (23-33cm)

Optional items under LOM 995.30 - 995.33 and 995.47 - 995.49 have been removed.

Attach 06 Appendix A LOM

Replacement Parts Tab Is LOM Ref# 86 (Disposable Probes - 39" Pack of 5) an option item, or an item to be included in the T-1/2 module?

Item highlighted as optional

Attach 06 Appendix A LOM

Would the Government please provide an unlocked "Attach 06 Appendix A LOM V22.3 ID04200024 23 Nov 2020" Excel file so that Offerors have the ability to filter data?

No - unlocking it provides the opportunity to manipulate the formulas

Attach 06 Appendix A

Replace Parts CLIN Tab LOM LOM 114 and 115 are calling out the same NSN. The NSN matches LOM 114 and should be removed from NSN 115.

114 is a custom configuration of sub components for the Zoll kit notation made in LOM

Attach 06 Appendix A

Replace Parts CLIN Tab LOM LOM 114-114.3 are marked on the spreadsheet as discontinued; however, 114.4 and 114.5 are not. Per the OEM, these two items are discontinued as well. Question: Will the government confirm the parts list and if discontinued provide replacement instructions?

The value of the cells have been changed to RED and will be locked.

Attach 06 Appendix A

Replace Parts CLIN Tab LOM LOM 86 and 83: For LOM 86 it shows: OPTION in the MFG field of the spreadsheet. The configuration quantity is 0. The quantity on the engineering schematics is 0.For LOM 83-

83.21 The configuration quantity is 1, but none of the items are in the engineering schematics.

Optional item quantity changed to '1' This is an option item that would function as an alternative item for the Tempus Pro - It is not pictured as the Tempus Pro is the primary patient monitor for this system. If purchased, it would most likely be as an individual item, not as part of the kit

Attach 06 Appendix A

Replace Parts CLIN Tab LOM Many LOMs have OP in the configuration QTY field on the spreadsheet. Does the government have schematics for these items, or is there an explanation of when/how these optional items are exercised?

Optional items are not part of the base configuration and as such do not necessarily have a "home" in the kit. These items are typically procured individually and are not expected to be integrated into the kit configuration.

Attach 06 Appendix A

Replace Parts CLIN Tab LOM Some kits call out each individual item. For example: LOM 194 is called out as a Airway Pouch Modular Insert, but each component is also called out LOM 194.1-194.3. The pricing only considers the complete kit and not the individual items, but there could potentially be cost differences. Will the government confirm we are to price both the kit and individual items separately?

Each item is procurable individually as well as a component of a sub-assembly. For instance, 194 could be ordered while also ordering additional quantities of 194.1concurrently

Attach 06 Appendix A

Replace Parts CLIN Tab LOM LOM 31.7 and 31.12 both call for 24-foot tubular webbing; however, the engineering diagram calls for 1x 24 foot and 1x 20-foot length. Will the government clarify precedence?

24 foot is the preference as the 20-foot webbing has been removed due to government preference. The engineering diagram is not a recent due to expiration of the previous contract

Attach 06 Appendix A

Replace Parts CLIN Tab LOM The configuration in the spreadsheet and engineering schematics appear to contradict each other. For example, LOM 44.9 is called out in the spreadsheet as part of LOM 4; however, in the Engineering drawings it appears to be part of LOM 45. Same with 44.10 which appears to be part of LOM 42 rather than LOM 44 on the spreadsheet. Can the Government clarify the discrepancy?

While the items in question are packed in a separate location when building the kits, they are in fact part of LOM 44 (Light Extrication Kit)

Attach 06 Appendix A

LOM 48 and LOM 48.1-48.5 are not the same. The grinder and the cutting wheels appear to be the main difference. LOM 48 has a grinder, a charger, 2 batteries, a bag, and a wrench.

LOM 48.1-48.5 has cutting wheels, a wrench, a charger, 2 batteries, and a bushing. Can the government verify the configuration?

LOM 48 is the complete Grinder that includes 48.1 through 48.5.

From a replacement part perspective 48.1 - 48.5 are available to procured individually.

Attach 06 Appendix A

Sets Kits Modules Tab The total for Y1 sums the numbers for Y2 and the total for Y3 sums the numbers for Y4.

Question: Will the Government provide a corrected Attachment 6?

Correction Made

Attach 06 – Appendix A LOM

List of Materials has several items requiring BRAND NAME ONLY with the manufacturer indicated as PRIME INTEGRATOR. This is the Incumbent’s Brand and provides an unfair advantage to the incumbent for pricing of these items. Would USG consider a plug amount or authorizing substitutions for the indicated items to ensure all offeror’s are evaluated fairly for the indicated brand name only items or remove these items as part of the evaluation criteria? The incumbent has entered into agreements with the manufacturers and the manufacturers will not provide quotes for several dozen of the items required in the List of Materials. This level of collusion essentially precludes all other bidders. If that is satisfactory, we recommend a J&A as other qualified bidders will be unable to get quotes on those items that have been so arranged between the current incumbent and the manufacturers. It will also result in extreme pricing for those items should the incumbent loose. The specific list is below Prime Integrator High-Angle Recovery - Double End Bag (COYOTE)

TICS.29.10340.C 8465-01-606-5946

Prime Integrator High-Angle Recovery - Double End Bag (MULTICAM)

TICS.29.10340.M 8465-01-606-5495

Prime Integrator Light Extrication Kit TICS.29.10338 5180-01-606-7189 Prime Integrator Rigid Litter - Quad Folding System Kit TICS.08.10065 6530- 01-659-8075 Prime Integrator TICS IFAK Pouch Modular Insert TICS.00.10007 6545-01- 607-7796

This is a misunderstanding of how to read the LOM and it was addressed with Industry during the pre-RFP phase; please cross reference the Base Configuration with the Replacement Parts Tab

- this will provide the insight necessary to source the components. Please all see the Brand Name J&A attached to the RFP. There has been no indication of "collusion," and if such activity is reported then proper evidence should be provided.

Attach 06 – Appendix A LOM

List of Materials indicates items of BRAND NAME ONLY which list a NSN number. These NSN Numbers have several suppliers under the same NSN. Would USG accept alternative brand for the same NSN numbers for these items?

No.

Attach 06 LOM 114.1-114.5 These items have been discontinued by Zoll. Please provide guidance. The government is aware of the discontinuance of items; these items are to remain as an unpriced placeholder until a suitable replacement technology is identified

Attach 06 There are several items listed within the LOM that are no longer available due to their end of life cycle and without a suitable substitute on the market. Within the LOM these line items are named by manufacturer and model and not specifically identified as “alternates acceptable”. Please advise how offerors are should respond to/treat these items.

The Gov't Program Management Office will work closely with the awardee, and the end user community, to identify potential replacements items that meet the program requirements and are found to be operationally suitable and effective.

Attach 02 Attachment 2, NET Training Appendix

The second bullet under "Administrative Considerations (Contractor)" appears to conflict with the first. The 7:1 ratio is stated elsewhere in the RFP. Please confirm that the minimum contractor personnel present at a course is one (1) for a 7-student course.

There is no minimum as it pertains to "contractor personnel"; the Ratio pertains to actual instructors. Given a 7-student course, there must be a minimum of one (1) instructor. That said, given the logistics associated with delivering a course (coordination of vehicles for extrication, movement/storage of equipment, etc.) it is very unlikely that a contractor would be successful in delivering a 4-day curriculum with only one (1) personnel on site A prospective bidder must provide qualified instructor cadre at the minimum student to instructor ratio, while also planning for logistics and support of the training event

Attach 01 SOW

AND

Attach 02, NET Training Appendix

Pg. 1 The SOW references "moving" GFE; however, the NET Training Appendix document refers to "transit of training equipment to/from Contractor storage facility" under the list of "GFE and services that are program-funded (Government Provided)." Please clarify that the Government has the responsibility for moving equipment.

The contractor will be responsible for transporting/storing all training equipment (GFE and Contractor Owned) during the training event. The government will ship the training equipment to and from the training venue. For example, in order to conduct an MTT at Eglin AFG, the government will coordinate a pickup at the contractor's facility for shipment to Eglin AFB; the contractor is responsible for transporting, storing, and re-palletizing the equipment during the course; Upon completion, the government will then schedule a pickup at Eglin AFB to be returned to the contractor's facility.

Attach 01 SOW and CDRLS

RFP CLIN 0009 CLIN 0009 is Not Separately Priced. The price shall be included in the price of the applicable CLIN as annotated within the CDRL. CDRL shall be in accordance with the Statement of Work. Where does the Contractor account for cost for each CDRL Deliverable?

CDRLS will not be separately priced in the contract or delivery orders. Block 17 and Block 18 of the CDRL DD FORM 1423-1 is required to be filled out.

Attach 01 SOW 3.2 The referenced Tactical Combat Casualty Care Guidelines 2018 (online) and the PHTLS edition 6E are outdated.

The referenced guidelines were identified prior to the RFP review process and were current at that time. The Gov't intent is to reference the most recent version of any and all documents or standards identified within the RFP.

Attach 01 SOW 4.10 CDRLs A 001, A002, A003, A004 & A005

Question: Will the current and editable Publication Program materials be provided to the Awardee as GFI for use in assuming Program configuration management and continuous process improvement?

Upon award, it will be the contractor's responsibility to create and maintain all CDRLs

Attach 01 SOW 4.4.2 Question: Assuming key personnel resumes are required would the government consider redacted resumes for those personnel?

Only requiring resumes for training cadre