FFMN__Pre_Proposal_QuestionsResponses.pdf
PDF 45 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Fill and Finish Manufacturing Network Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- BARDA-13-100-SOL-00004
About this file
4) Pre-Proposal Conference Q A's
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 13-100-SOL-00004_FFMN_CMO_Ammedment_No._4.pdf | ||
| 13-100-SOL-00004_FFMN_CMO_Ammedment_No._3.pdf | ||
| Amend_2_Body.pdf | ||
| FFMN.PreProposal.Slides.pdf | ||
| Amend2.cover.pdf | ||
| 13-100-SOL-00004_Amendment_No._0001.pdf | ||
| 13-100-SOL-00004_FFMN.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Is a list of commercial products (with
NDC
codes) sufficient as “evidence” that commercial product is being manufactured at the facility?
If not, can you suggest other documentation? Please provide the product name, license date, license and date of last fill in the facility.
2 Please confirm if the following information is required to be submitted for both Prime and Subcontractors:
(1) Disclosure of Lobbying activities (2) Small Business Subcontracting Plan
Disclosure of Lobby activities should be submitted by the Prime and Subcontractors.
Small Business
Subcontracting Plans only need to be submitted by the Prime.
3 Please define the difference between the Integrated Master Project Plan as described on pg.
69, item iii (4) vs.
Integrated Master Schedule as described on pg.
and 80.
The Integrated Master project Plan
(IPP)
is the narrative text describing plans, strategy, assumptions and rationale for decisions.
The Integrated Master Schedule
(IMS)
is the Gantt Chart with dates, durations, predecessors, critical path.
4 Please explain how Security is to be evaluated, since it's not currently addressed under Technical Evaluation
Criteria.
Security is evaluated under Evaluation Factor Sub factor “E” using the same color coded ratings as the other Sub-‐factors within that evaluation factor.
5 Does the Gantt requirement on pg.
59, item iii, fall under Evaluation Factor 1, sub-‐factor on pg.
or under Evaluation Factor on pgs.
79-‐80?
Requirement iii is for
EF1
Sub-‐factor
With respect to surge capacity, Pg.
of the
RFP
says “up to 50M” vs.
pg.
“Outstanding rating if mds”.
Can mds be proposed for surge capacity?
If so, does any/all proposed surge capacity mds also need to be filled within the same week window?
Yes, the Offeror can propose 50M doses for Surge Capacity.
The Offeror should provide details on what quantity can be provided within the week time frame as surge capacity during a pandemic.
Additional doses that could be provided after that weeks should also be described and include the additional time requirement for providing these additional doses.
The additional doses (exceeding the
12weeks timeline) will be considered as funding allows, if technically acceptable and if determined to be of best value to the
USG.
HHS
uses the terms “Pandemic vaccine” and “Influenza vaccine” interchangeably throughout the
RFP.
Can
HHS
clarify which pandemic and/or seasonal influenza vaccine candidates would be eligible candidates for the surge component of the
FFMN?
A monovalent component of an
FDA
licensed seasonal tri-‐valent influenza vaccine is the preferred technical transfer candidate.
A surge response to a pandemic would likely be a monovalent influenza vaccine.
Alternatively, a pre-‐pandemic influenza vaccine may be considered.
Unlicensed vaccine candidates must be at least at Phase Clinical testing to be eligible for consideration.
8 How will
HHS
address potentially overlapping requirements between
FFMN
and
CIADM?
HHS
expects potential overlapping requirements to be executed individually and completed per the terms of each contract.
If a contractor recognizes a potential overlap in a
T/DOR
they should address the overlap in their proposal.
The
RFP
indicates that “funding for future T/DORs is separate from the funding being allocated to establish
FFMN”
(pg.
10, line 15).
Can
HHS
explain what that means?
In recent years, all non-‐influenza funding for
ASPR/BARDA
has been provided by the BioShield Special Reserve Fund which is reported to be depleted by
September 2013.
What funding is anticipated be available to support the
FFMN
beyond its establishment?
The base period funding for the
FFMN
is Influenza money.
Task orders will be determined and issued based on availability of funding.
In Amendment
HHS
removed the following from Section C-‐4, CLIN
Contract Management
(FFP)…
“Additionally, monthly meetings, periodic site visit and quarterly site visits shall be included”.
In light of this change, how should Offerors include costs related to participating in quarterly site meetings in proposals, since such meetings would be a contractual obligation?
Amendment no.
deleted/replaced only the first sentence of this paragraph, the sentence referenced has not been deleted.
Questions-‐
FFMN
Pre-‐Proposal Conference BARDA Responses
In the scenario where
HHS
purchases bulk drug substance (under a
TO
with company A) and has it converted to drug product (under a
TO
with company B), which entity is responsible for covering the cost for replacing the bulk drug substance should there be an issue with significant product/batch loss during the drug product manufacturing process (at company B)?
Responsibility will be dependent on Root Cause analysis and investigation regarding the loss of product.
Replacement costs will be negotiated at/prior to contract award.
Under Organizational Competency on pgs.
and 62, please clarify how requirements under items and
(names, capabilities and approximate percentage of time each individual could be available for a
T/DOR)
differs from item (names and capabilities of personnel available for assignment to fill and finish manufacturing services
T/DOR)
other than time availability.
The two line items are the same and redundant-‐ the
RFP
will be amended to remove.
Please clarify why "Timeline to product availability (meets
FDA
requirements for use) is included under
Technical Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Factor 2, Sub-‐factor Organizational Competency, item
c. This requirement will be evaluated under Evaluation Factor Sub-‐factor 1-‐ the
RFP
will be amended to make the correction.
14 Please clarify HHS/BARDA's expectations/position around long lead time items… glass, stoppers, etc.
FFMN
to secure
20MM
vials and stoppers and store to be ready?
Expectation is for the Offeror to work with suppliers to develop cost effective strategy to ensure dose delivery requirements are met during a surge/pandemic.
15 Does the Govt have room temperature storage capacity for primary container closure at a Govt location or should the
FFMN
assume this cost?
Please provide details if the
FFMN
contractor was to assume this cost.
16 Does the Govt have cold storage capacity for
BDS
or finished product at a Govt location or should the
FFMN
assume this cost?
Please provide details if the
FFMN
contractor was to assume this cost.
Would temperature controlled mobile storage (trailers) be acceptable to store finished product? Temporary storage in non-‐ mobile, validated trailers may be acceptable but will need to be approved prior to implementation.
18 Should Serilization be included? All
FDA
requirements must be met as are requirement to this solicitation.
19 What
BSL
(Bio-‐Safety Hazard Level) should be assumed? BSL2 is the minimum requirement.
Offerors should propose their capabilities.
Are Controlled substances in scope?
Schedule class 2-‐5 drugs are within scope.
The Offeror should propose their capabilities.
21 Are Sterile Cytotoxic products in scope? Yes, the Offeror should propose their capabilities.
22 Are Sterile potent products in scope? Yes, the Offeror should propose their capabilities.
23 What inco term is required for shipment?
Should we assume
CIP?
Assume
FFMN
would need to provide insurance coverage on product until reaches destination.
INCO
terms are
FOB
Destination for
BARDA
contracts.
Refer to section F in the solicitation.
24 How many
USG
sites to ship to? TBD 25 Shipping costs for Non-‐surge products for other customers, we will assume
FOB
(FCA
Free carrier) INCO terms are
FOB
Destination for
BARDA
contracts.
Refer to section F.
26 What's the release cycle time anticipated by the USG? Please refer to section L.
11.2.c.ii.1 in the solicitation regarding the requirement for providing released doses for this solicitation.
27 Are electronic batch records a requirement? No.
28 Are there certain max rates/allowed for Validation, Engineering in capital bids? No.
How do you anticipate the
BDS
to be delivered to the
FFMN?
(tanks, bags ,etc) What size?
How many? This is dependent upon the chosen vaccine candidate.
The Offeror should make an assumption and justify the chosen delivery container in order to provide appropriate information in the Offeror's proposal.
What is the
BDS
batch size?
Can we combine two or more
BDS
lots to maximize equipment capacity? This is dependent upon the chosen vaccine candidate.
The Offeror should make an assumption and justify the chosen delivery container in order to provide appropriate information in the Offeror's proposal.
Under Proposal Formatting on pg.
of the
RFP,
item (3), it's stated that "text shall be printed using a font size of no less than cpi", whereas on pg.
under Proposal Page Limitations, it's stated that "Text shall be presented as single-‐spaced, or 12-‐point font..."
Please clarify the required font size for the submission.
Proposals should be as described on page 55.
"10 or 12-‐point font…" The
RFP
will be amended to make correction.
Please clarify if the Technical Appendix should be included with the Technical Proposal or submitted as a separate volume in a different binder. Using separate binders is at the Offerors discretion.
Please confirm if electronic copies of Mandatory Criteria, Technical Proposal, Technical Appendix can be contained on the same
CD,
with Business Proposal and Business Appendix submitted on a separate
CD.
Yes, Business and Technical proposals must be separate CDs for distribution to the different evaluation panels
34 Please clarify who should receive Past Performance Questionnaires.
Pg.
of the
RFP
indicates Quintin
Hackshaw, while Attachment #9 indicates Kyle Roberts.
Submit to Quintin Hackshaw.
The
RFP
will be amended to make correction.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .