Q_A Response Document_8SEPT26.pdf

FA248626RB004: Powertrain Multiple Award IDIQ Recompete

Questions and Answers Document

1. Total Evaluated Acceptability (TEA): Section M, Step 4 states that technically acceptable proposals will be sorted by their TEA, with awards made to the most technically acceptable and responsible offerors, not to exceed eight. Please define TEA and provide the methodology the Government will use to calculate or determine an offeror’s TEA. Specifically, please clarify how the Acceptable/Unacceptable ratings assigned under Steps 1 through 3 will be used to comparatively rank technically acceptable proposals.

a. There will be no numerical ranking assigned to acceptability. The Total Evaluated Acceptability is comprised of Evaluation Process Steps 1 through 3 located in Paragraph G of Section M.

2. Subcontractor Technical Capability and Past Performance: Section M states that, for purposes of the technical evaluation, the term “offeror” includes the offeror’s proposed teaming arrangement. May an offeror rely on a proposed subcontractor’s experience and capabilities to satisfy Volume II, Technical Element 1, including the required list of powertrain components previously overhauled or relevant parts previously delivered, and may the subcontractor’s recent and relevant past performance be submitted and evaluated under Volume III? If permitted, please identify any required documentation of the teaming arrangement and whether subcontractor experience or past performance will be evaluated differently from that of the prime offeror.

a. Sole Reliance on a subcontractor or supplier may result in a neutral rating for the technical Capabilities or Past performance of the Primary Awardee. This is not an Unacceptable rating. Past Performance and Technical capabilities will be considered for both the Prime and any identified Subcontractors.

3. DO1 Teaming Capability: RFP Attachment 3 requires the DO1 Logistics Plan to address procurement, parts compatibility and validation, and overhaul/repair processes, including diagnostics, repair, testing, and certification. May an offeror rely on the facilities, technical capabilities, and procedures of a proposed subcontractor that will perform these specialized functions to satisfy the DO1 Logistics Plan requirements?

a. Subcontractor or teaming arrangement capabilities can satisfy the requirements for DO1 if itemized and stated clearly. Excessive Pass through could affect the administrative cost components that are required for review as part of the DO1 Logistics plan.

4. Technical Element 1, Parts List Evaluation: Section L permits an offeror to demonstrate Technical Element 1 capability by providing a list of powertrain parts/components previously delivered under other contracts that are relevant to the SOW. In evaluating this list, will the Government consider the number and variety of qualifying powertrain parts/components, breadth of experience across the identified component and target-asset categories, and similarity of the prior deliveries? Please clarify how the breadth and relevance of the submitted parts list factor into the offeror’s technical evaluation and TEA, if applicable.

a. The proposals, after being found Acceptable or Unacceptable will be evaluated by the program office for their relevance to the needs of the program itself. Any additional information that can be provided to prove the capability to perform the requirements of the contract should be stated. No numerical ranking will be assigned to technical capabilities.

5. Section L states questions are due NLT 14 calendar days prior to due date of 8/31/2026, while the SAM.gov due date is Sep 14, 2026, 01:00 pm CDT.

a. The due date for Proposals is 9/14/2026

b. Questions are required no later than 8/31/2026

6. RFP Attachment 3 1.3 contemplates vendors that provide only repair and overhaul support. Please confirm the converse: that an offeror may propose parts acquisition and fabrication/procurement capability without proposing organic overhaul/rebuild capability, remain eligible for IDIQ award, and remain eligible to compete for all parts FOPRs issued under Attachment J-2 2.2.1.

a. Yes, an offeror may propose parts acquisition and fabrication/procurement capability without proposing organic overhaul/rebuild capability and remain eligible for IDIQ award. Fair opportunity will be given to all Awardees for all Delivery Orders within the program. RFP Attachment 3 will be amended to specify what is specifically required for a Parts only submission.

7. For delivery orders consisting of parts acquisition, please confirm how offerors should address the Nonmanufacturer Rule, including whether any SBA class waiver applies to the supplies acquired under this contract, and how the rule will be applied to orders for foreign-origin components required for the foreign target assets described in SOW 1.2.

a. There are no SBA class waivers. RFO 25.103 (b)(1)(i) and RFO 25,104(a)(30) are the exceptions that allow procurement of the foreign components. The Nonmanufacturer Rule will be addressed at the Delivery Order level at that time.

8. The SOW requires powertrain components for foreign target assets (e.g., YaMZ, UTD-series, and V-46/V-92 family engines) that are manufactured only outside the United States. Please confirm that components of foreign origin/manufacture are acceptable where the target asset requires them, and whether any country-of-origin restrictions beyond the solicitation’s incorporated clauses apply to the acquisition of these items through third-country channels.

a. Components of foreign origin/manufacture are acceptable where the target asset requires them under RFO 25.103 (b)(1)(i) and RFO 25,104(a)(30).

9. Please confirm that the 30-page limitation applies to Volumes II and III combined;

that cover pages, tables of contents, and dividers are excluded per Section L.B.3.c;

and that the DO1 Logistics Plan response (RFP Attachment 3), submitted separately with Volume I, is excluded from the limitation.

a. The 30-page limitations apply to volumes II and III combined. Cover pages, tables of contents and dividers are not excluded and do count towards page numbers. Furthermore, DO1 Logistics Plan response (RFP Attachment 3) is separate from the limit imposed upon Volume II and III.

10. Please confirm that the Structure for Managerial and Oversight Costs will be evaluated for fair-and-reasonableness at the solicitation level only, and that a narrative-plus-table presentation within the DO1 Logistics Support Plan (i.e., no separate pricing volume or format) satisfies the requirement.

a. Yes, the narrative-plus-table presentation with the proper information would satisfy the requirement and its evaluation is specific to the DO1 Review not the solicitation and has not been stated for any other reviews.

11. To support realistic capacity and sourcing commitments, can the Government share the approximate historical mix of parts-acquisition versus overhaul/repair dollars (or order counts) under the predecessor Powertrain IDIQ, if releasable?

a. The Government will not be releasing the historical mix of parts-acquisition versus overhaul/repair dollars under the previous Powertrain IDIQ contract.

12. Section M states all three volumes are rated either acceptable or unacceptable and the number of awards shall not exceed eight. If there are more than eight offerors that have acceptable proposals in all three volumes, what is the evaluation criteria to eliminate offerors from award to get to the mandatory no more than eight awards?

a. Up to eight of the highest technically rated offerors will be selected. The evaluation criteria will be in accordance with the evaluation criteria in Section M. The awards will also be made in accordance with the procedures for Highest Technically Rated with a Fair & Reasonable Price IAW RFO 15.103-3.

13. Section M states awards will be made to the highest and most technically rated offerors whose proposals meet the acceptance standards for all criteria. What defines highest and most technically rated, how can we meet this standard, and how is it rated?

a. There is no definition for the highest and most technically rated offerors.

Proposals are either acceptable or unacceptable after evaluation and the 8 highest rated proposals will be selected for award. The evaluation criteria will be in accordance with the evaluation criteria in Section M. The awards will also be made in accordance with the procedures for Highest Technically Rated with a Fair & Reasonable Price IAW RFO 15.103-3.

14. The solicitation contains representations and certifications, i.e., 52.209-7

Information Regarding Responsibility Matters (Deviation 2026-O0038) (Feb 2026), page 23, that require us to complete a paragraph (see paragraph (b)). If we have already completed the online Reps & Certs contained in SAM, do we have to complete and submit with our proposal any Reps & Certs contained in the solicitation, or will our online SAM Reps & Certs comply with the solicitation requirements?

a. You must complete the paragraph as stated even if your reps and certs in SAM are up to date.

15. As this is a follow-on contract, could you please provide historical data in regard to dollars obligated annually and the percentages of those dollars that went to Overhauls vs. Components, as well as percentages broken out by type of vehicle (Tank, Carrier, Radar System, Truck, Watercraft)?

a. The Government will not be providing historical data for the previous Powertrain IDIQ contract.

16. Are captions in tables allowed to be 8-point font?

a. Yes, captions in tables are allowed to be 8-point font.

17. Paragraph 1.3 establishes a reduced set of required paragraphs for an offeror whose capability is limited to repair and overhaul support. Please confirm whether a corresponding reduction applies to an offeror whose capability is limited to the acquisition and delivery of components, parts, and technical manuals — that is, whether such an offeror should address paragraphs 1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, and 1.3.5, or whether paragraph 1.3.6 is to be addressed by all offerors regardless of the scope proposed.

a. An offeror may propose parts acquisition and fabrication/procurement capability without proposing organic overhaul/rebuild capability and remain eligible for IDIQ award. Fair opportunity will be given to all Awardees for all Delivery Orders within the program. RFP Attachment 3 will be amended to specify what is specifically required for a Parts only submission.

18. If a reduced set of paragraphs is permitted for either category of offeror, please confirm how a logistics support plan addressing fewer than all six paragraphs will be evaluated relative to one addressing all six under the Acceptable/Unacceptable ratings established at Section M, and whether proposing a limited scope affects an offeror's eligibility for award or the range of delivery orders for which the offeror will receive Fair Opportunity Proposal Requests.

a. Offerors may submit parts and/or overhaul proposals. Only proposing one capability will not affect the proposal being rated Acceptable/Unacceptable.

Fair opportunity will be provided to all awardees for every Delivery Order RFP.

19. The Optional Ordering Period is listed as "September 24, 3031 to September 23, 2036." Can the Government confirm the correct start year for this option period (we assume 2031)?

a. The correct starting year would be 2031.

20. Section L.A.3 refers to the DO1 document as "Solicitation Attachment J5," while Section J's List of Attachments and the DO1 document itself identify it as "RFP Attachment 3." Can the Government confirm that RFP Attachment 3 is the controlling document for the DO1 Logistics Support Plan requirement?

a. RFP Attachment 3 is the controlling document for the DO1 Logistics Support Plan requirement.

21. Section 1.2 states the contractor may fulfill requirements by

"overhauling/rebuilding, fabricating and/or acquiring" components. Can the Government confirm that sourced serviceable or surplus material meeting original

OEM specifications is an acceptable fulfillment method under this contract, consistent with Section 1.3.9's provision for coordinating OEM deviations with the customer?

a. Yes, the Government confirms that sourced serviceable or surplus material meeting original OEM specifications is an acceptable fulfillment to the contract.

22. Page L-1 states “Please submit separately for the Solicitation requirements and the

DO1 requirements concurrently (Separate responses but both required at the same time)”, however page L-4 states that the Initial Delivery Order Logistics Plan (RFP Attachment 3) should be included as part of Volume 1.

Can the government please clarify how offerors are to submit this Logistics Plan?

Should it be included as part of Volume 1 and submitted separately as a standalone document? If submitted as a standalone document, is there a page limit?

a. RFP Attachment 3; the Initial Delivery Order Logistics plan is to be submitted concurrently as a standalone document at the same time as the other items in Volume 1. As per DO1 there is no listed page limit for the Logistics Plan.

23. Similarly, can the government confirm that the contents for the Logistics Support

Plan/Initial Delivery Order Logistics Plan/RFP Attachment 3 DO1 (The naming convention for the plan is listed out differently across Section L) is a written response to “1.3 Technical Requirements” in the same format as Volumes I-III?

a. The Written response to “1.3 Technical Requirements” Can be written in the same format as the response to Volumes I-III.

24. Page L-2 states that the pages for Volume II and III must not exceed 30 pages.

Are offerors free to break up the page number requirements as they wish and allot each volume pages as they see fit, or are offerors to split the pages evenly across each volume (i.e., 15 pages for Volume II and 15 pages for Volume III)?

a. Offerors are free to break up the 30 pages as they wish and allot each volume pages as they see fit.

25. Page L-4 states that offerors can provide either “a list of powertrain components they have previously overhauled; OR a list of parts that have been previously delivered on other contracts relevant”. Are offerors free to submit both?

a. Yes, Offerors are free to submit lists of both items in question to support their proposals.

26. Can the government confirm that the “Email containing Word/PDF/Excel Documents” language listed under the “Proposal Compliance Items” section on page L-5 is just to reference offeror’s submission email or email confirming DoD SAFE submission?

a. The wording that stipulates the email containing Word/PDF/Excel documents refers to the offeror’s submission email.

27. Is there a margin size requirement?

a. No, there is no listed margin size requirement for the submissions.