FA8213-16-R-3047_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

Date: July 8, 2016

The following are contractor questions/comments and the Government’s responses that arose from solicitation FA8213‐16‐R‐3047:

Contractor’s Question/Comment A significant number of years have passed since the contractor has last made the units solicited and not knowing the condition of the units to be remanufactured it may be more cost effective to manufacture new items.

Government’s Response At this time the Government only has funding for the remanufacture of the units rather than manufacture new units.

Contractor’s Question/Comment The contractor has not previously refurbished the units solicited and will required no‐recurring expenses for paperwork which would be amortized into the pricing.

Government’s Response The Government understands that if a contractor has not previously refurbished/remanufactured this item that a first article expense and possible non‐recurring expenses will be added into the unit price. Please include such expenses into your company’s proposal.

Contractor’s Question/Comment The contractor manufactures a similar part as the one solicited. If Hill is able to replace the part solicited with the part the contractor currently manufactures there would be very little non‐recurring expenses cost and a lower overall price.

Government’s Response Contractors may include in their proposal different part numbers and the cost to work out the procedures necessary for the alternate part to replace the one listed in the solicitation. Such proposed change procedures will be evaluated. Please note that this is still intended to be a remanufactured item and a first article will still be necessary.