RFP_Q A_20160916.pdf

Question 141: This morning we also noted that on page 4 of Amendment 1 FAR 52.222-54 was added by reference and then deleted in the next paragraph. We were not sure if this was purposeful or if the deletion was supposed to refer to the Aug 2013 version which was included in the original solicitation as opposed to the Oct 2015 version which is what was added and then deleted in Amendment 1.

Answer 141: This clause was deleted in error via Amendment 0001 and thus added back in under the same solicitation amendment. Refer to page 4 of Amendment 0001.

Question 142: PWS 6.3.3, Question/Answer #5, 9-9-2016

The PWS states “As most calls will be to U.S. locations or U.S. installations in OCONUS, the Government prefers to see the following pricing structure for these services: (1) calls placed to U.S.

locations (including Alaska and Hawaii); (2) calls placed to OCONUS U.S. installations, and (3) calls placed to the rest of the world. Pricing for service options (1) and (2) shall not exceed $0.04 per minute of call time. Pricing for service option (3) shall be at standard competitive global rates.”

There is no material difference between items (2) and (3). International long distance carriers do not differentiate between calls placed to OCONUS US Installations and other numbers in the same country.

Surveying more than 800 International countries and cities globally through a number of vendors, the rate for 500 of the 800 is in excess of $.04 per minute. Many of the rates range from $2.00 to $13.00 per minute. Service men and women calling from an ICP to family living off-post (OCONUS) will not be eligible for item (1) calling.

Question 142a: Will the Government clarify the requirement for item (2)?

Question 142b: Based on any clarification, will the Government modify or remove item (2)?

Answer 142: a: Yes, the Government has revised the PWS to reflect the $0.04 per minute to apply to calls made to U.S. locations. Refer to PWS Paragraph 6.3.3.

b: The Government has revised the PWS to reflect the $0.04 per minute to apply to calls made to U.S. locations. Refer to PWS Paragraph 6.3.3.

Question 143: Question/Answer #80, 9-9-2016 FAR 52.215-21 Alt IV(b)

FAR 52.215-21 Alt IV(b) instructs the Contracting Officer to, “[Insert description of the data and the format that are required, including access to records necessary to permit an adequate evaluation of the proposed price in accordance with 15.403-3.]” In reviewing 15.403-3, the clause states the Contracting Officer “shall specify in the solicitation…(3) Any requirement for data other than certified cost or pricing data.”.

Will the Government clarify this requirement and stipulate what data other than certified cost or pricing data is to be submitted with the offeror’s proposal?

Answer 143: In accordance with Section L, Paragraph 5.1.3 Pricing Information Requirements, “it is anticipated that pricing of this action will be based on adequate price competition; therefore, offerors are not required to submit certified cost or pricing data. If, after receipt of proposals, the Contracting Officer determines the required conditions of adequate competition do not exist, that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness, and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the offeror may be required to certify its submitted cost or pricing…”

The Offeror shall complete the pricing template for the proposal submission. If the Contracting Officer determines after receipt of proposal(s) that adequate price competition is lacking, the Contracting Officer will then request Other than certified cost or pricing data from the Offeror(s).

Question 144: I kindly request clarification as to whether the U.S. government will act as an “Importer/Exporter of Record” for the MWR-ICP requirement?

While the RFP and Q&A clearly state that the US government does not seek to take “title” to the equipment, from a Customs compliance standpoint it is possible for the US government to nevertheless be the Importer/Exporter of Record and not take title to the equipment. If the US government intends to be the Importer/Exporter of Record (I/EoR), the equipment should be excluded from local duties taxation.

But if the US government is not the I/EoR, then normal commercial terms apply and the E/IoR will have to pay local import duty, tax, etc. (where applicable). In addition, it’s reasonable to suspect that there may be also be a considerably higher risk of delay and even denial of entry into some countries without this protection in place.

To encourage maximum competition for this requirement, [offeror] requests that the US government serve as the E/IoR for this requirement.

Answer 144: The Government will not act as an Importer/Exporter of Record for services provided under this contract.