Industry Questions_16 Mar.pdf

How many DO/TOs does the government anticipate each year?

Unknown at this time

What percentage of DO/TOs does the government anticipate being FFP?

While the Government does not have a percentage, this effort will be predominately FFP, and contract type will be noted within the specific Requests for Delivery Order Proposals at the Delivery Order (DO) level

Is there a minimum number of DO/TOs that need to be quoted? Example – awardees must quote at least 90% of DOs issued.

There is not minimum number of DOs that need to be quoted.

How are the delivery schedules / performance periods developed? (e.g., past history, independent govt.

estimate, etc.)

This will be developed at the Delivery Order Level based on market conditions at that time.

How will the Program Office evaluate performance over time to include vendors that agree to delivery schedules and repeatedly deliver late?

Whether or not past performance will be an evaluation factor will be addressed within the Request for Delivery Orders or Delivery Order Level.

Concurrency states that Contractor may be awarded similar DOs to multiple PEO GCS customers to meet concurrent requirements. Are these logical follow-on requirements and are not competed under Fair Opportunity? Please clarify what these will entail.

The DOs are planned to be Fair Opportunity. This statement states that multiple DOs for similar items could be issued if a need is out there after another DO is issued or awarded.

Are commercial items allowed through the program?

This is a non-commercial contract, however there could be commercial items included as part of specified kits or assemblies.

Can additional Army customers use the contract? Can DOD customers from other branches use the contract?

PEO GCS customers listed in the Statement of Work will be allowed to use this contract during its lifecycle.

L.4.1.4 states that recent contracts are those performed within three years of the date of issuance of the RFP. Is the expectation that the contractor has complete the effort or can it be ongoing? Is a Delivery Order completed under an ongoing contract acceptable to meet the task completed criteria as stated in L.4.1.5?

Section L.4.1.3 - Definition of Contract for the Technical Experience Factor states “Indefinite Delivery Contracts (FAR Subpart 16.5), Basic Ordering Agreements (BOA), Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPA), and Federal Supply Schedules (FSS) are written instruments that typically DO NOT demonstrate actual performance, and as such, would not meet the definition of a Contract. Written instruments considered to demonstrate actual performance may include a single task or delivery order, a single work directive/technical instruction, or a single definite quantity contract provided it demonstrates a distinct effort was actually performed.”

If a Delivery order is what demonstrates actual performance of the effort the offeror is proposing for its Technical Experience proposal, then that Delivery Order would be considered a “Contract” for this evaluation, and would need to be Recent (as defined by L.4.1.4) in order to be considered in the evaluation. L.4.1.4 defines a Recent Contract as “those performed within three years of the date of issuance of this Request for Proposal (RFP).” Therefore, if this Delivery Order is still ongoing, it can meet the definition of a Recent Contract. However Offerors are reminded to be cognizant that uncompleted tasks on the Contract does not meet the RFP definition of recent experience (See L.4.1.5), and thus would not be considered (See M.4.1.1).

C.1 states “the Fielding Agile Supplies, Support, and Training (FASST) contract is intended for Delivery Order (DO) requirements that call for the contractor to produce Hardware, Electrical or Electronic components to support Upgrades (Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs), Modification Work Orders (MWO), Pre-Fielding failures), Training equipment and Test equipment, and only Incidental Services” Does the government intend to only award to manufacturers or are resellers also eligible?

The Government intends to award to all qualifying Offerors.

Per M.1.1.2: Proposal selection will be made on a best value basis, which is defined as a proposal that is considered to be technically acceptable in all Evaluation Factors (See M.4) and conforms to the requirements of the solicitation. Contract award will be made to all qualifying Offerors. A qualifying Offeror is one that submits a proposal that is considered to be technically acceptable that conforms to the requirements of the solicitation, and is otherwise eligible for award (See M.1.2 – Eligibility)

Please refer to Section M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD for additional details.

Can the government clarify what kinds of equipment will be purchased under this contract beyond “Hardware, Electrical or Electronic components to support Upgrades”?

Per Section C.3.4 general requirements to be supported to include any component(s) within the PEO GCS ground vehicle Techinical Data Packages (TDP). Specific requirements will be identified at the delivery order level to include but not limited to:

Metal Manufacturing: Each DO awarded hereunder may include a SOW specifying articles made of metal for fixtures, equipment, tools, and or devices of an object, vehicle, or platform. This may include but not limited to Interior Blast Mitigation Doors, Underbody Armor kits, Right angle gear box prop shafts, Towing and Tie down upgrades.

Assembly: Each DO awarded hereunder may include a SOW specifying articles that may require assembly of sub components into a system. This may include but not limited to Neutral Safety Switch and steering lock modifications, Battery Disconnect and Power tool Accessory Systems, Improved Power Take off Quick Disconnect Assembly, and Auxiliary Power Unit equipment.

Electronic components: Each DO awarded hereunder may include a SOW specifying computers and its components and related equipment such as hardware, disk drives, integrated circuits, display screens, cables, modems,software (to include firmware) or other components the contracting officer deems electronic in nature. This may include but not limited to Eyesafe Laser Rangefinders, Mission Control Units, Improved Fire Control Electronics Units, Situational Awareness components, LED Gauge Panel equipment.

Will companies with current CAS certifications be rated more highly?

No, companies with current CAS certification will not be rated more highly

How many awards does the government anticipate?

Unknown at this time

What Federal Stock Classes will be allowed to go through the contract?

There is no defined Federal Supply Codes for this contract.

Will DO/TOs be FOB Origin or Destination?

This will be detailed within the various delivery orders

Can the Program Office expand / define explanation of “substantiating” documents that support the technical proposal? For example, are slides and graphs part of the 10-page narrative limit or considered substantiating documents?

Substantiating documents are those documents specifically requested throughout Section L.4.1, for example L.4.6.1.6.4 paragraph (g) and (h).

Can a title page, table of contents, list of figures, and list of tables be excluded from the 10-page limit for Volume 1?

No, these are included within the 10 page limit

How will contractors be expected to handle impacts to delivery due to supply chain delays or other factors out of their control?

This will have to be handled at the DO level and brought to the PCO and CORs attention.

How will the government verify that items classify as “Army Class IX repair parts” for purposes of evaluating an offeror’s technical experience factor?

The Government will utilize information requested in the proposal, to include the USG kit number, USG part number, or an USG NSN, as part of the evaluation of the Technical Experience. See M.4.1.1.2.1.

What monetary value does an offeror’s previous experience need to have in order for it to be evaluated as “comparable” for purposes of technical experience factor evaluations?

The Government is not evaluating a specific dollar value, and will evaluated Technical Experience Factor IAW M.4.1 of the RFP.

At the time of award, would awardee be required to have finalized CMMC audit?

A finalized CMMC audit is not required at time of award

Will an “Enterprise-wide” SSP be required?

- No

If SSP is required, will this requirement need to be flowed down to subcontractors for an individual delivery order?

If SSP is required yes, it would be flowed down to subcontractors

Is CSDR applicable to Small Business concerns? If not, will Small Businesses only be eligible for FFP awards?

Yes, this is applicable to Small Business concerns if CSDR is requested as part of a DO.

Will the PFMEAs and Control Plan requirements be for both the contractor and the suppliers/subcontractors?

This applies to the prime. See ISO 9001 for externally procured services/product requirements.

Will the CoQ Program requirement flow down to subcontractors?

This is a requirement for the prime, however, there could be a risk of reporting inaccurate information if information isn’t provided by the sub(s).

For Section E.2 What will be required to report to the Gov’t and at what level?

All CDRLs will be required to be delivered to the requiring office, see each individual CDRL for details on POCs, content, and frequency

What will be required to report up from the subcontractors?

See ISO 9001 for all-inclusive requirements.

L.4.2.1 As a disadvantaged Small Business, do we still have to submit a Small Business Participation Plan that is a part of Volume 2?

Yes, per L.4.2.1: All Offerors (Large and Small Businesses) shall submit Attachment 003 which identifies a list of one or more small business concern(s)(which includes the subcategories of Small Disadvantaged Business, Women-Owned SB, HUBZone SB, Veteran-Owned SB and Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned SB) that it commits to providing, to the maximum extent practicable, opportunities for performance under this contract. SB Offerors may meet this requirement using work they perform themselves.

What are the anticipated Gov’t sites where work will be performed?

If applicable, it will be indicated at the Request for Delivery Order Proposal.

How will delivery orders be procured? What methods will be used (credit cards, BPO…etc.)?

Delivery Orders will be procured via Firm Fixed-Price (FFP) or Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) and billed through WAWF.

How many businesses will be awarded in each pool (Full-open, Restricted)?

This will be at the discretion of the Contracting Officer, IAW H.3.1 & H.3.1.2

Will the contract be limited to hardware? Will software procurement be added in the future?

This effort is limited to hardware only, however software could be provided as part of certain hardware requirements.

Will awardees ever be required to store purchased hardware?

There is not requirement to store purchased hardware

Will a facility clearance be required?

Facility clearance may be needed, however this will be indicated within the specific delivery order

Is there potential to segregate the Small Business pool?

Yes, Per Section H.2.1 FASST MA IDIQ contracts will consist of two pools: a restricted pool and a full and open pool. The restricted pool will be comprised of only Small Business (SB) contractors, and the Government will evaluate only SB offerors for inclusion in this pool. The full and open pool will be comprised of all Other-Than-Small Business (OTSB) offerors, and the Government will evaluate only OTSB offerors for inclusion in this pool. After award of a MA IDIQ contract, SBs may submit a proposal in response to a competitive delivery order request issued for either the restricted pool or the full and open pool. OTSBs may only submit a proposal in response to competitive delivery orders issued for the full and open pool.

Will the Army consider designating a separate pool for Veteran-owned Small Businesses?

The USG is only planning to have SB and OTSB pool IAW Section H.2.1. However, IAW H.3.1 Delivery Orders competitions may be set aside for the restricted pool (comprised of only SBs) IAW FAR 19.502- 4(c). Depending on the mix of contractors that receive MA IDIQ contracts, the SBSAs may be reviewed for opportunities to further set aside the requirements for specific sub-categories of SBs, (e.g., Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone), Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB).

Has the Army considered HUBZone businesses as a separate designation?

The USG is only planning to have SB and OTSB pool IAW Section H.2.1. However, IAW H.3.1 Delivery Orders competitions may be set aside for the restricted pool (comprised of only SBs) IAW FAR 19.502- 4(c). Depending on the mix of contractors that receive MA IDIQ contracts, the SBSAs may be reviewed for opportunities to further set aside the requirements for specific sub-categories of SBs, (e.g., Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone), Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business