(6Oct20) Consolidated RFP QAs - M67004-20-R-0007 (Amendment 1).docx

FINAL RFP Questions/Comments

1. RFP, PWS, Reference 2.3, Key Personnel Definition, Page 12:

Program Manager (PM): The PM has overall responsibility of the Program and collaborates with the government on Strategic and Continuous Process Improvement (CPI) efforts aimed at improving the program and support of the government customer.

The PM must have at least 10 years of experience and possess a Bachelor’s degree or 5 years of experience with a Master’s Degree.

Clarification and Recommendation:

Traditionally with government procurements, experience is allowed to be a substitute for formal education. Even with highly technical positions, numerous agencies will accept key personnel with directly applicable work experience instead of a generic degree. The way this requirement is written someone with a degree in education is more qualified than a career military officer with a specialty in logistics. Recently an Executive order has been signed for the purpose of modernization Government hiring practices that allows direct work experience to be substituted for education. Key points of this executive order is provided below:

· The President is signing an Executive Order requiring Federal agencies to focus hiring on the skills job seekers possess, rather than focusing on whether they earned a college degree.

· The order requires Federal agencies to revise and update outdated Federal job qualification standards and candidate assessments, improving the quality and competency of the civil service.

· Unnecessary degree requirements exclude otherwise qualified Americans from Federal employment, impose the expense of college on prospective workers, and disproportionately harm low-income Americans.

· The order implements best practices already adopted by private sector leaders to promote equity and inclusion.

· As a result of this reform, talented individuals with apprenticeships, technical training, and apt backgrounds will have greater opportunity to pursue careers in the Federal civil service.

We recommend that LOGCOM alter the SECREP PWS requirement to allow direct work experience to be substituted for higher level education. Recommended change is written below:

Response: Section 2.3 of the PWS will be revised as follows: The education for the PM, OM, SM, and ITM will be removed. The minimum years of experience will be as follows: 1) PM and OM – 10 years, 2) SM – 7 years, and 3) ITM – 5 years.

2. Solicitation Section L: A Draft Transition Plan is required to be submitted in Binder I: Technical, Section 4. Submission of a Draft Transition Plan is also identified in Binder V: Contract Documentation, paragraph d.2. (Page 46) and under Binder V (Page 51).

Question: Is the Draft Transition Plan submitted in Binder I for the proposal, and then the Final Transition Plan (provided 3 days after the post award conference) added to Binder V when it is incorporated into the contract? Please clarify if the Draft Transition Plan is required to be submitted with the proposal in both Binder I and Binder V.

Response: Submission of the Draft Transition Plan is only to be in Binder I – Technical. The Solicitation has been revised to remove the requirement from Binder V and to require the Draft Transition Plan in Binder I – Technical.

3. Solicitation Attachment 1-PWS, paragraph 4.5.2, Page 17: Subject paragraph requires the awardee submit a list of personnel issued keys to the LIS PMO in accordance with CDRL A001, however, CDRL A001 is related to NSN Change Requests.

Question: Can the Government review the Key Control requirement and provide the correct CDRL if necessary?

Response: The reference to CDRL A001 in paragraph 4.5.2 of PWS has been removed. While para 4.5.2 provides “The Contractor shall develop procedures addressing key control to be included in the Quality Control Plan (QCP),” there is no CDRL for the QCP as the QCP is required as part of the proposal. As identified in the PWS paragraph 4.5.2, a final list of all Contractor personnel issued keys will be submitted to the LIS PMO no later than one (1) day prior to Day 1 Ready.

4. Solicitation Attachment 1, PWS Paragraph 4.5.5, Page 18: PWS states that when hiring permanent replacement Key personnel, the contractor will provide a resume (without name) to the COR to obtain written concurrence from the Contracting Officer.

Question: Please clarify if the Government requires the offerors to submit Key personnel resumes in their proposal in accordance with Binder I, Section 1, subparagraph c (Page 47) without names?

Response: All resumes shall be submitted without names. Section L Binder I, Section 1, subparagraph c has been revised to require resumes be submitted without names.

5. Solicitation Attachment 2, Pricing Workbook:

Question: Does the Government plan to provide a revised Attachment 2, Pricing Workbook, that reflects the current elimination of tanks and vehicles due to Force Design 2030?

Response: The Government does not plan to provide a revised Attachment 2 – Pricing Workbook. The Pricing Workbook is current as of the release of the Solicitation.

6. Page 43 of the RFP: There are a number of contractors involved in the execution of the current SECREP management program. Similarly, the successful contractor under this award may not employ directly or as subcontractors, individuals or firms who are actively involved in the administration of this program absent an acceptable OCI plan.

Request the Government insert "under this contract" between "may not employ" and "directly or as a subcontractor". This addition makes it clear that the prohibition applies only to this contract and not all contracts.

Response: The Government added “under this contract” as addressed in the question.

7. Page 43 of the RFP: Disclose any potential or actual organizational conflicts of interest (OCIs) that your company (to include subcontractors) may have in the requirements of the PWS/solicitation.

Please confirm that this applies to subcontractors that may be performing the logistics services and not the suppliers performing the repairs.

Response: This only applies to subcontractors performing the logistics services, not to suppliers performing the repairs.

8. Page 49 of the RFP, Minimum qualifications for Key Personnel:

Request the Government allow for 5 additional years equivalent experience or military experience in lieu of a bachelor's degree for the Program Manager. Traditionally, in most Government RFPS, experience, especially military experience, is generally an acceptable substitution for education.

Response: See the response to question 1.

9. Attachment 10: Proposal Adequacy Checklist lists the Quality Control Plan as part of Binder V Contracts Documentation. Page 47 Section 1. d. for Binder I requires the contractor to address the Quality Control Plan.

Question: Where does the Government want the QCP?

Response: Submission of the Quality Control Plan is to be in Binder I – Technical. The Solicitation has been revised to remove the requirement from Binder V and to require the Quality Control Plan in Binder I – Technical.

10. Attachment 10: There are some inconsistencies in Section L and M to the Attachment 10 Proposal Adequacy checklist - Transition plan, CESP, and QCP.

Please clarify.

Response: Submission of the Draft Transition Plan and Quality Control Plan are to be in Binder I – Technical. The Solicitation has been revised to remove the requirements from Binder V and to require the Draft Transition Plan and Quality Control Plan only in Binder I – Technical. Attachment 10 has been revised to be consistent with Solicitation Sections L & M.

11. 52.216-19 ORDER LIMITATIONS (OCT 1995)

(a) Minimum order. When the Government requires supplies or services covered by this contract in an amount of less than $5,000.00 (insert dollar figure or quantity), the Government is not obligated to purchase, nor is the Contractor obligated to furnish, those supplies or services under the contract.

(b) Maximum order. The Contractor is not obligated to honor -

(1) Any order for a single item in excess of $100,000.00 (insert dollar figure or quantity);

(2) Any order for a combination of items in excess of $495,000,000.00 (insert dollar figure or quantity); or

(3) A series of orders from the same ordering office within 30 days that together call for quantities exceeding the limitation in paragraph (b) (1) or (2) of this section.

(c) If this is a requirements contract (i.e., includes the Requirements clause at subsection 52.216-21 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)), the Government is not required to order a part of any one requirement from the Contractor if that requirement exceeds the maximum-order limitations in paragraph (b) of this section.

(d) Notwithstanding paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, the Contractor shall honor any order exceeding the maximum order limitations in paragraph (b), unless that order (or orders) is returned to the ordering office within 60 days after issuance, with written notice stating the Contractor's intent not to ship the item (or items) called for and the reasons. Upon receiving this notice, the Government may acquire the supplies or services from another source.

Question: The threshold in paragraph (b)(1) of $100,000 appears extremely low. Due to the increased throughput from $50M-$90M per year, we recommend the Government increase the single item price to be $1,500,000.

Response: This amount will be changed to reflect the order ceiling for each location.

12. 252.237-7023 CONTINUATION OF ESSENTIAL CONTRACTOR SERVICES (OCT 2010)

(b) The Government has identified all or a portion of the contractor services performed under this contract as essential contractor services in support of mission-essential functions. These services are listed in Performance Work Statement (PWS) 4.7 The Continuation of Essential Services Plan, dated 28 August 2020.

(c)(1) The Mission-Essential Contractor Services Plan submitted by the Contractor, is incorporated in this contract.

(2) The Contractor shall maintain and update its plan as necessary. The Contractor shall provide all plan updates to the Contracting Officer for approval.

Question: Which is required the CESP or the MECS or are they interchangeable?

Response: The plans are the same. The title MECS was changed to CESP. The clause has been changed to be consistent and now references the Continuation of Essential Services Plan (CESP).

13. RFP Section L L- Proposal Comment (Page. 45 of 60)

Question: Is the completed excel Pricing Workbook, Attachment 2, excluded from the 10 page Price Proposal limitation? The Pricing Workbook exceeds the 10 page limitation.

Response: Attachment 2 – Pricing Workbook will not count towards the page count of Binder IV. Section L, Factor Responses, Binder IV – Price Proposal has been revised to exclude Attachment 2 – Pricing Workbook from the page count of Binder IV.

14. Cover page of the RFP: Block 1 provides for the DPAS rating which is blank

Comment: Please provide the DPAS rating for this procurement. Suggested rating would be DOA4 Tank/Automotive.

Response: RFP will be updated to reflect DPAS Rating of DOA4.

15. Section L, Page 45, Binder III: SMALL BUSINESS

a. The Offeror shall address the two (2) sections listed below.

b. A table of contents is REQUIRED and all response pages and paragraphs shall be sequentially numbered, even if that page is left blank.

c. The Cover Sheet, Table of Contents and the Section Divider Tabs shall not be considered part of the page limit. Table of Contents shall be numbered, i, ii, iii, to differentiate from the response pages.

Section 1: Small Business Participation Plan, for small and large businesses.

Section 2: Subcontracting Plan, for large businesses only.

Comment: The Subcontracting Plan as required by FAR 52.219-9 and DFAR 252.219-7003 requires multiple areas be addressed to have an adequate plan. Further, most large businesses plans are already submitted and signed by the Contractor and DCMA. These plans consistently are over the 16 page limit established for this binder. Request the Small Business Subcontracting Plan be excluded from the page count since small businesses are not required to submit the Small Business Plan. In the alternate, increase the page count to 38 pages or have the Subcontracting Plan be provided in Binder 5.

Response: The Government has increased the page limit for Binder III – Small business to 40 pages.

16. Section L: The Past Performance and Technical binders are required to be submitted with a redacted copy to exclude any branding or names. In both binders, it will obvious who the incumbent is due to the transition plan, key personnel, IT tracking system and past performance citations.

Request the Government delete the requirement for both or either redacted copies of the Technical and Past Performance binders.

Response: The Government requires Redacted and Original copies of both the Technical and Past Performance Binders as noted in the final RFP released on 16 Sep 2020.

17. PWS 5.4, Contract Turn Around Time, Page 28: Contractual Turn Around Times: The Government will grant relief from items missing KTAT with Justifiable reasons. Reasons for granting relief include: FEDMAIL backorder, ATAC shipping delays, acts of nature, and any delays due to the fault of the Government to: include delays associate with management Control Activity (MCA) processing. Contractor’s vendor backorders, vendor capacity, and equipment failure are not considered acceptable reasons for relief.

Comment: We recommend that relief from KTAT be considered for items that are outside the control of the integrator due to Government directed sourcing/sole source that impact capacity in surge, as well as directed source equipment failure or directed source repair part backorders.

Response: The Government will not grant relief from KTAT for directed/sole sources, surge capacity, directed source equipment failure, or directed source repair part backorders.

18. Final RFP M67004-20-R-0007, Section L, pg. 46, 51: Concerning Binder V Contract Documentation – ISO Certification for the following items:

4. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Certification or Equivalent. The Offeror shall provide copies of their ISO 9001:2008 or higher certification or equivalent. (Omission of the minimum ISO 9001:2008 certification or equivalent may result in the Offeror being unacceptable.)

Question: Could a Prime Contractor that teams with a subcontractor that holds the required ISO certifications fulfill the ISO certification requirements?

Response: No, the Government requires that the Prime Contractor meet ISO certification requirements.

19. Final RFP M67004-20-R-0007, Section L, Pages 46, 48: Concerning Binder V Contract Documentation – DD 254 In addition, the Offeror shall explain how they plan to have a “SECRET” contractor facility on Day 1 Ready of contract performance.

5. Complete Solicitation/RFP Attachment 6 Security Requirements form DD254. The offer shall submit a completed DD Form 254

Could the Government confirm if the Prime contractor must hold a current Secret level Facility Security Clearance Level (FCL) to be eligible for award?

Question: To meet the following requirement, will the Government sponsor a contractor to obtain a Secret Facility Security Clearance?

Response: No, the Government will not sponsor a contractor to obtain a Secret Facility Security Clearance. The contractor is not required to hold a Secret Facility Security Clearance by time of award to be eligible for award.

20. Final RFP M67004-20-R-0007, Section L, Page 47, Draft Transition Plan (Phase In):

The proposal instructions require the Draft Transition Plan to be included in two separate Binders.

Question: Could the Government confirm that the Draft Transition Plan (Phase In) is to be included in both the Binder I, Technical Proposal, Section 4; also in Binder V: Contract documentation, requirement 2?

Response: Submission of the Draft Transition Plan is only to be in Binder I – Technical. The Solicitation has been revised to remove the requirement from Binder V and to require the Draft Transition Plan in Binder I – Technical. See answer to Question 2.

21. RFP Sections A-M, FAR Clauses, Page 17:

PWS 2.3 Pg. 23

Question: Will the Government provide current labor categories, in addition to key personnel, and identify which are SCA labor categories on the program? Also, is the workforce in place today currently represented by a union and if so, is there a supporting Collective Bargaining Agreement that can be shared?

Response: No, labor categories for non-key personnel will not be provided. Each offer is required to address the staffing plan in the Management Approach. The “workforce” reference is unclear. If the question is based on “Government employee workforce”, certain positions are covered by a union which is supported by a Collective Bargaining Agreement. A connection between the Government employee Collective Bargaining Agreement(s) to the LIS contract has not been established and therefore will not be shared. If the question is based on “Contractor employee workforce” being covered by a union and sharing any such Collective Bargaining Agreement, the Government can’t provide that information to interested parties. Union covered contractor employees should be determined by each Offeror. Therefore, no, there is not a supporting Collective Bargaining Agreement that can be shared.

22. RFP Sections A-M, FAR Clauses, Page 17:

PWS 2.3 Page 23

Question: Is there a Collective Bargaining Agreement in place at any of the places of performance?

Response: There are no collective bargaining agreements that apply to the current contract.

23. RFP Section F, Page 10:

Question: Will the Government provide an Option period (June 1, 2026 through November 30, 2026) for CLIN 0007 - ODCs?

Response: Yes, Schedule B will be updated to reflect an option period.

24. RFP, Attachment 10, Proposal Checklist, Section L, Page 44:

The RFP states "All pricing information shall be addressed ONLY in the Price Proposal binder."

Question: Will the Government please clarify if in addition to percentages, dollar values are also required in the Small Business Binder. If so, please modify this requirement to allow for total proposed price information to be included for the Small Business Participation Plan and Subcontracting Plan?

Response: The Government can only require percentages in the Small Business Participation Plan. The Government requires both percentages and dollar values in the Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Dollar values in the small business binder shall be expressed as total dollars subcontracted. The Government has revised Section L Pricing Instructions to state “Dollar values as required in the Subcontracting Plan by FAR 52.219-9 and DFAR 252.219-7003 may be permitted in Binder III only as it relates to the Small Business Binder.”

25. RFP, Section L, Page 44:

Question: Will the Government 1) allow for both a Cost Narrative (MS Word or pdf) and Pricing Workbook (MS Excel) to be included as part of Binder II - Price Proposal? 2) remove the page limit for Binder II - Price Proposal?

Response: Yes, the Government will allow for both a cost narrative and the Pricing Workbook. Attachment 2 – Pricing Workbook will not count towards the page count of Binder IV. Section L, Factor Responses, Binder IV – Price Proposal has been revised to exclude Attachment 2 – Pricing Workbook from the page count of Binder IV.

26. RFP, Section L, Table 1, Page 45:

Question: Would the Government remove the page limit for the Small Business Binder (Small Business Participation Plan, Subcontracting Plan)?

Response: The Government has increased the page limit for Binder III – Small business to 40 pages. See answer to question 15.

27. RFP, Section L and Section M, Table 1, Pages 45-46, 51, 54:

The Draft Transition Plan (Phase In) has been identified as required in both Binder I - Technical and Binder V - Contract Documents.

Question: Will the Government please specify in which Binder should this plan be included?

Response: Submission of the Draft Transition Plan is only to be in Binder I – Technical. The Solicitation has been revised to remove the requirement from Binder V and to require the Draft Transition Plan in Binder I – Technical. See answer to question 2.

28. RFP, Section L, Pages 46, 51:

Page 46, states the Offeror is required to complete and include Attachment 10 - Proposal Adequacy Checklist with Binder V - Contract Documentation. The checklist states that the KO and CS will evaluate and complete the checklist.

Question: Please confirm that the Offeror is required to complete this checklist. If so, is 1) the date of evaluations the same as proposal due date? 2) Is evaluator the Offeror company name? The instruction states "evaluator's full name". Page 50-51 does not list Attachment 10 as required for Binder V.

Response: The Offeror is not required to complete the evaluation forms or the checklist. The evaluation forms are to be completed by Government personnel during the adequacy check and the Section M evaluations.

29. RFP, Section L , Page 49:

Question: For the SB Participation Plan, is the Government just looking for SB participation percentages or dollar values as well?

Response: For the Small Business Participation Plan, the Government is only looking for small business participation percentages.

30. RFP, Section M, Page 55:

For Factor 2, Past Performance, the Government states that “The Government will consider past performance information of an Offeror as a prime contractor to be more relevant than information submitted for the Offeror as a subcontractor."

Question: Will the Government please explain how the prime's past performance will the weighted and scored in terms of relevancy versus a subcontractor’s past performance?

Response: The Government will subjectively evaluate the Offeror’s Past Performance in accordance with the Solicitation. The Government will consider past performance information of an Offeror as a prime contractor to be more relevant than information submitted for the Offeror as a subcontractor unless the Offeror can demonstrate Past Performance as a subcontractor on efforts of similar size, scope, and complexity that the Offeror will be able to perform the requirements outlined in this solicitation. .

31. PWS 1.3, Page 4:

The PWS states the program is to provide ROR and / or TD&E of Marine Corps Ground Equipment. With the recent announcement that the Marine Corps will decommission all its Tank Units and transfer numerous M1A1 MBTs, M88A2 Recovery Vehicles, and AVLBs to the U.S. Army.

Question: Will the Government consider amending the NSNs listed in Attachment 2 (Pricing Workbook) to remove these armored NSNs or adjust the Level of Effort on these items?

Response: The Government does not plan to provide a revised Attachment 2 – Pricing Workbook. The Pricing Workbook is current as of the release of the Solicitation.

32. PWS 4.1, Page 17:

Internet is listed as Contractor Furnished Equipment.

Question: Will the Government allow the Contractor to connect to commercial internet in Government buildings?

Response: Yes, the Government will allow the Contractor to connect to commercial internet in Government buildings.

33. PWS 4.8.1, Page 23:

Question: Will the Government require the incumbent provide a file from their LIS so the Awardee can import the data to preserve maintenance history and assist in building the Awardee's LIS database?

Response: No, the Government will not require the incumbent to provide a file to the Awardee.

34. PWS 5.2, Page 27:

Question: Will Contractor be party to Engineering Change Plan (ECP) approval by the Government that changes configuration?

Response: No, the Contractor is not a party to ECP approval by the Government. PWS section 5.2 has been updated to explain the process for ECP approval.

35. PWS 5.2, Page 27:

Question: Will configuration changes be considered repair or Over and Above (O&A) actions for items in repair?

Response: Configuration changes are not O&A actions. PWS section 5.2 explains the Configuration Change Process.

36. PWS 5.3, Page 27:

Question: Will the Contractor be provided with a list of items considered Mission Essential so that these items can be given priority processing?

Response: No, all inductions are considered mission essential. PWS Section 5.4 has been updated to address expedite requests.

37. PWS 5.4, Page 28, Contractual Turn-Around-Time:

“In order to ensure mission readiness, the Marine Corps (MC) customer(s) has to make a readiness decision i.e., NSN repair using organic services, NSN repair using the LIS SECREP process, or procure a replacement NSN. The decision is primarily driven by the length of time it will take to get an item back in serviceable condition in support of the warfighter.”

Question: Please define organic services? Does it include organic Depots? If so, will the contractor have to compete with their TAT?

Response: Organic services is the Intermediate Maintenance Activities (IMA) and the Depots. No, the contractor does not compete with the organic (IMA and Depot) TAT.

38. PWS 5.4, Page 28:, Contractual Turn-Around-Time:

In order to ensure mission readiness, the Marine Corps (MC) customer(s) has to make a readiness decision i.e., NSN repair using organic services, NSN repair using the LIS SECREP process, or procure a replacement NSN. The decision is primarily driven by the length of time it will take to get an item back in serviceable condition in support of the warfighter.”

It is presumed all SECREP candidates itemized on the pricing attachment are historical SECREP repairs administered by the incumbent under the LIS SECREP process.

Question: Does any of that historical data include repairs performed by organic Depots?

Response: No, none of the historical data includes repairs performed by organic Depots.

39. PWS 5.4, Page 28, Contractual Turn-Around-Time:

“In order to ensure mission readiness, the Marine Corps (MC) customer(s) has to make a readiness decision i.e., NSN repair using organic services, NSN repair using the LIS SECREP process, or procure a replacement NSN. The decision is primarily driven by the length of time it will take to get an item back in serviceable condition in support of the warfighter.”

Question: When the decision is made to procure a replacement NSN, is the retrograde still provided to the contractor as a SECREP candidate?

Response: It is possible that the retrograde may still be provided to the Contractor as a SECREP candidate. LIS customers determine what items are inducted into LIS based on many factors.

40. PWS 5.8, Page 30:

Question: Will the Contractor be provided codification data and other documentation with the new National Stock Number (NSN) request?

Response: The contractor will be provided data/information adequate to evaluate adding new NSNs to the contract as described in PWS section 5.8.

41. PWS 5.14, Page 31:

Question: Will the Contractor be provided FMECA, LPD, FRACA or other relevant data necessary to perform RCA?

Response: For Root Cause Analysis (RCA), if the PMO has access to relevant data it will be provided to the Contractor if not proprietary information to the incumbent.

42. PWS 5.14, Page 31:

Question: What is the preferred standard/specification for Root Cause Analysis (RCA) performance?

Response: The Contractor will utilize their own method / process to monitor trends and data in support of RCA and trend analysis. The Government will not dictate the process for RCA / trend analysis to be utilized.

43. Section L, Pages 45-46: Contents of Binder I – Technical are noted as:

“Section 1: Experience managing the remanufacture, overhaul and repair (ROR) Section 2: Contractor-Owned, Contractor-Operated IT Tracking System Section 3: Experience Repairing & Handling Controlled Cryptographic Items (CCI) Section 4: Draft Transition Plan (Phase In) Section 5: Mission Readiness” Contents of Binder V – Contracts Documentation are noted as:

“1. Representations, Certifications, and Acknowledgments

Question: The Draft Transition Plan is a requirement of both Binder I and Binder V. Does the Government intend for this Plan to appear in both Binders? If not, will the Government please clarify which Binder should include the Draft Transition Plan?

Response: Submission of the Draft Transition Plan is only to be in Binder I – Technical. The Solicitation has been revised to remove the requirement from Binder V and to require the Draft Transition Plan in Binder I – Technical. See answer to question 2.

44. Section L, Page 10, Factor 3, Section 2, Paragraph B:

The Table shows: Minimum Quantitative Requirements by percentage for categories of small businesses.

Question: Will the Government please clarify whether the percentages are for subcontract dollar value or for the number of subcontracting actions? Also do the awards to small business subcategories count toward the overall small business percentage?

Response: The percentages are for the subcontracted dollar value. Yes, awards to small business subcategories count towards the overall small business percentage.

45. PWS, Paragraph 4.5.4: The Table shows: “Current Contract Space” and “Capacity Office Space”. These categories are open to interpretation.

Question: Will the Government please clarify what is meant by these two categories?

Response: Contract Space is the current number of occupants in the space provided. Capacity Office Space is the total capacity of office space that the current space can accommodate to be available to the Contractor. PWS 4.5.4 chart title “Current Contract Space” was changed to “Current Number of Occupants” for clarification purposes.

46. PWS Paragraph 5.7:

The last paragraph states: “While MILSTRIP format is currently effective in updating the Global Combat Support System–Marine Corps (GCSS-MC) files. In the event the MILSTRIP format becomes outdated, the Contractor will work with the Government to provide status updates in emerging current formats that can display in GCSS-MC.”

Question: Is there a forecast date as to when MILSTRIP may become outdated for updating GCSS- MC”?

Response: No, there is not a forecast date as to when MILSTRIP may become outdated for updating GCSS- MC.

47. Section G.4:

“When new Marine Corps Ground Equipment SECREP items of a type included on this contract other than replacements for items currently included in this contract require ROR, the contracting officer will make a determination as to whether the items are within the original scope of this contract based on their similarity to existing items in type, purpose…”

Question: Does this include components for new systems fielded? Will the Government provide a list or plan of potential new systems?

Response: Yes, as new systems are fielded and customer requirements develop, new NSNs may be added to the contract via the process for adding new NSNs in PWS Section 5.8.

48. Section G.5:

“The Contractor shall comply with all applicable contract clauses, including contract clause 52.215-21 Requirements for Cost or Pricing Data or Information Other Than Cost or Pricing Data-Modifications: Alternate III, for each modification expected to result in a unit price totaling in excess of $2,000,000…

Question: Does this value consider the price for NEW, or Repair, or Repair plus O&A?

Response: Yes, it includes all aspects.

49. Section G.6, Paragraph 3:

“When the Contractor discovers that Over and Above work, as defined in the subject clause and elsewhere in the contract, is required to return an item to the specified condition, the Contractor shall, within 5 working days…” The PWS states 7 calendar days. .

Question: Calendar days includes holidays, but working days does not. Will the Government please clarify?

Response: Calendar days includes holidays and weekends. The PWS accurately states 7 calendar days. Section G.6 Paragraph 3 has been revised to be consistent with the PWS and states 7 calendar days.

50. PWS Paragraph 1.3:

“When new items are fielded by the Marine Corps to replace similar items currently included in this contract, those replacement items shall be considered within the scope of this contract.”

Question: Will the Government please clarify if “new items” refers to new SYSTEMS or new COMPONENTS?

Does the Government have a plan to field new systems? If so, will the Government consider providing access for Offerors? Conversely, is there a phase out plan for current systems or components, either prior to contract award or during contract performance?

Response: New items could include those coming from new systems (containing new components) or already fielded systems where components are not yet on the LIS Contract. In either case, new NSNs may be added to the contract via the process for adding new NSNs in the PWS Section 5.8. The Government decides when to initiate an evaluation for adding a new item to the LIS Contract. The Offeror shall assume the Government does not plan to field new systems (containing new components) or already fielded systems where components are not yet on the LIS Contract prior to LIS Contract award. A supplemental agreement contract modification will be executed in the event new items (inclusive of new SYSTEMS and/or new COMPONENTS) are required in accordance with the terms of the LIS Contract. A plan will not be provided by the Government regarding phase out/phase in of systems.

51. PWS Paragraph 1.3.1:

The ZBE will be sent from the COR/COTR via facsimile, mail or electronic commerce (typically email) and will contain the following information, if applicable, consistent with the terms of the contract:

Is there a file for comments? Most important is the explanation of deficiency or discrepancy, which will allow for focused attention and improve KTAT.

Question: Will the component priority be provided? This will allow for focus and potentially expedited repair?

Response: PWS Section 5.4 has been updated to include process for expedited (priority) requests.

52. PWS Paragraph 1.4:

“Continuous Process Improvements - Provide advice on improving the Marine Corps SECREP Supply Chain”

Question: Will the Government allow for LEAN events or Kaizens for process / supply chain improvements?

Response: Yes, the Government allow for LEAN events or Kaizens for process / supply chain improvements.

53. PWS Paragraph 2.2:

“Core Items: Core Items are components of an item that the Contractor can expect to reuse during the ROR process. Any items designated as Core Items in the NSN configuration checklist which cannot be reused (e.g., out of tolerance, damaged or missing) in the ROR process shall be submitted as O&A charges.”

Question: This assumes cannibalization is expected. Will the Government please clarify whether or not cannibalization is allowed? Also will the Government please clarify how to manage cores? Is there an allowance for cores for cannibalization?

Response: Paragraph 2.2 does not imply cannibalization. There is no reason to assume cannibalization. Therefore, there is no core to manage and no necessity for core allowance

54. PWS Paragraph 2.2:

“Directed Source: A directed source (often an OEM) is an ROR source that has been identified by the government as the exclusive source for ROR for a given NSN.”

Question: May the Offeror identify an alternate source? CPI should allow for improved sources of repair, particularly of OEMs no longer support a component or system.

Response: Yes, the Offeror may identify or recommend an alternate source. The alternate source must be approved by COR/KO prior to implementing any change.

55. PWS Paragraph 2.3, RFP Employee Class Table:

PWS - Program Manager (PM): The PM has overall responsibility of the Program and collaborates with the government on Strategic and Continuous Process Improvement (CPI) efforts aimed at improving the program and support of the government customer. The PM must have at least 10 years of experience and possess a Bachelor’s degree or 5 years of experience with a Master’s Degree.

RFP

Question: There seems to be a discrepancy between the PWS PM experience requirements and the RFP employee class table. Please verify the PM employee class table is accurate?

Response: The PWS has been revised as addressed under question 1. All education requirements have been removed.

PWS Paragraph 4.4:

“Frustrated Asset Report (FAR): The FAR identifies misidentified assets by regional locations; i.e., wrong NSN/Part Number, NSN not on contract, NSNs that are not condition code “F.” (CDRL A006)”

Question: Will the Government please provide definitions for condition codes?

Response: Condition Code F – Unserviceable reparable; Condition code H – Unserviceable condemned. PWS Section 4.4 (h) has been updated to include the definition of Condition Code F.

56. PWS Paragraph 4.5.6:

“NSN item exchanges will occur during normal working hours. In the rare event there is a requirement for exchange outside of normal working hours, authorization to proceed shall be approved by the Contracting Officer and adjustments to the fixed price may be considered.”

Question: Will the Government please define normal working hours? Industry working hours vs military working hours can vary greatly.

Response: Normal working hours at most sites are 0630 to 1630, but are subject to change. There may be times when site representatives may be called in to support contingencies.

57. PWS Paragraph 4.8.2:

“The Incumbent may transfer its owned equipment to the Awardee to ensure successful turnover.”

Question: Will the Government provide a list of incumbent-owned equipment? Is it mainly office or computer equipment or inspection tools, material handling, etc.?

Response: No, the Government will not provide a list of incumbent equipment. The Government does not possess a list of incumbent owned equipment and therefore cannot determine the category for majority of equipment.

59. PWS Paragraph 5.3:

“If the contractor believes that an item is Beyond Economical Repair (BER) or Beyond Physical Repair (BPR), the O&A work request will state as much and provide justification.”

Question: Will the awarded contract cover price for replacement?

Response: Paragraph 2.2 of the PWS provides the definitions for BER and BPR, and TD&E. Teardown and Evaluation (TD&E) definition states “…in cases where an O&A requirement is identified by the Contractor during the TD&E and the Government determines that it will not approve the O&A charges, or the SECREP is declared BER/BPR, the Contractor will be paid only the TD&E cost for that item (not the $ROR).”

60. PWS Paragraph 5.3:

“When O&A work is required, the Contractor will cease any ROR action and obtain authorization to proceed from the Government KO.”

Question: Will the Government please state their response time? Some shops may charge warehouse or storage fees, or potentially return the asset if response is not timely.

Response: Government response time is approximately 14 work days.

61. PWS Paragraph 5.9:

“The Contracting Officer will annotate NSN(s) to be removed from contract on the submission RFP. NSNs are removed for various reasons i.e., as it has reached the end of its life cycle, no longer a requirement, or it cannot longer be supported… “

Question: Who determines an item can no longer be supported? Contractor or Government? Bilateral?

Response: The Government makes determinations when an item can no longer be supported. The Contractor can make recommendations for consideration, which may be considered by the Government in making its determination. PWS Section 5.9 has been revised to clarify.

62. Section L, and Proposal Adequacy Checklist:

“Section L states the transition plan is to be addressed in Binder I, Technical. Section L also states that the Transition Plan is to be provided in Binder V, Contract Documentation. The proposal adequacy checklist doesn't include the Transition Plan as part of Binder V.”

Question: Which Binder should contain the Transition Plan?

Response: Submission of the Draft Transition Plan is only to be in Binder I – Technical. The Solicitation has been revised to remove the requirement from Binder V and to require the Draft Transition Plan in Binder I – Technical.

63. Section L, and Proposal Adequacy Checklist:

“Attachment 10: Proposal Adequacy Checklist lists the Quality Control Plan as part of Binder V, Contracts Documentation. Page 46, Section L, Binder V does not contain the QCP plan requirement.”

Question: Please clarify.

Response: Submission of the Quality Control Plan is to be in Binder I – Technical. The Solicitation has been revised to remove the requirement from Binder V and to require the Quality Control Plan in Binder I – Technical.

64. Proposal Adequacy Checklist:

“The proposal adequacy checklist states "Does the offer show terms of any express warranty?". There is no requirement in the RFP to show terms of any express warranty. Attachment 2, provides for Storage and Operational warranty.”

Question: Is the statement in the proposal adequacy checklist just referring to attachment 2, columns R and S (Storage and Operational warranty) be completed?

Response: Yes, the “expressed warranty” referenced on the Proposal Adequacy Checklist is referring to LIS RFP Attachment 2 columns R and S (Storage and Operational warranties.)

65. Page 5, Section B - CLIN 0007 CONUS Shipping Cost:

“CLIN description states "No fee or markups allowed under this CLIN".

Question: Please confirm that "cost" includes contractor's indirect charges that are part of their normal accounting practices.

Response: “Cost” as referred to in CLIN 0007 CONUS Shipping Cost is inclusive of the “actual” cost to be paid by the LIS contractor to a vendor for shipping services required to meet the LIS SECREP repair requirements identified in the contract .

66. Section L, and Proposal Adequacy Checklist:

“Section L states the transition plan is to be addressed in Binder I, Technical. Section L also states that the Transition Plan is to be provided in Binder V, Contract Documentation. The proposal adequacy checklist doesn't include the Transition Plan as part of Binder V.”

Question: Which Binder should contain the Transition Plan?

Response: Submission of the Draft Transition Plan is only to be in Binder I – Technical. The Solicitation has been revised to remove the requirement from Binder V and to require the Draft Transition Plan in Binder I – Technical.

67. PWS Page 11, Warranty and Attachment 2, Pricing Workbook:

“Page 12 of the PWS provides the definition of storage warranty and operational warranty and states "The OW will not exceed the storage warranty”. In Attachment 2, the Operational Warranty is in several cases (72) greater than the storage warranty. See columns G and H of the Pricing Workbook. There appears to be conflict between the PWS and the Attachment 2.”

Recommendation: We recommend that the Government update Attachment 2 so that the storage warranty and the operational warranty do not conflict with the instructions in page 12 of the PWS.

Response: PWS Section 2.2 Warranty definition updated to remove the conflicting the language. The operational warranty is mutually exclusive of the storage warranty.

68. Attachment 2, Pricing Workbook and Warranty:

“Attachment 2, Pricing Workbook, columns G and H, contain the Government's suggested Warranties. Both of these columns are labeled Non-Contractual. The contractor is required to propose its warranty per NSN in columns R and S.

The non-contractual warranty in columns G and H, appear to be only a suggested requirement. With an unspecified requirement a bidder is allowed to bid any warranty timeframe as long as the Operational Warranty does not exceed the Storage Warranty.

This Non-contractual requirement can result in bids having different warranty periods, causing unbalanced pricing between offerors. Warranty lengths effects cost, which will make evaluation of bidders pricing difficult to determine, potentially causing an unfair comparison.”

Recommendation: Request the Government standardize the warranty requirements in the pricing workbook. for both Storage and Operational. This standardization will make evaluation of price models more consistent as well as providing the end users confidence in the performance of the repair and remanufactured NSN’s.

Response: The Government has reviewed the submitted recommendation to standardize the warranty requirements and had decided to not accept the recommendation. The Government has provided Offerors with historical warranty data in order to aid the Offeror in proposal reasonable storage and operational warranties.