M67004-20-R-0007 Responses to 1st dRFP Industry Questions-Comments.docx
DOCX document 29 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Logistics Integration Support
- Solicitation number
- M67004-20-R-0007
- Issued by
-
United States Marine Corps
About this file
This document contains questions and responses related to a draft request for proposal for logistics integration support services. The solicitation seeks proposals for a firm fixed price contract to operate and manage the Logistics Integration Support program for the Marine Corps, including remanufacture, overhaul, repair, and evaluation of approximately 2,000 secondary repairable items at six exchange locations. Key details include that the contractor will develop and manage a vendor base, operate the entire repair process, and ensure turnaround times and OEM specifications are met. The period of performance is anticipated to be five years. The NAICS code is 541614 and interested parties must qualify under that code. Proposals are due within 15 calendar days of publication and must demonstrate capability. The incumbent contractor is Raytheon Technical Services under contract M67004-16-C-0004.
View the file
Other files
Show all 31
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
| 1. | Draft PWS | pg.06 | 1.6 Stakeholders and Desired Outcomes | Historical Exchange Data |
| "Six Exchange Locations are identified in Attachment 1, LIS Draft PWS (final draft dated 8 May 20). The number of exchanges performed at each location is not provided. This information is required in order to determine the appropriate manning level at each site. |
Q: Will the Government provide the historical number of exchanges (to and from) for each of the six exchange locations?"
R: Yes, the Government will provide the historical number of exchanges at each location for informational purposes only. The information will be reflected in the Pricing Workbook.
| 2. | Draft PWS | 14 | 3.1 Government Furnished Equipment |
| MHE Operators | "Reference states, ""Material Handling Equipment (MHE) - sufficient to move and load/unload any SECREP will be available through coordination with the co-located Government facility operators."" |
Q: Does the GFE MHE come with operators or does the contractor provide MHE operators?"
| R: The contractor is not required to provide MHE operators. | GFE MHE comes with operators. | |||
| 3. | Draft PWS | 22 | 4.8 Transition Plan and 4.8.1: Phase -in | Transition |
"A critical function during the transition stage is the process of handing over all documents, files, receipt documentation, etc. of all SECREPS that are currently in work at a vendor, in the transportation network, returned for warranty or currently staged for delivery/ exchange.
Q: Will the Government ensure that all data required by the incoming contractor is provided during the transition?
R: Yes, the Government will ensure all non-proprietary data is turned over to the awardee.
Examples include: a list or file of all SECREPS currently in-work at their vendors, to include valid part numbers, serial numbers, any special modifications, condition, and estimated delivery dates, as well as all transportation and shipping data for all SECREPS that have either been shipped to a vendor, or anything in-bound from a vendor, estimated delivery dates, shipping information, and valid point of contacts. This includes warranty repair work initiated by the incumbent."
4. Draft PWS 26 5.1 Shipping Shipping breakout, including costs in TD&E "Reference reads, ""All other shipping to and from actual ROR facilities is the responsibility of the Contractor. Shipping costs shall be a component of the TD&E cost."" Q: How should the contractor differentiate cost for shipping (included in TD&E costs) between ATAC shipping (no cost to the Government) and all other shipping (contractor cost responsibility)? In other words, TD&E costs would be different for the same SECREP in OCONUS (ATAC shipping) versus CONUS (contractor-paid shipping). " R: The Government will add a separate CLIN (CLIN 0007) for ODC structured as a cost-reimbursement without fee CLIN. Therefore, the “shipping cost” will not be a component of the TD&E i.e. CONUS.
5. Draft PWS 26 5.1 Shipping Shipping OCONUS Q: Is the contractor responsible for delivering and receiving SECREPs to and from ATAC?
R: Yes. Reference PWS section 5.1.
6. Draft RFP 03 Item 0002 CLIN Makeup Q: Will the Government please confirm that labor is included in this CLIN?
R: Yes, “Integrator” labor is included in CLIN 0002 – ROR Services. Reference Solicitation Pricing Workbook (Tab 3 – LIS 2021 Pricing Workbook).
7. Draft RFP 03, 04 Section B Contract Type Q: Since it is unknown at proposal time regarding actual services that will be required for the Task Orders that will be issued under CLINs 2, 3, 5, and 6, will the Government change the contract type for these CLINs from FFP to CPFF? An FFP type contract might be perceived to provide an unfair advantage to the incumbents due to their familiarity with the required services.
R: The Government will not consider changing the contract type for these CLINs. The government does not consider a FFP contract type to be a competitive advantage to the incumbent. The contract type was selected based on well-defined SECREP repair requirements.
8. Draft RFP 07 Section E Inspection and Acceptance Location Q: Does the Government desire inspection and acceptance of supplies/services at Origin as stated, or at Destination?
R: The Government desires inspection and acceptance to be at Destination unless otherwise directed based on a requirement to inspect/test prior to the vendor packaging the required item for return to the Government.
9. Draft RFP 07 Section E Inspection and Acceptance Location Q: For inspection and acceptance, will the Government confirm that "origin" means vendor locations?
R: Yes. “Origin” means vendor locations.
10. Draft RFP 08 1.3 Exchange Locations After-hours Support "Reference reads, ""While these exchanges will normally be conducted during normal working hours, there may be times when site representatives may be called in to support contingencies."" Labor to support this does not appear to be funded by a CLIN.
Q: Will the Government provide either historical or estimated requirements that after-hour support has been or may be requested over the five-year period? " R: 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.
11. Draft RFP 08 Section F, F-1, 1.1 ATP Date Q: Would the Govt. please confirm that the ATP is May 1, 2021?
R: No. The Government cannot confirm that the ATP is May 1, 2021. ATP is unknown at this time.
12. Draft RFP "08, 09” Section F, Delivery Information CLIN 0001 Start Date Q: Should the POP start date for CLIN 0001 be May 1, 2021 instead of May 10, 2021?
R: The ATP date is unknown at this time.
13. Draft RFP 09 Section F, Delivery Information CLIN 0006 POP dates Q: Should the POP dates for CLIN 0006 be June 1, 2026 to Nov. 30, 2026 instead of June 1, 2021 to May 31, 2026 R: Yes. POP dates for CLIN 0006 is June 1, 2026 – November 30, 2026.
14. Draft RFP 10 2.2 Technical Definitions Global Combat Service Support-Marine Corps (GCSS-MC) Q: Is the Government directing the use of GCSS-MC as the sole logistics information system or are offerors encouraged to propose an augmenting solution?
R: No. It is not required for vendors to use or have access to GCSS. Reference paragraph PIEE 3.4 of PWS.
15. Draft RFP 11 Sections G, G-7 O&A Work Limitation REQUEST: DFARS 252.217-7028 does not limit cost to only parts and materials. It does permit labor and indirect costs. Request that the Government remove from the requirement the limitation of no labor and indirect costs for O&A work.
R: The Government has included a “mark up” rate for O&A. Reference Pricing Workbook spreadsheet.
16. Draft RFP 15 Sections H, H-3 Warranties REQUEST: Since any warranties are between the OEM/vendor and the Government, suggest the Government modify the referenced requirement to state: "Integrator shall maintain warranty records and status with the OEMs and/or vendors and return/process SECREPs for any warranty repairs or service."
R: The Integrator will have the responsibility to enforce all warranty terms with SECREP vendors.
17. Draft RFP N/A Sections L & M Missing Sections Although Section L is referenced in Block 9 of the Standard Form 33, there does not appear to be a Section L in the entire document, or a Section M.
Q: Will the Government be providing draft sections L and M prior to the final RFP release?
R: No.
18. Industry Day Questions and Responses 02 Question 10 IT Access "The Industry Day question reads, ""Does the Government have access to the Contractor’s IT system? If so, who will have access and will the customers also need access to the systems?"" The Government's response reads, ""Yes. The contracting officer and appointed representatives, program office, and the nine LIS SECREP Marine Corps customers (users) will need access."" Q: Will the Government please clarify what explicitly this ""IT system"" is, and for what purposes the Government will need to access it?"
R: Yes. IAW PWS para. 5, 11, “the contractor shall provide visibility of GFP … via a password protected commercial website viewable from Marine Corps network computers…”
19. Draft RFP G-6 and G-7, Page 11 of the DRFP.
“…for each modification expected to result in a unit price totaling in excess of $750,000 the Contractor shall include information (other than cost or pricing data) necessary to determine whether prices are fair and reasonable.”
The Defense Authorization Act of 2018 as promulgated by the Department of Defense pursuant to a class deviation dated 13 April 2018 changed the threshold for Cost and Pricing data to $2,000,000 effective 1 July 2018. (FAR 15.403-4) Q: Will the Government consider updating paragraphs G-6 and G-7 on page 11 to reflect the latest DoD Guidance?
R: Yes.
20. Draft RFP Over and Above CLIN - Clause G-7, Page 11 in the DRFP The Over and Above language provided in this clause states that the contractor is not entitled to all of its costs ( i.e. "no indirect costs such as overhead, G&A, etc. shall be included as O&A charge"). Section B, CLINS 0003 and 0006 state that the O&A Services are FFP.
Q: How can these CLINs be considered FFP if the contractor is not entitled to all of its costs?
R: The contract terms in G-7 have been corrected. The offeror is allowed to propose an integrator “mark-up” rate. Reference solicitation Attachment 7 - Pricing Workbook.
In essence the Government has created a Cost Sharing CLIN. FAR 16.303 states a cost-sharing contract may be used when the contractor agrees to absorb a portion of the costs, in the expectation of substantial compensating benefits.
REQUEST: There are no expectations of substantial compensating benefits in performing O&A work at less than cost. Further, requesting the Contractor share the cost of an Over and Above creates a significant amount of risk for the Contractor in that the number and value of Over and Above repairs throughout the period of performance cannot be estimated. This is also consistent with other LOGCOM contracts (e.g., M67004-16-C-0013 and 0014).
R: The contract terms in G-7 have been corrected. The offeror is allowed to propose an integrator “mark-up” rate. Reference solicitation Attachment 7 - Pricing Workbook.
REQUEST: Request the Government allow cost and fee on the Over and Above Repairs, consistent with the description provided in Section B and other LOGCOM contracts.
R: The contract terms in G-7 have been corrected. The offeror is allowed to propose an integrator “mark-up” rate. Reference solicitation Attachment 7 - Pricing Workbook.
21. Draft RFP SB Subcontracting Plan, (Section I) Q: Will the Government consider adding clause 252.219-7003, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (DoD Contracts) to CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE?
R: Yes.
22. CDRL Failure Report, CDRL A007 Q: Is it the USG intent to execute Failure Report (FR)/Root Cause Analysis (RCA) for every SECREP induction? (Approx. 2000 reports per Month) R: No. Reference CDRL A005. (Note: The Failure Report CDRL was changed from A007 to A005 in the final solicitation/RFP.)
23. Draft RFP M67004-20-R-0007 CLIN 0006 POP 01-JUN-2021 TO 31-MAY-2026 CLIN 0006 POP stated to be 6/1/21-5/31/26 (Page 9 of 43).
Q: As this is for Option to Extend Services (O&A Support) shouldn't the period of performance be 6/1/26-11/30/26 (Page 28 of 43)?
R: Yes.
24. Draft RFP M67004-20-R-0007 DRFP Clause F-1 Paragraph 1.2 and 1.3, Page 8 Clause F-1 does not include Plant Production Albany (PPA).
Q: Will PPA be added?
R: Production Plant Albany (PPA) will be included on the contract. All Albany, GA users will induct from one Albany location.
Q: What are the requirements/expectations for servicing Plant Production Albany (PPA)? (Albany Depot).
R: No additional guidance is required for PPA.
Q: Will an exchange site be required inside the plant or will exchanges be done at the current site in Albany?
R: No exchange will be required inside of PPA. All inductions in Albany, GA will be performed at one Albany, GA location.
Q: Are there any additional system interfaces required to support PPA?
R: No.
25. Comment on Para 5.14 Failure Reporting and Root Cause Analysis. (Page 30) Failure Analysis has a very broad definition and a wide range of activities that may be performed.
Q: Would the government further define the requirement to support or perform failure analysis?
R: Yes. Reference CDRL A005.
Q: Will the government further define what it wants on Appendix 16 so that offerors may accurately propose and price this activity?
R: Yes. Reference CDRL A005. Attachment 7 – Pricing Workbook has been updated to identify which NSNs will require Failure/Root Cause Analysis.
26. Draft RFP Section I. FAR clause 52.232-40 Providing accelerated payments to Small Businesses.
REQUEST: Request the Government add clause 52.232-40 to this solicitation, as it will allow the prime contractor to accelerate payment to small businesses especially during crisis situations (e.g., Covid-19).
R: Clause 52.232-40 has been added.
27. Draft RFP and PWS Page 7, Section E, Inspection and Acceptance. PWS Para. 5.5 Section E states that Inspection and Acceptance will be done at Origin. Paragraph 5.5 of the PWS states that DCMA will be used for Inspection and Acceptance.
Q: Does this mean that DCMA Inspection and Acceptance will be performed at the exchange locations specified in Clause F1 1.3?
R: The Government desires inspection and acceptance to be at Destination unless otherwise directed based on a requirement to inspect/test prior to the vendor packaging the required item for return to the Government.
Q: Will DCMA be used for all NSNs?
R: No
28. Draft RFP and PWS Use of Management Control Activity (MCA) - DRFP (Page 11 of 43) Q: Will the USG please further define how we will go through the MCA and how MCA processing will affect TAT?
R: Yes. Refer to PWS Section 5.4 and Section G (G-8) for MCA processing instructions. The contractor will not be held accountable for USG caused delays that affect TAT i.e., MCA processing delays caused by the USG.
Q: Does this include ordering parts from DLA or other non-MC inventory control points?
R: No.
29. Draft RFP and PWS Use of Management Control Activity Use of a MCA may delay Turn Around Time (TAT).
Q: What time standard will the Marine Corps MCA use to process requisitions?
R: The time standard that the Marine Corps MCA uses is not applicable as G-8 and PWS 5.4 states “The Government will grant relief for times missing KTAT with justifiable reasons. Reasons for granting relief include: FEDMALL backorder, ATAC shipping delays, acts of nature, surge and any delays due to the fault of the Government to include delays associated with Management Control Activity (MCA) processing.”
30. Q: Is there an incumbent? If so, who are they and what was the winning bid, contract number and SOW?
R: Yes. Raytheon Technical Services, M67004-16-C-0004, $141,771,484.01.
31. Q: Does the Offeror require SECRET facility clearance upon proposal submission, or will the USG sponsor clearance upon contract award?
R: No. The Offeror is not required to have a SECRET facility clearance upon proposal submission. The USG will not sponsor clearance upon contract award.
32. Q: Has a DRAFT Section L or M been posted? We’re trying to discern the proposal submission requirements (technical, past performance, etc.).
R: No. A draft Section L or M has not been posted.
33. Q: While the Pricing Workbook demonstrates the NSN, PEI, TAM, and quantities etc., will the Government further break out the items and demand by location?
R: Yes, the Government will provide the historical number of exchanges at each location for informational purposes only. The information will be reflected in the Pricing Workbook.
34. Q: In several cases, the Pricing Workbook defines the “Directed Source”. Does this mean that the unannotated items can be repaired/overhauled by sources chosen by the contractor?
R: Yes. The contractor can compete their sources unless otherwise directed. Reference PWS Section 2.2.
35. Q: Are shop tools, specialty tools, machine tools, and lift equipment included as part of the “tools” the contractor will be expected to provide? If so, can the government provide a list of these large tools required/recommended by site?
R: Examples of tools and equipment that may need to be provided by the Contractor at each site are as follows: pallet jack, hand tools, basic power tools, electro static discharge table (ESD), grounding station, scales, and work benches.
36. Q: Will the contractor be required to establish/maintain a clean room facility to support maintenance of electronics and other sensitive equipment?
R: No.
37. The Q&As from the Industry Day include Question 19: “Do the Government have historical data on the number of management personnel?
REQUEST: Please indicate where in the Attch 7 Pricing Workbook that this management personnel information is included.
R: Historical management personnel information is not contained in the pricing workbook and will not be provided in the solicitation/RFP. Each offeror is responsible for developing an individual plan to execute the terms/scope of the SECREP contract.
38. Q: Will the final RFP include Key Personnel requirements?
R: Yes.
39. Q: How will direct labor be priced? Will it be built into the item ROR, TD&E, and O&A prices?
R: The ROR and TD&E for each NSN are inclusive of all costs to the integrator including the integrators mark-up. The mark-up rates for ROR, TD&E, and O&A will be used to asses new NSN fixed Prices.
40. Q: Since no definition is provided in the PWS, what are the expectations for “Storage Warranty”?
R: Storage Warranty is defined as the amount of time that the NSN is warranted beginning at the receipt of said NSN by the Government until the end of specified amount of time, or until the NSN is issued to the end user. Reference PWS Section 2.2.
41. Q: Similarly, please define “Operational Warranty”.
R: Operational Warranty is defined as the amount of time that the NSN is warranted beginning at the time the NSN is issued to the end user. Operational Warranty terminates Storage Warranty coverage, and shall not exceed Storage Warranty. Reference PWS Section 2.2.
42. Q: Will draft sections L & M be provided to accompany the Pricing Workbook?
R: No. The final solicitation/RFP will include Sections L & M and the Pricing Workbook
43. PWS 4.4 Continuous Process Improvements Q: As the CPI program will be defined after submittal of the FFP prices for Item ROR, will the government consider a cost share on CPI projects that reduce program costs?
R: No. The Government will not consider a cost share on CPI project that reduce program costs.
Q: Will the government provide separate funding for development of CPI projects to drive program savings, innovation, and efficiencies?
R: No.
Q: Will the government score the proposed CPI program as part of the best value evaluation?
R: No.
44. PWS 5.8-5.9
Q: Can the government quantify the NSNs added, changed, and removed on the current contract?
R: Yes. 400 NSNs have been deleted over the course of the current contract. 337 NSNs have been added over the course of the current contract.
45. Attachment 2 NSN List Contains 45 items where 100% of the items have O&A charges.
Q: Does the government support building that Over and Above (O&A) Changes into the FFP ROR rates to avoid delays in turn-around time?
R: No.
46. Attachment 2 NSN List Contains 438 items with less than 2 failures in the “Total FY11-FY20 Repairs” column.
Q: Will the government provide estimated failure rates for these items?
R: No
47. Draft RFP M67004-20-R-0007 Q: Will the government provide a Draft RFP Section L and M so that industry can assess the bid requirements?
R: No.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .