M67004-25-R-0009 LIS Recompete Q and A 2025.08.20.pdf

Logistics Integration Support (LIS) M67004-25-R-0009 – Q&A

1. Who is the incumbent for this effort? What was their winning bid, contract number, and scope?

Answer: Vertex Aerospace, LLC (CAGE Code: 1P066) is the incumbent. Winning offer was $259,245,671.31 . Contract number is M67004-21-D-0002 and the scope can be found within the contract.

2. Will the Contractor ITM need to interface with USG IT personnel as well?

Answer: While it is not in the IT Manager's daily duties to interface with USG IT personnel, circumstances may arise where the IT Manager may have to interface with USG IT personnel.

3. Aside from the Site Manager at each Induction Site, must contractor provide additional support personnel to each location? Or will there essentially be a partnership with onsite USG personnel as well?

Answer: No, the contractor is not required to provide additional support personnel at each site; however, the contractor may choose to provide additional support personnel.

4. In Att J2 LIS Pricing Workbook on the NSN page, rows 967 to 1076 don’t have $0.00 is the Line-Item Pricing Columns. Is that Intentional?

Answer: Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook has been revised to have formulas in each Line-Item Pricing columns.

5. In our experience USG has provided a partially filled-out DD254. Will that document be forthcoming so that offerors can provide a completed copy?

Answer: Attachment J-7 Contract Security Standards Form DD 254 was provided at the time of the solicitation release and was partially filled out.

6. Will there be an opportunity to ask follow-on questions after answers are posted?

Answer: Yes, at the time of posting Amendment 0004 along with these Q&As there will be an additional 7 calendar day period to submit questions.

7. The response date for proposal submission is not provided on the SF33. Question: Would the US Government (USG) please provide a revised SF33 showing the submission date?

Answer: Yes. The SF33 has been amended to have a submission date in block 9 on Amendment 0003 and was released on 7 August 2025.

8. The "CLIN DELIVERY / TASK ORDER MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND CLIN ORDER VALUE" table shown on pages 8 and 9 is not populated. Question:

Would the USG please provide a revised "CLIN DELIVERY/TASK ORDER MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND CLIN ORDER VALUE" showing minimum and maximum CLIN values?

Answer: No, the USG will not provide minimum and maximums at the Task Order level. There are many uncertainties in funding coming from RIP and Wholesale locations to provide a reasonable estimate for minimum and maximum CLIN amounts at the Task Order level.

9. Both referenced locations state: "in response to MCLC Solicitation No. M67004-25-R- 0002." Question: Would the USG please revise the RFP to reflect the corrected Solicitation Number M67004-25-R-0009?

Answer: Yes. The SF33 has been amended to have a submission date in block 9 on Amendment 0003 and was released on 7 August 2025.

10. The RFP states: "Material and information relating to, or associated with, the acquisition and procurement of goods and services, including but not limited to, cost or pricing data, contract information and direct labor rates is considered controlled unclassified information (CUI). Examples include, Contractor bid or proposal information, technical data marked as proprietary by a contractor, and the name, address, and phone numbers of the offeror. The offeror must apply the appropriate CUI markings to its proposal documents, as applicable (see DFARS 252.204-7008 and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 800-171), to include Header and Footers: ‘CUI//PROCURE.’" Question: Are bidders correct in assuming that a CUI marking shall be applied to all pricing documents and spreadsheets?

Answer: Yes, offerors are correct that a CUI marking shall be applied to all pricing documents and spreadsheets. RFP, Section L, Labeling, has been revised to include the marking of proprietary information within Volume I- Technical and Volume IV

– Pricing.

11. The RFP states: "Material and information relating to, or associated with, the acquisition and procurement of goods and services, including but not limited to, cost or pricing data, contract information and direct labor rates is considered controlled unclassified information (CUI). Examples include, Contractor bid or proposal information, technical data marked as proprietary by a contractor, and the name, address, and phone numbers of the offeror. The offeror must apply the appropriate CUI markings to its proposal documents, as applicable (see DFARS 252.204-7008 and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 800-171), to include Header and Footers: ‘CUI//PROCURE.’" The phrase "contract information" used in this requirement is unclear. Question: Would the USG please provide additional instructions specifying what "contract information" should be labeled as CUI?

Answer: The Government advises that entire proposals are considered "contract information" and shall be marked IAW RFP Section L. Labeling. "Material and information relating to, or associated with, the acquisition and procurement of goods and services, including but not limited to, cost or pricing data, contract information, indirect costs and direct labor rates" is the category description for General Procurement and Acquisition found in the CUI registry.

12. The Minimum Quantitative Requirement (MQR) table on page 53 does not specify whether the MQR values apply to the to Total Contract Value or Total Subcontracted Value. Question: Would the USG please clarify whether the MQR percentages apply to the Total Contract Value or to the Total Subcontracted Value?

Answer: The Minimum Quantitative Requirement (MQR) percentages apply to the Total Subcontracted Value.

13. Question: Would the USG please confirm that the Small Business Participation Minimum Quantitative Requirement (MQR) excludes large business sole source OEMs (e.g., Directed Sources)?

Answer: Yes, the Small Business Participation Minimum Quantitative Requirement (MQR) excludes large business sole source OEMs.

14. Section L Volume Format (pg 48) lists the following submission items for Volume V Contract Documentation: i. Cover Page ii. Representations, Certifications, and Acknowledgments iii. Mission Essential Services Plan (CESP) iv. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Certification or Equivalent v. Complete Solicitation/RFP Attachment J-7 Security Requirements form DD254 vi. Organization Conflict of Interest (OCI) Plan or written Negative Response vii. Complete Solicitation/RFP Attach S-1 Proposal Adequacy Compliance Checklist viii. Small Business Subcontracting Plan. The list of submission items in Section L is in conflict with Section L Volume V Contract Documentation (page 55), which lists the following required materials for Volume V:1. Cover Letter 2. Signed SF33 3. Completed Clauses

4. Representations and Certifications 5. Organization Conflict of Interest (OCI) Plan 6.

DD Form 254 Security Requirements 7. Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan 8.

ISO 9001:2008 certifications or equivalent 9. Small Business Subcontracting Plan 10.

Complete Solicitation/RFP Attachment S-1 Proposal Adequacy Compliance Checklist.

Question: Would the USG please clarify the submission requirements for Volume V?

Answer: All documents located in Section L, Volume Format and Section L, Contract Documentation shall be included in Volume V, Contract Documentation.

15. This paragraph has a liquidated damages provision for missed RTAT, but the RFP terms (section B through I) do not contain a Liquidated Damages (LD) clause. Question: Since this clause is not in the RFP, does the USG intend to remove the penalty for late deliveries?

Answer: No, the Government does not intend to remove the penalty for late deliveries. FAR 52.211-11 has been added to the RFP in Amendment 0004, Section I.

16. Question: Given the instability of tariffs in the US at this time, would the USG please consider providing a specific date (for example, 2 weeks prior to submittal) for the pricing of tariff duties?

Answer: The Government will not provide a date to price for tariff duties. This is left solely to the responsibility of the Offerors.

17. On attachment J_2_LIS_Pricing _Workbook_RFP_2025_07 NSN tab, there are no formulas in rows 967‒1076 in columns W, Z, AC, AF, AI, AJ, AP, and AQ. Question:

Would the USG please provide the correct the formulas?

Answer: Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook has been revised to have formulas in each Line-Item Pricing columns.

18. It appears that J_2_LIS_Pricing _Workbook_RFP_2025_07 Tab O&A has a formula error. The formula is marking up the full $150M Government new NSN estimate by the ROR and the TDE rates. The $150M should be split between the TD&E and ROR instead of marking up the full $150M for each TD&E and ROR. For example, $xM could be ROR and would be marked up by the ROR percentage, and $yM could be TDE and would be marked up by the TD&E percentage. The x%/y% example, below, is how the formula could be changed. The same comment applies to cell G17, the total new work ROR and TDE for the option. =(((F15*(F14*x%)))+((F16*(F14*y%))+F14) Question:

Would the USG please review the formula in attachment J_2_LIS_Pricing _Workbook_RFP_2025_07 used on the O&A and New Work tab for cell F16?

Answer: The Government has reviewed the formula and will be leaving it as is.

19. It appears that the embedded formula on the TEP tab cell E20 is referencing the wrong column on the NSN tab. It should reference the total of AP not AQ on the NSN tab.

Question: Are bidders correct in assuming that cell E20 on the TEP tab of the Pricing_ Workbook should reference the total of column AP on the NSN tab, not the total of column AQ?

Answer: Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook has been revised to have TEP Cell E20 reference the total of column AN on the NSN tab.

20. The RFP states: "If a subcontractor at any tier performing on another related LIS contract (as outlined above) intends to submit an offer on the LIS RFP as a prime contractor or participate as a subcontractor to another Offeror, the Offeror must provide details outlining the specific scopes of work that the subcontractor is performing or performed on any of the related contract(s) and for this proposed effort." In the 2020 RFP, this issue was addressed, and the USG response was that it does not apply to repair suppliers.

Question: Is it correct to assume the USG's previous response in 2020 also applies to this procurement?

Answer: Yes, it does not apply to repair suppliers.

21. Within the Technical Volume, contractors are required to submit some details of their Quality Control Plan. PWS 4.4.j details the requirement of the Quality Control Plan which contractors are to submit no later than five business days after contract award. Can the Government please confirm that the narrative within the Technical Volume and the Quality Control Plan which is to be submitted after award are two separate and distinct requirements?

Answer: Yes, these are two separate and distinct documents. Technical Volume should describe their approach in the Quality Control Plan IAW, RFP Section L, Factor 1 Technical, Section 1. The final Quality Control Plan is to be submitted within five (5) business days after award by the awardee.

22. Under Section 1 - Technical Approach, the paragraphs are 1, b, c, and d. Quality Control Plan is not marked as e. Can the government please confirm the Quality Control Plan should be paragraph e?

Answer: Yes, the Quality Control Plan has been added as "e" in the RFP, Section L, Section 1, Technical Approach.

23. Solicitation states: Offerors are reminded that the time for receipt of proposals closes at 4:00PM EST on the date specified on page one (1), in Block 9, of the SF33. SF 33 Block 9 is not completed as indicated in this paragraph. Please update.

Answer: Yes. The SF33 has been amended to have a submission date in block 9 on Amendment 0003 and was released on 7 August 2025.

24. There is a discrepancy in naming convention for Section 4 between page 40 and page 50.

Will the Government please confirm whether Section 4 should be labeled Draft Transition Plan (Phase In) or Transition Plan?

Answer: RFP, Section L, Factor 1, Section 1, Technical Volume, Section 4, has been revised Draft Transition Period in Amendment 0004. The final Transition Plan is to be submitted within three (3) business days after the post award conference by the awardee.

25. Naming convention of Contractor Essential Services Plan is not consistent across references. Should the Plan name be Contractor Essential Services Plan (CESP) as referenced on page 30 or should it be Mission Essential Services Plan (CESP) as referenced on page 48?

Answer: RFP, Section I, DFARS 252.237-7023 and Section L, Volume Format, Technical Volume, Volume V, Contract Documentation has been revised to say Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan (MECSP).

26. Please confirm that Letters of Intent (LOI) for key personnel are excluded from page counts.

Answer: LOI and key personnel resumes are not included in the page count. RFP, Section L, Factor 1 Technical, Section 1, (d) Key Personnel, has been revised.

27. The instructions in the excel file state that "Offeror shall not adjust any formulas herein."

However, we observed that the formula for the Total Evaluated Price for CLIN 0008 is currently linked to the Bidder’s 5-Year + 6-Month Option Total Line-Item Price, which already includes the 5-Year total captured under CLIN 0002 – Integrator ROR & TD&E Services (NSN). Could the government please confirm whether this formula linkage is intentional? Or should CLIN 0008 instead be linked to a total for Column AP, which would reflect only the 6-Month Option to Extend?

Answer: Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook has been revised to have cell E20 of the Total Evaluated Price tab reference the sum of column AN of the NSN tab.

28. If there is a CPARS evaluation record available for the referenced contract, the Offeror does not need to have a POC fill out Attachment S-2. The Offeror may instead include a copy of the CPARS evaluation in their proposal. Please confirm if the Government would like the most recent CPAR or ALL CPARs for each citation.

Answer: Yes, the Government requests all available CPARs for each citation.

29. Should this Volume be labeled Factor 5. Contract Documentation, consistent with the naming convention of the other four factors?

Answer: No, it is not labeled Factor 5 as Contract Documentation is not an evaluation factor.

30. The RFP States: A table of contents is REQUIRED and all response pages and paragraphs shall be sequentially numbered, even if that page is left blank. Several of the documents included in this volume are either reproduced sections of the RFP or government issued documentation that offerors are required to provide. Will the government please confirm that offeror's are not required to place a sequential page number on reproduced sections of the Solicitation or any other required documentation that is outside of the proposal text?

Answer: Offerors need to label pages IAW Section L, Labeling of the RFP.

31. Attachment J-4 contains 299 checklists; however, 1,100 NSNs require ROR according to Attachment_J_2_LIS_Pricing_Workbook_RFP_2025_07_21. Please provide the checklists for all NSNs.

Answer: As of release of Amendment 0004 all current/applicable NSN Configuration Checklists can be provided via DoDSafe by request.

32. Attachment J-4 contains 299 checklists. Of the 299 checklists provided, twelve (12) are labeled with a duplicate NSN, with some checklists containing different references.

Please provide the current/applicable checklist for each NSN with the correct references.

Answer: As of release of Amendment 0004 all current/applicable NSN Configuration Checklists can be provided via DoDSafe by request.

33. Attachment J-4 contains three (3) checklists that are not listed on Attachment_J_2_LIS_Pricing_Workbook_RFP_2025_07_21.

Answer: This was an oversight. The NSNs that these checklists belong to have been removed from Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook. As of release of Amendment 0004 all current/applicable NSN Configuration Checklists can be provided via DoDSafe by request.

34. Please clarify if these checklists were provided in error or if these NSNs will be added to Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook: 6130015376417, 6625016138318, 7021015847230.

Answer: This was an oversight. The NSNs that these checklists belong to have been removed from Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook. As of release of Amendment 0004 all current/applicable NSN Configuration Checklists can be provided via DoDSafe by request.

35. Located within Attachment J-4, eight (8) NSN checklists contain a header citing "Raytheon Competitive Sensitive". Request the Government correct this issue so that prime bidders do not inadvertently distribute any 'competitive sensitive data' or provide confirmation that prime bidders are authorized to share/distribute these checklists with said markings to vendors to obtain pricing? These checklists are marked ' Raytheon Competitive Sensitive' 5998015943320, 5998016049538, 5998016151897, 5998016208076, 5999015013231, 5999015422754, 6105015009865, and 7025016846719

Answer: As of Amendment 0004, NSNs 5998015943320 and 5998016208076 have been removed from Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook. The header has been removed from the checklists for the remaining six (6) NSNs.

36. Personnel resumes shall be limited to two (2) pages. Recommend that resumes and letters of intent be uncounted pages as this number is dependent on the total number of personnel proposed for each position and could account for several pages of the Technical Proposal.

Answer: LOI and key personnel resumes are not included in the page count. RFP, Section L, Factor 1 Technical, Section 1, (d) Key Personnel, has been revised.

37. The PWS grants only a 21-calendar day phase in but holds the outgoing contractor fully accountable until “Day 1 Ready.” How will GFP losses or latent defects discovered post transition be adjudicated between incumbent and awardee?

Answer: The outgoing contractor will be responsible for any losses that occurred during the expiring contract.

38. "While MILSTRIP format is currently effective in updating the Global Combat Support System–Marine Corps (GCSS-MC) files if, in the future, 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." If there are Government-created updates in data exchange formats, who funds and schedules the interface regarding factoring specified in §5.9 “Contractor will work with the Government to provide status updates in emerging formats”?

Answer: The Government will submit a non-binding request soliciting a "cost impact" for all process improvements, Proof of Principle or engineering changes for review/approval. Schedules for data exchange formats will continue IAW PWS Section 5.9 until Contractually directed otherwise.

39. “The Contractor will provide an accurate accountable record of inventory to the LIS COR, upon request." The Performance Requirement Table also references "100% visibility of GFP in contractor possession per contract year". Will the Government provide a reconciled opening inventory for each induction site to serve as the “clean audit” baseline for the 100 % GFP visibility requirement?

Answer: The Contractor responsible for M6700425R0009 will have its own clean audit for all inductions executed on day 1 (+21days) until the end of this contract IAW PWS Section 5.9.

40. The PWS grants +12 days KTAT float for ATAC legs. Is that float excluded from the 95% on time metric in the PRS, or merely from penalties?

Answer: The 12 days is included in the metric for ATAC shipping. An OCONUS delivery will not be considered late until after KTAT+12 days.

41. Attachment S-1 shows that Attachment J-10 KTAT Workbook should be included in Volume V - Contract Documentation; Section L only lists that Attachment J-10 be submitted as part of Section 5 in Volume I Technical Approach. Please clarify whether J- 10 should be included within Volume V submission and update Attachment S-1 accordingly.

Answer: Attachment S-1, Proposal Adequacy Compliance Checklist, has been revised reflect that Attachment J-10 is to be included in Volume I Technical, Section 5.

42. To date, USG Directed Source, Raytheon, has been non-responsive. Please provide a point of contact for USG Directed Source, Raytheon/RTX (cage 96214) and Raytheon (cage 49956). If other Directed Sources do not respond, provide offerors POC's for these directed sources. If directed sources decline to work with bidders, please provide direction as to how offerors should price these NSNs?

Answer: It is solely the responsibility of the offeror/contractor to obtain pricing information from sources of repair. The Government will not provide any input for the development of offerors' pricing.

43. Column P contains a typo, as it's titled "FY21-FY20 Avg Annual BER Qty". Please update Column P with the correct FY end date.

Answer: Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook has been revised to show FY21- FY25 Avg Annual BER Qty in Column P.

44. On the "Inductions per Location" tab of the Pricing Workbook, the average number of inductions per year is identified as 28,455; however, on the "NSN" tab, the "TotalFY21- FY24 Qty Inductions" totals 27,897. This is a difference of 558 inductions. What source provides the correct number of historical inductions?

Answer: Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook has been updated. Totals and averages from the NSN tab and the Inductions per Location tab are now aligned.

45. On the "Inductions per Location" tab of the Pricing Workbook, the average number of inductions is identified as 28,455 "per year"; however, on the "NSN" tab of the Pricing Workbook, the total inductions from FY21-FY24 totals 27,897 with no reference to "per year". Please clarify whether the inductions are per year or for FY21 through FY24, and which list is accurate.

Answer: Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook has been updated. The Total FY21- FY25 column is a total throughout the life of the current contract. Totals and averages from the NSN tab and the Inductions per Location tab are now aligned.

46. USG Directed Source, Keysight Technologies Inc. cage 7ZXR5, requires serial numbers in order to price. Will the USG provide serial numbers for prime bidders to obtain pricing? If directed sources request specific information that is not provided to offerors as part of solicitation documents, please provide direction as to how offerors should price these NSNs?

Answer: No, the USG will not provide serial numbers or any input on how offerors should develop pricing. It is solely the responsibility of the offeror to develop pricing.

47. USG Directed Source, MILDEF, declined to participate, citing they do not contract repair services to 3rd party contractors. Will the USG provide historical ROR pricing information, considering they decline to work with all prime bidders? If directed sources decline to work with bidders, please provide direction as to how offerors should price these NSNs?

Answer: No, the USG will not provide any historical pricing or any input on how offerors should develop pricing. It is solely the responsibility of the offeror to develop pricing.

48. USG Directed Source, Spectro Scientific inc. cage 1BL81, has informed prime bidder that they decline to participate, citing their "current engagement with another prime contractor on the SECREP contract and their commitment to supporting that existing partnership". Does the USG allow directed sources to team exclusively with another prime bidder? If directed sources decline to work with bidders, please provide direction as to how offerors should price these NSNs?

Answer: The USG does not have any control if a directed source wants to team exclusively with another prime bidder and does not control business decisions of sources of repair. The USG will not provide directions on establishing business relationships with sources of repair. This is solely the offeror's responsibility to establish business relationships.

49. USG Directed Source, Foster-Miller, Inc. dba QinetiQ North America Cage 30233, has declined to participate. If directed sources decline to work with bidders, please provide direction as to how offerors should price these NSNs?

Answer: The USG does not provide directions on establishing business relationships with sources of repair. This is solely the offeror's responsibility to establish business relationships.

50. Excel line 898, NSN 6120016849376, is identified as a "Medium Repair". Please identify other NSNs with a designated level of repair. Please identify any other repair designations that might exist on the contract. Please define a "Medium Repair" and any other designations that might exist.

Answer: NSN 6120016849376 (Row 885) and listed as a “Repair” on the updated Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook.

51. Work Standards were provided for 980 NSNs; however, there are 1,100 NSNs listed on Attachment J-2 Pricing Workbook. Please provide the Work Standards for all NSNs.

Answer: Attachment J-3 has been updated to include all applicable work standards for all NSNs and can be accessed via DoD Safe by request.

52. Can the Government provide details on the size of the office space and warehouse space being provided for planning purposes at each location?

Answer: IAW PWS Section 4.5.4, Facilities, outlines office space at induction sites per the governments estimated of number of occupants and capacity of office space.

Office space and warehouse space is dependent on the site; however, it is ample space for necessary outgoing and incoming SECREPs.

53. Can the Government provide access to the LOGCOM Website for all prime contractors to assist the vendors with details required to price ROR?

Answer: Access to this link will be given post-award. Access to SharePoint is restricted to active MCEN account holders.

54. It states that "MHE sufficient to move and load/unload any SECREP will be available through USMC coordination." However, Paragraph 4.1 says that pallet jacks are not provided. Pallet jacks are required to move SECREPs, will they be provided through USMC Coordination for contractors to use?

Answer: No, IAW PWS Section 4.1, Contractor Furnished Equipment, pallet jacks are to be provided by the contractor.

55. Work Standards state, "Core/mandatory replacement Items are those items designated as core/mandatory replacement items as indicated on the NSN configuration checklist shall be replaced by the Contractor during remanufacture and shall not be submitted as O&A."

Within the configuration checklists provided to date, no core items have been identified.

Please confirm that there are no core items for these NSN parts. Please provide configuration checklists for all 1,100 NSNs in order to identify all core items.

Answer: Within Attachment J-4 NSN Configuration Checklist, the section titled “Components Required for Turn In” will list those parts considered as core mandatory.

56. Is there an option for contractors to pay for shipping from Okinawa and Hawaii and not use ATAC (i.e. Express Air or in-country facility)?

Answer: No, contractors are only permitted to use ATAC when shipping from Hawaii and Okinawa.

57. When requesting pricing from vendors for "Repair," most are asking what level of repair should they price since they are estimating this cost sight unseen, and since the cost of a repair can vary greatly following TD&E. Can the Government provide details on what level of repair we can request from the vendors? Many have stated that they will price just under the BER % without any details to cover themselves, which in turn will drive up our total price for the proposal.

Answer: No, the Government is not able to provide levels of repair as they are unseen at this current time. It is solely the responsibility of the offeror to develop pricing proposals and pricing models based on the level of repair required.

58. SECREP inductions require a joint inspection and signed Configuration Checklist by the COR, COTR, DCMA or authorized representative. Will these POCs be available every day, especially in the top 4 highest volume locations (Albany, Cp Lejeune, Cp Pendleton, Okinawa) to avoid shipping delays?

Answer: Yes, an authorized Government representative is available at all sites executing ROR services for SECREP items.

59. The definition for "Repair" does not designate details on the level of repair that must be priced by the Vendors - this is a large range for pricing. Will more specific details be provided to share with the vendors on the level of repair to price for a more accurate amount?

Answer: No, the Government is not able to provide levels of repair as they are unseen at this current time. It is solely the responsibility of the offeror to develop pricing proposals and pricing models based on the level of repair required.

60. Regarding the stated normal working hours of 0630 to 1630, please clarify if this indicates a standard 50-hour work week, or if it represents a 10-hour window during which an 8-hour shift is expected

Answer: This represents a 10-hour window in which an 8-hour shift is expected.

61. Section 1.1 stating the contractor provides "all personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervision and other items to perform ROR," Section 3.1 states that the government will provide office space and a warehouse at each SECREP exchange location. Will the government provide office and warehouse spaces?

Answer: The Government provides office and warehouse spaces for personnel and SECREPs held at SECREP exchange locations. It is the responsibility of the contractor/sub-contractors to provide any personnel, facilities, and equipment when SECREPs are going through the ROR process.

62. The contractor is not required to provide MHE forklifts or MHE operators. Will the government provide MHE drivers at all locations daily? If forklift drivers are not available for a period of days, how will the Government adjust contractor KTAT to ensure contractors are not penalized negatively?

Answer: Yes, the Government will provide MHE drivers IAW PWS Section 3.1. The Government will grant relief for items missing KTAT with justifiable reasons including delays due to the fault of the Government.

63. What are the warranty requirements for storage and operational warranties (SW/OW)?

Specifically, must items be mission-capable, fully mission-capable, or meet their original standards upon vendor return? How does the integrator determine when the OW begins for the end-user, initiating OW tracking and terminating SW tracking?

Answer: Additional information to support the warranty requirements are IAW PWS Section 2.2, Definitions, Warranty. All SECREPS inducted through the LIS program must meet the ROR standard assigned to support mission readiness. An efficient and effective warranty management program will initiate the operation warranty upon issue to the end user which cancels the storage warranty.

64. The work performed under this contract shall require some Contractor employees to have a CAC in order to gain access to base facilities and the DoD computer system. At a minimum, these employees will be required to have a favorable background check prior to obtaining a Government Identification Card and a dot mil account. Will the USG issue computers to CTR personnel for their dot mil accounts? If so, will the CTR at a minimum have view access to GCSS-MC?

Answer: No, IAW PWS Section 4.1, computers will be issued by the contractor. The Government will not issue any laptops to the Contractor supporting the LIS Contract nor will they have viewing access to GCSS-MC. Contractor personnel do not need access to Government laptops to check their dot mil accounts nor to perform LIS contract duties.

65. With the exception of Special Packaging, will the USG advise if the Contractor is responsible for providing the materials necessary for ordinary SECREP shipment packaging?

Answer: Yes, the contractor is responsible for providing the necessary materials for ordinary SECREP shipment packaging.

66. With the exception of Special Packaging, will the USG please provide historical shipment packaging material quantities?

Answer: No, the Government does not have this historical information as it is the responsibility of the contractor to provide.

67. Will the USG please advise if any employees are part of a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)? If so, would the USG please provide the CBA?

Answer: There are no employees part of a Collective Bargaining Agreement.

68. Multiple sources, to include USG Directed Sources, have declined to provide pricing, citing they are unable to price ROR sight unseen, serial numbers are required, they will not response to solicitations as they require use of their Return Merchandise Authorization (RMA) process to include the requirement to identify serial numbers, serial numbers required to determine warranty status/coverage, and defined levels of ROR. The information being requested is available to the incumbent and not made available to prospective bidders, creating an unfair advantage for the incumbent. 1) Request the Government provide serial numbers for existing NSNs under the program to all contractors bidding this solicitation. 2) Request the Government provide direction how to comply considering various vendors are unable to participate without evaluating equipment, obtaining serial number, defined levels of ROR.

Answer: No, the USG will not provide serial numbers or any input on how offerors should develop pricing. It is solely the responsibility of the offeror to develop pricing.

69. USG Directed Source for NSN 5985016505894 is identified as L3 Technologies;

however, L3 has stated that they do not support this part. Please verify and provide the correct the directed source for NSN 5985016505894.

Answer: The Government has verified that L3 Technologies is the correct Directed Source for this NSN.

70. USG Directed Source for NSN 6130994904703 has stated that this part is obsolete and cannot be repaired. Please provide direction as to whether this NSN is still active or whether a replacement part has already been identified for this NSN. In addition, please provide the type of ROR and the accurate directed source.

Answer: NSN 6130994904703 has been removed from the updated Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook.

71. USG Directed Source, Orbit International, has stated that NSN 5840015527034 is obsolete; therefore, it cannot be repaired, it can only remanufactured. Please provide direction as to whether this NSN is still active or whether a replacement part has already been identified for this NSN. In addition, please provide the type of ROR and the accurate directed source.

Answer: NSN 5840015527034 remains on the updated Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook. Directed source and level of repair are accurate.

72. USG Directed Source, COMTECH Corp. (Stellant PST Corp.), has stated that NSN 5895015683027 is obsolete, it cannot be repaired, and has declined to participate. Please provide direction as to whether this NSN is still active or whether a replacement part has already been identified for this NSN. In addition, please provide the type of ROR and the accurate directed source.

Answer: NSN 5895015683027 remains on the updated Attachment J-2 LIS Pricing Workbook. Directed source and level of repair are accurate.

73. OFFERORS MAY E-MAIL WRITTEN QUESTIONS REQUESTING

CLARIFICATION OF THE RFP TO THE GOVERNMENT. QUESTIONS WILL BE

ACCEPTED UP TO 7 BUSINESS CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THE RELEASE OF

THE RFP. Request that the Government allow contractors another opportunity to ask questions in light of the fact that contractors need time to reach out to all vendors and given the issues that have arisen related to directed sources refusing to provide pricing data. Allowing additional time to ask questions would allow contractors to go through the full effort of contacting all directed sources to get pricing.

Answer: Yes, at the time of posting Amendment 0004 with these Q&As there will be an additional 7 calendar day period to submit questions.

74. On January 20, 2025, the current president revoked Executive Order 14091, thereby abolishing the 15% aspirational goal and reverting the federal target back to the statutory minimum of 5% for SDB prime contracting and subcontracting, as mandated by 15 U.S.C. § 644(g)(2) Homeland Security TodayCongress.gov. Specifically, EO 14091 was rescinded and replaced by a new direction under Executive Order 14151, titled “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing”, issued on the same date. This executive order broadly eliminated equity focused initiatives and triggered a reset of SBA’s SDB goals back to the statutory baseline of 5% Congress.govgovernmentcontractslawblog.com. In summary: EO 14091 (Biden, signed earlier) had established the 15% SDB goal. EO 14151 (current president, January 20, 2025) rescinded EO 14091, returning the SDB subcontracting goal to the statutory minimum of 5% Should contractors follow EO 14151 issued on January 20, 2025 on SDB from 12.5% to 5%?

Answer: Offerors are to propose a Small Business Participation Plan in accordance with the Minimum Quantitative Requirement of 12.5% for Small Disadvantaged Business per RFP Section L Factor 3 Small Business Participation.

75. Each day that assets are turned in for ROR, the Government will provide via File Transfer Protocol (FTP) to the Contractor’s designated server, a single text file with 80 card column (cc) Document identifier (ZBE) Transactions for each SECREP item ROR.

Question - What is the exception of the File Transfer Protocol (FTP)? Is it going to be flat files manually processed (uploaded and downloaded) or is it going to be direct server to server?

Answer: The exception is the Government will submit a flat file to the Contractor for manual processing if server is down.

76. What are the warranty requirements for storage and operational warranties (SW/OW)?

Specifically, must items be mission-capable, fully mission-capable, or meet their original standards upon vendor return? How is the integrator informed that a SECREP was issued to the end user, and how are the "Operational Warranty" (OW) start and end times captured?

Answer: Additional information to support the warranty requirements are IAW PWS Section 2.2, Definitions, Warranty. All SECREPS inducted through the LIS program must meet the ROR standard assigned to support mission readiness. An efficient and effective warranty management program will initiate the operation warranty upon issue to the end user which cancels the storage warranty.

77. Row 1088 is blank but has a Cage Code listed in column J. Please confirm if this row should be blank and update Attachment J_10 accordingly to resolve this issue.

Answer: Attachment J-10 KTAT Workbook has been revised.

78. In column H of the attachment J-10 all NSNs show 90 days for Government Requested (non-contractual) TAT. In Attachment J-2 column I provides a unique Government Requested (non-contractual) TAT for each NSN. Which document takes precedence when the values are not the same?

Answer: Attachment J-2 Pricing workbook has been revised to show 90 days for Government Requested TAT for every NSN.

79. In column M - TotalFY21-FY24 Qty Inductions, some quantities are listed in "red" font.

Why are some listed in red font while others are not?

Answer: The “red” 1s have been replaced with “red” 0s to represent 0 inductions for those NSNs. This was a system generated error that has been fixed.

80. Please confirm that the successful offeror will be given access to interested incumbent personnel to include existing key personnel for Right of First Refusal purposes?

Answer: The Government cannot confirm that agreements have or have not been reached between employees and incumbent contractor.

81. The subject paragraph states "Work standards by NSN are located at the LOGCOM website". Can the government provide a hyperlink to this information?

Answer: Access to this link will be given post-award. Access to SharePoint is restricted to active MCEN account holders.

82. Should the Quality Control Plan paragraph listed in part of Section 1 be "e. Quality Control Plan"?

Answer: Yes, the Quality Control Plan has been added as "e" in the RFP, Section L, Section 1, Technical Approach.

83. The "Standard" and "Method of Inspection" columns regarding the Transfer of GFP (PWS 3.4) mentions use of the GFP module on the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE). PWS 3.4 was revised to instruct contractors to use CAV-RP. Please clarify if the standard should be revised to reflect the use of CAV-RP for GFP inventory purposes.

Answer: The PRS and PWS have been updated to show CAV-RP, now known as Repair Portal (RP), and GFP Module.

84. Numerous references are made to "IS" within the PRS table. Please clarify what "IS" the government referencing; CAV-RP, the COCO IT tracking system, or both.

Answer: This was a clerical error that has been amended to show "LIS" within the PWS, Appendix 1.

85. PWS Paragraph 4.9.1 states the contract Transition phase-in period is 21 calendar days while 4.9.2 states the phase-out period is 45 calendar days. Can the Government clarify the time allotted for Phase-In?"

Answer: The phase-in is 21 calendar days.

86. Section L Section 3 requests the offeror demonstrate experience repairing and handling controlled cryptographic items. Section M, Section 3 references PWS paragraph 5.12, Asset Visibility. Please confirm if the Government intended for PWS 5.13, Handling Unclassified CCI to be the referenced PWS section for Section 3.

Answer: RFP, Section M, Section 3, has been revised to reference PWS Section 5.14.

87. PWS 5.14 mentions quarterly submission of a CPI Report (CDRL A007) and also mentions a CPI Advise Report (AR) stating that all ARs will be reviewed/discussed during the monthly PMR. Please clarify when the CPI ARs are due.

Answer: IAW PWS 5.15 Continuous Process Improvement Reporting (CPI) reports are submitted quarterly and reviewed and discussed monthly.

88. The RFP states, "The Past Performance references shall be contracts or TOs for the performance of actual technical requirements. Master contract vehicles (e.g., Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs), IDIQ contracts) do not satisfy the Past Performance requirement unless submitted together with a TO similar in size, and relevancy to this requirement and awarded and performed under the vehicle." Given that the LIS SECREP Program is a single award IDIQ, can the Government please confirm that single award IDIQ programs, as a whole, will satisfy the Past Performance requirement?

Answer: Yes, a Single Award IDIQ will satisfy the Past Performance requirement.

89. If Offerors are to include TOs, would the Government consider increasing the page count?

Answer: No, the Government will not consider increasing the page count. Offerors are expected to provide narratives for each past performance reference, not a copy of the task order itself.

90. The instructions direct offerors to refer to Block 9 of the SF33 for the proposal due date.

Block 9 is not populated.

91. Answer: Yes. In Amendment 0003 released on 7 August 2025, the SF33 has been amended to have a submission date in block 9. Request the government provide a conformed solicitation file to include updates from all amendments.

Answer: At time of release of Amendment 0004 and the Q&A, a conformed copy of this solicitation with all amendments and attachments will be provided.

92. Will the office space provided by the USG be a shared space?

Answer: Yes, this will be a shared space with Government employees.

93. From the office space to the Base DBARK station, what is the distance we to estimate for running a Fiber line for internet connection in the office space?

Answer: Per PWS Section 4.5.4, the Contractor shall not install materials or equipment, modify existing facilities, or construct new facilities or structures on Government property. Therefore, the Government cannot provide an estimate of distance for running a fiber line.

94. CLIN 0001 has the same period of performance as CLINS 0002-0012. Should phase in begin prior to the full performance CLINS?

Answer: CLIN 0001 Period of Performance is correct.

95. How often do ‘Virtual Induction/ Transaction” occur and how are these communicated with the contractor to ensure systems are updated and accurate?

Answer: On occasion, based on USG need or a nonstandard or isolated requirement; by offering a waiver to the USG for on-site inspection process, replaced by a virtual process to facilitate the induction of assets not physically on site. The USG can provide direction and listings as well as supplier name, location and POC, along with guidance to create virtual asset records for association to specific ZBE document numbers when electronically received into the property management system. The virtual process defined assumes that the asset is on a contract listing previously accepted by the USG and all supplier vetting has been pre-established.

96. If necessary, will DCMA inspection of completed repair or purchases occur the source or at the destinations?

Answer: If necessary, DCMA will complete inspections of repair at the source locations or destinations.

97. Please clarify the Government's intent with this statement: "For CONUS shipments, the contractor will bill for shipping costs under CLIN 0005. DLA authorizes a military shipping label for all approved carriers (CONUS)."

Answer: The intent of the first sentence is to inform the contractor which CLIN they will bill CONUS shipping costs under. The second sentence is to inform the contractor that CONUS shipping must use DLA approved carriers.

98. The NAICS code referenced is 541990 (All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services) with a standard size of $19.5M. However, in GovWin the NAICS code is 541614 (Process, Physical Distribution and Logistics Consulting Services) with a standard size of $20.0. Request correct NAICS code be updated within the RFP and GovWin.

Answer: NAICS code 541990 with a standard size of $19.5M is the correct NAICS code this requirement is being solicited under. GovWin is not maintained nor managed by the Government; therefore, the Government has no input on the data found on the website nor its accuracy.