MCWS-X Question and Answer Round 3.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 12 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- M67854-20-R-2025_Amendment_0003
- Issued by
-
United States Marine Corps
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to solicitation M67854-20-R-2025_Amendment_0003 for the Marine Corps Wideband Satellite Communications - Expeditionary (MCWS-X) program. The solicitation seeks proposals for man-packable, multiband satellite terminals and spare part kits to support the United States Marine Corps. Through various amendments and questions, the Initial Issue Provisioning Kits have been removed from the requirements, along with associated pricing and delivery terms. Offerors are now required to provide a recommended sparing approach and list of critical spare parts for evaluation, but will price all spares through separate contract line items. The anticipated DPAS rating for the contract is DO-A7. Clarification was also provided that the Government will use its selected quantities to determine the Total Evaluated Price for proposal evaluation purposes.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 3 Delivery Schedule - 02 June 2020.DOCX | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 7 SOW Cross Reference Matrix - 02 June 2020.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| M67854-20-R-2025-0003.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 4 Pricing Workbook - 02 June 2020.XLSX | XLSX spreadsheet |
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
Sheet2
| Question Number | Document/Section | Paragraph Number | Question/Issue/Concern | Government Response |
| 1 | M67854-20-R-2025 Solicitation | Page 15 of 64, Section 3 Requirements, paragraph 3.2.1 MCWS-X Initial Issue Provisioning | SOW Section 3.2.1 states the IIP kits consist of LRU’s, expendables and consumables sufficient to support each system for 2 years. If an Offeror’s logistics analysis concludes that only a small number of a particular LRU, due to a particularly high MTBF, is adequate to support the full two-year population of fielded terminals (i.e.. not one-for-one), how does an offeror propose such an IIP configuration? The pricing workbook (Attachment 4) and the delivery schedule (Attachment 3) do not appear to allow for such a “shared” sparing pool. A “one-for-one” sparing philosophy would not be economically advantageous to the Gov’t and could disadvantage an Offeror when calculating their evaluated price. |
| We recommend the government remove the IIP kit from the Evaluated Pricing workup in Attachment 4 Pricing Workbook. Evaluating an offerors Pricing Workbook based on an vendor defined and arbitrary IIP kit opens the possibility for CLIN price manipulation and abuse by vendors and not necessarily meeting the goal of terminal sustainment for the USMC. Instead we suggest the Government ask vendors to provide a recommended IIP based on sustainment analysis, highlight critical spares in Attachment K and allow the government to apply a sparing cost analysis based on those data points. | In Amendment 0003 to the RFP, the IIP Kit has been removed from the SOW, Delivery Schedule, Pricing Workbook, and the IIP CLINs are now reserved. Section L and M have changed to remove references to the IIP Kit; however, a sparing analysis and recommended list and quantity of spares is still required. All spares must be priced in the proposal and will be purchased under Exhibit K CLINs. | |
| 2 | M67854-20-R-2025 | |
| Statement of Work | Section 1.1 | |
| L-2.3.1 Attachment 7 | The SOW Cross Reference Matrix only addresses a subset of the requirements set forth in the SOW. Does the government expect additional SOW requirements to be added to the matrix as provided? | Response is only necessary for those SOW paragraphs listed in the SOW Cross Reference Matrix, Attachment 7, which has been updated via Amendment 0003. |
| 3 | M67854-20-R-2025 | |
| Statement of Work | L-2.3.3 | |
| Sustainment Approach | Per the RFP, we are determining the composition of the IIP kits to support the system. What is not know is the quantity of systems each IIP kits is intended to support. Is (1) complete IIP kit to support 50, 100, or 200 hundred systems? That unit of measure is not known and impacts quantities of items each that would make up each kit. |
| Per question 1, IIP kits have been removed from the RFP. See updated language in Amendment 0003. | ||||
| 4 | M67854-20-R-2025 | SF33 | What it the anticipated DPAS Rating for the contract? | The DPAS rating for this contract is DO-A7 |
| 5 | M67854-20-R-2025 |
Section L-2.3.5 Volume V Price/Cost Paragraph 4 Please provide clarification for Total Evaluated Price (TEP).
In Attachment 4, the evaluated unit price for CLIN 001, CLIN 0002, and the remaining ordering periods is based upon the Qty 1-10 Unit Price. Since the direction from the Government is to leave the formulas in Appendix 4 intact, is it the Government’s intent to use the Qty 1-10 prices to develop a Total Evaluated Price (TEP) for proposal evaluation? Or is it the Government’s intent to use the offeror’s price for the Government-selected quantity (i.e. if the Government-selected quantity is 94, the unit price for 40+ will be used to calculate the TEP for evaluation purposes)?
Paragraph L-2.3.5 states, "As described in FAR Clause 52.207-4, each Offeror who believes that acquisitions in different quantities would be more advantageous is invited to recommend an economic purchase quantity. If there are significant price breaks at different quantity points than what is found in the Pricing Workbook, the Offeror may propose this information as well." Therefore, offerors are encouraged to use quantities that accurately reflect the particular economies of their own quantity discounts. The Government will use Government-selected quantities in determining the Total Evaluated Price.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .