Amended_A00001_N6264921R0038 QandA.PDF

Question No.

Industry Question Government Answer

Would we be able to bid on specific clins in all regions or do we have to bid all clins in the in each region? Please note § L.4.2.7.4, "Offerors shall not provide specific ELIN pricing in response to this solicitation".

At the task order level, in accordance with § L.4.1.2, offers must be able to perform all ELINs in each country, but may propose to perform in only a portion of the countries within a given region.

Also from reading through this request we would be able to supply fuel for this effort through our contract with DLA Energy and as a part of SeaCard.

The Government's requirement is described in § C of the RFP. Offerors must be able to supply or perform all ELINs listed therein. While the Government may define "Other Services" in accordance with the PWS, this will be done at the task order level. DLA Energy Seacard program is completely separate from

WEXMAC.

Can you confirm how many past performance questionnaires shall we include with our submission?

The solicitation does not define how many past performance questionnaires to submit. Rather, § L.3.1.1 imposes a 75 page limit on the submission. Offerors must choose how best to utilize the 75 pages to fully describe their responsibility to perform the requirement according the evaluation criteria in § M.

4 Do we have to bid on all ELINS in a category for our proposal to be eligible? See the answer to Question 1 page 70/75, L.4.2.8.1.1 – how many past performance questionnaires are we required to submit? is there a minimum or a maximum number?

See the answer to Question 3 page 71/75, L.4.2.8.1.8 – as already stated for past similar tenders, we believe this requirement shall be deleted as does not apply to global contracts, in fact, for a global contract it is simply not possible to provide a global license.

Shouldn’t the US government accept to delete his requirement, please confirm that a declaration from the offeror is enough as demonstration that he has the ability to obtain permits to operates worldwide.

The § L.4.2.8.1.8 language was modified from the synopsis version to the RFP. It currently reads:

"L.4.2.8.1.8 A demonstration that the offeror has or has the ability to obtain all registrations, permits and licenses required to perform the contract in the locations for which the offeror is proposing."

page 71/75 ‐ L.4.2.8.1.10 – “Demonstration the offeror has a computer system conforming to the requirements provided under Cyber Security Requirements for expeditionary services outlined within this RFP”. Please confirm if a written declaration is enough. In fact, at page 49 of the SOW it is written that:” the contractor that receives a MAC award shall confirm with the KO that its computer systems conform to these requirements immediately after contract award. The confirmation shall be in writing via e‐mail to KO”. Shouldn’t a written declaration be enough please confirm if one or more cyber security certifications are enough to demonstrate that the offeror has an IT System which conforms to the requirements.

§ L.4.2.8.1.10 requires offerors to demonstrate conformance with the Cyber Security Requirements as part of the General Standard of Responsibility. A written declaration, including policies, certifications, or other documentation as necessary, must be provided to document the offeror's responsibility.

page 71/75 ‐ L.4.2.8.2.1 – can you please clarify the financial statements for how many years back are to be provided?

See amendment P0001. Offerors shall provide audited financial statements for the most recent fiscal year end.

Minimum guarantee: please confirm if 500 USD is per region or total for the award (no matter the number of regions for which a company is awarded).

The minimum guarantee serves as consideration to make each IDIQ contract binding. As such, the minimum guarantee applies to the IDIQ contract regardless of the number of regions awarded.

Considering that pricing elements have to be sent only at the RTOP stage, please, be so kind to confirm that Section B of the Solicitation (pages from 3 to 20 out of 75) has not to be filled in by the Bidders, nor has to be included in the Proposal Package.

Each offeror shall ensure its proposal includes all items listed in § L.4. In accordance with § L.4.2.7.4, offerors shall not provide specific ELIN pricing in response to this solicitation. This applies to Section B and the ELINs listed in Attachment 1.

We participated to several Solicitations of the USN over the last years, NAVSUP Yokosuka included, but it is the first time we meet the FAR Clause 252.239‐7009 (dated 2015), related to Cloud Computing.

Would you be so kind to explain the meaning of that Clause and why the US Government decided to include it for this specific Contract?

The clause is being included in accordance with its prescription.

Solicitation Question and Answer

Please, be so kind to confirm our understanding that all the documents attached to the email(s) with which the Offeror’s Proposal Package will be submitted shall be calculated for the 75 pages limit stated at L.3.1.1. This means that, for example, Offeror’s cover letter, SF33 filled in, Amendments cover pages filled in, Attachment 2 filled in, etc. are all documents to be counted in order not to overpass the limit of 75 pages.

Correct. § L.3.1.1 states the 75 page limit applies to all items listed in § L.4 Proposal Content Requirements which includes the cover letter, SF33 and amendments, Section K, Attachment 2, subcontracting narrative, etc.

Considering the maximum limit of pages for the entire Proposal Package, please be so kind to authorize the Offerors to include in their offer only the pages of the FAR Clauses and Section K where an insert has to be done by the Bidder. This means that the pages of the Solicitation where no inserts have to be done, may be omitted from the Proposal Package.

The proposal content requirements remain the same as defined in § L.4.

L.4.2.8.1.1; NOTE 70: Could the Government please confirm that Offerors are to have the client complete Attachment 3 ‐ Past Performance Information and Questionnaire and submit this directly back to the Offeror? The Offeror will then submit the completed questionnaire with our proposal. We are confused by that instruction vs L.4.2.8.1.1 which states that the Offeror shall fill out Attachment 3 ‐ Past Performance Information and Questionnaire and return with its proposal which implies that the questionnaire would be submitted unsigned by the client.

In Attachment 3, the offeror fills out Part 1 ‐ Past Performance Information Sheet Sections 1‐4 and the client fills out Part 1 Section 5‐8 and Part II ‐ Past Performance Questionnaire. Once the form is filled out and signed, the offeror returns the form with its proposal. Attachment 3 shall be used for each past performance example provided.

L.4.2.8.1.1: If the Government intends for the Offeror to complete and have the client submit Attachment 3 ‐ Past Performance Information and Questionnaire directly to the Government, could the Government please clarify the due date and time of submission by client required for the Attachment 3 document? Will the Government notify Offerors when clients have submitted the Attachment 3 document?

The desire is for the client to submit its portion of Attachment 3 to the offeror to be transmitted with the offeror's proposal. However, if the client wishes to send the questionnaire directly to NAVSUP FLCY, it may do so. (See the Attachment 3 Note at the bottom of Page 2) In that case, the Government will consider only the information received by the due date for submissions.

A.12 (Page 2): The RFP states, "Provisions and clauses incorporated by reference are done in accordance with FAR 52.3...." and we can find no such FAR clause. Can the Government confirm they mean subpart 52.3 as identified in FAR 52.102 (c)?

FAR 52.3 refers to the clause matrix. This is the tool the Government uses to determine which clauses are prescribed for a given contract. FAR 52.102(c) guides the incorporatation of clauses in full‐text versus by reference.

G.2 ‐ 2 (Page 32): Paragraph 2 says "...HSP provider shall designate an electronic business point of contact..." Did the Government mean to say "WEXMAC provider"?

See revised language in Amendment P0001

G.2‐3 (Page 32): Paragraph 3 says "...The HSP is responsible designating a GAM who will be responsible for activating the company’s CAGE code in WAWF by following the instructions at the WAWF website"? Did the Government mean to say "WEXMAC is responsible..."?

See revised language in Amendment P0001

G.2 last para (Page 32) Paragraph says "For any task order issued for or by an agency that does not utilize the WAWF process, the HSPs shall follow the payment instructions as outline in the task order." Did the Government mean to say " the WEXMAC providers shall follow...."?

See revised language in Amendment P0001

Could the Government please confirm that any offeror's private company (non‐public) financials or financial information provided in the WEXMAC bid with restricted pages as marked per FAR 52.215‐1 will not be disclosed and will not be discoverable under the Freedom of Information Act?

5 U.S.C. §552 (b)(1) through (b)(9) contains 9 exemptions to FOIA records disclosures. Specifically, § (b)(4) " trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential."

The NAVSUP FOIA office processes all FOIA requests including determinations under the above exemptions. For more information, please follow the below links:

https://www.navsup.navy.mil/public/navsup/foia/ https://open.defense.gov/Transparency/FOIA/FOIA‐Handbook/

L.4.2.8.1.3; Q#14 (Page 70): In the Industry Day Q&A #14, the Government states there is no incumbent on this current work; could the Government please describe what is meant by the statement "a demonstration that the offer can comply with ... including a transition plan"?

Currently, the Government awards stand‐alone contracts for expeditionary requirements. While unlikely, a transition plan may be needed at the task order level to provide continuity of services. To address this element, offerors may provide a brief description of a transition plan that could be implemented to successfully transition services.

L.4.2.8.1.2 (Page 70): Would the Government please confirm that the Offeror can provide a signed statement certifying that subcontractors are providing services as required per the Performance Work Statement (PWS) in each region identified within our proposal are in good standing and operating ethically in lieu of submission of FAR 9.104‐1 General Standards of Responsibility?

Offerors will choose the method to document the responsibility of the team. In general, the more significant the subcontract in terms of technical skill and financial commitment (cash or assets) the greater the detail of information that should be provided. See also the answer to Questions 23 and 45.

L.4.2.8.2; M.2.2.1 (Page 70 & 74): Would the Government please confirm that the information required for FAR 9.104‐1 General Standards of Responsibility are only applicable to first‐tier subcontractors where the subcontractor may perform more than 50% of the services?

Offerors must determine how much information to provide based on the team structure and the significance of the subcontracted work in terms of the type and amount. § L.4.2.5 requires offerors to identify the extent to which subcontracting will be utilized. Further, proposals including significant teaming may require additional information to document the team's responsibility. This provision does not limit the requirement to a certain subcontractor tier or certain percentage of work being subcontracted.

To allow for greater competition and better product and services to the Government, would the Government consider allowing Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letters allowing an Offeror to use affiliates, divisions, etc.

for meeting requirements of this solicitation? For your review, language from the General Service Administration's (GSA's) in regards to Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letters can be found from the OASIS RFP below:

Offerors may team, form a joint venture, or utilize available resources within the existing corporate structure to perform the WEXMAC requirement. However the resources are made available, offerors should ensure the proposal narrative adequately describe the necessary information covering all aspects of the responsibility determination as defined in Sections L and M.

Would the Government consider providing a two week extension to provide Offerors with time to provide a competitive proposal?

Yes, see P0001

26 Will the Government provide the list of attendees during the virtual industry day in February? Yes, please see amendment P0001

Background: Attachment 4 is titled QASP. However, the information appears to be the evaluation criteria for QASP.

Question: Will the Government please confirm the subject matter of Attachment 4 incorporates the entire QASP?

The QASP is comprised of both Attachments 4 and 5.

Background: Section L.4.2.1 states: “Cover Letter: Offerors shall submit a cover letter, not to exceed two (2) pages, clearly identifying the Global Region(s) in which the proposal includes and any country limitations within the region.”

Question: Will the Government consider the cover letter requirement exempt from page count?

No

Background: Section L.4.2.2 states: “SF33: Signed Standard Form 33 ‘Solicitation, Offer, and Award’ with blocks 12 – 18 completed by the Offeror. If amendments to the solicitation are issued, each signed Standard Form 30 ‘Amendment of Solicitation/Modification of Contract’ shall be included with blocks 8 and 15 a through c completed by the Offeror.”

Question: Will the Government consider the SF33 and SF30(s) exempt from page count?

No

Background: Section L.4.2.3 states: “Completed Representations and Certifications (Section K): This shall include any supplemental information required by the representations and certifications in Section K. If the offeror is a joint venture, a Memorandum of Association shall be provided which indicates who has the authority to bind the business entity.”

Question: Will the Government consider the representations and certifications exempt from page count?

No, but if the offeror is a joint venture and a Memorandum of Association is provided, it will be excluded from the page count.

Background: Section L.4.2.4 states: “Attachment 2 – WEX‐MAC Vendor Points of Contact: Offerors shall fill out and return Attachment 2 with its proposal.” Question: Will the Government consider the POC (Attachment 2) worksheet exempt from page count?

No

Background: Attachment 3 – Past Performance Information and Questionnaire is a minimum of 5 pages (6 pages maximum). Question: Will the Government consider the past performance information and questionnaires exempt from page count?

No

Background: Attachment 3 is a PDF that does not allow text entry. Question: For ease of customer response, would the Government please allow offerors to convert the PDF to allow text entry?

Yes

Background: Section L.4.2.8.1.1 states: “For each past performance example, the offeror shall fill out Attachment 3

– Past Performance Information and Questionnaire and return with its proposal.” Question: Due to global events (e.g., the COVID‐19 pandemic), will the Government consider a proposal extension to allow US Government clients time to respond appropriately to the Attachment 3 requirements?

See the answer to Questions 25

Background: Section L.4.2.8.1.7 states: “Certificate of registration of the company.” Question: Will the Government consider the company registration of the company documents exempt from page count?

No

Background: Section L.4.2.8.2.1 states: “Element 1 – Financial Capability: The offeror shall provide audited financial statements that comply with the United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles or equivalent in the country that the offeror was formed. At a minimum, the financial statements shall include a balance sheet, income statement, and statement of cash flows or equivalent statements in the country that the offeror was formed.

Offerors may also describe available lines of credit or other financial resources available to perform the requirement. All statements shall be in the English language.” Question: Will the Government consider financial statements (such as SEC filings) exempt from page count?

No

Background: Section L.4.2.8.2.4. states: “A narrative or other substantiating documentation shall be provided to document the offeror’s responsibility.” Question: Will the Government provide additional clarification defining what is meant by “offeror’s responsibility” in relation to Quality?

The Government will utilize the narrative (See § L.4.2.8.2.4) among other information provided such as the Attachment 3 ‐ Past Performance Information and Questionnaires (See § L.4.2.8.1.1) to evaluate the factor listed at § M.2.2.1.4.

Background: Section L.4.2.8.2.4 states: “A narrative or other substantiating documentation shall be provided to document the offeror’s responsibility.” Question: Will the Government provide examples of types of “substantiating documentation” that offerors might provide?

No

Attachment 3‐Past Performance Questionnaire: Will the Government clarify what is meant by "financial commitment" as it pertains to past performance contracts?

The response may describe the financial commitment in terms of cash, time delay from the expenditure to the reimbursement, value of the resources deployed (assets, personnel, cash), or any other means to explain the adjective selection in § 4.2 of Attachment 3.

RFP L.3.1.1 & L.4.1.1, page 69: Can you confirm that if we submit regional‐specific proposals that each of the proposals has a page limit of 75 pages per proposal?

Correct, see § L.4.1

Attachment 3‐Past Performance Questionnaire ‐ 4.1 Complexity of Work: ☐ High ☐ Med ☐ Routine Explanation: Will the Government clarify what is meant by "Complexity of Work" as it pertains to the Past Performance Questionnaire?

The response may be described in terms of the required coordination with stakeholders, management of tight schedules, managing a diverse and complex team, or any other means to explain the adjective selection in § 4.1 of Attachment 3.

42 Can an extension to the 01 April due date be granted? See the answer to Question 25

Can you please confirm the anticipated award and implementation dates listed in Section F 31 May 2021, or advise of dates otherwise?

Section F represents the estimated start and finish of the base contract ordering period. Specifically, the Government anticipates awards being made the end of May 2021 and ordering to commence in June 2021.

L.4.2.5: Is there an estimated percentage of subcontracting work that the government considers “significant teaming”?

No

L.4.2.5: Is the estimate to which subcontracting is needed determined by percentage of ELINs requiring subcontractor support for a potential RTOP or is there a different measure?

The purpose of Subcontracting Narrative is to gauge the offeror's ability to self‐perform versus team.

While the extent of teaming may vary based on the RTOP, the Government wants to know the significant team members so they can be included in the responsibility determination.

46 L.4.2.7.4 : Are we required to fill in the unit price and max amount on page 3‐20 of solicitation? See the answer to Question 10

Throughout the PWS below an “X” is used as a placeholder in the ELIN to show that the ELIN numbers will vary by region. Does it mean that each region will have different requirements shown by different ELIN numbers?

The requirements are the same, but the ELIN nomenclature will differ based on the region. See Page 2 of Attachment 1

SUBCLIN 0001AJ : SECTION 10 ‐ CLASS I – FOOD, RATIONS, AND WATER SUPPLIES

10.1 If the requesting activity requires food, rations, or water supplies such as fresh fruit and vegetables (FFV), the requirement must be primarily satisfied through other U.S. Government contracts. Use of these contracts for food, rations, or water supplies (i.e. Defense Logistics Agency) is mandatory when available If such a contract is available within a region, does it mean that these ELINs are not needed in this PWS? Where can we obtain information on whether such contracts already exist within a region/country?

The requirement may include these ELINs as part of the solution, and if so, the PWS imposes a duty to utilize the existing DoD supply chain for these ELINs. Additional information on available contracts can be found at https://www.dla.mil/TroopSupport/Subsistence/FoodServices/.

SUBCLIN 0001AL : SECTION 12 – CLASS III – PETROLEUM, OILS, AND LUBRICANTS SUPPLIES

12.1 If the requesting activity requires petroleum, oils, and lubricants supplies, the requirement must be primarily satisfied through other U.S. Government contracts. Use of these contracts for petroleum, oils, and lubricants supplies (i.e. Defense Logistics Agency) is mandatory when available.

If such a contract is available within a region, does it mean that these ELINs are not needed in this PWS? Where can we obtain information on whether such contracts already exist within a region/country?

See the answer to Question 48. See also:

https://www.dla.mil/Energy/Locations/Pacific/ https://www.dla.mil/Energy/Offers/Products/BulkPetroleum/

50 Is it possible for us to ask for an extended deadline? See the answer to Questions 25

4.1 ‐ Modification of Orders ‐ Unless otherwise provided herein, in the event an order or ELIN is cancelled at least 72 hours prior to the start of the period of performance, the U.S. Government will not be liable for any charges.

Statement ‐ The procurement, movement, and staging of many of the logistics items contained in the ELINs will have to begin well in advance of the 72 hours prior to the PoP and costs will be incurred. This puts the entire risk on the prime contractor.

Question ‐ Would the government consider expanding the time where the U.S. Government would be liable for any charges to 7 days, or at least provide a 50% cost reimbursement where the prime contractor can provide documentation of incurred expenses between 72 hours and 7 days?

Yes, see the amended language P0001

Could you please let me know about the place performance of the subject project or location of this project ?

Please see the PWS § 1.5 for a full listing of regions.

4.1 ‐ Modification of Orders ‐ Reference is made to the below paragraph that discuses no cost cancellation. As WEXMAC’s purpose is to provide Humanitarian Assistance/Disaster Relief Support, Contingency Support, Exercise Support, Lodging Support, Logistic Support and Ashore Support time & distance associated with mobilization of equipment and personnel at many locations call for contractors to commit financial & human resources more than 72 hours ahead of the start of a Task Order’s (TO) Period of Performance (POP). If the USG will not consider changing the no cost cancellation clause to account for mobilization time of equipment & staff what recourse do contractors have for recovering costs associated with the cancellation of a TO?

See the answer to Question 51

Will vendors be required to move munitions & weapons? PWS § 8 covers cargo/mail transportation as well as hazardous materials. DFARS Clause 52.223‐7002 Safety Precautions for Ammunition and Explosives has been added to the solicitation. Details regarding the specific cargo to be detialed at the RTOP level and the requiring activity will be responsible for ensuring contractor compliacne with the DoD Contractors' Safety Manual for Ammunition and Explosives.

55 Will drivers to be required to obtain a NATO Secret Clearance? No

Will US government personnel and/or partner military forces operate inside of contracted warehouses? (i.e. break down cargo and repackage it)

This would be specificed at the RTOP level.

PWS indicates that warehouses need to be able to store HAZMAT material, does that include AMMO? This would be specificed at the RTOP level.

Will vednors be required to cross regions? I.E.‐cargo arrives in Germany (Region 9) and needs to be delivered to Estonia (Region 10)?

Yes, within the intent the WEXMAC scope, RTOP requirements may require cross‐country and inter‐region transportation in support of the requirement. This would be specified at the RTOP level.

There is a provision for HAZMAT transportation, but does that include AMMO? This would be specificed at the RTOP level.

The PWS reads as if the requirement is loading/ unloading of aircraft. Would the government also require drop off/ pick up area not inside the confines of an airport?

This would be specificed at the RTOP level.