Questions and Answerround 3.pdf

RFP-0002480

Caliber – 5.56mm NATO / 223 Remington

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS #3

Posted July 27, 2020

The following questions and answers are provided for informational purposes only.

Nothing contained in the below questions and answers constitutes a change to the terms and conditions of the solicitation. Any change to a term or condition will be issued through an amendment to the solicitation. Upon review of the answers provided below, if additional clarification is needed, please forward questions to the attention of Amy E. Lacy at AELacy@fbi.gov by close of business on August 28, 2020.

Note: In some instances, additional context has been added to the original question in order to clearly describe the question for all potential Offerors.

QUESTION 1:

Section C.4.1 - Projectile weight: While the RFP does not require a specific weight or tolerance for the frangible projectile as shown in section C.4.1, the Phase I evaluation requires SAAMI/NATO compliance to Dimensional Specifications. The current SAAMI requirement is ± 3.0% for non-lead bullets. It is our understanding that most if not all .223/5.56 frangible projectiles have a standard ± 2.0 grain tolerance which is outside SAAMI compliance. Could the RFP be modified to state that the weight requirement for frangible projectiles be ± 2.0 grains? And that this requirement supersedes the stated SAAMI requirement?

ANSWER 1:

THE FBI WILL ACCEPT A +/- 2.0 GRAIN TOLERANCE FOR FRANGIBLE

PROJECTILES.

QUESTION 2:

Section J - Manufacturer’s Test Data Sheets: Would the Government be willing to provide this Section as “Microsoft Word” document?

ANSWER 2:

YES. THIS DOCUMENT WILL BE POSTED ON BETA.SAM IN WORD FORMAT BY

AMY LACY.

QUESTION 3:

M.2.2.4 - Phase 1/Pricing Review: Can the Government expand on/clarify what measures and/or metrics will be utilized to determine “reasonableness” of submitted pricing. If a submission is deemed unreasonable, will it be eliminated from further/Phase 2 evaluation and consideration?

ANSWER 3:

UNDER M.2.2.4-PHASE 1 PRICING REVIEW, ALL LINES ON PRICING REVIEW

SHEET SHALL BE REVIEWED TO VERIFY ALL LINES ARE COMPLETED WITH

EITHER PRICING OFFERED OR A NO BID CLEARLY NOTATED. PRICING SHALL

BE REVIEWED TO ENSURE THERE IS A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE

REQUIREMENT BY THE OFFEROR AND WITHIN INDUSTRY STANDARDS.

Per FAR PART 12.209 Determination of price reasonableness:

The contracting officer should be aware of customary commercial terms and conditions when pricing commercial items. Commercial item prices are affected by factors that include, but are not limited to, speed of delivery, length and extent of warranty, limitations of seller’s liability, quantities ordered, length of the performance period, and specific performance requirements. The contracting officer must ensure that contract terms, conditions, and prices are commensurate with the Government’s need.

In addition, data related to pricing shall be reviewed including established catalog/market prices, sales to government entities and comparison of proposed pricing with previous government contracts awarded.

If pricing is deemed unreasonable per guidelines listed above or an incomplete pricing sheet is received, offeror shall be considered non responsive and shall not be submitted for Phase 2.

QUESTION 4:

M.2.3.12 - Phase 2/Cleanliness: Can the Government expand upon what measures and/or metrics will be utilized to evaluate and score ‘Cleanliness” for cartridges and test barrels? Is there a product related standard (as with Muzzle flash) or will submission be compared and/or ranked versus other submissions?

ANSWER 4:

THE METRIC THE GOVERNMENT WILL USE TO EVALUATE THE CLEANLINESS

OF CARTRIDGES/TEST BARRELS IS THE EXTENT TO WHICH THEY DISCOLOR

AN OTHERWISE WHITE CLOTH/CLEANING PATCH.

THERE IS NO PRODUCT RELATED STANDARD AND SUBMISSIONS ARE NOT

EVALUATED AGAINST EACH OTHER.

QUESTION 5:

The Subject Solicitation indicates that a manufacturer may subcontract subcomponents. Does the term “components” include services such as Load, Assemble and Pack LAP) if the manufacturer is directing the LAP and is providing the cartridge design and specification?

ANSWER 5:

NO. THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CONSIDER LOADING, ASSEMBLING, AND

PACKING TO BE COMPONENTS OF THE CARTRIDGE.

STATEMENT OF WORK SECTION C.3.4 STANDS AS WRITTEN.

QUESTION 6:

We understand the manufacturer is required to charge the FBI 11% Federal Excise Tax (FET) on all ammunition delivered to the FBI. Does the FBI agree with this assessment. If the FBI does not agree that FET is due on ammunition sales made to the FBI; will the FBI provide the manufacturer with FET exemption form or provide the manufacturer with the reference that exempts the FBI from the FET?

ANSWER 6:

FEDERAL TAX EXEMPT FORMS WILL BE PROVIDED TO VENDOR IF

APPLICABLE.