Round3_RFP_Questions_09162015.docx

Solicitation SPE4A2-15-R-0002 Packaged Petroleum, Oil, and Lubricants (Chem/POL)

Page(s): 12; 1 Section: 52.216-9030 Economic Price Adjustment - Department Of Labor Price Index (Jun 2014) DLAD; H-900 Pricing and Payment

Page(s): 12; 1 Section: 52.216-9030 Economic Price Adjustment - Department Of Labor Price Index (Jun 2014) DLAD; H-900 Pricing and Payment

Page(s): 1 Section: 1.A. Preparation and Submittal Citation: "Charts, graphs or spreadsheets may be on fold-out pages, but must fold within the page size specified and will count as one page."

Page(s): 1; 14 Section: H-900 Pricing and Payment; F. Factor 5, Volume 7: Price Proposal Citation: “Throughput Fee: A fixed percentage is established to cover expenses that vary with the volume of business such as the costs of transportation and warehousing. The fee is applied to each NSN unit price and is paid on each delivery order issued. This fee is applicable throughout the entire contract.”

Original Question #2: “Will the offeror’s proposed throughput fee percentage 1) be multiplied by the offeror’s proposed NSN unit price and converted into a fixed unit price per NSN item that remains fixed for the duration of the contract or, 2) be a fixed percentage that will be multiplied by the NSN unit price on each delivery order to derive the throughput fee payable for the individual order? If the answer is #2 above the throughput price per NSN will increase and decrease in step with the EPA adjustments for the POL and chemical items. The costs covered by the throughput fee, however, do not bear any relationship with the material prices so the EPA adjustments will cause throughput fee to vary above and below contract costs. If the answer is #1 above can offerors propose an annual escalation, like management fee is priced?”

Original Government Answer #2: “The Government's intent was to tie the Throughput Fee to a measure that would vary with volume on the contract. As the pricing indices will vary throughout the contract (going both up & down) and the Government can't predict which way indices will travel at any given time, the Government will not be adjusting its Throughput Fee equation.”

The Original Question #2 did not ask whether the Government would change the Throughput Fee equation, but asked which of two possible interpretations of the Throughput Fee calculation was correct. Depending on the answer, there was either a follow-up concern or question. The Government did not respond to either interpretation, so it is possible that neither was correct. Can the Government confirm which interpretation is correct, if either, and provide an example of how Throughput Fee is calculated on an individual contract delivery order based on the percentage proposed for the initial contract? Also please clarify how Throughput Fee will be calculated on the basis of an ‘adjusted NSN unit price at the time of each shipment’ as described in the Government’s response to Q44. By ‘adjusted NSN unit price’ does the Government mean current material NSN unit price as adjusted by the terms of the EPA clause of the contract?

The Throughput fee will be a fixed percentage applied to the EPA adjusted NSN price on each delivery order. See Amendment 04.

Page(s): 4 Section: H-906 PRICING OF ITEMS ADDED TO THE CONTRACT

Page(s): 17; 14 Section: 6.4 Inactive Material; F. Factor 5, Vol 7, Price Proposal

Page(s): 3 Section: I. RF Equipment and Equipment Support Citation: “The contractor will furnish all aRFID equipment. The Contractor shall contact and coordinate with the Government POCs for the delivery of the initial software and for any other assistance or advice required.”

Page(s): 16 Section: 6.9.1.1. Fill Rate Exceptions – Direct Shipments Citation: Note: there is no definition for Direct Shipments in the Statement of Work or description for how Direct Shipments are processed.

Could the Government confirm that a “Direct Shipment” order is a delivery order issued to the Contractor that specifies an OCONUS f.o.b. destination ship-to address, which must be corrected via a manual iterative process (e.g. via telephone or email) between the Contactor, DLA, and DDC to change the delivery order to f.o.b. origin for pickup and transport by DDC’s designated carrier? Further, could the Government confirm as part of this process the Contractor must: a) screen for and hold Direct Shipment orders; b) validate with DDC that the orders are indeed Direct Shipment orders because sometimes these orders should instead be corrected to f.o.b. destination orders for Contractor shipment to a CONUS destination, c) request a delivery order modification from DLA (changing the order to f.o.b. origin), d) notify DDC when the contract modification is complete, e) monitor and download the revised shipping instructions and related documentation from VSM, f) attach these documents to the package, and f) schedule the pickup with the DDC directed freight carrier? Also, could the Government confirm that approximately 200 Direct Shipment orders are processed per month, each of which must be worked / reworked through the manual/email processes described above?

The term “Direct Shipment” will been removed from section 6.9.1.1 of the SOW via amendment. Items that require FOB-Origin shipment will require the process cited, as DLA has no automated means to capture these.

Page(s): 48 Section: Clauses Added to Part 12 by Addendum; 52.247-51 Evaluation of Export Offers (JAN 2001) FAR Citation: “Offers shall be evaluated and awards made on the basis of the lowest laid down cost to the Government at the overseas port of discharge; Offers shall be evaluated on the basis of shipment through one of the ports set forth in paragraph (d) of this clause to the overseas port of discharge.”

Page(s): 28 Section: Clauses Added to Part 12 by Addendum; 52.223-03 Hazardous Material Identification And Material Safety Data (JAN 1997) FAR, 252.223-7001 Hazard Warning Labels (DEC 1991) DFARS