SPE4A520R0150-Amendment3QandA-29May2020.pdf

SPE4A5-20-R-0150

Questions Submitted After Posting of Amendment 3

1. Is the prime contractor required to be QSLD certified or only its subcontractor(s) that distribute material supplied for the FSG 53 program?

The prime contractor as well as any warehouse locations distributing material requiring QSL certification will be required to provide QSL applications at time of submittal of offer if not already QSL certified. Additional locations identified after contract award may submit applications to be certified at time of identification. SOW Section C 10.3.2 includes the following website regarding QSLM and QSLD which provides QSLD applications for each Type of Item listed.

https://www.dla.mil/TroopSupport/IndustrialHardware/Engineering-and-Technical-services/Qualified-Suppliers-List/

2. When does DLA anticipate providing an answer to the question [Question 14 of posted Q&A File “SPE4A520R0150-AmendmentQ&A-15May2020.pdf”], does each warehousing location used to perform the contract require QSLD certification and can this certification be done as warehouses are stood up during Transition?

Answered above.

3. SOW/Section C 1.1.2, Alternative Regarding the statement, “[f]or CD items, the Contractor will ship directly to DLA customers” and “[f]or DD items, the Contractor will ship directly to DLA warehouses”, does the government intend for the contractor to ship Alternative NIIN orders to their shipping destination on an f.o.b.

destination basis? If so this conflicts with the solicitation clauses, FAR 52.247-29 F.O.B. Origin (Feb 2006), C15 First Destination Transportation (FDT) Program, Government-Arranged Transportation for Automated Awards (Aug 2017), and C16 First Destination Transportation Program, Government Arranged Transportation for Manual Awards (Aug 2017).

No, the government does not intend for the contractor to ship Alternative NIIN orders to their shipping destination on an FOB Destination basis. The inclusion of the FDT indicates that FOB Origin terms are allowable with I/A Destination (i.e. DLA Stock) orders.

Please note that SOW Section C.3.3 (a) references FAR 52.247-30 F.O.B. Origin, Contractor’s Facility which was included based on the use of FAR 12 with this solicitation. The SF-1449 solicitation document included FAR 52.247-29 F.O.B. Origin which is typically utilized for FAR 15 solicitations. The inference to use F.O.B. Origin remains intact and the appropriate clause, whether FAR 52.247-29 or -30, will be finalized upon award.

4. Amendment 003 Question #8 of posted Q&A File / SOW Section C 7.3.1, On Time Delivery The purpose of original question [Question #8 of posted Q&A File “SPE4A520R0150- AmendmentQ&A-15May2020”]was intended to correct what appeared to be a typographical error, however, the government’s response appears to significantly change how on-time delivery (OTD) is measured for this program. Our understanding was that OTD metric completion occurs once the contractor has packed the order and entered it into VSM for government carrier pickup.

Amendment 0003’s Q&A response, however, states that the OTD metric completion occurs when the material is delivered to DLA or DLA’s customer and SOW Section C.7.3.1 was changed to state: “When the total quantity of material for a delivery order is received by DLA or the customer on or before the scheduled delivery date, the order will be considered on time. If the delivery order’s receipt date is after the scheduled delivery date and/or the total quantity of the order is not received, the order will be considered late.”

a. Does the OTD metric completion occur when an order is delivered to its shipping destination by the government’s contracted carrier instead of when the contractor has packed the order and entered it into VSM for government carrier pickup from the contractor’s facility?

Yes.

b. If the OTD metric completion occurs when each order is delivered to its shipping destination what are the new OTD timeframes to allow time for government carrier pickup, transportation, and delivery?

OTD will be calculated based on when delivered to destination. There are no performance disincentives affiliated with OTD.

c. Since the contractor cannot control how long the government’s carrier takes to pick up an order once it is packed or how long the carrier takes to transport and deliver each order to its destination, can the government reconsider its SOW revision and re-define OTD metric completion as when the contractor has packed the order and entered it into VSM for government carrier pickup? If not, how will the contractor’s OTD performance be adjusted to exclude carrier pickup, transportation, and delivery time?

As stated above, OTD is calculated based on when orders are delivered to the final destination.

DLA will consider supporting information provided by the contactor that the orders have been shipped.

5. Amendment 0003 Question #23 of posted Q&A File / Section L.11.4, Core Basket Pricing Reference the government’s response, “DLA will remove the request for MOQs for Core Basket via amendment. Only EOQs are suggested, especially for items with EAD=1”. Core basket NIINs are purchased by the contractor and stored in the contractor’s inventory in advance of receiving orders for them so that the contractor can fill orders in time to meet contract metrics. Economic order quantities (EOQs), if offered by the contractor’s suppliers, only affect the contractor’s inventory replenishment planning decisions. EOQs are not applicable to customer orders for Core NIINs since these orders filled out of the contractor’s stock with no order quantity minimum. For example, if a contractor’s supplier sells an item with an EOQ of 100 the contractor buys in increments of 100 to replenish its stock but issues items to DLA customers from stock for any quantity customers request (no minimum). Applying EOQs to Core NIINs will significantly increase administrative complexity by having two unit prices per NIIN: one if the EOQ is ordered and another if any quantity other than the EOQ is ordered.

Offering a separate unit price for an EOQ may also drive the need for a production lead time to ship the full economic order quantity. This method may cause confusion with DLA customers who are used to ordering stocked items at one unit price and having orders filled on demand without any minimum order quantity restriction. It is tantamount to having Core NIINs double as Alternative NIINs for customer direct orders. Therefore:

a. Can DLA remove its request for EOQs on Core list items since EOQs are not applicable to stocked NIINs, i.e. orders for Core NIINs filled from the contractor’s inventory?

DLA requests the Contractor pass along EOQ ranges when requested of and offered by the contractor’s suppliers, especially where Core item EADs=1. EOQs are advantageous in situations of unforecasted demands by DLA customers. EOQs are requested “where available”.

b. Can Core list items with minimal demand levels, e.g. EADs of 1 for all contract years, be moved to the Alternative list and handled as customer direct orders?

Not at this time. During the course of the contract and in accordance with SOW Section C 6.0, NSN migration across baskets may be necessary as demand and situation changes occur and will be able to be proposed on a quarterly basis by both parties.

6. Amendment 0003 Question #24 of posted Q&A File / Section L.11.4, Alternative Basket Pricing

a. Given how it is not feasible for offerors to propose EOQs for 50K+ Alternative Basket NIINs within the solicitation timeframe can the government remove its request for offerors to propose EOQs for Alternate Basket NIINs or at least remove the applicability of the Section M.5.4 statement that the government will evaluate the completeness of proposals to ensure EOQ’s are included?

Section M.5.4 states in full: “The Government will evaluate the completeness of proposals to ensure EOQs are included, especially in the case of items with an estimated annual demand (EAD) of 1. For instance, if the majority of items with EAD of 1 do not contain an EOQ in the proposal, the Government may determine this a weakness in the proposal.” The Government is taking into consideration whether or not EOQs are proposed on items where EAD=1 (645 Core and 24,377 Alternative) and may consider it a weakness in the proposal if EAD=1 items do not include EOQs. For instance, if not feasible to provide EOQs for all items in the Alternative basket with an EAD of 1, the offeror may provide a plan to satisfy this requirement with its offer for the Government’s consideration.

b. Confirming the government’s response, “DLA may consider EOQs provided following contract award” will the government allow the contractor to also revise EOQs previously submitted? This may be necessary due to changes in the supply base or production.

DLA may consider EOQs provided following contract award.

c. Will the government allow PLT adjustments for orders placed for economic order quantities, e.g. longer PLTs for EOQs exceeding historical average order quantities?

PLT adjustments are allowed for Alternative items at time of the first order, including first orders where EOQs are applicable.

d. Will cost sharing calculations for Alternative NIIN orders exclude orders placed for EOQs if greater than historical order quantity averages due to special price discounts offered for EOQs?

No, all orders are included in the cost sharing calculations.