Q&A_SPRBL119R0042_9_September_2019.pdf

INTERCONNECTION EQUIPMENT CONTRACT – SPRBL1-19-R-0042

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

Number Reference

DATE QUESTION ANSWER

1 20 AUGUST 2019 How can interested parties access cFolders? https://pcf1x.bsm.dla.mil/cfolders/ 2 21 AUGUST 2019 After reviewing the RFP documents in full…requesting that the Government considers extending the submission deadline to October 1 or later.

The Government cannot extend the solicitation due date at this time due to the urgency of the requirements that will be filled through this contract upon award.

3 21 AUGUST 2019 30 days seems a short period to quote, can this be extended out until 10/16/19?

The Government cannot extend the solicitation due date at this time due to the urgency of the requirements that will be filled through this contract upon award.

4 21 AUGUST 2019 Is there a new TDP file available for the solicitation? How do offerors access the TDPs?

Yes…Interested parties will need to follow the solicitation instructions in order to receive the TDPs. Instructions are found on page 4 of the solicitation under “Technical Data Package Receipt Instructions.” A signed NDA and SAM verification, sent via email to the POCs listed, is required to receive the TDPs through SAFE. Interested parties will also need to access a portion of the TDPs through cFolders:

https://pcf1x.bsm.dla.mil/cfolders/.

5 21 AUGUST 2019 Is this an all or nothing award? In other words, if we only identify the items we can make, does that keep us in the ballpark?

The scope of the Interconnection Equipment Contract (IEC) includes any product and incidental service used by the Department of Defense (DoD) or the Federal Government to connect weapon systems, computer systems and networks, global and tactical networks, radio networks, etc. As briefed during the sources sought notice, the contract has the potential to support over 100K items. The Price Evaluation List is a small sampling of items that will be procured. It DOES NOT cover the full scope of the contract. As stated in the solicitation and Statement of Work (SOW), awardees will be expected to provide the entire scope of items and incidental services.

6 21 AUGUST 2019 Can the Government provide the word document for the solicitation?

The Government cannot provide the word document of the solicitation.

7 23 AUGUST 2019 We are just looking for clarification or direction on Attachment 0001, Price Evaluation List. The quantity listed for each cable is one specific quantity. There are not any price breaks. L.6.2.1.2. states “The offeror should take into consideration that there will be no minimum order quantity on the PEL items. “ We wanted to ask how we could quote just one quantity if there is no minimum buy? Should we quote different price breaks because of the no minimum order quantity?

Attachment 0001, Price Evaluation List (PEL) has been updated as of 23 August 2019 to the nomenclature of “Best Estimated Quantity” for the quantities listed as opposed to “Quantity” on the previous version. The quantities provided are for planning purposes only.

Offerors shall only quote one price, per item, per period as required. As stated in the solicitation, the PEL has been established for price evaluation, and the final pricing will become not to exceed CEILING PRICES for each line item/associated period of performance at award. After award, the Government reserves the right to compete the PEL items, or to order from the ceiling price. If competed, an awardee cannot propose a price greater than the ceiling price established at award.

8 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

In section M, there is a [past performance] very relevant rating [Section M, paragraph M.3.2.1.3] that states “Past performance includes long-term-contracts of five years or more, with a ceiling of at least $25M.” But, the Government is asking for contracts that were performed within the last three (3) years? Is it five (5) or three (3) years?

The reference to five (5) years in the “very relevant” rating means the contract length (i.e. a long-term contract of 5-years), and is not the same as a contract performed within the last three (3) years.

9 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

[Section L, Past Performance] Does the Government only want the last three (3) years and only three (3) examples? Or can offerors provide more?

The Government wants a maximum of three (3) examples that were performed within the past three (3) years.

10 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

[Section L, Past Performance] What happens if we haven’t completed long-term contract(s) of five

(5) years or more?

Offerors will be rated in accordance with Section M.

11 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

[Section L, Past Performance] Do the contracts need to be completed? Or can they be in process?

For Past Performance evaluation, the contracts do not have to be completed contracts.

12 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section A (page 2) states that “[t]he Government intends to make multiple awards”.

Please indicate the approximate number of awards that the Government is contemplating within both the full and open and reserve components.

The Government does not have an approximate number of awards. There is no limit or cap.

13 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section A (page 2) states that “...the solicitation also includes reservation(s) for small business contract awards, and will require prime awardees to provide a Small Business Commitment Document that targets a minimum of 40% of the awarded orders to small businesses”, however, Solicitation Section F (page

22) states that “[s]mall business participation is 40% of the total awarded order dollar value throughout the life of the contract”, and Solicitation Section L.5 (page 79) states that “[t]o receive consideration for award, the offeror shall provide a SBPCD that maintains a minimum of forty percent (40%) of its total contract dollars for each IDIQ year to small business” (emphasis added). Please resolve these apparent inconsistencies.

The solicitation has been updated to remain consistent throughout. Narrative A “Multiple Awards” paragraph and Section L.5 has been updated.

14 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section A (page 3) states that “[t]he offeror shall provide ceiling prices on a minimum of 95% of the supply items (or 121 items) on the Price Evaluation List, for either the exact item specified or an acceptable alternate. Alternate items to those found on the Price Evaluation List can be offered at the time of Price Proposal.

However, the offeror must provide a complete technical data

Question A: Solicitation has been updated in Narrative A “Pricing Overview” to address the question A.

Question B: The Government will evaluate in accordance with Section M, paragraph M.5 Price. Yes, the intent of the “common line item” approach is to ensure that the evaluation is fair.

Question C: Refer to the answer to Question A. The solicitation has been updated in Narrative A “Pricing package for the Alternate item being offered as well as the item on the Price Evaluation List” (emphasis added).

A). Are offerors required to, or permitted to, submit pricing for both the exact item specified and their proposed alternate (in the latter case to protect themselves in the event that their alternate is deemed not to be acceptable by the Government)?

B). How will the Government ensure a fair evaluation if some offerors provide pricing for 121 items, and some offerors provide pricing for more than 121 items (e.g., 127 items)? Will that concern be resolved through the “common line item” approach?

C). If an offeror is permitted to submit pricing for both the exact item specified and their proposed alternate, and their proposed alternate is deemed to be acceptable and is included on the Price Evaluation List, will the price for that item be evaluated in lieu of, or in addition to, the price for the original item included in the Price Evaluation List? If the latter, that would appear to result in an “unlevel playing field” for offerors that choose to propose alternative items.

D). If the offeror proposes an alternate item, it is understood that they must provide a complete Technical Data Package (TDP) for that alternate item, however, does the offeror also have to

Overview” to clearly communicate that the offeror must propose to either the actual item or the alternate.

Question D: The Government will provide the TDPs for the items on the PEL during solicitation. Refer to the TDP receipt instructions in Section A of the solicitation.

Offerors are required to provide TDPs for alternates items with their proposal.

After award, awardees may be required to provide TDPs for alternate items as well as the exact item solicited.

provide a TDP for the item on the Price Evaluation List?

15 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section A (page 3) states that “[p]rospective offerors should insert prices, complete all requirements within the RFP, and sign and upload all pages” (emphasis added).

Please clarify the reference to the requirement for the offeror to “sign all pages”.

The solicitation has been updated in Narrative A “General Instructions” to clarify.

16 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section A (page 4) states “DLA cannot guarantee that it can complete all validation requests by the due date for any solicitation responses.” Assuming that offerors submit their technical data requests in a timely manner, if DLA cannot provide the requisite proposal preparation information to potential offerors within the required timeframe, it is respectfully requested that the closing date for the Solicitation be extended so as not to unnecessary restrict competition.

cFolders validation requests are promptly handled by DLA for this acquisition. As briefed at the Pre-Proposal Conference, there is a direct POC for cFolders issues, Steven.Manno@dla.mil. Your organization should promptly notify DLA if any issues arise.

17 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section A (page 4) states that “[a]fter contract award, the contracting officer may choose to use [a] reverse auction for the competition of delivery orders”. If a reverse auction approach is employed, is the Government’s expectation that the contractors will elect to discount their contractual ceiling prices?

As stated in the solicitation, reverse auction may be utilized for order RFPs. Offerors will be given the opportunity to lower their prices for items on the PEL if reserve auction is used.

18 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section F (page 22) states that “[i]n accordance with DFARS 252.244-7001, the IEC contractor shall establish and maintain an acceptable purchasing system.” Please verify that the requirement for such a Purchasing System is

Yes. An acceptable purchasing system is required after award.

mailto:Steven.Manno@dla.mil post-award rather than in conjunction with the submission of the offeror’s proposal.

19 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section F (page 22) identifies the Performance Standards that will be applicable to the awarded Contracts. Please indicate how and when these evaluations will be conducted, and how the Government will employ the results of these evaluations during Contract performance.

The performance Reviews section of the solicitation explains, “These reviews will occur frequently, and as often as monthly or may be triggered by an event.” Additionally, the section also explains that the small business participation compliance reviews will occur semi-annually, and purchasing system reviews will occur annually. Refer to Section H for the Off Ramp procedures.

20 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section F (page 22) states that “[a] Satisfactory rating is based on 100% compliance with contract requirements (i.e. meets the SOW On-time Delivery Metric and QuoteMetric, maintains a Small Business Commitment of 40%+, has an acceptable purchasing system, is timely submitting the CDRLs, and any other requirement(s) in the contract and Statement of Work (SOW))”, however, the definition of “Satisfactory” states that “[t]he contractual performance reflects some minor problem(s) for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory” (emphasis added). Is it reasonable for the Government to expect 100% compliance with all Contract requirements in order for a contractor to achieve a “Satisfactory” rating? Under the current structure, a contractor that meets 99% of the contractual requirements would have to be rated “Fair” which appears to be a misnomer and would not accurately reflect the timeliness and quality of that contractor’s performance. Please resolve these apparent inconsistencies.

The standards that are in the contract are clear. For example, an IEC prime contractor can have issues with delivery and still meet the 90% on-time delivery metric.

21 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section F (page 23) states that “[i]f the IEC contractor is not performing at the stated metrics, then the Contracting Officer has the right to use any contractual remedies, including those listed in Section H, Off-ramping”, and Solicitation Section H (page 32) states that “[t]o ensure the success of the IEC, each IEC prime contractor must meet the satisfactory performance standards in Section F of the contract. If an IEC prime contractor does not meet the performance standards, it is the Government’s intent to off-ramp the contractor...” (emphasis added). If a contractor is successfully performing 99% of the contractual requirements and, as a result, has received a “Fair” rating, is it reasonable and in the Government’s best interests for the Government to Off-Ramp that contractor?

As stated in the Off Ramp/On Ramp section of the solicitation (Section H), an “off ramp” can mean five (5) different options, including providing a “cooling off/remedial period” during which contractors will be permitted to submit a get-well plan.

22 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section H, Small Business Reservation and Small Business Set-Asides on Orders (page 33), states that the Government anticipates making multiple awards in two separate categories: other-than Small Business and Small Business. Once the Government has awarded all of the Small Business contracts that it intends to award in the Small Business reserve category, will Small Businesses be eligible for any additional awards to be made in the other-than Small Business category?

The Government does not have an approximate number of awards. There is no limit or cap to small business awards.

23 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section I-79, Order Limitations, FAR 52.216-19(d) states that orders may be returned to the ordering office “within seven N/A days…” Should the provision state seven or N/A?

The solicitation has been updated in Section I to correct the administrative error under the clause.

24 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section L.2.1.8 (page 77) states that “[a]ll proposal volumes, with the exception of

The solicitation has been updated in Section L.2.1.8. to clarify.

Volume 4, shall be delivered in PDF files...PDF pages should not exceed 8-1/2 inches in width by 11 inches in length with at least one inch margins on all sides, using a font with a 12 point size type or larger for all body text”. Is the selection of the font style for both the narrative and graphics portions of the proposal at the offerors’ discretion?

25 27 AUGUST 2019 Is the structure of the Technical Factor proposal and the allocation of the 50-page limit across the Sub-factors and Sub-sub-factors at the offerors’ discretion?

Unless otherwise specified in the solicitation, yes

26 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section L.5 (page 79) states that “[t]he following are non-mandatory goals for socio-economic contracting programs that should be considered in the offerors plan...” Are these goals applicable to the Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD), the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, or both?

As stated in the solicitation, the goals are for the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, which applies to other-than-small-business-offerors.

27 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section L.5 (page 79) states “...the offeror shall provide a SBPCD that maintains a minimum of forty percent (40%) of its total contract dollars for each IDIQ year to small business.” What “total contract” dollar value should the offeror use to calculate its percentages since it is not permitted to use its proposed cost/price in any volume except the Price Volume? There is no separate socio-economic category goal listed for Small Disadvantaged Businesses (including 8(a) small businesses). Should they be included as a separate category when describing the offerors’ Small Business Participation Commitment Document? Is there any specific format or content

The solicitation has been updated in Section L.5. to clarify.

There is not a specific template for the SBPCD.

that is required for the Small Business Participation Commitment Document?

28 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section L.6.2.1.7 (page 80) states that “[t]he Contracting Officer may at any time request evidence of the technical acceptability of the supplies offered in response to this solicitation” (emphasis added). Please explain under what circumstances and at what times such a request for additional proposal information could be made by the Contracting Officer. Is it anticipated that such a request would only be made in conjunction with the conducting of discussions with the offerors, or at some other time?

Additional information would only be requested if discussions take place.

29 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section M.1 (page 83) states that the “[n]on-cost evaluation factors for tradeoff are listed...in descending order of importance”.

Please provide the relative order of importance of the Price Factor compared to the Technical, Past Performance, and/or Small Business Participation Factor(s), individually.

All evaluation factors other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than price. Refer to the solicitation for the order of importance as listed in Section M.1.

30 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section M.2.3.1 (page 84) states that “[t]he evaluation will consider the degree to which the offerors plan meets the requirements, indicates an adequate approach and understanding of those requirements and minimizes the risk of unsuccessful performance” (emphasis added). Please clarify what “plan” is being referred to in this provision. Would the term “proposal” be more appropriate?

The solicitation has been updated in section M.2.3.1. to refer to “proposal”.

31 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section M.2.4.2 (page 84) provides the definition of “Deficiency” (i.e., “[a] material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a

The numbering has been updated within Section M.2. of the solicitation. The color and adjectival rating chart in Section M.2.3.2. has been updated per the DoD Source Selection Procedures Guide.

proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level”).

Please explain how an offeror can be rated “Outstanding”, “Good”, or “Acceptable” despite the presence of one or more Deficiencies in their proposal (see the adjectival rating definitions in Solicitation Section M.2.4.2 (page 84)).Should not these definitions be those set forth in the DoD Source Selection Procedures as indicated in this section of the Solicitation? It is noted that there are two Solicitation Sections designated as M.2.4.2 on page 84.

32 27 AUGUST 2019 In Solicitation Section M.2.4.3 (page 84), is the Technical Evaluation Approach Sub-factor rating derived by rolling up the Sub-sub-factor ratings or is it rated separately from the sub-sub-factors?

Please explain how the sub-sub-factor and sub-factor ratings will be compiled into an overall Technical Factor rating.

Refer to section M.1. and M.2.3.4 for the explanation. The compilation of these sub-factors/sub-sub factor color/adjectival ratings will form the basis of the Factor rating. An offeror that receives a final rating of Red/Unacceptable at any factor/sub-factor/sub-sub factor level is ineligible for award.

33 27 AUGUST 2019 In Solicitation Section M.4.1.3 (page 86), please explain why there are two sets of definitions for Small Businesses and Other than Small Businesses since those definitions are exactly the same.

There are two sets of ratings due to the criteria of other-than-small-business offerors and the requirement for them to provide Small Business Subcontracting Plans.

34 27 AUGUST 2019 Solicitation Section M.5 (page 87), defines and discusses the term “common line items”. Is it the Government’s intent to only evaluate those line items for which every offeror has submitted a price? For example, if there are twenty offerors, and they all submit prices for the same fifteen items on the Price Evaluation List, will the Price Factor evaluation be based upon only those fifteen items?

Yes

35 27 AUGUST 2019 Reference Attachment 0001 and the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) deliverable items. Does the

The Government is not evaluating the CPFF CLINs for the base award. The CPFF CLINs have been added as

Government intend to evaluate cost realism in conjunction with the CPFF deliverables? If so, how?

placeholders if incidental services are needed. Cost realism may be used during the order RFP if necessary.

36 27 AUGUST 2019 Reference First Article Test (FAT). Does the Government intend to evaluate costs associated with FAT? If so, how?

Section L.6.2.1.8 has been added to the solicitation. The Government is not evaluating FAT for the base award. The offerors ceiling prices should not include FAT as stated on the PEL. Awardees will be provided an opportunity to propose FAT at the order RFP notice for that item.

While the ceiling price does not include FAT, the ceiling price should include all other requirements in the solicitation e.g. testing, shipping, etc.

37 27 AUGUST 2019 Please provide the offerors with a copy of Appendix E.

Appendix E was attached to the SOW in Amendment 0001 of the solicitation.

38 27 AUGUST 2019 The CDRL makes reference to SOW Para. 3.6.4, however there is no such paragraph in the SOW Supplement ILSC-1A and paragraph 3.6.4 in the IEC-1 SOW references “Other Deficiencies.” Can the Government confirm that the reference should be to Section 3.8 of the IEC SOW?

The SOW Supplement ILSC-1A document, Exhibit B, was updated to clarify.

39 27 AUGUST 2019 Can the Government please clarify if FAT, Production Verification Testing, and Production Lot Testing should be included in the price or will it be bid as needed on future order RFPs issued to the IEC Contract Holder?

The PEL pricing should be ceiling prices that will remain throughout the life of the contract. Any additional testing not included in the PEL or supplemental PEL requirements will be released at the order RFP.

40 27 AUGUST 2019 Section C Purchasing Review:

Can the Purchasing Review requirement be removed, as this effort is competitive and exempt per FAR 15.403-1 (b)?

No, a purchasing system review is a base IEC contract requirement, and is required for every IEC prime contractor regardless if the FAR requirements apply.

41 27 AUGUST 2019 FAR 52.230-6 CAS is included in the RFP – due to the competitive and commercial nature, this

CAS may only apply to non-commercial items, and as specified. The applicability will be determined at the order RFP level.

effort would be exempt from CAS. Can the CAS requirements be removed?

42 27 AUGUST 2019 Several discrepancies were noted in comparison of the Parts List to the Kit Drawings where the Parts List noted higher revisions. Can the Government please advise which document takes precedence?

Please email the list of the TDPs with the discrepancies to the POCs provided in the solicitation (Michelle and Lindsey).

43 27 AUGUST 2019 Can the Government please advise what the warranty period is per the inclusion of FAR 52.246-17?

The clause has been added to Section I within the solicitation in its entirety.

44 27 AUGUST 2019 The RFP states, “Graphics must be able to be printed and copied in pure black and white (no color).” Can the Govt confirm that this requirement means graphics must comply with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act rather than having to be created in black and white?

Graphics must be able to be printed and copied in black and white.

45 27 AUGUST 2019 Attachment_0005 has a column titled “CDRL F001

– First Article Qualification Test Plan and Procedure.” The subtitle of the CDRL is “First Article Test Plan and Procedure.” Is the Government using these terms interchangeably?

Attachment 0005 was updated.

46 27 AUGUST 2019 Reference Section M.3.2.1.3 which states that Small Businesses and Other-than-small-businesses will be rated the same. The current definitions will likely preclude potential Small business offers from achieving a Very Relevant rating as currently defined “as a long term contract or contracts of five years or more and a ceiling of $25M or more.”

Small Businesses will have difficulty meeting that standard, which will impact their overall Performance Confidence Assessment. Will the government consider revising the ratings definition for Small Business Past Performance Relevancy to a lower threshold in order to

The rating definitions will remain as is.

encourage Small Business participation, or revise the definitions for all offerors by removing the contract length and ceiling requirements?

47 27 AUGUST 2019 IAW Section L.2.1.8, can the Government please confirm it is permissible to add a tab to the PEL spreadsheet for the purpose of adding a cover page and including proprietary markings in Volume 4.

Offerors may add a tab to the PEL spreadsheet in order to add information relevant to the cover page or proprietary markings.

48 27 AUGUST 2019 Referencing FAR 52.222-3 - My understanding is that we are not allowed to use prison labor to build products or kit products for this opportunity.

Can Unicor be utilized for labor and still comply to this FAR 52.222-3 that was checked in the RFP?

Refer to the exception within FAR 52.222-3.

49 27 AUGUST 2019 The proposal submission time is blank on the SF33 and not mentioned in paragraph L.2.1.10. Please specify time proposal is due on the due date specified.

As stated within FBO, the proposal is due by 5:00 PM ET on 16 September 2019.

50 27 AUGUST 2019 There are CLINs in Section B that are marked CPFF but are not included on the pricing excel sheet Attachment 0001. Are we to price these CPFF CLINs?

The CPFF CLINs were added as placeholders for the incidental services. These are not priced for the solicitation.

51 27 AUGUST 2019 There is no contract volume. Where do we put contractual documentation?

The signed solicitation and amendments will be included in your proposal submission.

52 27 AUGUST 2019 DLAD Proc Note C04 Unused Former Government Surplus Property (DEC 2016). Solicitation states that this note is for the PEL items only. Can the government identify which items this applies to?

The Proc Note applies to Attachment 0001, Price Evaluation List.

53 27 AUGUST 2019 The technical proposal shall not exceed fifty (50) pages. There are a lot of elements outlined in Sections L and M for the technical proposal. To appropriately respond to all of the requirements, many can only be allocated a page or two at the most. It will be difficult to be completely

The page limit remains as is.

responsive in an appropriate amount of depth and detail in that amount of allocated space. Would the government consider increasing page count to 75 pages to ensure that it receives a thorough and responsive technical proposal?

54 27 AUGUST 2019 Type of Contract is listed as Type of Contract 1:

FFP and Type of Contract 2: CPFF, yet in paragraph labeled “Multiple awards” it is stated that each awarded contract will provide all items (FFP CLINs) and incidental services (CPFF CLINs). Is it the Government’s intent to award contracts containing both FFP and CPFF CLINs?

The Government reserves the right to order CPFF and FFP incidental services as required. These incidental services are not priced during the proposal.

55 27 AUGUST 2019 There are both CPFF and FFP Incidental Services CLINs included in the Pricing Schedule and are marled see SOW, Exhibit A. Incidental services are mentioned in SOW, Exhibit A in Section 1.2 Scope “The Government may elect to use incidental services to accomplish any goal in support of producing an item within the Interconnection universe. Such services include the time and effort of the contractor to perform an identifiable task in addition to furnishing an end item supplied.” Will these incidental services CLINs be specified in an “identifiable task” and priced at the task order level?

The Government reserves the right to order CPFF and FFP incidental services as required. These incidental services are not priced during the proposal, and will be clearly identified during the order RFP.

56 27 AUGUST 2019 Please confirm items are FOB Destination to New Cumberland, PA and that there are no additional delivery addresses.

Section L.6.2.1 of the solicitation has been updated. FOB Destination to New Cumberland was provided for planning purposes only. The ceiling prices on the PEL must include shipping to any customer worldwide. See SOW paragraph

3.4.4. for more information.

57 27 AUGUST 2019 Can you send out an attendee list from Pre- Proposal Conference?

We cannot send out a list of attendees. Refer to the interested vendor list on FBO.

58 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Why weren’t a lot of the proposed first order items [Attachment 0004] on the PEL?

Attachment 0004 was provided as a courtesy for planning purposes, and to provide offerors insight on what to expect for the first order RFP. The scope of the contract is broad, and the PEL is a very small portion of that scope.

The prices for the items on the PEL are the only long-term prices formerly included on the contract. The Government reserves the right to add or delete items on the PEL after award.

59 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

[Attachment 0001, PEL] Will the ceiling prices be attached to our contract or all contracts?

Your company’s ceiling prices will be attached to only your company’s contract.

60 27 AUGUST 2019

Conference Question

[Attachment 0001, PEL] It is just one price for the ceiling?

Yes

61 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

[Attachment 0001, PEL] For the 127 items, is it the price for the entire contract?

Yes. Offerors will quote one price for the base-period (5-years), and a price for each option year ( years six (6) through ten (10)). We can remove or add items to the PEL.

62 27 AUGUST 2019

Conference Question

Will there be an economic price adjustment? No.

63 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

[Attachment 0001, PEL] Does the Government intend to add the items to the PEL?

Yes. For example, If our customers come up with a cable that is a readiness driver and they need every year, we would communicate that to you in the quarterly forecast and engage if it is an item that we can add to the PEL.

64 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

[Attachment 0001, PEL] Are the quantities associated with the P/Ns on the PEL estimated annual quantities or the 5 year quantity? It is a 5 year quantity?

Attachment 0001 has been updated to clarify.

65 27 AUGUST 2019

Conference Question

In regards to the PEL becoming a rapid ordering catalog, do you mean the contractor needs to deliver 24 hours or submit a proposal in 24 hours?

IEC prime contractors will need to submit a proposal in 24 hours.

66 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Is it working days? Yes.

67 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

How will the PEL pricing be used, if there is a scale?

We intend to issue an order RFP (fair opportunity notice), and provide IEC prime contractors the ability to quote on a scale. But, the prices on the PEL are CEILING Prices, and IEC prime contractors will not be able to exceed the prices on the PEL.

68 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Because the PEL states the [BEQ} quantity, we are only signing up to deliver that quantity at that price. We can’t sign up above the BEQ. How is this going to work?

The Government intends to issue order RFPs for larger quantities, which will provide IEC prime contractors a chance to propose. However, proposed prices to the order RFPs cannot exceed the PEL prices. It was noted that the BEQ is based on the something. A QTY of 1000 is unlikely.

Unless there is a surge. Also, there are mechanisms in the contract to remove PEL items if an item becomes an issue.

69 27 AUGUST 2019

Conference Question

If we are creating a joint venture, then do we need the enhanced JCPs for the new company?

The JCP must be valid for the CAGE that is proposing.

70 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

In reference to “we are going to have at least one

(1) small business set aside [reservation],” so if only one (1) small business receives the reservation, how are the order set-asides going to work?

Section H, “Small Business Reservation and Small Business Set Asides on Orders” (page. 34) explains that “if only one small business is awarded an IEC IDIQ contract, then the Contracting Officer may decide to limit the amount of small business reservation set asides to a combined $1,000,000.00 over a six (6) month period.”

71 27 AUGUST 2019 Small Business Commitment Documents (SBCD)– how is the SBCD going to be measured?

Section H, “Small Business Commitment Document Report” (page 32) explains that “ IEC prime contractors are required to submit semi-annual Small Business

Conference Question

Participation Commitment Documents reports that certify the contractor is continuously meeting the 40% small business participation requirement.” Additionally, it is in our Contract Management Plan that the Contracting Officer will review for contract compliance and will send a copy to the local Small Business Administration (SBA) Procurement Center Representative (PCR).

72 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Originally the sources sought mentioned a tailored logistics support. Why isn’t it a TLS [Tailored Logistics Support]?

It was an error. This acquisition is not a TLS effort.

73 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

What are the incidental services? Incidental services are services that will be explained on an order RFP, if needed, to accomplish any goal in support of producing an Interconnection equipment item. Incidental services are further explained in Exhibit A, IEC Statement of Work and CDRLs.

74 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

How will you evaluate the CPFF incidental services

CLINS?

The CPFF incidental services CLINs will not be evaluated for base contract award. The CLIN was added for informational purposes only, and to provide the Government flexibility to utilize the CPFF Incidental services if needed. If the Government decides to use the CPFF Incidental services then the evaluation of the CLIN will be explained in the order RFP.

75 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

How will FAT be priced? Will it be in the unit price?

The Government is not evaluating FAT for the base award.

The offerors ceiling prices should not include FAT as stated on the PEL. Awardees will be provided an opportunity to propose FAT at the order RFP notice for that item.

While the ceiling price does not include FAT, the ceiling price should include all other requirements in the solicitation e.g. testing, shipping, etc.

76 27 AUGUST 2019 Because of obsolescence issues, if there is an equivalent that is more cost effective, how should it be priced?

Offerors should use the Alternative Offers process explained in the solicitation and IEC Statement of Work.

Question

77 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

[PEL Attachment 0001] If you are procuring a part that we cannot get long-term pricing – how do you expect us to propose these items?

The PEL is a less than 1% of the potential scope of this effort. Offerors are expected to take on some risk to be a part of this effort.

78 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Will there be potential for DPAS ratings? Yes, if the requirements activities have a very urgent requirement, we could get DPAS rating. Note that the Government also included IEC contract priority ratings.

Refer to section H of the solicitation for the IEC contract rating.

79 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Surge and Sustainment – What is required to address surge and sustainment as needed?

Surge and Sustainment requirements may be applicable throughout the life of the contract, and when applicable will be provided in the order RFP. But the items on the PEL do not have surge and sustainment requirements at this time. Thus, a Surge and Sustainment Capability Assessment Plan is not required for the base award of the IEC. Offerors should address Surge and Sustainment to extent needed to fulfill the requirements in the solicitation, Section L (see paragraph L.3.3.1.1. and Exhibit A for more information).

80 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Do we need to address EDI tools in the proposal? Please refer to Sections L&M on what should be addressed in the proposal.

81 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Will it be possible to fast track QPL items? Yes, we are working on it for post-award.

82 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

What is the expected delivery for the first delivery order?

It will communicated on the order RFP.

83 27 AUGUST 2019

Conference Question

How will liquidated damages work? Refer to the liquidated damages clause.

84 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

If these item are built at different locations, how do you handle multiple locations?

Refer to Proc Note E06. Offerors will communicate the locations at the proposal on the order RFPs.

85 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Is the pricing in year 6 renegotiated? No. It will be exercised in the unilateral options. Prices go up to year 10.

86 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

For the 40% small business [participation], are they broken up into other socio-economic goals?

No, but offerors should address in their plan the non-mandatory socio-economic contracting programs.

87 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Will Small Businesses doing the work themselves meet the 40%?

Small businesses can apply work that their organization performs towards their 40% requirement.

88 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

If a joint venture was created, does it need to provide the past performance for the joint venture or can we use the two companies that created the joint venture.

Section L.4.1. and M.3.1 of the solicitation have been updated. The Government will consider past performance of joint ventures themselves, as well as the two individual companies that created the joint venture for the requirements listed in the Past Performance Volume of the solicitation.

89 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

If using a subcontractor, can we use the subcontractor performance?

Section L.4.1 and M.3.1 of the solicitation have been updated. The Government will not consider any contracts that were completed or performed by a subcontractor for the requirements listed in the Past Performance Volume of the solicitation.

90 27 AUGUST 2019 Do you plan to release the entire item list (100,000 items)?

No, we plan to release the quarterly demands only.

Question

91 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

What is the forecasted award date? October 31, 2019.

92 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Is there a fee to use the contract? We have not established a fee for use at this time.

93 27 AUGUST 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference Question

Do the prices that we offer have to be Firm-Fixed Price for the entire period of the contract?

Yes.

94 29 August 2019 PEL Line Item 002, NIIN 000708747, assigned to Keysight Technology’s CAGE is obsolete with no replacement. Is this a validated item that has current demand or was it selected for the PEL based on historical demand?

If obsolescence information is known, please provide that information to the POCs (Lindsey & Michelle) as soon as possible.

95 29 August 2019 Does DLA want to know which items are obsolete?

Yes if the items are on the PEL

96 29 August 2019 How will DLA ensure standardized measurements? If an item is sold by the foot, what length does DLA want for that Line Item?

How will DLA take into account minimum length requirements per manufacturer? (for context’s sake, X company requested a quote for PEL Line Item #038, NSN 6145-012829578, assigned to Lynn Electronics’ Cage—they can quote it but need a specific length)

The TDPs should state the specific length of each item. If it does not, then industry needs to let the Government know.

The minimum length requirement is at the discretion of the offerors.

97 29 August 2019 Will items on the PEL have tighter delivery requirements? Will there be stocking requirements for them?

Product Lead Times for PEL items will be competed at the order level as appropriate. Stocking requirements are not included in the solicitation.

98 29 August 2019 Are there any conditions that would prompt DLA to reduce items on the PEL and/or the quote percentage? For example, if all potential primes are only able to get quotes on 80% but manufacturers refuse to provide quotes for the other items due to a variety of reasons (obsolescence, competitive reasons, lack of time), will DLA consider reducing the PEL and/or the quote percentage?

Per the solicitation, evaluation of PEL items is based on commonly proposed items.

As stated in the Pre-Solicitations Conference, the Government reserves the right to modify the PEL as necessary.

99 29 August 2019 Can other customers, like NAVAIR, send MIPRS to DLA on this contract?

The contract scope supports the Federal Government.

100 29 August 2019 Can the Government provide drawing A3012753-1 and A3140058-1 for PEL line item 40?

Government sent two (2) SAFE file on 8/29/19 to all POCs that have requested TDPs and have verified JCPs. These files were included in the 2nd SAFE file sent in the PM.

Please advise if you did not receive the link as soon as possible.

101 29 August 2019 Can the Government provide the following drawings: SC-D-883963-G9-3, SC-D-883963GRP9, PPL-18225, PPL-18226, PPL-10502, PPL-10711, PPL-10618, A3013722, A3148019, A3140027, A3148018, A3180155, A3014056, A3106088

Government sent two (2) SAFE file on 8/29/19 to all POCs that have requested TDPs and have verified JCPs. These files were included in the 1st SAFE file sent in the AM.

Please advise if you did not receive the link as soon as possible.

102 29 August 2019 Regarding the following CLINs, only the parts list was uploaded: CLIN 024 – PPL-18225, CLIN 028 –

PPL-18226, CLIN 072 – PPL-10502, CLIN 104 – PPL-

10618, CLIN 123 – PPL-10711. Can Government provide complete TDPs?

These CLINs are SINCGARS IKs. All SINCGARS IKs shall be delivered in accordance with the corresponding PPL, which is the procurement parts list that listing the components the IK contains. Any additional drawings of the IK is for reference only.

103 29 August 2019 Where are the annual estimates coming from if there is no history? Our team is trying to understand where the demand is coming from for these items that appear to have no prior purchase

The demand for these items was identified and validated with the user community. The Government is not adjusting the PEL based upon demand at this time.

history (not sure if that is b/c programs are not reporting accurately or what). Is there purchase history that has not been reported but exists, hence these items are on the PEL? Or is the no history accurate and they should potentially be removed from the PEL?

104 30 August 2019 CLIN 008 – Cannot read the drawings Documents have updated in the cFolders.

105 30 August 2019 CLIN 010 – Cannot read the drawings Documents have updated in the cFolders.

106 30 August 2019 CLIN 047 – No assembly drawing or parts list was in the TDP package.

Government sent a SAFE file with the top level drawing which provides wiring assembly and parts list on 9/4/19 to all POCs that have requested TDPs and have verified JCPs.

Please advise if you did not receive the link as soon as possible.

107 30 August 2019 CLIN 104 – In regards to: RSCK 19657, BRACKET, ANTENNA & RSCK 19656 BRACKET, SUPPORT –

What does RSCK referring to?

Please ensure that PPL-10618 dated February 20, 2019 is referenced and used. An old version of PPL-10618 may have referenced RSCK, which may have been an old part number. However, the parts list has been updated, and shall be built in accordance with the drawings. PPL-10618 dated February 20, 2019, shall be used.

108 30 August 2019 CLINs 19, 25, 26, 29, 30 - There are items included on the bill of materials listed on the install drawings, but are not listed on the PPL provided with these CLINS. Do we go by the PPL or the install drawing?

These CLINs are SINCGARS Installation Kits (IKs). All SINCGARS IKs shall be delivered in accordance with the corresponding PPL, which is the procurement parts list that lists the components of the IKs. The installation drawing of the IK is for reference only.

109 30 August 2019 List of drawing discrepancies. Please advise which revision we should be utilizing for pricing efforts.

Kit Drawing Revision

Parts List Revision

All of these SINCGARS IKs shall be delivered in accordance with the corresponding PPL, which is the procurement parts list that lists the components of the IKs. The installation drawing of the IK is for reference only.

PPL-

10132

A3050624 AC AE

PPL-

18225

A3017268 AA AC

PPL-

10302

A3050637 AF AG

PPL-

10305

A3050646 A -

PPL-

18226

A3017269 AA AE

PPL-

10300

A3050639 AC AE

PPL-

18186

A3017108 AB AD

PPL-

18325

A3050703 AA AD

PPL-

18318

A3050696 AA AD

PPL-

18360

A3050738 AA AD

PPL-

18322

A3050700 AA AB

PPL-

10490

A3157581 AA A

PPL-

10484

A3104120 AA A

PPL-

10384

A3104086 - A

PPL10705 A3325488 - B

PPL-

10711

A3325498 - A

Therefore, the offeror(s) should be utilizing the latest revision of the PPLs for pricing efforts.

110 30 August 2019 Will customers be permitted to purchase items without NSNs as long as the items are within the interconnection scope?

Yes. If a requiring activity has a need for an item within scope that has not been provisioned, then it can be purchased utilizing the Interconnection Equipment Contract.

111 30 August 2019 Can a prime’s own parts/kits/equipment be purchased through the contract?

If it is within the scope of the contract, and permitted by the regulations, then yes we can purchase it through the contract.

112 30 August 2019 The following NSN’s TDPs have DRS Technologies drawings and designate DRS Technologies as the “actual manufacturer.” The acquisition method/code states “acquire only from the actual manufacturer”.

7010-01-624-6442 p/n: 9850-32500-2102

7010-01-620-7697 p/n: 9850-32500-2016

7010-01-614-8813 p/n: 9850-32500-2004

The following NSN’s TDPs have Northrop Grumman drawings and list the approved sources as Northrop Grumman, Ace Electronics, and DRS Technologies. The acquisition method/code states “acquire only from the prime contractor”.

7010-01-591-7636 p/n 170429-8

7010-01-591-8713 p/n 170429-16

The AMC/AMSC will be updated to be either 1/G or 2/G.

An AMC of “1” or “2” means that it is suitable for competition for either the first, second or more times. An AMSC of “G” means that the Government has the rights to the technical data. Therefore, these parts do not need to be acquired from the actual manufacturer, and can be manufactured in accordance with the Government drawings.

7010-01-591-8755 p/n 170437-4

Outside of these six, all the other installation kit’s acquisition methods/codes show “suitable for open acquisition” and all the TDPs are Government drawings.

113 3 September 2019 Will assembly drawings for CLIN 116 & 117 on the PEL be provided?

Drawings are not provided for code, P/N buy.

114 3 September 2019 Can you provide a legible copy of CLIN 0032? Government sent a SAFE file with a legible copy of the drawing A3168053 on 9/4/19 to all POCs that have requested TDPs and have verified JCPs. Please advise if you did not receive the link as soon as possible.

115 4 September 2019 L.4.1. To assist the Government in evaluating past performance, the offeror shall provide a list of relevant completed contracts/orders, commercial or government, performed within the past three

(3) years. Up to three (3) total, government OR commercial contracts for the same or similar items shall be submitted. Could the Gov’t please clarify if we are to submit a comprehensive list of all such contracts in the last three years, or just the three references are required?

Refer to Question 9 above. The Government wants a maximum of three (3) examples that were performed within the past three (3) years.

116 4 September 2019 The plans shall include the name of the company and type of services or supplies they will provide, their small business and socioeconomic size standard, the current commitment the organization have with the offeror, and the percentage of work that will be performed when using the small businesses to ensure the required forty percent (40%) small business participation

Refer to Question 30 above. The solicitation has been updated in section M.2.3.1. via Amendment 0003 to refer to “proposal”.

will be met. The plan shall include the organizations commitment to ensuring that the forty percent (40%) is maintained through bi-annual size standards checks with its vendors.

Would the Gov’t clarify which “plans” the required information needs to be included in?

The SBPCD or the Small Business Subcontracting Plan?

117 4 September 2019 An offeror (either Other-than-small-businesses and small businesses) shall provide a Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) substantiating how it will meet the small business participation requirements. Please clarify: the only requirement for VOL III Small Business Participation for small business offerors is the SBPCD. Small Business do NOT need to submit a SB Plan or the substantiating documentation of SB performance?

Per the regulations, only other-than-small-businesses are required to submit a Subcontracting Plan.