W15QKN-15-R-0240_QUESTION_SET_1.docx

W15QKN-15-R-0240 Offerors’ Questions Set #1 with Government Responses

1) Once the required forms have been submitted and verified, how will offerors be notified that access has been granted to view the TDP via the Safe Access File Exchange (SAFE) website?

Response: Email Notification is sent by the ARMDEC Safe Site to offeror’s representatives.

2) The CLIN structure accounts for 84 IAC Kits. The range quantities given are for 1 to 181 IAC Kits. How will the requirement for the additional 97 IAC Kits be handled contractually?

Response: CLINs will be revised.

3) Contract Terms: The solicitation mentions a base plus four (4) one (1) year option but also refers to a 5 year contract.

Question: Our assumption with the contract terms as mentioned is the contract will have a guaranteed base year of 1 year with 4 optional years, meaning the Government only guarantees 1 year. Please clarify.

Response: Upon award, the Base Period will be for a period of 12 months after contract award. The Government will provide written notice to the contractor of the Government’s intent to exercise an Option within the base or any future option period.

4) Please be advised I have another clarification which I believe is a typo. On page 4 of 96 one of the sub-assemblies to be installed into the Cab Assembly we believe is mislabeled.

Response: The drawing number for the Personnel Access Doors Installation should be 12620750, not 12555570. The drawing number 12555570 should be replaced by 12620750 anywhere it appears in the RFP and attachments.

5) Multiple Questions (a. thru i.):

a. Section A-4, Page 4 – Executive Summary section A-4 states, "The contract is a "build to print" effort, using the Government-provided Technical Data Package (TDP). The Government provided design has completed testing and manufacturer modifications are not required." This is in conflict with Statement of Work (SOW) paragraph 3.2.1, which states "The contractor shall resolve drawing discrepancies in regards to form, fit, or function issues with IAC Modification Kit items during the performance of this contract."

Can you clarify the Government's expectations regarding custodianship of the TDP during the performance of this contract?

Also, if the contractor will NOT be the custodian of the TDP during the performance of this contract, then are the requirements in SOW paragraph 5.4 Configuration Status Accounting (CSA) applicable to this effort?

Response: Since this will be the first “build-to-print” production contract for the IAC Mod Kits, involving new contractor(s) and processes, there is the possibility that some minor form/fit/function issues will occur, especially with the initial kits. If a form/fit/function issue arises during IAC Mod Kit production, it is the contractor’s responsibility to identify the drawing discrepancy, submit a Request for Deviation (RFD), and/or submit an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) w/ applicable Notice of Revisions (NORs) to the Government. The Government will disposition the Engineering Change Proposals and provide the updated drawing(s) through a contract modification. Although the contractor is not the custodian of the TDP, the contractor must maintain the approved baseline configuration of IAC technical data used in production and document the revision level of manufactured articles. The contractor must maintain CSA records for each IAC Mod Kit produced that details the GFE drawings and their respective revisions, changes, and deviations the kits were built to.

b. Section B, Page 7-29 -The delivery schedules and production rates provided in Section B are in conflict with the delivery schedule provided in Section F, as follows:

* CLIN-0002: Section B states that delivery of IACs begins 480d after receipt of order at a rate of 1/month and continues at that rate until completion, except for the 6th delivery which is for 2 IACs (CLIN-0002). Section F states that delivery to start "60 days after PVU approval" (which could be as early as 300d after receipt of order) at a rate of 1/month for four months, then increasing to "2 units until end of contract". Can the Government clarify the correct delivery schedule?

* CLIN-0004: With production IACs specified at a rate of 2/month plus the opportunity to provide "Range Pricing" for up to 181 IACs (CLIN-0002) with up to 5 Integration Spares (CLIN-0004) and up to 5 Fielding Spares (CLIN-0018). Can the Government clarify what actual production rate is required as a baseline?

Response: The Section B CLIN Structure is correct. Section F will be amended accordingly

c. Section B, Page 11 - PVUs - Is it correct to assume that the PVUs for the Option Periods (CLIN-0005, CLIN-0008, CLIN-0011, CLIN-0014) would only be exercised if there were a break in production greater than 12 months?

Response: Please refer to Section C 4.6

d. Section B, Page 12 - Option Year Production - Is it correct to assume that the undefinitized delivery schedule for IACs (CLIN-0006, CLIN-0009, CLIN-0012, CLIN-0015) will not exceed the Government's stated production rate of 2/month?

Response: Yes, Production Rate is 2 per month

e. Section B, Page 23 - CLIN A001 - Specifies 42 CDRLS (A0001-A0042) however Exhibit A only includes 32 CDRLs; which is correct?

Response: The Statement of Work and Document Summary List are correct as written. The Exhibit A – CDRLs has been revised accordingly.

f. Section C, Page 34 - SOW paragraph 4.4 states the "contractor shall generate Acceptance Test Procedures for acceptance of the kit as well as those items listed in Attachment 0016". Attachment 016 specifies 13 kits that requires component testing to be performed on the PVUs, and only 9 kits that require Acceptance Test Procedures (ATP).

f1) With this contract being defined as a "build-to-print", can the Government clarify its intention to require ATP for all of the kits or just the subset listed in Attachment 016?

Response: Will Clarify by 16 Aug 2016 (Production and Quality to Address) f2)Can the Government provide previously approved ATPs for these components?

Response: No f3) Do ATPs require Special Inspection Equipment (SIE)? If so, is Government approved SIE available for use?

Response: Yes and yes. The Special Inspection Equipment (SIE) is government furnished jigs (required for properly assembling and aligning cab pieces) already on the Government Furnished property List (Section J Attachment 22)

g. Section C, Page 34 - SOW paragraph 4.4 refers to SOW paragraph 5.4.1 and there is no SOW paragraph 5.4.1 within the document, was this meant to be 4.4.1? If not, can you clarify which SOW paragraph should be referenced?

Response: The correct reference is paragraph 4.4.1

h. Section C, Page 34 - In SOW paragraph 4.7; is it correct to assume Corrosion Prevention and Control (CPC) program is limited to changes only and not for build to print items?

Response: Yes

i. Section C, Page 35 - In SOW paragraph 5.2.2. do "items manufactured under this contract" also include larger non-COTS procurements (e.g. CAFU) with respect to Physical Configuration Audit (PCA)? What level of verification do the larger non-COTS procurements require?

Response: Evidence to support Physical Configuration Audits (PCAs) of Non-COTS procurements can be in the form of acceptance data, first article inspection, or real-time measuring of the first units off the line. This data can be measured, recorded, and provided by the supplier when delivering the item or by the prime contractor upon receiving the item. For the CAFU, P/N 12485366, this is a source control drawing (SCD) that contains mechanical interface dimensions and performance requirements at the assembly level. The prime contractor would not have to PCA anything below the source control drawing if procuring from approved sources. If the supplier does some level of acceptance testing to verify the SCD requirements and provides the records, then nothing else would be required. If the supplier does not provide verification evidence of the SCD requirements, then that would need to be verified by the prime contractor.

6) Is this a 100% Small Business Set-Aside Response: Yes

7) Can a Small business Team with a Large Business?

Response: Please refer to FAR 19.102.

8) Has the IAC been previously produced to this TDP?

Response: The IAC has been previously built to performance specification. The Government acquired the license rights to the TDP.

9) If I do not comply with the Welding Certification requirement listed in Sections A and L of this Solicitation will my proposal be evaluated.

Response: As stated in the RFP, "Offerors must demonstrate that they employ personnel that possess (or have possessed within two years prior to date of RFP posting) the capability to perform welds in accordance with TACOM standards for "Ground Combat Vehicle Welding Code - Steel 19207-12479550" and "Ground Combat Vehicle Welding Code - Aluminum 19207-12472301". Both of these certifications are critical to perform work in compliance with the associated TDP. Proposals that do not demonstrate proof of the aforementioned qualifications by submitting appropriate Procedure Qualification Records will be considered non-responsive and receive no further consideration".