USG_Response_to_Clarifications_to_FBO.pdf

Clarification Requests for Solicitation Number W15QKN-18-R-0102

USG RESPONSES:

1. Section A 6. Contract Award states “the price applicable to an individual order is the price for the ordering period in which the order is issued. The delivery date does not determine the ordering year”.

Section F states that production CLINS are due within 90 days after FAT approval or 120 days after award if a FAT is not required. Are the 90/120 day periods intended for completion of delivery or start of delivery? How does this affect the previous statement in regards to limitations on ordering for delivery in out-years when the pricing for the ordering period utilized might differ from pricing in the period of delivery?

Response 1: The CLIN when initiated in Section B will lay out which ordering year/period is awarded.

In regards to the 90/120 day periods intended for start of delivery. Each contract award will specify which ordering period is being awarded, which will coincide with the pricing proposed for each container type for that specific ordering period/year.

2. The previous specification these containers were produced to did not require 100% air testing. Can you confirm that the incumbent manufacturer is producing the PA157 to the 100% air testing spec? Will alternate sampling plans be considered?

Response 2: PA157 containers have been and/or are currently produced utilizing a 100% leak test rate.

Currently, the USG is not considering alternate sampling plans.

3. Can NRE be included in the proposal if required by the contractor to meet requirements of the production? What effect would this have on the evaluation of the offer?

Response 3: Contractors are required to submit pricing in accordance with Attachment 0003 Pricing

Matrix.

4. 2D Barcoding is required per Section D Items 1 a. & 2 a. Is there a specification that identifies the requirements for the required 2D bar coding that is to be placed on these pallets of empty metal containers?

Response 4: Barcoding shall be IAW drawing 12999545

5. Reference Section D - a) Wood Packaging Materials. Is it required to heat treat temporary wood shipping pallets IAW ISPM 15 since all shipments will be made to CONUS destinations?

Response 5: Yes heat treatment is required for all pallets

6. The solicitation references LPTA (Section A & M.1.1) and Best Value (Section A & M.1.2) evaluation criteria. Will the evaluation be lowest price or best value?

Response 6: All source selections are considered “Best Value” to the USG, however, within the Best

Value there are two (2) types of evaluations: Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) or Trade-Off.

For the purposes of this RFP, the proposals will be evaluated utilizing LPTA.

7. What is the acceptable format for providing an objection to Section A Disclosure of Unit Price

Information?

Response 7: Acceptable format for providing an objection to Disclosure of Unit Price Information can an email or formal letter addressed to the contract specialist.

8. Section A instructs offerors to submit proposals via email, Section L.2.3.1 instructs offerors to submit multiple paper copies and CDs. Is an all-electronic submission via email acceptable?

Response 8: Proposals shall be sent via Mail to the appropriate address located in Section A under

General Information to Offerors. No email submissions of proposals will be accepted.

9. Section C.8.1 & C.8.2 call for a formal OPSEC program, is this required for contractors that do not handle, produce, or test energetics?

Response 9: Yes, an OPSEC program is required for contractors that do not handle, produce, or test energetics.

10. Section E Part II 2.2 calls for Ammunition Data Cards. ADCs are normally created and maintained at the LAP level, is this expected of the container manufacturer? If so, how will this be coordinated with the LAP?

Response 10: Page 17 of the RFP explains the process for ADC’s and what contractors are required to submit.

11. The revision levels of several specifications have changed since the original solicitation was released.

The following drawings were not provided in the updated TDPs; 12998172 Rev D, 12998366 Rev C, and 9347108 Rev G. Can the drawings be provided to support pricing efforts?

Response 11: Revisions have been uploaded to FBO.

12. The Contract C Requirements do not line up with the TDPs or drawing revisions. The latest drawing revisions called out on Contract Cs were not included in the package.

Response 12: The latest drawing revisions were uploaded to FBO.

13. The following NOR’s were not included in the package:

-NOR R17S2004

-NOR R17K2008

-NOR R17S2024

-NOR R17K3007

-NOR R18K2005

Response 13: The latest NORs were uploaded to FBO.

14. The attached CDRL file doesn't seem to include anything other than CDRL A001 and I seem to be having trouble opening it correctly. Can you provide the full document in a standard pdf file

Response 14: CDRLs A001 thru A018 were re-up loaded to FBO.