W15QKN22R0057-0002.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. Contract ID Code Page Of

2. Amendment/Modification No.

3. Effective Date

4. Requisition/Purchase Req No.

5. Project No. (If applicable)

6. Issued By Code 7. Administered By (If other than Item 6) Code

8. Name And Address Of Contractor (No., Street, City, County, State and Zip Code)

9A. Amendment Of Solicitation No.

9B. Dated (See Item 11)

10A. Modification Of Contract/Order No.

10B. Dated (See Item 13) Code Facility Code

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning ____________ copies of the amendments: (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. Accounting And Appropriation Data (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS

It Modifies The Contract/Order No. As Described In Item 14.

A. This Change Order is Issued Pursuant To: The Changes Set Forth In Item 14 Are Made In

The Contract/Order No. In Item 10A.

B. The Above Numbered Contract/Order Is Modified To Reflect The Administrative Changes (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) Set

Forth In Item 14, Pursuant To The Authority of FAR 43.103(b).

C. This Supplemental Agreement Is Entered Into Pursuant To Authority Of:

D. Other (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return _______________ copies to the Issuing Office.

14. Description Of Amendment/Modification (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. Name And Title Of Signer (Type or print)

16A. Name And Title Of Contracting Officer (Type or print)

15B. Contractor/Offeror 15C. Date Signed 16B. United States Of America 16C. Date Signed

By (Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITIONS UNUSABLE

30-105-02 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

SEE SCHEDULE

X

Firm Fixed Price

0002 2022AUG26

W15QKN

ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND - NJ

PICATINNY ARSENAL, NJ 07806-5000

TIMOTHY CASSIDY

EMAIL: TIMOTHY.J.CASSIDY12.CIV@ARMY.MIL

W15QKN-22-R-0057

2022JUL12

X

X 2022OCT28 03:00pm

/SIGNED/

2 signed

SEE SECOND PAGE FOR DESCRIPTION

1 29

CONTINUATION SHEET

Reference No. of Document Being Continued Page of

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION A - SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Buyer Name: TIMOTHY CASSIDY

Buyer Office Symbol/Telephone Number: CCNJ-MC/(973)724-3244

Type of Contract 1: Firm Fixed Price

Kind of Contract: Supply Contracts and Priced Orders

*** End of Narrative A0000 ***

The purpose of Amendment 0002 to W15QKN-22-R-0057 is to answer questions received from industry, update Attachments in Section J, update

Sections L and M, and extend the proposal due date and time to 28 October 2022 at 3:00PM EST.

Question 1: In furtherance of ITAR Section 129.5, will the Government include a statement on the contract that this contract supports a foreign assistance or sales program authorized by law?

Answer 1: No, the USG does not intend to include this statement because it is not applicable to the Contract award. It may be specified on a delivery order basis.

Question 2: Request Removal of the following CLINS from the attachment. Item 0320, 0321, 0322, 0323, 0379, 0380, 0381, 0382

Rationale: These items are obsolete and/or are only manufactured in Russia. Due to current conflict any surplus has been consumed.

Request that these items be removed from Attachment 0001 - Price Matrix.

Answer 2: Items will not be removed at this time. PdD-SAWS does not agree that all CLINS are obsolete. Amendment 0001 addresses concern regarding any banned sources and if any CLIN should be obsolete or only available from a source not in compliance with Section H of Amendment 0001, then the contractor shall provide that rationale to the USG.

Question 3: Regarding RFP Sections L.2.3, L.2.5.2 and L.2.5.4 Letters of Commitment: Requesting that the Letters of Commitment be removed from the page count for Volume II.

Rationale: Responding to the RFP requirements with detailed supplier letters of commitment, for the large number of suppliers to support the large number of SAWS items, requires a significantly larger page count than currently allocated. Removing the limits enables offerors to provide the level of detail required by the RFP that is not feasible otherwise.

Answer 3: Letters of Commitment shall be removed form the page count for Volume II.

Question 4: Regarding RFP Section L.2.3, Request clarification on which volume the Small Business Subcontracting Plan should be contained Volume VI or Volume VII.

Answer 4: Offerors shall submit in accordance with the RFP requirements for the Small Business Participation Plan Volume - Volume VI, specifically, L.3.9 (9) and (10).

Question 5: Regarding RFP Section L.3.9 (2), Volume IV Small Business Participation "total contract price as calculated in accordance with D.5.b.iv", is reference to D.5.b.iv in paragraph (2), correct?

Answer 5: No, it is not the correct reference. RFP Section L.3.9 Paragraph (2) has been updated to the correct reference of M.7.b.iv.

Question 6: If the contractor is primarily relying on a network of vendors, including several in particular in Eastern European nations with whom we work regularly, and who plan on manufacturing, quality testing, and exporting the product directly to the destinations listed in the Task Orders, is there any evaluation criteria associated with walking through the offeror's secured premises?

Answer 6: Offerors are reminded that all evaluation criteria is included in Section L of this RFP. In addition to the evaluation criteria in Section L in accordance with M.12.3 "A pre-award survey may be required by the Contracting Officer in accordance with FAR

9.106". This Pre-Award survey could require an on-site visit to the prospective contractor's facility for safety and security. Please also note the requirements for Explosive Safety Site Plans (ESSP). ESSPs are required for all Department of Defense (DoD) GSI inspection locations including ingress/egress routes. There is also additional information in both Attachment 0013 and 0012 regarding the facilities and safety requirements.

Question 7: If the offeror plans to drop ship and dispatch directly from the original manufacturers straight to the customer generally speaking, is it necessary for the offeror to describe in depth the details associated with the safety requirements and/or the compliance with the above referenced / attached 'premises' points?

Answer 7: For each item listed in Section J, Attachment 0001, - Price Matrix for all Item Numbers, IAW L.3.5.2, a minimum of one manufacturer must be listed for each item and the offeror shall provide at a minimum Key Point #1 and Key Point #2 (L.3.5.2). For each

2 29

W15QKN-22-R-0057

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

item in the Table on Page 88 & 89 the Offeror shall provide a Transportation plan IAW L.3.5.3 which includes all of the information required per L.3.5.3.

Question 8: Is there any downside in the evaluation metrics to not addressing this specific area?

Answer 8: Yes if any area of section L is not addressed, the Offeror will be evaluated according to Section M - M.1 Basis of Award.

Question 9: To be clear, we looked through the solicitation's broad submittal evaluation criteria areas that are disclosed, and it doesn't specify whether that type of information needs to be included in the technical proposal. Is that a requirement we must address in the submittal?

Answer 9: Yes if any area of section L is not addressed you will be evaluated according to Section M - M.1 Basis of Award.

Question 10: The solicitation also does not address whether an Offeror needs to be able to demonstrate having a functioning and working bunker to be considered for award or list that as any gate criteria. Are these areas documented from the solicitation referenced above in this email considered a gate criteria or an evaluation criteria for award?

Answer 10: A working bunker is not part of the requirements of this contract if not manufacturing or storing ammunition.

Question 11: RFP section L.2.2 on page 85 says a 12-point minimum font size applies. However, section L.2.3 on page 86 says the font size shall not be less than 10-point. Is the minimum text font size 12-point or 10-point?

Answer 11: L.2.2 Each paragraph should be single spaced, and shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or Times New Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be produced in landscape mode.

Pages should not exceed 8-1/2 inches in width by 11 inches in length; pages printed on both sides depicting such items as sketches, factory floor layouts, etc. will be counted as two pages. The font used shall not be less than 10 point.

In summary, the font size depends on the type of document submitted in accordance with the above.

Question 12: Amendment 0001 provided an updated Attachment 0014 which updated the Contracting Officer email address from renee.k.prendergast.civ@army.mil to jennifer.m.rustwick.civ@army.mil; however, the name of the Contracting Officer identified is Renee

Prendergast. Should it be Jennifer Rustwick?

Answer 12: Amendment 0002 has corrected to Jennifer Rustwick.

Question 13: Attachment 0001 Price Matrix: Request removal of the following CLINs from the attachment:

Item 0139 & 0140: These items are only manufactured in Russia using depleted uranium.

Item 0296: No source of manufacture can be identified due to UN Convention on Cluster Munitions dated 1 August 2010

Items 0324, 0325, 0326 and 0398: Sole source manufacturer will not offer items due to export restrictions. Manufacturer has provided written confirmation stating they will not be submitting a proposal in response to the request.

Answer 13: Items 0139, 0140, 0296, 0324, 0325, 0326 & 0398 are hereby removed from the Section J, Attachment 0001 - Price Matrix and those line items are intentionally left blank.

Question 14: Proposals are now due at 3:00PM EST on 26 September 2022.

Request that proposals be due at 3:00PM EST on 28 October 2022 as major suppliers have had to delay pricing due to prioritizing current

SAWS/NSA high priority items.

Answer 14: Amendment 0002 serves to extend the proposal due date and time to 3:00pm EST on 28 October 2022.

Question 15: Does ACC require the line items in the Table (0010, 0010, 0357, 0024, 0024, 0352) to be priced out by their respective manufacturers as part of the proposal submission and sale/contract be discussed during the IMS? Or is Table only to be utilized for the sample workflow and processes that ACC wish to be documented in the IMS?

Answer 15: The table in this section is not used for pricing purposes. The pricing will ONLY be IAW Section J, Attachment 0001 - Price

Matrix and Section B and evaluated IAW Section M.7. The Table, as it states on Pg. 87 of RFP (W15QKN-22-R-0057), L.3.5.1 "This subfactor evaluates the Offerors Program Management Plan using the examples in the Table below." All Key Points should be developed using the Table below on Page 88. Page 88 Includes a Table of Items including Item Numbers, Quantities and Destinations and it correlates to the CLIN List (Attachment 0001) of the RFP. The Item Number list includes a schedule which should be used to develop the

3 29

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

IMS and other Key Points for the Subfactor 1 Program Management Plan.

Question 16: Can ACC provide prospective participants with an example of the Gantt chart format they wish the offerors to provide in order to best document the deliverables for the IMS?

Answer 16: No, an example Gantt chart will not be provided to Offerors.

Question 17: Does ACC require 100% of the items listed in the excel spreadsheet in Section J (Attachment 0001 - Price Matrix) to be priced out in their entirety? If so, how much of a grading factor will be assigned to the ability to support the entire price matrix requested? Is there a percentage weighting towards being able to price all the items? Is it pro-rata based on the percentage of total items able to be quoted? What if the prospective Offeror cannot commit to provide 100% of the Item Numbers at the time of submission, but can make a substantial contribution to the program on a significant number of the Item Numbers, or alternatively, key sections product areas requested?

Answer 17: The USG will not provide direction to Offerors submission of Section J, Attachment 0001 - Price Matrix. Failure to comply with the RFP requirements for Price information may result in an adverse assessment of an Offerors proposal. Pricing is evaluated IAW

M.7. and not assigned weights.

Question 18: Will task orders be issued against the pricing quoted in the spreadsheet, or will offerors who advance to the BPA stage be asked to re-quote on a rolling basis depending on the program's ongoing requirements? For how long? What are the interval periods?

Answer 18: Only Offerors who are awarded contracts will be able to compete on Delivery Orders. The USG does not have a schedule of future Delivery Orders at this time.

Question 19: If the actual Task Orders / Delivery Orders be competed again on a rolling basis once the BPA gets underway, how essential is it for the supporting vendors to issue a validity of 270 days? Is the "length of commitment of 270 days discussed in Key Point #2 referring to a commitment from the vendor to supply the offeror generally for subject product/item, or does the 270 days pertain to validity date for the pricing provided in the Price Matrix?

Answer 19: Only Offerors who are awarded contracts will be able to compete on Delivery Orders. The USG does not have a schedule of future Delivery Orders at this time. Please note resultant contract will not be a BPA. As mentioned in the RFP, it is a Firm Fixed

Price IDIQ contract.

Question 20: Even with the total allotment of time in the solicitation's time frame, from solicitation publishing to solicitation due date, due to global raw material shortages and price inflation, many manufacturers are having a difficult time to pin down the pricing for a commitment of 270 days which is required for all of these line items. For any prospective BPA holder in this program it would be unlikely to be able to support 100% of the total # of line items (which is implied as being requested), due to the sheer size of the requirements. Please advise whether not pricing 100% of the line items will be grounds for rejection from the program, AND/OR, please advise the exact grading criteria that not pricing 100% of the line items will impact.

Answer 20: Yes, failure to comply with the RFP requirements for Price information may result in an adverse assessment of an Offerors proposal. Please note resultant contract will not be a BPA.

Question 21: If Offeror is primarily relying on one counterparty for the majority of the supply items, will that in any way negatively affect the grading of the Offeror's ability during the evaluation of the solicitation? Is there a minimum number of vendors each Offeror is mandated to count with, or must comply with, in order to be successfully considered for entry to the program? If one subcontractor vendor is capable to support the majority of the products, and is a manufacturer of considerable size (including many subsidiaries specialized in various subsets of the Price Matrix master listing) and experience, will that count the same as having multiple vendor letters of support? Or will having multiple vendor letters of support be considered as greater capability in the evaluation than having just one vendor letter of support?

Answer 21: There is no minimum or maximum number of vendors mandated for the RFP. Offerors will be evaluated IAW M.1 Basis of Award.

Question 22: Offeror is not planning on providing certain line items from either Table, which we understand is utilized for the purpose of evaluating competency and ability to manage various aspects of the program deliverables, will Offeror be adversely affected during evaluation for leaving out several line items (that they do not plan to support in the program because their mandated Vendors do not offer such product and Offeror will choose not to bid on subject item eventual Task Order or Delivery Order)? Must the Offeror provide answers for 100% of the Tables items for the respective sections? If Offeror does not comply with 100% of the Table items for the respective sections, is it automatic grounds for dismissal and/or is there a percentage weighting of the overall grading for this criteria?

Answer 22: Yes, failure to comply with the RFP requirements for any section of Section L of the RFP, inclusive of L.3.5, may result in an adverse assessment of an Offerors proposal.

Question 23: It states that the Offeror shall submit a detailed IMS, Transportation Plan, Manufacturers Supply List, and Price for

4 29

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Delivery Order 0001. Since the overall Manufacturer's Supply List section states that the Offeror must provide "Section J, Price Matrix, for all Item Numbers, with a minimum of one manufacturer each," this implies that there is overlap with the requested information and the Price and Letter of Commitment will already be provided or addressed in the previous section. Does ACC simply want this broken out again and separated in a complete volume for everything in the Subfactor 4 Table? i.e. Does ACC want this information twice, but just formatted differently the second time?

Answer 23: Please refer to Sections L and M. There is no duplication of information required.

Question 24: Key Point #1: Is ACC requesting that Offeror obtain the drawings from its manufacturing vendors, for the Item Numbers listed? We assume that TDP means drawings by definition, so is it realistic to assume that manufacturers of subject Item Numbers will voluntarily hand over their proprietary drawings and manufacturer specifications of the subject products for the Offeror to provide to

ACC for evaluation?

Answer 24: The manufacturer may not provide drawings of their items, however, an example of the drawing may be provided through open source drawings and diagrams with call outs for dimensions and markings as applicable to fill Gen Spec requirements.

Question 25: Key Point #2: If the Offeror will rely on the manufacturer/vendor it mandates for the subject Item Numbers to perform the technical (manufacturing), testing and inspection processes complete, will it be acceptable to approach answering these points by documenting or describing the manufacturing vendor's ability to support those testing and inspection requirements? OR is ACC's expectation that the Offeror can perform additional inspection and testing on the manufacturer's product? Offeror respectfully believes that relying on highly experienced manufacturer's producing subject products for many decades will be more effective than any type of verification process that can be developed externally by Offeror in-house, and that the best case scenario will be to perform adequate back-to-back paperwork inspection on delivered products' manufacturing travelers/reports. Please comment on the above points and we respectfully request clarity of ACC in what their expectations are.

Answer 25: Testing and visual inspections must be provided within the TDP to fulfill Gen Spec requirements.

Question 26: Key Point #1: If Offeror is relying on manufacturing vendors that are external parties/subcontractors, as we believe is expected of the Offerors generally in this solicitation, can Offeror provide two completed examples of Lot Acceptance Testing Reports from its mandated manufacturer from previous delivery orders, or is ACC's expectation that Offeror provides two completed examples of

Lot Acceptance Testing Reports that were generated by the Offeror in the past? Is it assumed that Offerors can produce Lot Acceptance

Testing Reports that are internally generated on behalf of externally procured products or is it expected that the LATRs will be generated by the mandated external vendors listed?

Answer 26: The USG will not provide proprietary Technical Data from LATRs.

Question 27: The ACC requests Offeror to provide a comprehensive LATR narrative description for 5 different General Specifications, but the sample LATR Item Numbers number only 2 lines. Is it acceptable to provide the comprehensive LATR narratives for only the 2 General

Specifications that pertain to the 2 Item Numbers which are requested the previous LATR examples for?

Answer 27: Per Section L provide Data as requested.

Question 28: Volume IV: PRICE: Can ACC provide a copy of FAR 15.403-5 for the Offerors to review and ensure compliance?

Answer 28: Offerors can utilize acquisition.gov to view the latest version of the FAR clause. https://www.acquisition.gov/far/15.403-5

Question 29: Subsection 4): "Prices will establish an NTE unit price for the SAWS items based on the price matrix, and awardees can propose lower FFP unit prices on future DOs but cannot exceed the unit prices in the contract." This will be a multi-year BPA and pricing is certainly expected to change; how long are the prices on the Price Matrix expected to be valid for, before the ACC will allow prices to be re-quoted?

Answer 29: Prices will not be re-quoted. This is not a BPA but a five year FFP IDIQ. The NTE Prices will be priced for the five year duration for each ordering period as laid out in the Section J, Attachment 0001 - Price Matrix. The Pricing structure follows the FAR

16.5 guidance for IDIQ contracts.

Question 30: Subsection 8) It states that the Offeror shall submit pricing for all the items in Attachment 0003 in DO Proposal Form, but in other sections its understood that the entire Price Matrix must be priced. This implies that there is overlap with the requested information and the Prices requested in Attachment 0003 will already be covered in the Price Matrix. Does ACC simply want this broken out again and separated into the sample DO Proposal form? i.e. Does ACC want this information twice, but just formatted differently the second time?

Answer 30: Attachment 0003 is specific to Delivery Order 0001 only. Please follow instructions for L.3.5.4 Delivery Order 0001.

Specifically Key Point #2 the Delivery Order Proposal Form (Attachment 0003).

5 29

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Question 31: Volume V Past Performance, Sections 1 and 2: If Offeror is utilizing a key and experienced subcontractor / mandated manufacturing vendor for subject products, will it be acceptable to submit past performance a) Contract Descriptions AND Performance

Narratives of its mandated manufacturing vendor? If subcontractor has more experience than Offeror, can Offeror submit and import subcontractor's past performance volumes in lieu of submitting respective volumes of its own performance as a prime contractor, if the subcontractor's prospective volumes are more relevant to the stated objectives and requirements of the solicitation?

Answer 31: Subcontractor Past Performance cannot be submitted in lieu of. Past Performance can only be submitted IAW L.3.8 Past

Performance.

Question 32: There is no defined # of past performance volumes requested in this section. It simply states "All Federal Govt contracts for the Prime Offeror that are relevant." How will Offeror be adversely impacted if they have fewer examples than other Offerors? Is there a grading criteria associated with this? Offeror believes this is subjective since there is no set number of Past Performance volumes explicitly requested.

Answer 32: The exact criteria of how Past Performance is evaluated is found in M.8.

Question 33: If Offeror is able to submit large quantity of information on behalf of its subcontractor in the last three years, but they are not subcontracts filled on behalf of the Federal Government's requirement, but other customers such as international foreign military end users, how will this be weighted against other Offerors who comply with the requirements to have PP with the Federal Govt?

Answer 33: The relevance of all submitted Past Performance is found in M.

Question 34: If Offeror is able to submit large quantity of information on behalf of its subcontractor in the last three years, but less information on its own PP as a prime contractor for similar/relevant activity, is there any indication of how this will be weighted in the evaluation process? Will ACC view significant PP evidence and documentation of the subcontractor as acceptable in light of more limited PP material furnished from the actual prime contractor / Offeror?

Answer 34: The exact criteria of how Past Performance is evaluated is found in M.8.

*** END OF NARRATIVE A0003 ***

6 29

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION J - LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

List of Number List of Number

Addenda Title Date of Pages Transmitted By Addenda Title Date of Pages Transmitted By________________ ____________________________________________________________ _______________ ____________ _______________________________ ____________________________________________________________ _______________ ____________ _______________

Attachment 0001 PRICE MATRIX 25-AUG-2022 001 DATA

Attachment 0014 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (25 AUG 2022) 25-AUG-2022 006 DATA

7 29

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

L. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

L.1 Offerors shall provide information by addressing each Factor / Subfactor in the format and sequence identified in the solicitation.

The Offerors must provide information in sufficient detail to allow the Government to make a best value assessment of the Offerors capability to support the proposed response to the evaluation criteria. Proposals that do not contain the information requested in the solicitation risk being determined unacceptable by the Government. The Government will not assume the Offeror possesses any capability, understanding, or commitment not specified in the proposal. The proposal must not merely repeat the solicitation requirements, but rather must provide convincing documentary evidence in support of conclusive statements of how contract requirements will be met.

L.1.2 Alternate Proposals: Alternate proposals will not be accepted.

L.1.3 Proposals shall be valid through 270 calendar days from date the solicitation closes.

L.1.4 All questions concerning this procurement, either technical or contractual, must be submitted in writing to the Contracting

Office. No direct communication between the technical representative and a prospective Offeror shall be conducted. Questions and proposals shall be submitted to the following Point of Contact (POC):

Army Contracting Command New Jersey

ACC-NJ-MC, Bldg. 10

ATTN: Timothy Cassidy, Telephone: (973) 724-3244

Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806

E-mail: timothy.j.cassidy12.civ@army.mil

Responses to submitted questions will be provided to all Offerors via Contract Opportunities at https://beta.sam.gov/ and the Solicitation Module at https://piee.eb.mil/sol/xhtml/unauth/index.xhtml

L.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS ________________________________

L.2.1. The Offeror shall submit their proposal electronically through the Solicitation Module of the Procurement Integrated Enterprise

Environment (PIEE) suite at https://piee.eb.mil/pee-landing/ In order to do so, vendors must be registered as a

Proposal Manager in PIEE. Vendor registration instructions can be found at:

https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/ce/cap/docs/piee/PIEE_Solicitation_Module_Vendor_Access_Instructions.pdf

Proposals submitted by mail or hand carried will not be evaluated. Proposals sent through proprietary or third party File Transfer

Protocol (FPT) sites or DoD Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE) will not be retrieved. It is the Offeror's responsibility to obtain written confirmation of receipt of all electronic files of the full proposal by the ACC-NJ Contracting Office. Any portion of the proposal that is changed (as a result of discussions or proposal revisions) should be annotated and dated. Each volume shall begin at the top of a page and be clearly labeled with its Title and a copy number (e.g., one of five). In the event that the PIEE Solicitation

Module is down, the alternate method for proposal submission is via email to usarmy.pica.acc.mbx.acc-nj-proposal-submissionarmy.mil@army.mil. It shall be noted that the size limit on incoming messages for this alternate email is 35MB. The Offeror must obtain prior approval from the Contracting Officer via email to use the alternate submission method. All proposals received after the exact time specified for receipt shall be treated as late submissions and will not be considered except under facts and circumstances allowed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). For instructions on how to post an offer, please refer to the Posting

Offer demo: https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf

Offerors are responsible for ensuring electronic copies are virus-free and shall run an anti-virus scan before submission. Electronic copies of each volume shall be compatible with the following software products: Adobe Acrobat Reader DC and Microsoft Office Suite 2016.

Narrative portions of the proposal shall be in Adobe Acrobat portable document file (pdf) searchable text format. The Offeror shall not embed sound or video (e.g., MPEG) files into the proposal files. Electronic files shall be clearly identified for each volume, section, and item.

L.2.2 Each paragraph should be single spaced, and shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or Times New Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be produced in landscape mode.

L.2.3. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

| Volume | Title | Maximum Pages |

| I | Go / No-Go: Licensing | No page limit

| | Item 1 | |

| | U.S. Department of State | |

| | Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) Brokering License | |

8 29

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

| | Item 2 | |

| | Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Type 11 License | |

| II | Management | 180 for the entire Management Volume* |

| | Subfactor 1 Program Management Plan | |

| | Subfactor 2 Manufacturer Supply List | |

| | Subfactor 3 Transportation Plan | |

| | Subfactor 4 Delivery Order 0001 | |

| III | Technical | 100 for the entire Technical Volume |

| | Subfactor 1 Technical Description | |

| | Subfactor 2 Technical Verification | |

| IV | Price | No page limit |

| V | Past Performance | 40 |

| VI | Small Business Participation | 50 |

| VII | Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents | No page limit |

| | and Certifications / Representations | |

*Letters of Commitment are not included in the page count for Volume II.

Each volume shall be as brief as possible, consistent with complete submission. Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed or not read and will not be evaluated by the Government. The page count will be made by counting the pages from left to right, consecutively. Pages that exceed the page limitation will be returned to the Offeror and will not be evaluated. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. Annexes, documentation and attachments that are submitted by the Offeror, which are not required as part of the RFP, will count against the page limitations. If pages are printed on both sides, each side will count as a separate page. The following will not count against page limitations: volume title pages, table of contents pages, cross-referencing pages, indices, acronym lists and page dividers (used to separate proposal sections). Pages should not exceed 8-1/2 inches in width by 11 inches in length; pages printed on both sides depicting such items as sketches, factory floor layouts, etc. will be counted as two pages. The font used shall not be less than 10 point.

L.2.4. There shall be no classified material within the proposal.

L.3. PROPOSAL FILES ______________

L.3.1 Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin_____________ at the top of a page. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and RFP number in the header and / or footer. A Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Contents feature in MS Word. All proposal volumes shall be marked with the appropriate Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) markings. MS Word (doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins Top, Bottom, Left, Right 1

Gutter 0

From Edge Header, Footer 0.5

Page Size, Width 8.5

Page Size, Height 11

The following additional restrictions apply:

L.3.2 File Packaging. All of the proposal files shall be compressed (zipped) into one file entitled proposal zip using WinZip version_____________________

6.2 or later, or as separate uploads in their narrative format (i.e., doc, xls, ppt, etc.). Files shall be in read-only format, using

PDF files. All price breakdown information to aid in the price evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read / Write format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2016. All information submitted as part of the proposal shall be submitted as searchable text

(i.e., CTRL+F enabled) including explanations referencing images. All images shall be clear and evaluators shall be able to clearly identify text and markings within the images at 100% view. **Please note Self-extracting .exe files are not acceptable.

9 29

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

L.3.3 Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The Offeror shall confine submissions to essential__________________________ matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked. The following shall be included in the Narrative discussion:

Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details (i.e., drawings, test data) to permit a complete and accurate evaluation strictly from a technical standpoint. The non-Price Factor submittals shall have a separate index, which contains narrative titles that are cross-referenced to both the applicable SOW paragraph and page number. This index shall not count against the Page limitation for the Technical Volume. The narrative discussions shall also be related to the applicable SOW paragraph by placing the appropriate SOW number at the beginning of the discussion text. The proposal shall be detailed and clearly stated to allow an assessment by the

Government without the need for additional clarifications. The Offeror shall provide detailed narrative discussions that address both the SOW and the Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs) of the solicitation. All information and data provided shall be specific to

SAWS, except for the area of Past Performance. In response to the RFP, the Offeror must address the following Factors and Subfactors:

L.3.4 VOLUME I Go / No-Go: Licensing. Proposal shall demonstrate that the Offeror is capable of meeting solicitation requirements by ________________________________ providing copies of the necessary Licensing documents associated with the importation process. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

L.3.4.1 Section 1 Item 1 U.S. Department of State Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) Brokering License. This item __________________________________________________________________________________________________________ demonstrates the Offerors ability to meet the DDTC Brokering License requirement. The Offeror shall provide a current, unexpired electronic copy of their DDTC Brokering License or if recently expired, evidence of renewal submission prior to the expiration date.

Offerors shall submit "in process" paperwork if the Offeror does not currently hold a license with the DDTC.

L.3.4.2 Section 2 Item 2 Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Type 11 License. This item evaluates the Offerors ATF Type 11 __________________________________________________________________________________

License. The Offeror shall provide a current, unexpired electronic copy of their ATF Type 11 License or if recently expired, evidence of renewal submission prior to the expiration date. Offerors shall submit "in process" paperwork if the Offeror does not currently hold a license with the ATF.

L.3.5 VOLUME II Management. The volume shall be organized into the following Subfactors: ____________________

L.3.5.1 Subfactor 1 Program Management Plan. This subfactor evaluates the Offerors Program Management Plan using the examples in the ___________________________________

Table below. The Offeror shall provide a detailed Program Management Plan for the items in the Table below. The Plan shall include details to effectively manage, meet schedule and monitor performance of the Offerors major / key Subcontractors. Major / key

Subcontractors are defined as those that will be providing critical hardware, or process, or whose subcontract is for more than 25% of the proposed price. At a minimum, the Offeror will provide information to substantiate the following:

KEY POINT #1: The Offeror shall provide a detailed Integrated Master Schedule (IMS), which identifies all program tasks required for____________ successful execution (milestones, events and program tasks from receipt of DO, through delivery, highlighting the critical path and closeout of the DO identified with associated manufacturer) to include the tasks and milestones identified in the Government SOW, and

General Specifications, including deliverables and data items. The IMS shall be provided in a Gantt chart (or similar presentation format). File shall be submitted in PDF format.

KEY POINT #2: The Offerors Program Management Plan shall also include a description of each of the tasks included in the IMS with____________ references to the tasks and milestones identified in the Government SOW, and General Specifications, including deliverable and data items.

KEY POINT #3: The Offeror shall provide evidence that substantiates the Offerors experience and ability to effectively manage schedule____________ and performance of the Offerors major / key Subcontractors. Evidence can be submitted in the form of deliveries of substantially similar contract actions.

Offeror shall use the following items to illustrate their capability to provide a complete and detailed Program Management Plan.

***PLEASE NOTE: This plan is for Evaluation Purposes ONLY.

| Item Numbers | Item | Quantity | Destination |

| 0010 | 7.62x54mm Ball | 1,000,000 | Mogadishu International Airport, Somalia |

| 0010 | 7.62x54mm Ball | 100,000 | Crane Army Ammunition Activity, IN |

| 0357 | 7.62x54mm Linking Machine | 2 | Mogadishu International Airport, Somalia |

10 29

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

| 0024 | 12.7x108mm Ball | 250,000 | Mogadishu International Airport, Somalia |

| 0024 | 12.x7108mm Ball | 50,000 | Crane Army Ammunition Activity, IN |

| 0352 | 12.7x108mm Ball Linking Machine | 2 | Mogadishu International Airport, Somalia |

L.3.5.2 Subfactor 2 Manufacturer Supply List. This subfactor evaluates the Offerors current Manufacturer Supply List. The Offeror shall _____________________________________ provide its current manufacturer supply list for each item listed in Section J, Attachment 0001 - Price Matrix for all Item Numbers, with a minimum of one manufacturer listed for each item. A Letter of Commitment from that respective manufacturer should support each manufacturer proposed. If Letter of Commitment is to an entity other than the Offeror, the other entity should provide a Letter of

Commitment to Offeror and a copy of Letter of Commitment from the manufacturer. The Offeror shall provide, at a minimum, the following:

KEY POINT #1: The manufacturer of each Item Number shall have the following information, at a minimum:____________

Item.

Quantity.

Manufacturer location(s).

Supply type - new production and / or surplus with ammunitions range of years manufactured and service life. As defined in the

General Specifications, stock ammunition must be less than five years old for all ammunition, except for small caliber ammunition, which shall be less than ten years old.

If multiple manufacturers, the quantity should be reflected for each manufacturer.

KEY POINT #2: Letter(s) of Commitment from manufacturers should include, at a minimum:____________

Name and address of the company providing the commitment.

Item of commitment.

Length of commitment; the Government prefers a minimum of 270 calendar days from date the solicitation closes.

Date received and signature of individual from manufacturer; the Government prefers and individual that is authorized to bind the company and provides a firm commitment.

L.3.5.3 Subfactor 3 Transportation Plan. This subfactor serves to evaluate the Offerors Transportation Plan using the eamples in the ________________________________

Table below. The Offeror shall provide a detailed Transportation Plan for the items in the Table below. The Plan shall include details to ensure effective management, meet schedule and monitor programmatic performance of the Offerors Subcontractors and Freight

Forwarders. The Offerors plan at a minimum shall including the following substantiating information:

KEY POINT #1: The Offerors Transportation Plan shall include the following at a minimum:____________

Schedule milestones of each shipment.

Schedule milestones and terms of local and state permits, approval and / or clearances in manufacturers country and all foreign states and locality necessary for the movement and into final country.

Mode(s) of transportation from origin to final delivery point (to include inland transportation).

Identification of port(s) to be utilized.

Identification of freight forwarder companies with commitment letters.

Rough Order of Material (ROM) price for transportation costs.

***PLEASE NOTE: Transportation Plan is for Evaluation Purposes ONLY.

| Item Numbers | Item | Quantity | Destination | Delivery Schedule |

| 0297 | 40mm HE Frag | 20,000 | Camp Arifjan, Kuwait | 180 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| 0010 | 7.62x54mm Ball | 5,000,000 | Camp Arifjan, Kuwait | 90 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| 0010 | 7.62x54mm Ball | 400,000 | Crane Army Ammunition Activity, IN | 90 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| 0357 | 7.62x54mm | 5 | Camp Arifjan, Kuwait | 180 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| | Linking Machine | | | |

| 0357 | 7.62x54mm | 1 | Picatinny Arsenal, NJ | 180 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| | Linking Machine | | | |

| 0357 | 7.62x54mm | 5 | Crane Army Ammunition Activity, IN | 180 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| | Linking Machine | | | |

| 0341 | Belt, 7.62x54mm | 5000 | Camp Arifjan, Kuwait | 90 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

11 29

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

| | (100 rds) | | | |

| 0341 | Belt, 7.62x54mm | 10 | Crane Army Ammunition Activity, IN | 90 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| | (100 rds) | | | |

| 0444 | Inert 125mm | 25 | Picatinny Arsenal, NJ | 270 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| | APFSDS | | | |

| 0425 | Inert 90mm | 25 | Picatinny Arsenal, NJ | 270 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| | HESH-TP-T | | | |

| 0432 | Inert 30mm | 25 | Picatinny Arsenal, NJ | 270 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| | HE Frag | | | |

L.3.5.4 Subfactor 4 Delivery Order 0001. ________________________________

Requirements of Delivery Order 0001 include:

| Item Numbers | Item | Quantity | Destination | Delivery Schedule |

| 0005 | 7.62x39mm Ball | 99,840 | Blue Grass Army Depot, KY | 90 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| 0005 | 7.62x39mm Ball | 1,000 | Picatinny Arsenal, NJ | 90 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| 0001 | 5.45x39mm Ball | 23,400 | Blue Grass Army Depot, KY | 90 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

| 0001 | 5.45x39mm Ball | 1,000 | Picatinny Arsenal, NJ | 90 calendar days after award or EUC, if required |

The Offeror shall submit a detailed IMS, Transportation Plan, Manufacturer Supply List, and Price for Delivery Order 0001. The Offerors response for Delivery Order 0001 shall include the following substantiating information at a minimum:

KEY POINT #1: The Offeror shall provide a detailed IMS (in accordance with the delivery schedule requested in the Table above, as well____________ as Section J, Attachment 0003 Delivery Order Proposal Form - Delivery Order 0001), which identifies all program tasks required for successful execution to include the tasks and milestones identified in the Government SOW, and General Specifications, including deliverables and data items. The IMS shall be provided in a Gantt chart (or similar presentation format) with milestones, events, and program tasks from receipt of delivery order through delivery, highlighting the critical path with the associated manufacturer. Item shall be identified in IMS with associated manufacturer. File shall be submitted in PDF format.

KEY POINT #2: The Offeror shall provide a detailed Transportation Plan (in accordance with the delivery schedule requested in the Table____________ above, as well as Section J, Attachment 0003 Delivery Order Proposal Form - Delivery Order 0001) and shall include at a minimum the following:

Mode(s) of transportation from origin to final delivery point (to include inland transportation).

Identification of port(s) to be utilized.

Identification of freight forwarder companies.

Transportation costs.

Letter(s) of commitment from freight forwarder companies, to include the following:

o Name and address of the company providing the commitment.

o Length of commitment for a minimum of 270 days from the date the solicitation closes.

KEY POINT #3: The Offeror shall provide a Manufacturer Supply List and include at a minimum:____________

Item.

Quantity.

Manufacturer and location.

Date of Delivery.

Supply type - new production and / or surplus with ammunitions range of years manufactured and service life.

Identify any required EUC.

Letter of Commitment from the manufacturer, to include the following:

o Length of commitment for a minimum of 270 calendar days from the date the solicitation closes.

L.3.6 VOLUME III Technical. The volume shall be organized into the following Subfactors: _____________________

L.3.6.1 Subfactor 1 Technical Description. The Offeror shall include sufficient information to complete an accurate evaluation from a __________________________________

12 29

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

technical standpoint. The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative that addresses the Key Points as described below.

KEY POINT #1: The Offeror shall submit the following two completed examples of Technical Data Packages (TDPs) as defined in the____________ applicable General Specifications (listed in Key Point #2, below) for the following items:

Item Number 0279: 82mm Mortar HE (Complete).

Item Number 0434: Inert 40mm HE Frag.

KEY POINT #2: The Offeror shall submit a comprehensive narrative description with process flow chart(s) that adequately demonstrates its____________ means to ensure compliance to meet each of the technical, testing and inspection requirements, and verification procedure requirements as defined in the General Specifications listed below:

General Specification for Special Ammunition and Weapon Systems, dated 24 August 2020.

General Specification for Rocket Propelled & Spin Stabilized Grenade Ammunition, dated 24 August 2020.

General Specification for Mortar Ammunition, dated 24 August 2020.

General Specification for Small Caliber Ammunition, dated 24 August 2020.

General Specification for PdD SAWS Mortar Weapon Systems, dated 24 August 2020.

L.3.6.2 Subfactor 2 Technical Verification. The Offeror shall include sufficient information to complete an evaluation from a technical ___________________________________ standpoint. The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative that addresses the Key Points as described below:

KEY POINT #1: The Offeror shall submit the following two completed examples of Lot Acceptance Test Reports (LATRs) as defined in the____________ applicable General Specifications (listed in Key Point #2 below) for the items listed below:

Item Number 0279: 82mm Mortar HE (Complete).

Item Number 0008: 7.62x39mm AP.

KEY POINT #2: The Offeror shall submit a comprehensive LATR narrative description with process flow chart(s) that adequately____________…