W15QKN24R0004 RFP Questions and Answers 1.docx

W15QKN24R0004 RFP Questions and Answers #1

1) Please confirm that 11X17 (foldout) pages depicting items such as sketches, factory floor layouts, Process Flow Diagrams, tabular data, and IMS Gantt charts count as one page against the Volume I page limit of 100 pages.

A: Each fold will be counted as a separate page. This will be added to the RFP as an amendment.

2) What portion of our Past Performance Volume II should be in Excel format? If we provide all Past Performance data in MS Word, do certain portions need to be repeated in an Excel format? If so, how does the Excel submission count against the maximum page limit for Volume II?

A: We will be amending the solicitation to change the format from Excel to MS Word only.

3) Are Past Performance Volume II Major Subcontractor Letters of Commitment and Letters of Consent excluded from the Volume II page limit?

A: No, all pages are included in page count other than Past Performance Questionnaire.

4) Will the US Army consider granting a 4-week proposal due date extension to permit our best possible pricing and to permit a detailed review of the six TDPs that were not available prior to RFP release?

A: The government is discussing the possibility of an extension but at this time, no extension has been granted.

5) Will the US Army consider adding an Economic Price Adjustment (EPA) clause to the RFP for certain price-volatile commodities such as:

1. Steel raw material?

1. Natural gas used for forging, nosing, and heat treating?

1. Electric energy used for manufacturing processes?

To provide best value to the Government in out-year unit prices and more effectively level the competitive landscape, request that the Government consider adding EPA for steel to the solicitation.

A: At this time there will be no EPA clause for any commodities added to this solicitation.

6) Will the US Army consider adding an EPA clause to the RFP for out-year direct labor costs?

A: No the government will not add an EPA clause for out-year direct labor costs at this time.

7) It does not appear the solicitation has been uploaded into the Procurement Integrated Enterprise environment (PIEE) system. Will the US Army confirm that the solicitation is uploaded, so proposals can be submitted in PIEE?

A: The solicitation has been uploaded to the PIEE system.

8) Request that the Government consider adding some form of financing, either Performance-Based Payments or Progress Billing, to the solicitation.

A: The government will not add Performance-Based Payments or Progress Billing to the solicitation at this time.

9) Request that DFAR 252.227-7023 Drawings and Other Data To Become Property of Government be removed from the solicitation as inapplicable, due to the solicitation being for a supply contract and not for design, development, or engineering/construction, and due to the fact that the Government's rights to data developed with Government funds under any resultant contract are already delineated and protected in DFAR 252.227-7013.

A: DFARS 252.227-7023 will be removed from the solicitation.

10) In 52.216-19 ORDER LIMITATIONS, the solicitation states a fixed dollar value for awards, rather than award quantities. Typically, this section is stated in physical order quantity, in order to, understand how current capacity constraints align with potential orders. Paragraph b(3) states "quantities exceeding the limitation in subparagraph b (1) or b (2)." Request the Government revise this clause to indicate limitation on quantities, and not dollar values.

A: No changes will be made to this clause.

11) Will the Government be providing a prescribed Past Performance Questionnaire form, or shall offerors use an offeror format?

A: Yes, Attachment 0012 Past Performance Questionnaire has been uploaded to SAM.gov.

12) Section L.2.4 states "A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies." Section L.2.5 states regarding proposal volumes "The font used shall not be less than 10 point." Will the USG confirm that the required proposal font is 10 point for volume narratives?

A: 10 point font will be removed. Please follow section L.2.4.

13) Request that the USG provide the weights and TEP calculations for the evaluation methodology being described in this section. With the pricing methodology moving from range to curve pricing, and this approach not being typical for metal part production contracting, request the USG strongly consider sharing with Offerors how the TEP will be derived.

A: The government will not be providing weights and TEP calculations.

14) The higher-level contract quality requirement as stated in Section E-3 is ISO 9001:2008. This appears to be in conflict with C.2.1.4 and C.5.2, where ISO 9001:2015 is called out. Can the Government clarify?

A: ISO 9001:2015 is the correct contract quality requirement. Section E-3 should be updated to reflect.

15) Request that the Government specify under what, if any, circumstances accelerated deliveries will be accepted under any resulting contract, and state what the "allowable variation" in quantity will be per FAR 52.211-17.

A: Accelerated deliveries need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. For example, if storage space at the specific destination of a delivery order CLIN allows, accelerated deliveries may be accepted. Regarding FAR 52.211-17, this solicitation does not have any allowable variations for excess deliveries Can the Government confirm that the delivery rate requirement is a minimum of 60,000 total parts per month (6 configurations x 10,000 per month)?

A: For the purposes of evaluating the solicitation, an offeror must show that they can meet a delivery requirement of a minimum of 60,000 total parts per month (6 configurations x 10,000 per month). However, once a contract is awarded, the specific delivery rate cannot be confirmed at this time since this is an IDIQ and requirements for specific configurations can vary.

16) Section I-109 paragraph (a) states: “The Contractor shall deliver per specification unit(s) of Lot/Item 60mm and 80mm Mortar Cartridges within 270 calendar days from the date of the delivery order to the Government at for first article tests.” CDRL A006, DD1423-1 states: "Contractor shall submit the First Article Test Report within 270 calendar days from the date of this contract." Can the USG confirm that the requirement is for IFAT to be conducted within 270 days of contract award, FAT report to be submitted within 30 days of completion of FAT, approved FAT to be delivered via DD250 receiving report upon receipt of USG approval (accounting for USG review time of 30 days), and that delivery date of any IFAT CLIN will reflect accordingly?

A: As described in Section I, there are two FAT Clauses in this solicitation. Section I-108 and CDRL A006 are related and require that IFAT AND the associated report be conducted and delivered within 270 days from the date of contract award. The delivery date on the CLIN would reflect the time to deliver the report and the 30 days Government review period. Section I-109 is for Government testing in support of FAT. This is for the FAT requirement of “Launch safety and security at max average pressure “. Samples need to be delivered to the Government on the prescribed timeline in the clause.

17) All 81mm TDPs include a citation of DFAR 252.225-7025 Restriction on Acquisition of Forgings in the TDP certification. However, DFAR 252.225-7025 is not listed in Section I. Can the Government clarify whether DFAR 252.225-7025 is applicable to this solicitation?

A: DFARS 252.225-7025 is not applicable to this solicitation.

18) IMS: Will the USG permit Offerors to submit a summary Base Period IMS in Volume I.3 and submit the full IMS as a pdf attachment?

A: Yes, as long as the submission still adheres to the maximum pages for the combined factors I.1, I.2, and I.3 in Paragraph L.2.5 of the solicitation.

19) Attachment 0002 Price Matrix does not seem to indicate an upper bound on quantity pricing, since the model will return an extrapolated price for quantities beyond the highest quantity point shown. We believe that is not the USG's intent, since Section H, paragraph b states curves are "between two specified quantities." Please confirm.

A: Yes – the highest quantity in the matrix is the maximum quantity that the Government will order in any one given delivery order – the columns that compute the unit prices will give a unit prices if they input a quantity greater than the highest quantity – however, they are correct in that the Governments intent is to not order anything higher than that highest quantity listed.

20) To best meet page count restrictions while adequately describing methods and approach, will the USG accept detailed descriptions and Process Maps of the proposed manufacturing processes for one (1) HF-1 and one (1) Non HF-1 shell body?

A: No, that will not be acceptable as each shell body in this solicitation has unique requirements from one another that will need to be evaluated from a Technical standpoint.

21) The solicitation states, "The Offeror shall identify each Critical Characteristic and related critical processes for the 60/81mm HF-1 and Non HF-1 Mortar Shell bodies…". To best meet page count restrictions while adequately describing critical characteristics methods and approach, will the USG accept detailed descriptions for one (1) HF-1 and one (1) Non HF-1 shell body?

A: No, that will not be acceptable as each shell body in this solicitation has unique requirements from one another that will need to be evaluated from a Technical standpoint.