Copy_of_Attach_0031_Solicitation_Questions_and_Answers_110218.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 21 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W31P4Q-17-R-0046
About this file
This document contains questions and responses related to a solicitation for the Hydra-70 Rocket System production and engineering services requirements. The U.S. Army Contracting Command-Redstone Arsenal anticipates awarding a single-source hybrid firm-fixed-price and cost-type contract for a period of five years to provide Hydra-70 Rocket System hardware, including various rockets, warheads, containers and components. Engineering services will also be required to maintain the capability of the Hydra-70 Rocket System and its variants. The solicitation is restricted to companies that are members of the National Technology and Industrial Base. Questions were submitted between August 2018 and November 2018 and addressed pricing templates, past performance submission requirements, technical data package information, and various contract clauses. Responses provided clarification and in some cases revisions to the solicitation language.
Attachment 0031, Solicitation Questions and Answers, dated 2 Nov 2018
View the file
Other files
Show all 42
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
RFP Questions and Responses
| TrackingNo | Title | Date Rec'd | Contractor Question | Govt Response | Date Closed |
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0001 | TEST | 9/26/18 | |||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0002 | TEST | 9/25/18 | |||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003 | Attachment 0025 Price Template Questions | 10/10/18 | 1) On Tab FFP Evaluated - All Cells in Column AY-BC - it appears that the formula for these columns are inconsistent, they are generating a "False" result in some rows. It looks like the formula is missing a, 0 for one of the "if-then" statements. - Not Fixed, still getting FALSE error in row 66. | The formulas in tab “FFP Evaluated” cells AZ66 to BC66 were corrected, the if-then-else statement was updated to reflect if (AZ$6=0,then 0, rather than proceed with the next nested if statement. | 10/11/18 |
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(a) | 2) On Tab FFP Evaluated – Cells in Column HE-HI row 44 – it appears that the formulas are calculating off the incorrect quantity of units per container. It should be dividing by cell HD7 (quantity 3 per box) rather than HD6 (quantity 6 per box). – Partially fixed. | The formulas in tab “FFP Evaluated” cells HE44 to HI44 were corrected, and the divisor was changed from HD6 to HD7 to reflect the proper quantity “6 per box.” | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(b) | 3) On Tab Offeror Hardware Price List – Cell HP7, based on the definition defined in the CLIN description this should be palletized as 4 motors per box and 20 boxes per pallet (see CLIN 0021AA Packaging and marking) = 80 in a pallet, not 48. | The formulas in tab “FFP Evaluated” cell HP7 quantity was corrected from 48 in a pallet to 80 in a pallet. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003© | 4) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Cells in Row 6 for wood boxes (EW-FB, FI-FN)- For EW-FB you should look at the max quantity, it appears to be low. I entered a reasonable year (not high) of warhead onlys and it is over the max (9,590 boxes > 8,500 boxes). When you put in a high year you could have as many as 12,500 and in max condition you would have 91,250 boxes (if all warhead types maxed out). For FI-FN it appears that it is calculating the total need based on quantity 3 per box, but the requirements for the MK66 motor are 6 per box, therefore that portion of the quantity would be divided by 6 to adjust the maximum. | The intent of the Attachment 0025 price model for the containers was to capture the quantities as palletized totals and not individual box quantities. Attachment 0025 revised in RFP amendment 003. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(d) | 5) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 10, 12, 14 & 92 are not pulling prices for the M151 Warhead (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on rows 10, 12, 14 & 92. The model pulled the M151 Warhead table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(e) | 6) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 18, 20 & 22 are not pulling prices for the M274 Warhead (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on rows 18, 20 & 22. The model pulled the M274 Warhead table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(f) | 7) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 26, 28 & 80 are not pulling prices for the M156 Warhead (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on rows 26, 28 & 80. The model pulled the M156 Warhead table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(g) | 8) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Row 82 is not pulling prices for the M264 Warhead (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on row 82. The model pulled the M264 Warhead table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(h) | 9) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 32 & 84 are not pulling prices for the M255A2 Warhead (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on rows 32& 84. The model pulled the M255A2 Warhead table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(i) | 10) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 36 & 38 are not pulling prices for the M255A2 Warhead (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on rows 36 & 38, these rows are for the M255A1 Warhead, however, the model pulled the M255A1 Warhead table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(j) | 11) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 10, 18 & 26 are not pulling prices for the GFM Refurb M643 Container (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating). | Could not repeat the error reported on rows 10, 18 & 26. The model pulled the GFM Refurb M643 Container table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(k) | 12) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 32, 36, 82 & 84 are not pulling prices for the Wood Box 4 Long box (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on rows 32, 36, 82 & 84, these rows are for the GFM PA150 Container, however, the model did pull the GFM PA150 Container table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(l) | 13) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 12, 20 & 28 are not pulling prices for the GFM PA151 Refurb Container (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on rows 12, 20 & 28. The model pulled the GFM PA151 Refurb Container table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(m) | 14) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 38 are not pulling prices for the Wood box long 4 or Wood Box long 4 LAP (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on row 38. The model pulled the “Wood Box 4”, and the Wood Box Long 4 LAP” table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No Issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(n) | 15) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 86, 88 & 94 are not pulling prices for the Wood Box long 6 (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on row 86, 88 & 94. The model pulled the “Wood Box Long 6” table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No Issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(o) | 16) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Row 92 is not pulling prices for the M648 Container or M648 container LAP (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on row 92. The model pulled the “M648 Container” and the ”M648 Container LAP” table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No Issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(p) | 17) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 32, 36, 82 & 84 are not pulling prices for the PA150 LAP (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on row 92. The model pulled the “PA150 LAP” table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No Issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003(q) | 18) On Tab FFP Evaluated - Rows 12, 20 & 28 are not pulling prices for the PA151 LAP (formula looks good, can't figure out why not populating) | Could not repeat the error reported on row 12, 20 & 28. The model pulled the “PA151 LAP” table data and properly calculated within the “FFP Evaluated” tab. No Issues. | 10/25/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0003r | 19) On Tab Offeror Hardware Price List - Cells in Columns CJ, CK and CL starting in row 10,015 there appears to be a formula that should not be there and when data is populated it overwrites the data in column CJ, CK and CL which will impact the pricing calculation sheets (FFP CLIN Pricing Proposed and FFP Evaluated) | (Part A) The formula in question in tab “Offeror Hardware Price List” is a sequential item calculation string. This is simply the previous cell plus one. Column CJ is a blank column, column CK is the item “quantity” count column, and column CL is the “Hardware Item” description. |
(Part B) after populating the tab “Offeror Hardware Price List”, all data was pulled properly into the “FFP CLIN Pricing” and “FFP Evaluated” tabs including all of WTU-1/B. No Issues.
| 10/25/18 | |||||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0004 | Past Performance Question - Pg 213, 214 Section L Para L-21.f. | 10/15/18 | Under Past Performance it indicates that the forms are excluded from the 20 page limitation, but does the 20 page limitation include all of the elements referenced in the note; the Table of contents, executive summary, narrative discussion and acronym list. Or are the table of contents, executive summary and acronym list excluded from the page count? | RFP Amend 0002 Issued as Attachment 0030 | 10/15/18 |
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0005 | Past Performance Question | 10/15/18 | This requirement requests the Offeror provide a list of major subcontractors and the dollar value of the work they will perform in Volume V Past Performance, but in section L-21.d on page 213 it states "No Cost/Price information or qualifications that bear on, relate to, or impact pricing shall be presented in any part of the proposal except Volume IV.” Can the government update this paragraph to remove the requirement for cost information? | RFP amend 0002 as attachment 0030 and that has been posted to FBO. | |
| 10/15/18 | |||||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0006 | Past Performance Submission Clarification | 10/15/18 | L-21. h. Early Proposal Information. The Offeror is requested to submit the Past Performance Volume V 15 calendar days after the RFP issuance date, to the Contracting Officer at the address specified in L-14(g). Early submission of Volume V is highly encouraged. |
L-22.d.6. Offerors are requested to submit the Past Performance Volume V 15 calendar days after the RFP issuance date, to the Contracting Officer at the address specified in L-18(g).
And
L-22.d.6. Offerors are requested to submit the Past Performance Volume V 15 calendar days after the RFP issuance date, to the Contracting Officer at the address specified in L-18(g).
| "Past Performance volume is requested 15 days after issuance of RFP" is correct. | 10/15/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0007 | Section B Pricing Instructions | 10/29/18 | RFP Page 5, Section B - For completion of the Section B pricing the instructions indicate in section L-22.d.4 required the offeror to fill in section B with the total proposed prices by CLIN and the total proposed prices by ordering period for ordering periods 1 to 5 for each CLIN. Since there is not one unit price for each year, what does the Government want filed out in the Unit Price and Amount columns? |
Just the first year, last year, or average of the five years?
For which price point? Or does the Government want the max quantity range unit price for each year completed in those columns (So 5 different unit prices and amounts)? Or should the Unit Price and Amount columns be blank and we only fill in the ordering period prices? Please clarify.
The total value for all 5 ordering periods should be inserted into the amount column.
| The Unit Price column should be left blank. | 10/30/18 | ||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0008 | Inspection of GFM WGU-59B guidance sections clarification | 10/29/18 |
Section H-11(D) calls for the contractor to inspect the GFM WGU-59B guidance sections upon receipt for “compliance to the requirements listed in the MIS detail specification MIS-DTL-61067”.
| MIS-DTL-61067 was not provided and is not available to us via our IHS subscription. Can the Government provide us a copy of the MIS-DTL-61067 or a summary of the inspection criteria? | MIS-DTL-61067 was provided in the zip file for TDP 13722930. | 10/30/18 | ||||
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0009 | FAR 52.215-10 Price Reduction for Defective Certified Cost or Pricing Data | 10/29/18 | RFP Page 163, Section I, Para 24 - FAR 52.215-10 “Price Reduction for Defective Certified Cost or Pricing Data” is not applicable to competitive solicitations and Section L-21 Proposal Content; para . d Volume IV Cost/Price, confirms certified cost or pricing data are not required based on competition so as a result, will the Government delete FAR 52.215-10? | FAR 52.215-10 “Price Reduction for Defective Certified Cost or Pricing Data” will remain in the solicitation. | 10/30/18 | |
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0010 | Earned Value Management | 10/29/18 | RFP Page 180, Section I, Paragraph I-164 Please confirm Earned Value Management applies only to the Engineering Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) 0047 under the Solicitation. | Yes, Earned Value Management applies only to the Engineering Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) 0047 under the Solicitation. | 10/30/18 | |
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0011 | Duty Free Entry - DFARS 252.225-7013 | 10/29/18 | Since transportation of supplies by Sea is incorporated, we request Duty Free Entry be incorporated, will the Government incorporate DFARS 252.225-7013 “Duty Free Entry” to account for Contractors wishing to make selected purchases from overseas? | DFARS 252.225-7013 “Duty Free Entry” will be incorporated into solicitation. | 10/31/18 | |
| FRFP-17-R-0046-0012 | TDP Question | 11/1/18 | Comments regarding revisions related to TDP | Attachment 0004 TDPL Listing updated and posted to FBO. | 11/1/18 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .