Attachment 0009 - Industry Questions and U.S. Government Answers 24 APRIL 2020.pdf

24 April 2020

Attachment 0009 – Industry Questions and U.S. Government Answers

Question 1: A.2 states “If an offeror intends to submit proposals for more than one CLIN Group, the offeror shall submit a separate proposal for each CLIN Group to include all evaluation factors (Technical, Past Performance, Small Business and Price).

Each proposal received will be evaluated separately.” Please verify that is an Offeror is proposing on 3 CLIN groups, that Offeror should provide 3 separate complete proposals, 1 for each CLIN Group.

Answer 1: Yes, a separate proposal is due for each CLIN Group the offeror is proposing on. Since each CLIN Group evaluation is done separately a separate proposal is required for each CLIN Group.

Question 2: L.2.2.a.1. states “maximum 25 PowerPoint Slides per CLIN” and “* The offeror shall include a separate technical approach for EACH CLIN for which they are providing a proposal. If any of the remaining sub- factors/volumes differ between CLINs the offeror shall make a very clear notation as to which CLIN it applies.” L.1.6.b. states “Offeror's will be allotted up to 1 hour for the oral presentation per CLIN Group. Within each CLIN Group, the first CLIN shall be presented entirely. The offeror has the option of presenting the remaining CLINs in its entirety or highlighting the differences.” Can the Government please clarify if the requirement is 25 slides per CLIN or 25 slides per CLIN

GROUP?

Answer 2: The maximum allowance of slides for the Technical Approach sub-factor is 25 slides PER CLIN. For example, CLIN Group 6 consist of five CLINs (0603, 0604, 0605, 0606, and 0607). Therefore the total allowance of slides for the Technical Approach sub-factor for CLIN Group 6 is 125 slides. However, each CLIN should be no more than 25 slides.

Question 3: C.4.1 states “The contractor shall implement and maintain the QMS submitted with its proposal and in use at the time of contract award.”

a. Can the Government please confirm that the QMS information is only required in the Technical Approach Oral presentation?

b. Does the Government want Offerors to provide the QMS documentation as an attachment to the technical volume provided on 10 Feb?

Answer 3: Yes, in accordance with L.3.3.b.4, the QMS requirements shall be addressed in the Technical Approach Sub-factor oral presentation. As stated in L.3.3.b.4, certification is required if the offeror plans to use an ISO certified QMS.

Question 4: If Offerors are bidding on more than one CLIN Group but are using the same past performance references for each proposal, does the Government want PPQ Respondents to complete the PPQ Form multiple times (1 time for each proposal)?

Answer 4: Yes, since the evaluations are being done separately PPQs will need to be submitted under each proposal.

Question 5: Is the 12 point font requirement applicable to the MS Project IMS required in Sub-factor 5?

Answer 5: In accordance with L.2.5.a., “The font used shall not be less than 12 point.

(Font smaller than 12 point is ONLY acceptable in graphics, sketches, tables, charts, price matrix, etc. but must be readable without magnification).” Therefore the font in the IMS may be small than 12 point font, however, it must be readable without magnification.

Question 6: Does the IMS count toward the 10 page limit of Sub-factor 5?

If so, do the 11x17 pages count as 1 or 2 pages?

If so, would the Government please consider significantly expanding the page count for Sub-factor 5 to ensure Offerors can thoroughly address this and the other Sub-factor 5 requirements?

Answer 6: Yes, the IMS does count towards the 10 page limit for Sub-factor 5, Program Mangement. As stated in L.2.5.a, “flow diagrams and tables may exceed 8-1/2 inches in width by 11 inch in length.” The IMS would be considered a flow diagram or table and therefore can exceed 8-1/2 by 11 inches. See question 9 regarding the page limit allowance.

Question 7: L.1.6.f states “The names of presenters shall be listed on the Title Slide for each Technical Sub-factor.” Can the Government please clarify if Offeror’s should identify presenters:

a. On the briefing Title Slide

b. On the briefing sub-section slides

c. Both

Answer 7: The U.S. Government’s requirement is to have the presenters identified on the Title Slides. Which title slide is used is at the discretion of the proposing contractor.

It can be the briefing title slide and / or the title slide for each section.

Question 8: L.3.3.b.1 states “The offeror shall identify in Attachment 0003, GFM Asset List, the place of performance for each CLIN.”

a. Does Attachment 0003 count in the 25 slide count?

b. Does the Government want Attachment 0003 provided as an attachment to the technical volume provided on 10 Feb?

Answer 8: Attachment 0003 does not count towards the 25 slide count. As part of the oral presentation the offeror needs to include where place of performance will be completed. The attachement its self is not required to be included in the slides. Yes, Attachment 0003 does need to be included with the proposal as part of the technical approach sub-factor.

Question 9: Would the Government please consider expanding the page count for Sub-factor 5 (currently 10 pages) to ensure Offerors can thoroughly address the IMS requirements?

Answer 9: The page limit for Subfactor 5, Program Management, is hereby increased to 15 pages.

Question 10: C.4.1 states “The contractor shall implement and maintain the QMS submitted with its propsal and in use at the time of contract award.” Does the Government want offerors to provide the QMS as an attachment to the Technical Volume to be submitted on 25 Feb?

Answer 10: In accordance with L.3.3.b.4, “The offeror shall provide a detailed description of its approach for meeting the Quality requirements as defined in the solicitation. Offeror shall provide identification of its Quality Management System (QMS) to be used and shall specify state whether or not it is certified or equivalent with Industry Standards, such as ISO 9001, or equivalent system acceptable to the U.S. Government. Describe the system in sufficient detail to determine its suitability for use in performing the resultant contract, particularly if it is an equivalent system. Provide proof of certification, if any.”

The U.S. Government will be changing CDRL A004, Quality Management System (QMS), and Section C.4.1 to state the QMS is to be submitted after contract award.

Question 11: RFP Section A.2 states “If an offeror receives mulltiple CLIN Group awards, they will receive one contract that contains all awarded CLIN Groups.” If offerors are supporting more than one CLIN Group, how would the Government like offerors to address schedule and cost economies of scale attributed to demilitarization of more than one CLIN Group?”

Answer 11: Each proposal is a stand alone evalaution and therefore should account for what is required to meet the requirements of that CLIN Group. If the offeror includes any assumptions in its schedule those shall be stated in the proposal.

Question 12: In answer 2 in Attachment 0009, the USG states that the total allowance of slides for CLIN Group 6 is 125 slides. The solicitation states that the contractor has 1 hour to present all slides. For CLIN Groups with more than 1 CLIN, would the USG consider allowing extra time for each CLIN?

Answer 12: The U.S. Government understands each CLIN Group has a different quantity of CLINs included in the group. However, the CLIN Groups include like items and therefore it is anticipated that the demil process will be the same or extremely similar for all CLINs included in the CLIN Group. Therefore, the alloted time will be one hour for each CLIN Group.

Question 13: Will each individual technical presentation within a CLIN Group that contains multiple CLIN’s be evaluated separately or as a group?

Answer 13: Each presentation will be completed for one CLIN Group at a time that will include all CLINs within that CLIN Group. Individual CLINs will not be evalauted separately.

Question 14: In answer 6 in Attachment 0009, the USG states that the IMS does count towards the 10 page limit for Sub-Factor 5. This page count is inadequate to address all of the sub requirements in SubFactor 5 when the IMS is included in the page count.

Would the USG consider that the IMS be counted separately from the remaining items within Sub Factor 5? Without the IMS in the page count, 10 pages is still very restrictive to thoroughly address all the requirements in this Sub-Factor.

Answer 14: See question 9.

Question 15: In Sections A-2 and L.1.1.a, it states that the offeror shall be able to meet the requirements for all the CLIN’s included in the CLIN Group. Would the USG consider separating out the items containing asbestos into a separate CLIN Group?

Alternatively, would the USG consider a proposal that only addressed the non-asbestos containing items within a specific CLIN Group?

Answer 15: A new CLIN group for all items containing asbestos will not be established.

Each offeror must propose for all CLINs within a specified CLIN group.

Question 16: There has been a suggestion that the parachute cords on the 4.2” M335 Illumination Cartridge contain asbestos. The drawing package provides some details on higher level assemblies on this item but does not provide some details on higher level assemblies on this item but does not provide this level of details. Can the USG confirm the presence of asbestos in these assets and provide additional technical drawings to confirm this?

Answer 16: The U.S. Government is unable to locate additional technical drawings to be provided. However, based on the U.S. Government’s review asbestos does not appear to be present in the M335 4.2 mortar projectile.

Question 17: Additional clarification is requested for A.9.

A.9, the MGQ that each successful awardee will receive is listed in Attachment 0002, MGQ Asset list. For each CLIN that results in multiple awards, both awardees will receive the same MGQ, evenly split, if possible. An asset list may have one single item, which can only be provided to a single contractor. If applicable, the other contractor will receive an additional item of another NSN within the same MIDAS family.

Can USG clarify, in multiple awards, will both awardees receive the same MGQ (100% of the MGQ list each awardee) or will the MGQ be evenly split between awardees (50% of the MGQ list each awardee)? Please see examples below:

Answer 17: The same MGQ will be awarded to all offeror’s and will not be split (example 1). The only exception would be for items that we only have one item left. In that case the other awardee would receive an equivelant item.

Question 18: RFP Attachment 0002 MGQ Asset List, CLIN 6 Launcher, H051, lists the MGQ as 2033, but RFP Attachment 0003 GFM Asset List lists the total quantity for this DODIC as 2365. In accordance with RFP A.9, “for each CLIN that results in multiple awards, both awardees will receive the same MGQ, evenly split, if possible.” It seems that if two awards were made there would not be enough assets available to award both prime contractors the same MGQ. Is there a discrepancy on the quantities included in the RFP for this DODIC?

Answer 18: Attachment 0002, MGQ Asset List, is what each awardee will receive.

These quantities will not be split. The U.S. Government is taking a closer look at the discrepancy identified with the quantities for H051. A revised Attachment 0002, MGQ Asset List, will be provided by 31 January 2020.

Question 19: In RFP Attachment 0009 Industry Questions and U.S. Government Answers, the U.S. Government provided answers to the first part of Question 6, but did not respond to the two follow-up questions related to Sub-Factor 5. Will the U.S.

Government please clarify as to whether an 11x17 page counts as 1 or 2 pages?

Additionally, will the U.S. Government consider separating the 10 page limit on Sub- Factor 5 from the IMS Project Schedule? Having an unlimited page count for the IMS would be preferable to ensure the proper steps are addressed for the benefit of the proposal reviewer.

Answer 19: Question 6 has been updated.

LOC NSN DODIC NOMEN QTYOH CC PRWT STONS Awardee 1 Awardee 2 CAAA 1305012139658 A677 CTG 20MM AP HEI PGU-28/B SNGL RD 97,000 H 0.66 32.2 97,000 97,000

LOC NSN DODIC NOMEN QTYOH CC PRWT STONS Awardee 1 Awardee 2 CAAA 1305012139658 A677 CTG 20MM AP HEI PGU-28/B SNGL RD 97,000 H 0.66 32.2 48,500 48,500

Example 2 (50% of the MGQ list each awardee)

Example 1 (100% of the MGQ list each awardee)

20MM CARTRIDGES - CLIN GROUP 1

20MM CARTRIDGES - CLIN GROUP 1

OR

Question 20: In RFP Attachment 0009 Industry Questions and U.S. Government Answers, the second sentence of the U.S. Governments answer to Question 7 is incomplete. Will the U.S. Government provide clarification as to how the second sentence to Answer 7 should read?

Answer 20: Question 7 has been updated.

Question 21: Since the Government is now requiring a complete proposal for each CLIN Group (different from the requirement in the DRAFT RFP), would the Government please consider an extension from February 25th of three weeks to allow time for offeror’s bidding on multiple CLIN Groups to develop their multiple bid?

Answer 21: The U.S. Government is not extending the closing date of the solicitation beyond 25 February 2020.

Question 22: During the Industry Day for CAD 2020, USG briefed an acquisition timeline of oral presentations being approximately 2-3 months after proposal due date and award occurring approximately 8 months after proposal due date. Can the USG provide an updated timeline or confirm if this timeline is still accurate for this acquisition process?

Answer 22: As stated in L.1.8.a, “Oral presentations will be scheduled no sooner than five working days after closing of the RFP.” At this time the U.S. Government is tentatively planning to start oral presentations the week of 09 March 2020. Award is dependent on many factors that are unknown at this time. However, the current plan is to have award made in September / October 2020 timeframe.

Question 23: For CLIN Group 5 (Flare/Illumination), can the USG please clarify if any of the flares/illumination contain a BBU Impulse Cartridges installed? If so, we respectfully request the USG to update the solicitation to reflect this information.

Answer 23: The U.S. Government cannot find any indication that the MG62 BBU 35/B Impulse Cartridge is installed on items contained within CLIN Group 5 from manufacture and are both shipped and stored separately.

Question 24: C.6.2.3 and C.6.2.4 states that lot numbers “with less than .20 percent effective stabilizer” must be reported to the Contracting Officer and subsequently burned/disposed. Can the USG confirm these clauses are correct to mean .2% effective stabilizer and not intended to be 20%?

Answer 24: Yes, the solicitation is correct as written (.20 percent).

Question 25: For A.5, the USG determines that the small business reserve is “intended to ensure that a minimum of one small business award is made for this group (CLIN Group1); as long as there is a small business within the competitive range.” A.5 seems to indicate that the “competitive range” is in reference to price. As this is a best-value-trade-off contract, can the USG clarify what criteria are being evaluated to establish the “competitive range” for the small businesses reserve?

Answer 25: The order of importance is outlined in M.1.3. In order to establish the competitive range, all price and non-price factors will be taken into consideration along with their order of importance. As stated in M.1.3.b., “Although price is not the most important factor, it could become a controlling factor if proposals under the non-price factors are determined to be relatively equal.”

Question 26: C.3.3 states that the contractor “shall begin demilitarization within eighteen months after contract award” and H.1.5 confirms that an eighteen month “startup period” is allowed for the first order. Can the USG please confirm that the Five- Year length on the IDIQ workload associated with the award begins upon the start of demilitarization (within 18 months after award) and extends five years after the start of demilitarization and not upon award date?

Answer 26: The five year length of this IDIQ begins at date of award and extends five years after date of award as outlined in A.10. Please note, this is for ordering purposes only. The period of performance (the timeframe allowed to complete demil) may extend beyond this period.

Question 27: C.12.1 indicates "The USG reserves the right to request the return of metal pallets and metal pallet adapters to the owning Military Service". These pallets can become contaminated with energetic materials and/or asbestos depending on material being transported and may be deemed hazardous. Asbestos is contained within some of these munition items, and munition items may arrive in various states of degradation. Can the USG consider all pallets associated with asbestos munition items to be excluded from this clause and subject to immediate proper disposal?

Answer 27: The U.S. Government is unaware of any pallets contaminated with asbestos from munitions, therefore as stated in C.12.1., “The U.S. Government reserves the right to request the return of metal pallets and metal pallet adapters to the owning Military Service.”

Question 28: A.15 indicates that "estimated transportation costs will be added to each Offeror's proposal for evaluation". Can the USG confirm they will use actual door-to-door estimations from origin to Offeror's location, or will the USG use average transport costs and apply the same transport pricing averages to all Offeror proposals?

Answer 28: Please refer to M.4.2.b for a full breakout of how the transportation costs will be estimated. As stated in this paragraph, “Transportation will be estimated by calculating the cost of transportation from the location identified in the GFM Asset List (Attachment 0003) to the offerors identified place of performance/storage as set forth in the offerors proposal as required by L.3.3.b.1 in this solicitation.”

Question 29: L.3.8.b.3 seems to indicate that subcontractor history may be assessed in proposal evaluation. If the Contractor has no relevant history they may be neutral/unknown confidence. However, if the subcontractor has history (whether positive or negative), will the Contractor and proposal be assessed as neutral or will the subcontractor history supersede in the confidence evaluation (meaning the evaluation may be other than neutral)?

Answer 29: Evaluation will be completed based on the contractor references provided in the offeror’s proposal. If the offeror does not have any recent and relevant past performance, they will be rated as neutral. If the offeror chooses to use the past performance of its subcontractor(s) for evaluation purposes, they may do so. The offeror would include the contract references pertaining to its subcontractor(s).

However, if the offeror chooses to use its subcontractor(s) past performance the rating will reflect their subcontractor and will not be a neutral rating if its subcontractor(s) past performance warrants a different rating.

Question 30: C.5.3.1 states "the Contractor shall submit an SSP to the Contracting Officer IAW DoD 4145.26M and CDRL A001 for review and approval". L.3.4 Safety Subfactor, does not indicate that an SSP or preliminary SSP is required upon proposal submission. Are SSP's being evaluated by the USG during the review of Offeror proposals; or is this review only occurring post-award and SSPs should not be submitted with the proposal?

Answer 30: The Safety Site Plan will be required to be submitted for review and approval after contract award. As stated in L.3.4, "The offeror shall submit a detailed description of its Safety Site Plan demonstrating understanding and compliance with the applicable contractual and regulatory safety requirements including but not limited to the current DOD 4145.26 M (including International, Federal, State, and Local regulatory guidance) for the proposed CLINs, which is consistent with the proposed technical approach. Offeror shall identify Safety Person(s), indicating qualifications and experience (to include relative to ammunition and explosives (AE)). Offeror shall identify safety and AE-related training planned or completed consistent with the technical approach."

Question 31: Is the Integrated Master Plan (IMP) included in the 15 written pages (increased from 10 pages) associated with the Program Management Subfactor or does it have a separate page requirement outside of the 15 page limitation?

Answer 31: The page limit for the Program Management Subfactor is limited to 15 written pages. As stated in L.3.7.a, “The offeror shall submit an Integrated Master Plan (IMP) and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) with its Program Management Plan submittal. Information provided for the IMP and IMS are required to address only the MGQ.” The IMP shall be included in the Program Management Subfactor.

Question 32: Is it the government's intent for each offeror to submit 1 5-volume proposal for each CLIN family on which it will bid? I.e. does the government want separate technical proposal, Past Performance volume, Price proposal, Small business participation volume, and volume 5 for each CLIN family that is bid?

Answer 32: Yes, each CLIN Group will be evaluated separately and therefore a FULL proposal needs to be provided for each CLIN Group the offeror is proposing on.

Reference L.1.2.b. “The offeror shall submit a separate proposal for each CLIN Group to include all evaluation factors (Technical, Past Performance, Small Business and Price). Each proposal received will be evaluated separately.”

Question 33: Request clarification for L.2.2.a.4. Volume 4 Small Business Participation.

Please advise if the Maximum page allowance of 10 page limit include or excludes the subcontracting plan.

Answer 33: No, the Subcontracting Plan is not counted as part of Volume 4 – Small Business Participation (L.2.2.a.4). The subcontracting plan will not be used for evaluation purposes but is required to be submitted with the offeror’s proposal in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 if applicable.

Question 34: When is the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) Form due?

Answer 34: The PPQ is due on or before the proposal due date.

Question 35: Can an offeror develop and submit one IMS that shows all potential CLIN Groups being proposed, as well as their interdependencies, to meet contract requirements as defined in the solicitation and provide that same IMS with each CLIN Group proposal? Is it the Government’s intent that the IMS should display all CLIN Groups that the offeror intends to propose in a single comprehensive IMS to “clearly illustrate interdependencies” associated with contract award”? Or is it the Government’s intent that a single IMS should be independently submitted for each CLIN Group and thereby not show interdependencies between the possibility of multiple contract awards, which may not demonstrate the offeror’s ability to execute demilitarization of multiple CLIN Groups throughout the MGQ years?

Answer 35: The U.S. Government will be evaluating each CLIN Group separately.

Offerors shall provide a separate IMS for each CLIN Group they are proposing on for that CLIN Group only.

Question 36: Regarding RFP Section M-3, Transportation Evaluation F.O.B. Point of Delivery of Government Furnished Material (With Differentials) the Contractor is requested to indicate a price differential which will be added to the unit price for the supply quantity for which the Government-furnished material is delivered via rail. How does the Government intend to evaluate this differential? Will the differential proposed be evaluated as part of our TEP? As each CLIN/CLIN Group is different and has multiple ranges, how should the contractor input the differential? Is a per truck price sufficient?

Answer 36: This clause does not apply since the U.S. Government is responsible for all shipping costs. Amendment 0005 will remove this clause from the contract.

Question 37: This question is regarding the HC Smoke Canisters (C396, D445, and D450). Typically these canisters are installed inside of artillery projectiles, however based on information received from the USG, it appears these canisters will be shipped to the Contractor facility without the projectile. Can you please inform us what configuration these canisters are shipped to the Contractor facility?

Answer 37: Typical packaging configuration is:

C396 - packed 48 canisters per wooden box/container and 16 wooden boxes/containers per pallet. Approximately 133 lbs. per container and approximate pallet weight 2,200 lbs.

D445 - packed 24 canisters per wooden box/container and 16 wooden boxes/containers per pallet. Approximately 192 lbs. per container and approximate pallet weight 3,158 lbs.

D450 - packed 24 canisters per wooden box/container and 16 wooden boxes/containers per pallet. Approximately 111 lbs. per container and approximate pallet weight 1,862 lbs.

Typical unitization is on a 40 inch X 48 inch pallet with height not to exceed 50 inches.

*Please note that standard type packaging, configuration, and quantity may change.

Question 38: We request the U.S. Government to confirm there is no additional format criteria: It is our understanding that this new written requirement must meet the following criteria (and no additional criteria): ”Each volume shall be as brief as possible. Pages shall not exceed 8- 1/2 inches in width by 11 inches in length; flow diagrams and tables may exceed 8-1/2 inches in width by 11 inches in length. The font used shall not be less than 12 point.” (Font smaller than 12 point is ONLY acceptable in graphics, sketches, tables, charts, price matrix, etc. but must be readable without magnification). It is our understanding that this is the format that must be met and that industry can utilize any processing program to comply, as long as the final submission is in PDF format.

Answer 38: Yes that is correct. Only submission requirements are must be in PDF, no longer than 35 pages per CLIN Group, pages shall not exceed 8- 1/2 inches in width by 11 inches in length; flow diagrams and tables may exceed 8-1/2 inches in width by 11 inches in length. The font used shall not be less than 12 point.

Question 39: Utilization of videos in presentations was previously permitted. This Amendment does not mention the ability for industry to use videos or similar media. As great lengths and resources were utilized to previously provide the U.S. Government this information, we request the U.S. Government to confirm that videos may be attached as part of the Technical Subfactor. We also request the U.S. Government to specify the acceptable file format(s).

Answer 39: Yes embedded videos are allowed. They shall be no longer than ten minutes in length per CLIN Group. Videos will need to be submitted through DOD Safe.

The required format is MPEG.