Attachment 0009 - Industry Questions and U.S. Government Answers 28 Jan 2020.pdf

28 January 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?

Question 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.