Attachment 0012- Industry Questions and Government Responses.pdf

03 January 2020

Q1.: The prior sources sought for Bulk Explosives stated that only New Type I or II TNT would be acceptable. Type III was not acceptable. The RFP does not specify the Type of TNT required

(Type I or Type III). Please confirm the acceptable types of TNT for this procurement.

A1.: U.S. Government will only accept Type I or Type II bulk explosive. Type III will not be accepted. The TNT must meet the specification requirements identified in MIL-DTL-248D and all other solicitation requirements. This clarification has been made in paragraphs A.1. and C.1.1. of the solicitation.

Q2.: With delivery of the TNT Sample to Picatinny Arsenal, are there preferred delivery times due to Holiday closures? If so, what are the receiving days and hours during this period?

A2.: Monday -Thursday Only (06:30-14:30 ET) The Picatinny ASP will be closed Dec 2-13, Dec 24-26, and Dec 31-Jan 1. No deliveries are accepted on Fridays. Must be on post by 2pm ET to deliver the load. Please proceed to the truck gate (2nd Picatinny Arsenal Gate on Rt15 North).

Off hours contact Picatinny Police: 973-724-6666. Please note: The ship to address has been updated in paragraph L.4.1.1.1 to the following:

CDR, CCDC, DEVCOM ARMAMENTS CENTER (W907CC)

AMMUNITION RECEIVING OFFICE FIDLAR ROAD, BLDG.806

PICATINNY ARSENAL, NJ 07806-5000

MARK FOR: Philip Samuels EMCN # A18 Philip.j.samuels2.civ@mail.mil Telephone number: 973-724-6937

Q3.: The RFP list NAICS code of 325920, Explosives Manufacturing, with a size standard of 750 employees. At the same time, according to paragraph A.1. of the RFP, the solicitation is issued under Full and Open Competition. Based on this statement, does the size limit of 750 employees apply to this requirement?

A3.: There is not a size limit on this action as it is solicited as Full and Open competition.

However, to accurately track awards for internal goals we need to know what size each vendor is according to the NAICS used for this procurement action. The size standard for NAICS code

325920 is 750 employees. FAR 52.204-8 incorrectly states the small business size standard as

1500 employees, this has been corrected.

Q4.: When are all questions due by?

A4.: For this procurement we did not put a due date for questions (oversight on our part). So questions can be submitted at any time. However, the sooner questions are submitted the sooner we can get answers out to industry. We do not plan on extending the closing date of mailto:Philip.j.samuels2.civ@mail.mil the solicitation beyond 27 FEB 2020 and so if questions come in late, we cannot guarantee they will be answered prior to the closing date.

Q5.: As discussed, we understand the solicitation has a requirement for a test sample of TNT to be included as part of the proposal submission. Per Section L.4.1.1.1 of the solicitation the offeror shall send one 55 lb box (gross weight, i.e., 50 lb nominal) of TNT from each proposed producer. Since class 1.1 explosives cannot be sent by air they must be sent by sea. Our concern is getting such a small amount of TNT to Picatinny Arsenal on time for the proposal’s due date. It takes about 6 weeks to deliver by sea. Furthermore, the cost will be exorbitant if we put just 55 lbs of explosives into a 20 foot container. One solution would be to eliminate the requirement for a sample to be submitted prior to selecting a vendor. Another solution would be to extend the due date for the sample to be submitted.

A5.: The U.S. Government is hereby extending the date for the proposal sample submittal to 27

FEB 2020. The quantity of material submitted as the proposal sample is to allow evaluation of both the material and the packaging. The shipping issues are understood and the due date for the sample has been extended to 27 Feb 2020.

Q6.: Is it possible to provide a smaller quantity on TNT to be tested and the fiber box with all necessary packaging separately for evaluation purposes?

A6.: IAW L.4.1.1.1 a 55lb gross weight (i.e. 50lb nominal) sample of TNT is required to complete all of the necessary testing.

Q7.: Does the RFP provide authorization to use Sunny Point and/or Concord as Port of Import?

A7.: The RFP does not provide authorization to use MOTSU or MOTCO for receipt of shipments.

Q8.: If we are currently providing material that has been approved and is currently being used in government programs (over last several years) will a material sample be required?

A8.: Per Section L, paragraph L.4.1.1.1, “If the Offeror is using a source that has already been verified by the Department of Defense, the Offeror has the option to provide verification that the Department of Defense has previously accepted TNT from that source within the last two years and it is in accordance with MIL-DTL-248D Amendment 01 or an equivalent specification.

The documentation shall include a report from a Department of Defense agency that clearly identifies a Government Point of Contact, date the testing was completed, the name of the source, the testing that was completed and the results to indicate the TNT was determined to be IAW MIL-DTL-248D or equivalent.” Additionally, if an Offeror intends to use one of the following producers: Nitro-Chem, Poland; Zarya, Ukraine; FSUE, Russia, no further documentation is required. These suppliers have been qualified by the Energetics Material

Qualification Board.

Q9.: Is there a business size limit for a contractor to offer a bid on this RFP?

A9.: There is not a size limit on this action as it is solicited as Full and Open competition.

Q10.: With reference to solicitation W52P1J-19-R-0075, § L.4.1.1.1 which states:

“As part of its proposal, each Offeror shall provide a fiberboard box with appropriate waterproof plastic liner, containing 55 lb. gross weight (i.e. 50 lb. nominal) sample of TNT explosive material … The TNT shall be produced and tested to be in compliance with MIL-DTL-

248D or equivalent … The test will result in either a pass or fail rating”

If an Offeror is contemplating utilizing a source that is currently not qualified by DoD, and it is also contemplated that the 55 lb. gross weight sample would arrive to CONUS post-January 8, 2020. Would the U.S. Government accept a “Plan to Qualification” for a previously non-qualified source as a response to “Sub-Factor 1: Test Sample of TNT” which documented the estimated deliverables and the dates to which such deliverables could be expected so that a new source of TNT could be qualified to DoD post-January 8, 2020? The end result being a

“pass or fail rating” on the TNT produced by such source by the POC listed in § L.4.1.1.1 of solicitation W52P1J-19-R-0075.

A10.: No, a “Plan to Qualification” for a previously non-qualified source as a response to “Sub-

Factor 1: Test Sample of TNT” is not in accordance with the RFP and will not be considered acceptable. If an Offeror is contemplating utilizing a source that is currently not qualified by

DoD, the 55 lb. gross weight sample shall arrive to the CONUS testing agency by 27 Feb 2020.

Q11.: Currently, FAT deliveries are due 270 days after award, the USG has 30 days to approve, and production deliveries are due in 90 days after FAT approval, which is a total of 390 days. This might be difficult for large orders and transatlantic shipment(s), which not only require production time, but also transit permits, loading, shipment, import, and trucking. Given that, is it possible for the USG to consider a longer time for production deliveries if the contractor submits the FAT samples early? In other words, can the total time from award to delivery still remain 390 days if FAT is done early?

A11.: US Government FAT deliveries can be provided prior to the 270 days after award of the contract. USG approval would be provided within 30 days of receipt of FAT deliveries. Once

FAT approval is received, the contractor may start deliveries. First deliveries shall be received within 390 days after contract award.

Q12.: Are all deliveries, up to the maximum for the ordering period, due 90 days after FAT approval or are deliveries required to start within 90 days and complete within a certain time period?

A12.: Production deliveries must start within 390 days after contract award (e.g. FAT shall be submitted within 270 days after contract award, the Government has 30 days to approve or deny (300 days), once the Government has approved FAT, first deliveries may begin. First deliveries shall be received within 390 days after contract award.) and must be completed twelve months after the first delivery.

Q13.: It is our understanding, that based on the answers provided in Amendment 0002, that FSUE, Russia is a qualified TNT source. However, it is also our understanding that FSUE cannot export TNT for military purposes without involving JSC Rosoboronexport (ROE), the sole state intermediary agency for Russia's exports/imports of defense-related and dual use products, technologies and services. If ROE must be used, does the USG plan to waive the 48 CFR 52.209-6, Restricted Parties requirement to allow use of FSUE’s TNT for US Government Military use?

A13.: While FSUE TNT has been qualified, the USG has no interest in waiving the Restricted Parties requirement to allow involvement of a Russian state agency for shipment of the product.

Q14.: It is our understanding that, based on the answers provided in Amendment 0002, that FSUE, Russia is a qualified TNT source. In order to bypass JSC Rosoboronexport (ROE), the sole state intermediary agency for Russia's exports/imports of defense-related and dual use products, technologies and services, would the USG consider waiving the USG flagged vessel requirement since the Russian TNT cannot be exported on a USG EUC and can only be imported commercially?

A14.: The US government is legally required to use US Flag vessels for transport of military material. This requirement cannot be waived.

Q15.: Since no additional documentation or TNT samples are required from qualified TNT manufacturers, such as Nitro-Chem, will the USG require bidders to obtain and present letters of commitment from one of the qualified TNT manufacturers to ensure that they have received a recent and valid bid, reduce duplication of respondents counting the same capacity from identical TNT manufacturers, and ensure realistic proposals?

A15.: Any proposed TNT manufacturer must identify that they have available the annual capacity to support the requirement to be delivered under a contract resulting from this RFP.

Q16.: If contractor is using one of the three approved suppliers noted in section L.4.1.1.1 of amendment 0002 and production has been ongoing for current government programs with no lapse greater than 90 days, is FAT test and report (as specified in C.1.4) still applicable?

A16.: This is an issue that will be decided after contract award. For the purposes of all proposals received, First Article Test submittal must be part of all proposals.

Q17.: If contractor is using one of the three approved suppliers noted in section L.4.1.1.1 of amendment 0002 and production has been ongoing for current government programs with no lapse greater than 90 days, is AIE package submittal still required? (as specified in Section E paragraph (d))

A17.: This is an issue that will be decided after contract award. For the purposes of all proposals received, AIE package submittal must be part of all proposals.

Q18.: If contractor is using one of the three approved suppliers noted in section L.4.1.1.1 of amendment 0002 and supplier packaging is currently being accepted in support of USG programs (with no production lapse greater than 90 days), does that confirm all packaging requirements, as specified in Section D.1, are approved when using the same packaging being accepted for other USG programs?

A18.: Just because supplier packaging is currently being accepted in support of other USG programs does not mean that the packaging and shipping requirements of this RFP will be waived. Amendment 0002 is quite specific about packaging and shipping requirements which must be met.