Questions and Answers for Draft RFP W52P1J-20-R-0046.pdf

1. Section B, Page 6 does not indicate inspection, acceptance nor FOB points for FAAT and Production Quantities. Can the U.S. Government indicate whether the point is Origin or Destination for each of these?

FAT Inspection/Acceptance: Origin/Destination Production Inspection/Acceptance: Origin/Origin – FOB Origin

This description will be added to Section B in Final RFP.

2. Page 44, Paragraph (e) states lot numbers shall be used for all ammunition end items and their major components. Will shellcases and bullets require lot numbering?

Lot numbers shall be in accordance with MIL-STD-1168 lot number convention and the technical data package (TDP) requirements. Lot numbers shall be used for all ammunition end items and their major components, including inert, dummy, or non-energetic items and components. When not required by the TDP and not an end item or major component, the component lot number may be constructed through contractor lot number convention. The only exception to this requirement are to bullets and/or cases made in-house which are not require to be lotted.

3. Page 104 – Page Limitations for Technical Volume. Please allow an exclusion on page count for Government requested evidence documents (such as Letters of Commitment from each supplier, Integrated Master Schedules, Process Maps and FMEAs for Failure Analysis).

The Government agrees to a page limit exclusion for Letters of Commitment and Process Maps.

Please note that Integrated Master Schedules are not an explicit requirement of this RFP.

However, if it is included it shall count against page limitation.

4. CDRL A016, Quality Audit Site Visit Schedule has a contract reference to Section E. No clause within Section E references the CDRL A016 requirement. Which clause within Section E is the contractual basis for CDRL A016?

CDRL A016 is referencing Section E in regards to the requirements outlined in clause 52.246- 11, Higher-Level Contract Quality Requirement to include ISO 9001:2015, and the Vendor/Subcontractor Purchase Controls requirement outlined in Paragraph 1.9 of the Statistical Process Control clause/narrative.

5. CDRL A024, GFE Status Report for GFE Critical Items has a contract reference to Section C of the RFP. Section C contains no specific clause that relates directly to GFE. Will the USG provide a list of GFE Critical Items or is the designation of GFE Critical Items determined by the contractor based on testing required for production?

CDRL A024 is referencing Section E clause/narrative Contract Production/Delivery Reporting, which also references RFP Attachment 0007, Contract Production/Delivery Reporting SOW. The Government will change the heading to Contract Production/Delivery/Consumption Reporting to cover the GFE reporting requirements.

The initial GFE Critical Items list will be provided by the Government after contract award (based on what the Government determines to be long-lead and/or short supply items). The contractor will then update the list every two weeks in coordination with the Government.

Contractor Questions / Government Answers Draft RFP W52P1J-20-R-0046

6. Lot Acceptance testing for the .50 Caliber M8 and M20 require function and casualty testing in the M3P firearm. The RFP does not list this firearm as being provided as GFE. Will the M3P firearm be provided as GFE or is the contractor required to provide the M3P in support of testing? If the contractor is required to provide the M3P firearm, will the USG consider waiving the requirement for testing in the M3P?

If required, the Government will provide a high rate of fire weapon (not necessarily the M3P) to support Lot Acceptance Testing for Caliber .50 M8 and M20.

7. Does the Government plan to make any changes to the TDPs released with the Draft RFP?

Any approved engineering changes to the TDP after release of the Draft RFP will be accounted for within the Final RFP.

8. The RFP provides an Economic Price Adjustment (EPA) for Copper (CU) for Option years 1-4 but not for the base option year. Since the initial base award quantities are significantly lower than the max allowable for an ordering period, the USG could award significant quantities in the base option year up to 364 days after initial contract award. Therefore, the lack of an EPA for the base option year places undue financial risk on the contractor driven by volatility in the copper market. Can the USG extend the EPA to the base option year to reduce the financial risk placed on the contractor?

There will be no EPA for copper in base option year.

9. The Nitrocellulose (NC) pricing agreement between BAE at Radford and the US Government is not set for the entire period of the contract proposed in draft RFP W52P1J-20-R-0046. This agreement forms the basis for NC pricing from Radford to commercial customers. As such, propellant suppliers indicate they will be unable to provide firm pricing relative to the five-year period encompassed by the draft RFP. Would it be possible to include an EPA in the RFP for NC?

An EPA for NC is being considered by the Government. Will be addressed in the Final RFP release.

10. FAR 52.246-26, Reporting Non-Conforming Items requires the contractor to screen all receipts of items in support of the contract through the Government-Industry Date Exchange Program (GIDEP) to avoid use of items that may have a major or critical nonconformance.

For the purpose of major and critical nonconformances, is the term “items” interpreted to mean end items listed in the Schedule for delivery to the customer?

If not, how does the USG define “items”?

The Government is evaluating the inclusion of this clause and will provide guidance if clause is determined to be required.

11. Under FAR 52.246-26 are “major” and “critical” nonconformances those defined in the applicable USG Technical Data Package (i.e., Quality Assurance Provisions, Specifications, & Drawings)?Provisions, Specifications, & Drawings)?

12. Under FAR 52.246-26 the contractor is required to submit a report to GIDEP if an item purchased by the Contractor for delivery to, or for the Government is a common item that has a major or critical non-conformance. A common item is defined as an item that has multiple applications versus a singular or peculiar application. Many of the items that would be procured in support of the contemplated contract are peculiar to the manufacture and packing of small caliber ammunition. Which, if any, “items” under this Draft RFP are considered common?

13. Under FAR 52.246-26 the contractor “shall not” submit a report for an item if the contractor can confirm that the organization where the defect was generated has not released the item to more than one customer. In the event a subcontractor is unwilling to disclose if a lot of an item was released to more than one customer, is the contractor obligated to submit a report to

GIDEP?

14. Under Section L, Subfactor 2 paragraph (1) (i) the RFP indicates that plans shall be provided to qualify and utilize domestic suppliers for raw materials to mitigate the risk from international sources. Should plans to use domestic suppliers and/or domestic production (excluding the Lake City Army Ammunition Plant) for intermediate components/assemblies such as projectiles, shellcases, primers and packaging also be provided to enable the USG to fully assess the risk associated with the supply chain in support of the contract contemplated by Draft RFP W52P1J- 20-R-0046?

See question 16. Below. The Restriction of Critical Items and Components clause/narrative is being revised to state that all finished components with the exception of Magnesium Powder and Tracer Bullets/Projectiles must be obtained from U.S./Canadian sources. As a result, Section L, Subfactor 2 paragraph (1) (i) will remain as stated.

15. Narrative E0004, Destructive Testing states in paragraph (c) that all pieces of the complete first article shall be considered as destructively tested items unless specifically exempted by other provisions of this contract and per paragraph (e) the Government reserves the right to take title to all or any items or components as described in the previous paragraphs, including (c). Under clause I-129, FAR 52.209-3, First Article Approval—Contractor Testing paragraph (e) states that unless otherwise provided in the contract, that the contractor may deliver items or components from an approved First Article that were not consumed or destroyed in testing. The two clauses contradict one another, which clause takes precedent as to what may be done with items or components that were not actually consumed or destroyed during a First Article?

Paragraph (d) of the Section E Destructive Testing clause/narrative states that, “The contractor shall not reuse any components from items used in a destructive test during First Article, lot acceptance in-process testing, unless specifically authorized by the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)”. This paragraph is the provisional exemption listed in paragraph (c). Typically a contractor will state in their PCO approved First Article Test Plan the proposed disposition of First Article items that are not subject to destructive testing. This, in turn, complies with paragraph (e) of FAR clause 52.209-3.

16. Narrative C0008, the Restriction of Critical Items and Components, has been significantly narrowed in scope from previous RFPs. Paragraph (c) requires that load, assemble and pack must occur in the U.S., its outlying areas, or Canada but with no restrictions on the origin of components used except in the case of the components expressly called out in paragraph (b) of the same clause. Under the draft provision, foreign non-tracer projectiles, shell cases and primers, which are critical components to the support of national defense items, can be provided. In prior RFPs you in fact have described such components as “critical to the support of national defense items” for which “it is necessary to create and/or maintain a domestic capability for the production of these items and components by limiting production and procurement to the United States/Canadian industrial base.” There is no reason to alter this limitation. Therefore, each of these cartridge components should be added to paragraph (b) to ensure that they are manufactured, assembled and tested in the US, its outlying areas, or Canada. As you have in the past, please revise the draft RFP to protect the domestic base for these items.

Narrative will be revised to state that all finished components with the exception of Magnesium Powder and Tracer Bullets/Projectiles must be obtained from U.S./Canadian sources.

17. Page 10 – Restriction of Critical Items and Components Subsection b lists three categories of components that must be manufactured in the US, it’s outlying areas or Canada. As a point of clarification, may components that are not specifically listed be sourced from outside the US, it’s outlying areas or Canada?

See response to Question 16.

18. Page 8 - Sale/De-Militarization of Enhanced Performance Rounds (EPR)

Subsection b directs de-militarization of EPR projectiles. Can the de-militarization work be sub-contracted with work completed either in the facility of manufacture or at another facility?

There is not a restriction on subcontracting demilitarization of EPR projectiles provided the subcontractor meets all the terms and conditions of the contract.

19. Page 9 – Engineering Support

Could you provide additional information and/or examples of the types of engineering support that may be requested under this requirement.

The Government will provide additional information and examples in the Final RFP release.

20. Can the Government provide an update on the current list of exceptions associated with MIL-STD-

1916.

There is not a current list of exceptions to MIL-STD-1916. However, alternative acceptance plans may be submitted for USG review and approval in accordance with MIL-STD-1916.

21. Will projected quantity splits for the M855A1 and the M80A1 round between Lake City and the

Second Source be provided to prospective offerors?

Quantity splits will be determined on a year by year, case by case basis and will not be provided.