Questions_and_Answers.docx

Questions and Answers for the Expeditionary Water Packaging System (EWPS) on Solicitation W56HZV-15-R-0225

Q1: The paragraph numbering in the body of the Attachment 1, ATDP does correspond with it's Table of Contents or the references made throughout solicitation Sections A-M and it attachments.

A1: Attachment 0001 (ATPD 2418) was revised to correct the paragraph numbering. The revised version of ATPD 2418 dated 19 Jan 16 was incorporated by Amendment 0001.

Q2: In the past completed "practice" submittals prior to submitting our proposal. We would like to do the same for this solicitation on the Federal Business Opportunities website to ensure we have the right process and allow the right amount of time for the final submittal. Is this something you can arrange for us?

A2: The vendor can submit their proposals until the solicitation closes. Once the solicitation response date and time are met the vendor will no longer be able to submit their actions in FBO.

Q3: What are the bidding criteria (and their weight) to win this project?

A3: Contract award will be made using a Lowest Priced, Technically Acceptable source selection process IAW FAR 15.101-2. Please see the requirements stated in Sections L & M of the solicitation.

Q4: Can a European company win this project (or only USA based companies) and are there any financial criteria (turn-over, ebida, number of employees)?

A4: As stated in block 10 of solicitation W56HZV-15-R-0225, this procurement is unrestricted. The end product is subject to trade agreements and a European company is eligible for award as long as manufacturing and production of the end product is done in accordance with DFARS 252.225-7021 Trade Agreements.

Q5: Can a USA based “new company” win this project?

A5: This procurement is unrestricted.

Q6: Will the government clarify the ordering periods on the expected contract?

A6: Narrative A002 to CLIN 0011 will be revised by solicitation amendment.

Q7: Will the government clarify the reference call outs on the Product Sample Plan, Attachment 6? References to Attachment 0001, PD Sections in the table on page 3 appear to be incorrect

A7: The PD section 3.3.3 lists that the EWPS consists of two ISO shelters and the components that ISO Shelter 1 will contain. PD section 3.3.4 lists power requirements. The references are correct. The PD section numbers will be corrected by solicitation amendment.

Q8: Reference the ATPD section 3.3.12. Cleaning - Surfaces inside the EWPS bottling room shall be capable of being fully cleaned and sanitized utilizing any of the solutions in 3.3.9.14.1 using contractor developed/Government approved procedures. Surfaces of the EWPS components in the bottling room shall be easily cleaned without requiring disassembly or the use of special tools or equipment. The EWPS shall be capable of being cleaned and sanitized as described herein without suffering damage or degradation. Should this be 3.3.9.13.1?

A8: Yes. This will be corrected by solicitation amendment.

Q9: Reference the ATPD section 4.4.1 Tie-down Provisions - The TWPS shall be tested in accordance with MIL-STD-209. Should this be EWPS?

A9: Yes. This will be corrected by solicitation amendment.

Q10: Section L.2.2.4.2 references TACOM Clause 52.219-4004 within Section L of the Solicitation, but we cannot locate this clause. Can you please direct us to where this clause is located?

A10: TACOM Clause 52.219-4004 will be added by solicitation amendment.

Q11: A 30-day extension to the solicitation is requested.

A11: Amendment 0002 will revise the closing date. Amendment 0002 should be posted NLT 26 Feb 16.

Q12: The resolution of Appendix A to ATPD 2418 is too low. Is it possible to post a version in higher resolution?

A12: A higher resolution copy of Appendix A to ATPD 2418 has been posted to FBO as a separate document.

Q13: ATPD 241: Attachment 0001, APPENDIX A, is not clear/readable. Would it be possible to obtain a better quality document?

A13: Yes, a better quality document has been posted to FBO as a separate document with better resolution.

Q14: Could the delivery date for the FAT-unit be extended?

A14: The number of days for delivery of the FAT unit on CLIN 0016 will be increased by 45 days from 180 days to 225 days as stated in Amendment 0002.

Q15: During FAT, should the personnel be 3 (PVT) +1 (OT) months in Proving Grounds for operation and testing? We understand with ‘operation’ that we should provide the operators during the running of the EWPS.

A15: The Government estimates 3 months for PVT and 1 month for OT with a refurbishment in-between, and taking place on weekdays, excluding Federal holidays, at 80 hours per 2 week period. However, the testing may extend or accelerate beyond these estimates as necessary to complete testing. The Contractor shall operate and maintain the EWPS during all test events.

Q16: Integrated Product Team (IPT) meetings shall be held bi-weekly: do you mean during the whole extend of the contract?

A16: Yes, IPT meetings shall be held bi-weekly or as mutually agreed upon between the Government and Contractor.

Q17: Minimum production rate of 900 (T) – 1200 (O): what is the meaning of (T) and (O)?

A17: (T) Threshold and (O) Objective

Q18: On GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY (GFP): The PD has priority above the solicitation: we understand from the PD that we need to supply the collapsible water storage tanks, but in the solicitation it is a government furnished item. Please clarify.

A18: The PD and the solicitation both state that the 3000 gallon collapsible water storage tanks are Government Furnished Equipment (GFE).

Q19: How do we need to store the 4x 3000 gallon collapsible water storage tank in shelter 2 (in a rack?)? If government furnished, o you have any dimensions and weight?

A19: The following dimensions and weight are in ATPD 2344: Net Weight: 139 lbs. and the dimensions are: 28in x 25in x 44in (L x W x H) (NOTE: The ATPD number has been corrected).

Q20. Reference Attachment 0001, ATPD 2418 dated 23 Feb 2016 which was posted on FBO on 29 Feb 16 with Amendment 0003. The ATPD paragraph numbers are all incorrect. The document starts and ends with para 1 throughout the document!

A20: Attachment 0001, ATPD 2418, dated 23 Feb 2016 (corrected paragraphs) was posted to FBO on 1 Mar 2016.

Q21: For requirements similar to and including 3.3.3.9 of the ATPD, we simply request that competitors be allowed to propose similar solutions with an explanation as to how these solutions do not affect the form, fit or function of the overall EWPS.

A21: Section 3.3.3.9 of the ATPD does not exist. The Government has revised the language in Section M to clarify that only the criteria listed in Attachment 0006 will be evaluated as part of the technical factor, which accounts for similar solutions to the form, fit, and function required by ATPD 2418. However, offerors should note that the First Article Test unit and all production deliveries must meet or exceed the requirements of ATPD 2418.

Q22. Proposers be allowed to demonstrate with similar on-hands COTS solution systems within the 14 to 90 day post solicitation submission stage and present how those example systems differ from the ATPD and how the ATPD will be met with the US Army specific solutions.

A22: The Government has reviewed the recommendations to revise moving the product sample evaluation timeframe for the Army's solicitation of the Expeditionary Water Packaging System. The Government has accepted some recommendations and revised the Product Sample Test Plan timeframe to address your concerns. However, none of your stated ATPD concerns seem to conflict with those sections outlined in Attachment 0006. Paragraph M.4.1 was revised on Amendment 0003 as follows:

M.4.1 The technical factor will consist of an evaluation of the Product Sample Test and resultant production bottles, which will be conducted on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. The Acceptability/Unacceptability of the Product Sample Test will be based solely on the minimum requirements identified in Attachment 0006. The Government will not evaluate other requirements ATPD 2418 beyond the minimum requirements identified in Attachment 0006. (The Contractor will be responsible for meeting all requirements of ATPD 2418 during performance.) The determination of Acceptable and Unacceptable for each requirement specified in Attachment 0006 will be based on the following definitions:

Q23. Paragraph M.4.13 determination for the sample system will not be totally representative of the requirement of the Attachment 006, but allow the offeror to show that there is a technical path to meet those in the deliverable units.

A23. We have rejected the recommendation to allow the offeror to show that there is a technical path to meet the requirements of Attachment 0006 due to the limited evaluation criteria. Each criteria in Attachment 0006 will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis.

NOTE: The following questions will be addressed on the next Q&A to be posted: (1). Clarification of the FAT ordering period; (2). Clarification of the payment conditions for the FAT unit.