Sust_Svcs-Gov't_Answers_to_Industry_Questions-04-02-2019Rlb.pdf

Question/Suggestion/Comment Answer

Why is the anticipated solicitation, W56HZV-18-R-0040, not being solicited under TS3 and ERS as ERS has the same NAICS Code? Is this to allow the incumbent an opportunity to compete since they are not a prime on ERS? The effort intended to be solicited under W56HZV-18-R-0040 is for a single award IDIQ with up to five ordering years to issue Task orders to further define and fund the required LOE effort. TS3 is an already established Multiple Award Task Order (MATO) contract and was determined to not be a suitable instrument, because it does not not allow the issuance of a second-tier IDIQ instruments to a single awardee; Each task order for this effort would be subject to FAR 16.5 Fair Opportunity. Furthermore, TS3 does not have a sufficient amount of ordering period of performance for this requirement.

Viewing the new FBO GFPM posting for this effort, it shows a total of 416,238 hours vs. the previous GFPM where it showed 2,284,400 hours. I just wanted to confirm that the intended support was in fact been scaled back to the 416,238 hours and the procurement will be at this reduced level. Also, is it intended that this will be a Full & Open procurement, or will it be a Set Aside?

(1) The initial draft GFPM utilized estimates for the entire 5 year period of performance. The updated GFPM reflects the current estimates for ordering period 1. If you apply a factor of 5 to that number, the difference is in line with the previous estimates. (2) this contract will not be a set aside and will be awarded through full and open completion on a best value basis.

1. In paragraph C.7.3 Deployment Maintenance in Support of Contingency Operations there is no ramp up identified. What is the ramp up period for a deployment?

2. Does the USG have a specific manpower mix requirement for contingency operations? What tasks, missions and durations are anticipated?

3. What facilities for mission support, housing, power generation, HVAC and meals will be provided in contingency operations?

(1) Per C.7.3. "the contractor personnel shall be capable of deploying in support of contingency operations within 60 days of being called up by the Government"

(2) Yes, the RFP will provide a minimum quantity of personnel and mix of labor categories to support a single Stryker Brigade.

(3) The RFP will incorporate the appropriate contract clauses that detail the extent of USG responsibilities to contractors deployed in support of contingency operations.

Paragraph C.8.9 Information assurance (IA) / Information Technology (IT) Training requires that all contractor employees receive this training within 6 months of employment and 10 days following completion of training reporting certificates/proof of completion of this requirement to the PCO.

What is the required source and method of training?

C.8.9 "All contractor employees working IA/IT functions must comply with DoD and Army training requirements in DoD 8570.01, DoD 8570.01-M, and AR 25-2". DoD 8570.01 brings the contractor to the following website:

https://iase.disa.mil/Pages/index.aspx where details on where and how to complete the required training. This will be clarified in the RFP.

The noted paragraphs define the mandatory attributes of the following non SCA positions: Instructor Supervisor, Instructor and Field Service Representatives (FSR). Both the Instructor Supervisor and the Instructor positions require that personnel be “certified” to provide instructions on all Stryker FoV and Mission Equipment Packages (MEPs). There is no definition for what that certification is, if all instructors have to have all 27 variant capabilities and to what extent that certification must be maintained/re-certified.

1. Can the USG clarify and define these requirements and what USG support will be provided to obtain any USG required certifications? For FSRs, the only corresponding requirement is that the individual must “Meet Level III mechanic criteria responsible for inspection, testing, installation, calibration, troubleshooting.” The Department of Labor (the authority of SCA Labor Category definitions) does not provide a labor category that bears a reasonable relationship for a Level III mechanic.

2. What criteria will the USG consider for certifications (are they specific to the equipment or generic to capabilities); if generic, how will the USG evaluate the differences between contractors?

OEMs exceed this certification requirement, and have established prolonged training/learning programs for FSRs (specific to the equipment, technology and diagnostic unique tools & software required) that are effectively FSR certification programs. This ensures the quality and consistency of autonomous FSR talent provided to the U.S. Army, and has a related impact on the readiness of the units. Recommend that the following sentence be inserted into paragraph H.3.4:

“Each FSR will complete a certification program prior to start of work, conducted to OEM standards.”

Comment: This will certify customer service and vehicle related service skills have been demonstrated to a high degree of proficiency by each FSR for Stryker specific tasks, procedures and all variants.”

3. Additionally, there is no mention of Nationwide or Local SCA labor rates in draft solicitation. Which category will be directed by the USG?

4. Will leased vehicles and Material Handling Equipment (MHE) be provided to perform mission requirements at each site?

1. The only required formal certifications are for Instructor Supervisors and Instructors and can be found in the referenced Attachment 0012 NET Instructor Certification SOP. This is a specific Government Certification process. There is no formal requirement or method detailed by the SOW for the contractor to certify FSRs. FSR support requirements are defined in the scope of work at C.7.4.1 and H.3.4 and it will be the contractors responsibility to ensure the personnel they field to meet those requirements are qualified to do so.

2. There is no requirement for FSR to be formally certified by the USG as there is no SOP to do so. Bidders will be evaluated according to Section L/M, particular the experience and management plan subfactors.

3. Per H.3.1. "For Wage Grade positons as identified below, the labor categories will be subject to conforming to the requirements of the Service Contract Act (SCA) Wage Determination 99-0316." This is a contract field team nationwide wage determination. It is also anticipated that there will be an additional local WD utilized for those employs working within commuting distance of JBLM, WA.

4. No lease vehicles will be provided by the government. In the event the contractor personnel is on TDY as defined by the contract, rental cars will be an allowable expense and will be provided for through the Cost Only Travel CLIN. All MHE will be provided by the government. It will be clarified in the scope of work.

“The Contractor shall provide qualified personnel to develop and implement all program management plans and processes to efficiently and effectively execute the requirements of this contract.” Recommend the Government modify the LOE in the Draft Government Furnished Pricing Model to include PMO staffing. As an example, staffing should include Program Manager, Financial Analyst, part time contract specialist, part time deployment specialist, part time HR specialist, and part time contract specialist.

Program Management is considered "labor overhead 1" rate on the GFPM and will be made part of the composite hourly rates for each of the contracted labor categories. The government will consider clarifying on the Final GFMP.

"The contractor shall perform risk management in accordance with attachment A001." As written, there is insufficient information to identify, quantify and price a risk management plan to support this program. Would the Government please indicate when the Attachments will be made available, and in what format?

Yes, the attachments are available immediately upon request to the mailbox listed in this RFI.

This section references a management process and brief to USG within 30 days detailing the divisions of effort. Would the Government please clarify to whom the management process is to be submitted approval (within the Government)?

What is the format (oral or written)? If written, will a format be prescribed?

Formal submittal is not a requirement. The contractor will be expected to brief this management process during the Start of Work meeting. It is noted that the Start of Work Clause as referenced in that paragraph is not included in the Draft RFP. Start of Work narrative will be included in the official RFP.

Identifies a requirement to complete a 100% inventory. To gain perspective on shop tools and support equipment that will be maintained on the contract; will the Government provide a listing, in advance, to prospective bidders of all GFE/GFP? Yes, the attachments are available immediately upon request to the mailbox listed in this RFI

“The contractor shall have 100% of required instructor personnel certified for all variants and configurations to include the Mission Equipment Package (MEP) for variant specific platforms within in time to meet the Ordering Period One NET plan execution dates…” In order to enable offerors to thoroughly price this requirement; will the Government provide prospective offerors a copy of the ordering period 1 NET training schedule prior to release of the final RFP?

Yes, the attachments are available immediately upon request to the mailbox listed in this RFI

In order to ensure we staff the contract properly during transition, will the Government provide a listing of all required/mandatory training for personnel supporting this contract prior to release of the Final RFP?

Yes, all required formal training necessary to begin work on this contract is listed in the draft RFP. It is incumbent for each offeror to read the RFP in its entirety to assess all required/mandatory training for personnel.

Environmental Compliance. In our review of the DRFP, we noticed that a Government POC is not identified. Recommend the Government identify a recipient for environmental issues discovered during contract execution.

Per C.5.1. "The contractor shall immediately notify the PCO if the Government gives any direction that may result in violation of law or regulation." The PCO will be identified on the signature line of the contract.

The contractor shall conduct OPNET and FLMNET for the Stryker FoV in accordance with Government provided training and fielding schedules as set forth in the NET Plan for the ordering period for which the services are ordered and Program Of Instruction (POI), Attachment 0010. The contractor shall be responsible for training students on the integration of the GFP items onto the Stryker vehicles, as listed in Attachment 0011 Stryker Contract Property List.

NET/Fielding – to adequately quantify the necessary resources and to establish a level playing field among all offerors not the incumbent, the following information is requested for release with the RFP: length of time for each course, expected number of students per course, expected number of fieldings and how much simultaneity the contractor must be capable of (that is, must the contractor be capable of doing NET/Fielding at more than one location at any given time? If so, how many), for each year (inclusive of the periods).

All of the requested information is included within the NET Plan, Attachment 0009 and Attachment 0013, Density Schedule. The attachments are available immediately upon request to the mailbox listed in this RFI

1. The contractor shall provide all maintenance, scheduled and unscheduled, and material to ensure the DRCF Continental United States (CONUS) vehicles at Joint Base Lewis McCord (JBLM) remain FMC plus safety configuration after the initial Technical Inspection (TI) in accordance with the Stryker TMs and IETMs.

2. Will the Government provide an assumption for bidders to use for unscheduled maintenance man-hours required for DRCF vehicles to be maintained at JBLM?

1. Yes, Attachment 0013 Density Schedule details the head count estimated to be ordered during the first ordering period. This is an LOE requirement and the level of support will be determined by the Government. The attachments are available immediately upon request to the mailbox listed in this RFI

2. The DRCF maintenance standard will be clarified in the final RFP.

The contractor shall provide all maintenance, scheduled and unscheduled, and material to ensure the DRCF Continental United States (CONUS) vehicles at Joint Base Lewis McCord (JBLM) remain FMC plus safety configuration after the initial Technical Inspection (TI) in accordance with the Stryker TMs and IETMs.

Do DCRF vehicles experience any OPTEMPO miles, or are the vehicles basically stationary until issued?

The vehicles located in the DRCF lot are stationary until used, however, the vehicles undergo an unknown amount of turnover according to the needs of the field so the level of maintenance will be unique to each individual vehicle depending on its condition at the time it is inducted into the DRCF process. Within the DRCF scope of work, the contractor will be responsible for requisitioning any material (meaning Class IX parts) needed to bring the vehicles up to FMC. This will be clarified in the RFP.

The contractor shall perform the support described in C.6.4 for PM Owned vehicles at JBLM.

Will the Government provide an assumption for bidders to use for the amount of unscheduled maintenance man-hours required for PMMV vehicles to be maintained at JBLM?

Yes, Attachment 0013 Density Schedule details the head count estimated to be ordered during the first ordering period. This is an LOE requirement and the level of support will be determined by the Government. The attachments are available immediately upon request to the mailbox listed in this RFI.

The contractor shall perform the support described in C.6.4 for PM Owned vehicles at JBLM.

Do PMMVs experience any OPTEMPO miles, or are they basically stationary until issued?

The vehicles located in the PMMV lot are stationary until used, however, the vehicles undergo an unknown amount of turnover according to the needs of the field so the level of maintenance will be unique to each individual vehicle depending on its condition at the time it is inducted into the PMMV process. Within the PMMV scope of work, the contractor will be responsible for requisitioning any material (meaning Class IX parts) needed to bring the vehicles up to FMC. This will be clarified in the RFP.

CONTINGENCY DEPLOYMENT CAPABILITY SUBFACTOR. The Offeror shall provide a deployment plan and checklist, which outlines both the proposed level of support and how it will ensure it has available, qualified, and deployable personnel for Field Service Representative and maintenance services in support of contingency operations to ensure compliance with Section C.7.3 within 60 days from an order to support up to 1 brigade.

The Government provides a definition of maintenance services in C.7.2 by listing those requirements in C.7.2.1, C.7.2.2, and C.7.2.3. Would the Government provide a definition or a listing that identifies the requirements associated with the term “maintenance services” for L.4.2.2?

Yes, the USG will define maintenance services in Section L.4.2.2. to reflect the same definitions defined in Section C.7.3.1.

Maintenance support may accompany the units during training exercises as required. Maintenance services to be provided include the following: A training location or exercise may be a different location with potentially altered density of equipment than the attached density schedule depicts. Will the Government provide assumptions or planning factors for bidders to use for the amount of unscheduled maintenance man-hours required for training exercises vehicles to be maintained to include experience of any OPTEMPO miles?

This is an LOE contract. The Government established the necessary level of support in order for the contractor to augment the Unit Maintence personnel. Specific level of effort won't be known until the individual unit solicits the PM for support. The Government intends to release the GFPM with an estimated amount of hours for each labor category. Once a composite hourly rate is established for each, the Government will order the necessary amount of hours at that rate to accomplish the needs of the individual units.

The contractor shall order Government approved parts through the LMP in accordance with C.6.1.4. Is C.6.1.4 supply requisitioning the process to follow in support of all maintenance events (Garrison Maintenance support, Deployment Maintenance in support of contingency operations, DRCF, and PMMV)?

No, in support of Field Level Maintence (Contingency and Non Contingency), the units will be responsible to order the necessary parts through the system. The contractor is only required to utilize LMP in support of TPF and DRCF/PMMV activities, as referenced in the scope.

The contractor shall maintain 100% on-time delivery of CDRL A017, FSR/Mechanic Summary Report. The COR, identified in section G of the contract, will conduct analyses of contractors performance against this performance standard. Upon period of performance completion, acceptability of the services performed will be based on said analysis. Unacceptable performance will be handled in accordance with clause 52.246-5 -- Inspection of Services -- Cost-Reimbursement.

We recommend the Government evaluate offerors who propose a company commitment to meeting additional or higher level of performance metrics, in all areas of the Performance Work Statement, and that these are evaluated more favorably and given a higher evaluation score. Offerors proposing additional metrics and/or committing to higher quality metrics will allow for more clearly defined results. As an example, the vehicle fleet delivered to the contractor shall have a vehicle average Non Mission Capable – Maintenance (NMC-M) downtime not to exceed 5 days, over a 60-day period. Another example might be - how effective is the inspection process? Defects identified during the initial inspection compared to final faults repaired. Initial inspection shall identify not less than 95% of all faults.

The required performance metrics are defined in the draft RFP. We do not intend to consider evaluating beyond these performance metrics.

CUSTOMER FUNDED FSR SUPPORT. The contractor shall provide FSR support within sixty days of contract award for customer funded FSR requirements.

Will the Government provide a timeframe as to when PM SBCT wants all 40 PM Funded FSRs on board? Will this be incorporated as a factor in the Phase-In process, if so; will all 40 be required during that phase or a lesser number?

Yes, the expected dates of service are contained within Attachment 0012 Density Schedule. These dates may be impacted by the phase in schedule and the date of contract award. The attachments are available immediately upon request to the mailbox listed in this RFI

In the “Proposal Content”, there does not appear to be a specified page limit for each section.

Will the Government provide specific page limits for each section with the release of the RFP?

The Government does not intend to establish any page limitations in the proposal. The Government may consider including a page recommendations for certain proposal Volumes, which would be reflected in the final RFP.

The Contract(s) must have been performed by the offeror, or a key subcontractor, as the prime contractor.

Would the Government be more specific in their definition of a “key subcontractor”? We recommend providing a specific definition or a list of criteria, for example, 20% of the total work scope and/or performing a key function/requirement.

The Government intends to further define the criteria for "key subcontractor" in the final RFP.

The offeror shall describe its use of labor sources and techniques to attract, hire, and retain personnel, and how it will ensure prospective personnel meet the minimum qualifications (e.g. experience level, background) and security clearance requirements (as applicable). The Government requests that the offeror describe its historical ability to recruit and retain personnel and how this capability will be utilized to successfully meet the schedule and performance requirements of the statement of work.

Recommend that the evaluation factors include an emphasis on the offeror’s training and certification program for its workforce. The training approach should be evaluated on its ability to keep the current and new workforce members up to date on current and future requirements. Training approaches that provide a trained workforce that minimizes the overall costs to the Government should be evaluated more favorably and given a higher evaluation score.

The Phase In/Staffing Approach subfactor will review each offeror's approach to certifying the required amount of Instructors for Ordering Period 1 in accordance with the requirements set forth in the contract. The Government does not intend to evaluate any additional training approaches.

Prime Direct Labor Rates, if proposed, shall be in line with justifying supporting data (redacted payroll data, salary survey, Bureau of Labor and Statistics Occupational Employment Statistics (BLS-OES), DCMA approved FPRR/FPRA, etc.) for each category.

We understand that this work requires skilled and knowledgeable individuals and those individuals should be compensated appropriately. Evaluating a Total Compensation Plan or Package as part of the proposal will give the Government insights to the details of the workforce’s salaries and benefits on the program. In an effort to maintain a qualified and certified workforce, we suggest that a Total Compensation Plan be evaluated as part of each bidder’s proposal.

Pursuant to M.4.3.5 and 4.3.6, the government will evaluate both reasonableness and cost realism in its evaluation.

1) The Offeror shall submit a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Phase-in offer for proposal evaluation purposes. 2) The Government will evaluate the Offerors proposal for unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price,…

Given that any contractor other than the incumbent will have transition costs, if transition cost is included in the Total Evaluated Price, the incumbent will have an unfair advantage, since the incumbent will have no such cost.; therefore, we recommend the Government review and evaluate the transition cost for reasonableness and realism but exclude it from the Total Evaluated Price (TEP).

The Government does not agree that any advantage an incumbent has with respect to the Phase-In requirement to be unfair. The RFP states that the "Phase In" is the contract guaranteed minimum which is a material term of the contract, so the Government has determined it will be considered in the Total Evaluated Price in order to obtain competitive pricing. The Phase-In effort is Firm Fixed Price, and will not be evaluated for realism.

a. Is page 45 intentionally blank?

b. Section B.3 appears to be missing summary text with references to applicable Section C paragraphs between Sections B.3.2 and B.3.2.1 (first instance, page 47): B.3.3 and B.3.2.1 (second instance, page 48)

c. Duplicate Sections -Second instance should be B.3.3.x.

i. Section B.3.2.1 on page 47 and Section B.3.2.1 on page 48

ii. Section B.3.2.2 on page 47 and Section B.3.2.2 on page 48

iii. Section B.3.2.3 on page 47 and Section B.3.2.3 on page 48

iv. Section B.3.2.4 on page 47 and Section B.3.2.4 on page 48

v. Section B.3.2.5 on page 47 and Section B.3.2.5 on page 48

d. 2024 is a leap year.

i. Page 47 -Section B.3.1.4 Ordering Period Four is listed as ending on 2/28/2024, and Section B.3.1.5 has Ordering Period Five starting on 3/1/2014. 2024 is a leap year. Will Ordering Period Four extend to 2/29/2024 or Ordering Period Five begin on 2/29/2024?

ii. Page 47 -Section B.3.2.4 Ordering Period Four is listed as ending on 2/28/2024, and Section B.3.2.5 has Ordering Period Five starting on 3/1/2014. 2024 is a leap year. Will Ordering Period Four extend to 2/29/2024 or Ordering Period Five begin on 2/29/2024?

iii. Page 48 -Section B.3.2.4 Ordering Period Four is listed as ending on 2/28/2024, and Section B.3.2.5 has Ordering Period Five starting on 3/1/2014. 2024 is a leap year. Will Ordering Period Four extend to 2/29/2024 or Ordering Period Five begin on 2/29/2024?

iv. Page 49 -Section B.4.1.4 Ordering Period Four is listed as ending on 2/28/2024, and Section B.4.1.5 has Ordering Period Five starting on 3/1/2014. 2024 is a leap year. Will Ordering Period Four extend to 2/29/2024 or Ordering Period Five begin on 2/29/2024?

v. Page 50 -Section B.5.1.4 Ordering Period Four is listed as ending on 2/28/2024, and Section B.5.1.5 has Ordering Period Five starting on 3/1/2014. 2024 is a leap year. Will Ordering Period Four extend to 2/29/2024 or Ordering Period Five begin on 2/29/2024?

vi. Page 50, 51 -Section B.6.1.4 Ordering Period Four is listed as ending on 2/28/2024, and Section B.6.1.5 has Ordering Period Five starting on 3/1/2014. 2024 is a leap year. Will Ordering Period Four extend to 2/29/2024 or Ordering Period Five begin on 2/29/2024?

e. Page 57 -Section C.2.4. The Information Flow Down section heading has "(In the SOW (c.2.5))". However, Section C.2.5 is OPSEC Awareness Training Requirements. Is the SOW

c. 2.5 reference applicable?

f. Page 61, Section C.5.3.2.1 System Safety Working Group (SSWG). Are meetings to be attended in person? How often are these meetings conducted? Which Contractor Role(s) are to attend the SSWG meetings?

g. Page 63, Section C.6.1.7. Will laptop or MSDv2 or MSDv3 equipment be used to read the Interactive Electronic Technical Manuals (IETMs) be provided as GFE or as ODC "other" category?

h. Page 72, Section C.8.4, item (b), second sentence. Should the year "2013" be replaced with "2019"?

a. Page 45 is a result of the government contract writing system and is not blank but part of the CLIN on page 44.

b.-d. Thank you for identifying these errors with the Draft RFP. Suggestions will be taken into account and when necessary, be incorporated into the RFP.

e. Reference has been removed from the solicitation for clarity.

f. Requirement will be clarified in the RFP.

g. Yes, a MSD will be provided to the contractor and is located on the GFE list.

h.This is a TACOM local clause narrative. 2013 is the year this particular requirement was established.

i. Page 73, Section C.8.11 has Threat Awareness Reporting Program (TARP) training for personnel with security clearances. Given that Section C.2.1 states that this is an unclassified effort, is TARP training required?

j. Page 84, Section H.4 references Sumner, JBLM, Anniston Army Depot (ANAD), Lima, OH, and Scranton, PA. Earlier in the RFP only JBLM and Detroit are listed. Section H.5 listed Germany; Section H.6 lists Republic of Korea. What is the full location list for performing this effort?

k. Will the following be included with the official RFP release? Page 115 Section J lists 19 attachments. The following are cited directly in the RFP.

i. Page 55 - Section C.1.4 references Attachment 0001 Stryker Risk Management Plan.

ii. Page 55 - Section C.1.5.2 references Attachment 0015.

iii. Page 57 - Section C.2.3 references Attachment 0003 OPSEC Plan. While Page 73, Section C.8. 7 item (b) states it will be provided at time of award.

iv. Page 65, Sections C.6.2.2.3, C.6.2.3.1 reference POI Attachment 0010.

v. Page 68, Section C.7.1.5 references Attachment 0011 Stryker Contract Property List.

vi. Page 87, Section H.6 -Attachment 0016. Ceiling Rates.

I. Missing CORL reference. These sections have "CORL XXXX"

i. Page 58 - Section C.2.5.

ii. Page 58 - Section C.2.7

iii. Page 58 -Section C.2.8

i. TARP training is a requirement. There are instances that the contractor may come into contact with classified information or material and this training will make sure they are qualified to handle.

j. Service under this contract may be performed anywhere a Stryker vehicle is located, both CONUS or OCONUS, in support of the USG or FMS customer. A detailed listing of unit locations can be referenced on Attachment 0012 Density Schedule.

k. All attachments are referenced in the RFP and a compiled listing is located in Section J. All attachments will be released with the RFP by formal request to the mailbox per the RFI.

l. These CDRLS were not readily available for the draft RFP. All referenced CDRLS will be included with the RFP.

m. Missing timing references. These sections have"***" calendar days

n. Pages 140, 141. Exhibit A does not include CORL A002. CORL A002 is referenced in Section C. 2.3. What is the Exhibit A information for CORL A002?

o. Page 141 -Exhibit A, CORL A003, Block 5. Missing contract reference C.3.2. /or/ Page 59 - Section C.3.2 has incorrect reference to CORL A003 and it should be CORL A006. Which is correct?

p. Page 143 - Exhibit A, CORL A005, Block 10. Is the submission no more than 10 times per option period or no more than 10 times over the live of the whole award?

q. Page 143 & Page 144 - Exhibit A, CORL A006 is listed twice.

r. Page 146 -Exhibit A, CORL A008, Block 5. Has contract reference C.3.4. Section C.3.4 does not reference CORL A008, only CORL A00l. Section C.3.6.1 does reference CORL A008.

s. Page 147 - Exhibit A, CORL A009, Block 5. Missing contract reference C.3.6. or/ Page 59 - Section C.3.6 has incorrect reference to CORL A009 and it should be CORL A008. Which is correct?

t. Page 148 - Exhibit A, CORL A0l0, Block 5. Missing contract reference C.6.1.10.3. References a section which is not in the RFP: Section C.6.2.1.2. Reference C.6.1.3 is correct.

u. Page 150 -Exhibit A, CORL A013, Block 5. References Section C.6.4.6.1 which is not a section in the RFP. References C.6.2.4 is correct.

v. Page 151- Exhibit A, CORL A014, Block 5. References Section C.6.4.6.1 which is not a section in the RFP. References C.6.2.4 is correct.

w. Page 153 - Exhibit A, CORL A017, Block 5. Missing contract references Sections C.7.2.3, C. 7.3.4, C.7.4.1, and C.7.4.3. References Section C.7.5.1 which is not a section in the RFP. Reference C. 7 .3.3 is correct.

x Page 154- Exhibit A CORL A018 Block 5 Missing contract reference Section C 7 4 1 References Section C 7 5 1 which is not a section in the RFP m-x. All referenced CDRLs will be reviewed prior to release of the RFP.

a. The "Instructions" tab has instructions for all tabs with the exception of the "Suggested OOCs" tab. Where would we document any items for the OOC category "Other"?

b. Per the Draft RFP Section C.1.5.2, work is to be performed in Washington. Are we to include our Washington state taxes in the OOC "Other" category?

L.4.1.3(a) Performance of Total Package Fielding activities as outlined in Section C.6.1 for platoon, company, battalion, or brigade sets of military ground combat or tactical vehicles of multiple variants.

1. What topics in section C should we address, specifically? Should we address the entire PWS/Section C?

L.4.1.3(b) Perform full vehicle OPNET and Maintenance training, as outlined in Section C.6.2 of the Scope of Work, on military ground combat or tactical vehicles at multiple Garrison locations, concurrently, on at least 50 vehicles of multiple variants, in a 12 month period.

2. What topics in section C should we address, specifically? Should we address the entire PWS/Section C?

L.4.1.3(c) General Maintenance (both Scheduled and Unscheduled) that involved the knowledge and use of technical manuals or IETMS, of at least 350 automotive vehicles of multiple variants, performed at multiple locations concurrently, both within the United States and internationally across a 12 month period.

3. What topics in section C should we address, specifically? Should we address the entire PWS/Section C?

The government updated Section L.4.1.3 to specify what activities, at a minimum, the bidder's proposal must address.

All Questions Received