W56HZV-23-R-0025 RFP QUESTIONS_ANSWERS.docx

W56HZV-23-R-0025

Questions & Answers

26 MAY 2023

1. QUESTION: Can you confirm if a “Contract Data Requirements List” will be provided?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: No Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) list necessary except for delivery schedule.

2. QUESTION: Regarding page 63 item G: “The Contractor is responsible for providing operating and maintenance instructions, spare parts support, and repair of the first article during any first article test.” With the TDP being provided by the government, will it be required of the contractor to provide operating and maintenance instructions?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: In accordance with 52.209-4(g), the Contractor is responsible for providing operating and maintenance during any first article test.

3. QUESTION: Block 9 on the SF33 does not have a due date and time for submission of offers. On SAM.Gov it has June 7, 2023 at 12:00am. What is the correct date/time for submissions and will the RFP be amended?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Yes, the solicitation has been amended, and the due date remains 2023 JUN 07 at 12:00am.

4. QUESTION: The RFP has CLINs 0011, 0012, 0013, 0014, 0015 and 0016. In the body of the RFP CLIN 0011 Is listed for a quantity of 82 and CLIN 0016 for a quantity of 1 (also called First Article Test). Section F has delivery broken out by CLIN this way however in Section I-92 (a) states that 1 unit (s) of Lot/Item 0011 within 60 calendar days from the date of this contract. This is in conflict with Sections A2, F-2. Both of these have the First Article item called out separately at 120 days out of CLIN 0016. Which paragraph is correct?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: FAR Clause 52.209-4 has been corrected in Solicitation Amendment 001 and has changed from 60 to 120 days.

5. QUESTION: Section M.2(a)(1) This paragraph is missing several CLINs for the total price. As written only CLINs 0011, 0012, 0013, and 0014 are listed. The RFP has CLINs 0011, 0012, 0013, 0014, 0015, and 0016. Is the intent to not evaluate the price for CLINs 0015 and 0016 or is this something to be amended? The paragraph also states FAT EVALUATION CRITERIA for additional information pertaining to CLIN 0014, and see M.4. As written CLIN 0014 is the Fourth Ordering Year and not the First Article Test CLIN. Will this be corrected? Also M.4 is titled OFFER REJECTION and not FAT EVALUATION CRITERIA. IS there a FAT EVALUATION CRITERIA or is this something to be corrected?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Please see Solicitation Amendment 001 for corrected Section M criteria.

6. QUESTION: I see the Inspection and Acceptance is at Origin and you want us to include the cost of shipping of the parts to Sumner, WA. Will you be evaluating the cost of shipping? This would be an unfair evaluation item as shipping would be different depending on your distance from Sumner, WA. Is there a way to break out the cost of shipping separate and not be included in the overall evaluation of price? Also, with acceptance at origin would we be allowed to invoice at acceptance for the total price including shipping? As no other acceptance is occurring at destination there is no other means for us to be reimbursed.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Delivery terms is FOB Destination. All Shipping costs shall be included in the overall proposal price. Inspection and Acceptance is at Origin therefore, Contractor must contact the Defense Contracting Management Agency (DCMA) to arrange for Government inspection and acceptance prior to the items shipped. Payment instructions are to be followed in accordance with DFARS 252.232-7006 as indicated in the solicitation.