A-KIT DRAFT RFP QUESTIONS and REPONSES (07282020).pdf

DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)

W58RGZ-20-R-0063

QUESTIONS FROM INDUSTRY GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

I’m not sure how to interpret this statement in the DRFP –“The Army Contracting Command Redstone Arsenal, AL intends to issue Small Business Set-Aside solicitation restricted to small businesses located in the Huntsville-Decatur-Albertville Combined Statistical Area as defined in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Bulletin No. 18-04, dated 14 September 2018, for manufacture of hardware” Does this mean that the actual manufacturing must be done within the designated Statistical Area or does the SB have to be headquartered within that area or can the SB simply have an office presence within that area?

The Contract Awardee must be located and final kitting, inspection, and acceptance must be done within the Huntsville-Decatur- Albertville Combined Statistical Area as defined in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Bulletin No. 18-04.

On the subject draft RFP, we work with a few different contract manufacturers in the Tennessee Valley that would be excellent at fulfilling parts of the requirement. Are you open to evaluating a proposal from an integrator/contract manager that is using multiple suppliers within the geographic parameters to fulfill the contract?

The Contract Awardee must be located and final kitting, inspection, and acceptance must be done within the Huntsville-Decatur-Albertville Combined Statistical Area as defined in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Bulletin No. 18-04.

If there is an incumbent for this contract can the Government provide the incumbent contract number?

There is not one incumbent. Some of the kits have been bought at production level quantities on the following. Each order was competed.

W58RGZ-19-D-0045, Delivery Order W58RGZ20F0011 W58RGZ-13-D-0047, Delivery Order 0014; Delivery Order 0043; Delivery Order W58RGZ19F0032

Can the Government please provide clarification for the special characters throughout the solicitation? For example, on page 102 under Volume III, it states, "Each volume and attached documents shall be formatted for print on 8 / 'bd x 11 paper."

The Contract Writing system used to prepare RFPs/Contracts occasionally inserts artifacts. ‘bd is an example of such an artifact. The RFP will be updated to spell out numbers or other instances where artifacts appear.

Is it the Government's intent to cover shipping costs through a TAC code or other means? If not, will the Government allow an additional cost reimbursable CLIN for shipping costs?

It is the Government’s intent to provide the specific ship-to address along with the transportation accounting code (TAC) in the individual delivery orders.

Section A states "Should the Government in less than 30 days from the last order's issuance, require more of the same Kit part number, the contractor shall offer the Government the range benefit of combining the latest issuance quantity with the new requirement." Does this 30 day window extend only from the placement of the first order in a window? For example if the USG places an order for four kits, and 20 days later another five the 30 day window does not open again and allow further additions, but rather ends 30 days from the initial order of four, or ten days from the order of five (20+10=30) in the above example.

This 30 day window extends only from the placement of the initial order.

The provided ranges will likely increase the government's cost in the lower range, due to the Contractor accounting for the risk involved in such a wide range including very low quantities. Material minimum buys and the effort to setup a production run for 1-10 kits significantly increases unit costs compared to higher quantities. For the Government to receive the best pricing we recommend ranges of 1, 2-10, 11-20, 20+.

Thank you for your input. The USG will consider your suggestion given the USG’s intent to procure these A-kits for fielding.

Which part numbers will require Serialization?

The top level A-kit is the only part number requiring serialization.

Please confirm CLINs 1021 & 1022 are for UH-60Ms, page 2 describes them as HH-60M kit CLINs.

Page 2 is incorrect. CLINs 1021 and 1022 should be UH- 60M AWIS. The RFP will be updated.

Does the Government intend to award the PCA CLINs at any time other than the base contract period?

A specific PCA CLIN will be awarded at the same time as the corresponding A-Kit CLIN. This could happen throughout the entire 5-year contract period, not only in the base year. The RFP will be updated to include fill-ins for pricing of PCAs in each ordering period.

Will all PCA CLINs be awarded upon award of the IDIQ? The first delivery order to be issued concurrently with the basic contract will not award all of the PCA CLINs. A specific PCA CLIN could be awarded at any time throughout the 5-year contract period if it hasn’t been previously ordered.

Will the government provide all material marked as GFE in the TDP to the Contractor during Delivery Order execution?

The contractor does not need to provide any material marked as GFM in the TDP. Specific GFM may be provided to the contractor for inclusion in the kit or sent directly to the unit. The SOW lists additional items not identified as GFM in the TDP that will be provided as

GFM.

Given that this is a small business set aside contract, for Firm Fixed Price orders, please add clauses DFARS 252.232-7004 DoD Progress Payment Rates. (DEVIATION 2020-O0010-Revision 1) and FAR 52.232-16 Progress Payments. (DEVIATION 2020-O0010-Revision 1).

Final RFP will reflect the addition/inclusion of clauses, as applicable to RFP.

Please add clause 52.249-14 Excusable Delays to the contract clauses Final RFP will reflect the addition/inclusion of clauses, as applicable to RFP.

CLIN 1015 (A-KIT COLLECTOR AWIS, CH-47F) and CLIN 1016 (PCA, A-KIT COLLEC-TOR AWIS, CH-47F) both reference PN WTG00093-

001. The drawing for that PN was not included in TDP 1. Will the Government please provide the drawing for PN WTG00093-001?

For the Draft RFP, the USG only provided a couple of TDPs which are representative of the types of A-kits to be procured. All TDPs will be included with the release of the final RFP.

For a streamlined acquisition outcome with no additional risk or cost, we recommend that you consider awarding this program as a sole source award to {Company Name Removed} under the 8(a) program. Our request is supported by FAR 19.800(e), which states: “For actions above the simplified acquisition threshold, the Contracting Officer shall consider 8(a) set asides or sole source awards before considering small business set asides” and DFARS 219.803(2), which states: “Before considering a small business set aside, review the acquisition for offering under the 8(a) Program”

All reviews and considerations will be made, as applicable and supported by the FAR and DFAR, with consideration to performance and capability driving USG discretion.