PFD Solicitation Questions_AnswersRev3.docx
DOCX document 21 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Parachutist Flotation Device (PFD)
- Solicitation number
- W911QY-20-R-0010_PFD
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 61 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
28 May 2020
Category 1 – Functional Overlaps between CLIN 1092 (Completed TDP) and CLIN 1030 (Data Rights)
The completed TDP required for CLIN 1092 is required to be sufficient to use for future competitive procurement purchases, and should be definitized “to the extent necessary for a competent manufacturer to produce an item, which duplicates the physical, interface, and functional characteristics of the original product”.
CLIN 1030 requires pricing for the grant of Government Purpose Rights in and to the technical data (which the Government may or may not exercise, at its discretion).
Given the TDP would allow the Government and any ‘competent manufacturer’ to whom the TDP is distributed to replicate the offeror’s system, and given the TDP is to be delivered ‘with Government Purpose Rights (Paragraph C.5.1.3 and H-4), pricing has to assume that it will include the grant of Government Purpose Rights to the Government under the sale of the TDP pursuant to CLIN 1092.
I. Is it the Government’s intent for the TDP (to be delivered under CDRL A020 CLIN 1092) to include Government Purpose Rights in accordance with DFARs 252.227-7013 (as stated in paragraph C.5.1.3) regardless whether the Government chooses to exercise CLIN 1030?
Answer: No. Payment of CLN 1030 creates the GPR in the TDP prior to which either, e.g., 252.227-7013 or a properly prepared and accepted data rights assertion in response to 252.227-7013, 7014 or 7017 that the TDP is delivered at less than unlimited rights would control.
II. Or is it such that CLIN 1092 is intended to be the price to prepare and deliver the TDP without Government Purpose Rights acquired and CLIN 1030 is to be the price for the Government to acquire Government Purpose Rights?
Answer: Correct.
III. If (II) is the intent, does the Government assure it will not use the TDP for the purposes of any future competitive acquisitions of the PFD system without entering a separate agreement to purchase such rights, or by exercising the right to purchase such rights under CLIN 1030?
Answer: The government is bound by 18 USC 1905 which is evidenced by any properly prepared data rights assertion (see above question I).
Category 2 – Scope and Pricing for CLIN 1030 (Data Rights)
CLIN 1030 requests pricing for the Government’s acquisition of Government Purpose Data Rights in and to the technical data. Government Purpose data rights extend for 5 years and then convert under the applicable clause to Unlimited Rights.
I. Is it anticipated the pricing to be entered at CLIN 1030 should cover whatever price the contractor wishes to charge for both the Government Purpose and subsequent Unlimited Rights in the technical data?
Answer: The premise that this changes from GPR to Unlimited Rights is incorrect. The H-clause while having a typo is intended to define GPR under 252.227-7013(a)[13] (not (a)(12)) which does not incur the change from GPR to Unlimited Rights reflected in 252.227-7013(b)(2).
II. If (I) is correct, does the Government anticipate the contractor is to determine a price for the outright sale of the technical data, and then calculate and reflect that total as a per-unit price over the life of the contract, which would yield an inverse relationship between Units and Price-Per-Unit in Stepladder Pricing (e.g. $100,000 for 1 unit in Block 1 of the Stepladder on page 11, $13.33 for 7,501 units in Block 2, etc.)?
Answer: See Category 2, I answer above.
III. Would the Government consider extending the terms for Government Purpose Rights to a period beyond the 5 years in the clause and then eliminating the follow-on Unlimited Rights Provision?
Answer: See Category 2, I answer above.
IV. While the solicitation provides that the Government will enter a Use and Non-Disclosure Agreement with any third parties to whom it distributes technical data, does the Government intend to continue entering such agreements after receiving Unlimited Rights?
Answer: This not a relevant question (see above I) unless a data rights assertion is filed asserting that the Gov’t has GPR. If a data rights assertion is filed asserting that Gov’t has GPR then after 5 years and under DFARS prescription (227.7103(7), the Gov’t would no longer be required to enter into a Use and Non-Disclosure Agreement with any third parties once it has Unlimited Rights to any technical data.
Category 3 – Patent Coverage and Limitations
There are two clauses incorporated into the solicitation, DFAR 252.227-7013 (Rights in Technical Data – Noncommercial Items) and FAR 52.227-14 (Rights in Data – General) for which it is not completely clear whether Patent Rights would be covered under each.
****************FAR 52.227-14 is being removed from this solicitation.
In 252.227-7013, there is no reference to any exception to patent rights; in 52.227-14, subparagraph (i) indicates that “Nothing contained in this clause shall imply a license to the Government under any patent or be construed as affecting the scope of any license or other right otherwise granted to the Government.”
| I. | If a technology to be offered is covered by any patents (either issued or pending), does the Government intend by the provisions of this solicitation to receive license under such patents? |
| II. | If (I) is correct, |
| a. | does the Government accept that such license(s) would be limited to any extent? |
| b. | does the Government intend to enter license agreements with the patent holder(s)? |
| c. | does the Government expect to pay further license fees for such patent licenses? |
Category 4 – Pricing of Revisions and/or Additions to Data
The solicitation anticipates that if during the course of the contract further developments or improvements to the PFD are realized, the contractor will provide such further developments or improvements to the Government in the deliverables under the contract.
I. If these developments or improvements are made at private expense, is it anticipated the contractor can charge for their inclusion in the deliverables?
Answer: A properly filed data rights assertion based on new information or inadvertent omissions may be made in accordance with 252.227-7013(e)(3) (after award). It is not anticipated that either of the foregoing occur, therefore, the contractor is pricing CLIN 1030 to cover GPR in a complete finalized TDP (deliverable under CLIN 1092) and development is covered under the contract pricing as provided for in 252.227-7013. Alternatively, negotiations may ensue to discuss such a contingency.
II. Does the Government expect these developments or improvements to be included in the Final TDP CRDL Report?
Answer: See Category 4, I answer above.
III. If (II) is accurate, will the Government permit an increase in the price for CLIN 1092 when such additions are made?
Answer: See Category 4, I answer above.
IV. Does the Government expect to receive rights under CLIN 1030 for these developments or improvements?
Answer: See Category 4, I answer above.
V. If (IV) is accurate, will the Government permit an increase in the price for CLIN 1030 when such additions are made?
Answer: See Category 4, I answer above.
Category 5 – Data Rights Assertion Chart
Clause 252.227-7013 contains, at subparagraph (e)(2), the data rights assertion chart.
I. May a contractor provide data rights assertions under that chart and still be deemed to be responsive under the solicitation?
Answer: The contractor must comply with DFARS 252.227-7017 which will be incorporated into the solicitation. This covers data rights assertions made prior to contract award. DFARS 252.227-7013(e)(3) covers data rights assertions made after award and a properly filed data rights assertion can only be based on new information or inadvertent omissions may be made after contract award.
a. May the contractor offer less than the rights requested by the terms of the solicitation?
Answer: No – the contractor may not offer less than the rights requested.
b. May the contractor except all patent rights from any transfer of technical data under the contract?
Answer: This is inapplicable to this contract as FAR 52.227-14 will be removed from the contract vehicle.
c. May a contractor except the conversion of the Government Purpose Rights to Unlimited Rights under the contract?
Answer: This not a relevant question unless a data rights assertion is filed asserting that the Gov’t has GPR. If a data rights assertion is filed asserting that Gov’t has GPR then after 5 years and under DFARS prescription (227.7103(7), the Gov’t would no longer be required to enter into a Use and Non-Disclosure Agreement with any third parties once it has Unlimited Rights to any technical data.
27 May 2020
1) On Page 87, Section L.2.3.2.1, Section 1 Management, Manufacturing, Para 2 it states that offerors need to include “current and historical working quality documentation demonstrating:
· Management Commitment
· Control of Documents
· Human Resources (Training)
· Internal Auditing
· Improvements (Corrective Action, Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement)”
Our company quality documents pertaining to these 5 categories are more than 25 pages in length alone. Can these documents we submitted perhaps in a volume II appendix such that they won’t count against the 25 page limit? If not how can we go about submitting this company documentation with our bid?
Answer: Offerors must adhere to the 25 page limit. If the offeror would like to refer to charts, graphs, tables, photos, etc. in Volume II of their proposal, these may be included as a reference in a volume II appendix. No text will be evaluated in the appendix.
2) Our Quality Management System (QMS) is not currently certified by an accredited 3rd party, however, we are willing to go through the certification process if it is a requirement for the contract. Is 3rd party certification of our QMS a requirement for contract award? Will our proposal receive a rating of “Unacceptable” or "Marginal" for not meeting the requirement to "present a 3rd party certification document" with our proposal since we are not currently certified and are unable to include a 3rd party certification document in our proposal?
Answer: 3rd party certification of the QMS is a requirement. Contractors without certification will be evaluated "Unacceptable" and will not be included in the competitive range.
21 May 2020
1) We need to know when the Log Demo will be scheduled and cannot find it. How many days after IDIQ should/will the Log Demo be scheduled?
Answer: 105 days after contract award, and two days of contractor support.
2) D-7 – Unique Identification (UID) Requirements - We’ve reviewed the referenced FAR/DFAR 211-274-6(a), 252.211-7003, and 252-211-7006; there are several applicable options for which we are seeking clarification.
Is Radio Frequency Identification required at the item, carton, and/or pallet level?
Answer: No, the proposed individual dollar value per PFD will not exceeds threshold for this requirement, but at a minimum, RFID/UID are on the pallets and shipping boxes. The shipping information should be included in the Peckham Shipping instructions. (See attached)
3) C.12.2 – Lot Traceability - Section C.12.2 Lot Traceability directs contractors to “maintain complete and accurate records of the system serial numbers that correspond to each lot produced…”.
Will the Government provide an example of or guidance to the serialization composition and format required?
Answer: No, there are several types of serial numbering systems that can meet this requirement. It is key that product traceability from the end product back through supplier or operator is maintained to reduce product nonconformance inspection.
4) C.8.1– Quality Management Systems (QMS) / C.8.1 and General / L.2.3.2.1 – Proposal Submission Instructions Section C.8.1 states “The contractor shall maintain, operate and continually improve a QMS acceptable to the government in accordance with ISO 9001:2015 or equivalent.”
Section E-1.1 states “Any exceptions to ISO 9001:2015 shall be clearly stated.”
L.2.3.2.1 states “The offerors shall present a 3rd party certification document” in reference to “Proposals shall describe, in detail, the offeror’s Quality Management System (QMS).”
One can infer an inconsistency between these statements; can the Government clarify if 3rd party certification of the QMS is required?
Answer: The supplier will be rated from what is requested in section L of the contract. We are requesting that suppliers meet a 3rd party audit and provide some detailed information to help support their quality system management commitment. There seems to be a consistent overarching theme.
5) Several events, timelines and obligations are triggered after or upon “contract award”.
On the Required Delivery Schedule table (page 45), Time of Delivery is stated as some number of days “after IDIQ award” for several CLINs.
Section C-7.1 states “The contractor shall attend and participate in a technical conference with government contracting and program management technical personnel to be conducted within 30 days after contract award [...]” Section E-1.1 states “After contract award the government will visit the offeror’s manufacturing site to perform an audit of the facility and its manufacturing processes including Process, Logistics, and Quality Management System (QMS)”.
Can the Government clarify whether the references to “After contract award” in sections C-7.1 and E-1.1 is synonymous with the phrasing “after IDIQ award” used in the Required Delivery Schedule?
Answer: After contract award is synonymous with after IDIQ award.
6) As you are no doubt aware, there is an awful lot to do in response to this solicitation in a relatively short time. Could you please extend the due date? Another month would allow us, and the other offerors, sufficient time to properly address all the items required Answer: The government is not extending the solicitation due date at this time.
15 May 2020
1) Is an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) required with the proposal submission?
Answer-Yes
a. If so, for what period? (e.g., year 1 only[?] since that has most of the items and years 2-5 are the same production activities).
Answer-For the duration of the contract.
b. At what level of detail?
Answer-Sufficient to outline what the vendor determines are critical tasks and milestones affecting and driving the proposed schedule.
2) For the final production product, will manuals need to printed as hard copies or is electronic version all that is required?
a. If hard copy printing is needed, how many manuals will need to be printed?
Answer: From CDRL A003- The First, Second, and FRC submissions may be delivered to the Government representative electronically. Each submission shall be sent with a letter of transmittal on Contractor letterhead with appropriate signature blocks completed and will be considered a draft until accepted by the Government.
3) Since the solicitation talks about all things required throughout the entire lifecycle of this contract, at times it is difficult to determine exactly what you want delivered with the proposal submission. For example, some things are only relevant at the Design Validation (DV) phase and the same thing for the Development Testing and Operational Testing DT/OT) phase. Can you please provide a checklist of what items are currently required for each of the five Volumes?
Answer: Please follow the general instructions in Section L.
4) How many offerors will be selected to proceed to the Design Validation (DV) phase?
Answer: There is no set number of offerors that will be determined to be in the competitive range for DV.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .