FA8003-19-R-A007_Helmets_RFP_Amendment_0001.pdf

FA8003-19-R-A007 Next Gen Ballistic Helmets Request for Proposal (RFP) with Amendment 0001

Request for Proposal (RFP)

Amendment 0001

Requirement Title: Next Gen Ballistic Helmets

Solicitation Number: FA8003-19-R-A007

Solicitation Issue Date: Thursday, 15 August 2019

Amendment 0001 Issue Date: Wednesday, 21 August 2019

Response Deadline: Thursday, 29 August 2019 Tuesday, 03 Sep 2019 no later than 5:00 PM EST

Contract Specialist (CS): Aubrey Frost / aubrey.frost.l@us.af.mil

Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO): Vanessa Russell-Reed / vanessa.russell-reed@us.af.mil

AMENDMENT INFORMATION

RFP Amendment 0001:

1. The purposes of RFP Amendment 0001 are to:

a. Update the proposal due date from 29 Aug 2019 to 03 Sep 2019 (time remains the same).

b. Update the Addendum to FAR Provision 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial

Items, as follows:

i. Section I.D.: Updated the due date for RFP questions from 21 Aug 2019 to 23 Aug

2019 (time remains the same).

ii. Section I.G.: Replaced AMRDEC SAFE with DoD SAFE.

iii. Section II.B.1.a.: Replaced page 7 with page 8.

iv. Section II.B.2.b.i.: Added section regarding if Offeror’s proposed helmet is not listed on the United States Air Force (USAF) Approved for Use List (AUL).

v. Section II.C.1.: Replaced AMRDEC SAFE with DoD SAFE.

c. Add an area to the Offeror Information section for the Offeror to acknowledge RFP Amendment 0001.

d. Update the Addendum to FAR Provision 52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items, as follows:

i. Section II.B.2. Measure of Merit: Added verbiage regarding if Offeror’s proposed helmet is not listed on USAF AUL.

2. Changes to the above areas of the RFP are shown in red font.

GENERAL INFORMATION

1. This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued.

2. This solicitation is being issued as a Request for Proposal (RFP).

mailto:aubrey.frost.l@us.af.mil mailto:vanessa.russell-reed@us.af.mil

3. This RFP document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect through:

Federal Acquisition Circular 2019-03 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Public Notice 20190628 Air Force Federal Acquisition Circular 2018-0525

4. This acquisition is set-aside for 100% Small Business Concerns.

5. The North American Industry Size Classification System (NAICS) Code associated with this requirement is 339113, Surgical Appliance and Supplies Manufacturing.

6. The Small Business Size Standard associated with the above NAICS Code is 750 Employees.

REQUIREMENT INFORMATION

Description:

As the battlefield shifts and asymmetric threats become more prevalent, Security Forces (SF) defenders require the most modernized equipment available. Standardization across SF Squadrons, through procurement of high-cut helmets that meet/exceed the Air Force's technical requirements (salient characteristics), will assure that the SF defender is outfitted in the most modem, comfortable, and effective protective equipment available while also assuring a consistent helmet style across all Contiguous United States (CONUS) and Outside the Contiguous United States (OCONUS) Air Force Bases (AFBs).

The Air Force Security Forces Center (AFSFC) has requested that the Air Force Installation Contracting Center's (AFICC) 771st Enterprise Sourcing Squadron (ESS) at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio provide a contract vehicle for the enterprise-wide purchase of an advanced combat helmet (ACH) that meets the evolved need by utilizing the most advanced technologies available in the marketplace that have been developed to provide better protection and safety for SF defenders while enhancing/improving performance.

The current requirement is for a total of 24,300 helmets to replace those currently in use.

The Next Gen Ballistic Helmets enterprise sourcing effort will provide for a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) Single Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract vehicle for AFSFC that will supply approximately 8,100 standardized ballistic helmets (and associated helmet covers) per year over a three (3) year ordering period (no options), starting at the date of contract award and ending three years after the date of contract award, to both CONUS and OCONUS SF Squadrons. The minimum quantity for all orders issued against this contract shall not be less than 7,500 and the maximum quantity for all orders issued against this contract shall not exceed 24,300. Delivery orders will start in fiscal year (FY) 2019 and continue through FY 2022. Delivery orders will be placed by AFICC 771 ESS as requested by AFSFC, most likely on an annual basis, which will ensure standardization of helmets procured for SF defenders across the Air Force.

Delivery/Shipping/FOB Point/Acceptance:

a. Helmets will be shipped/delivered directly to SF Squadrons at various CONUS/OCONUS AFBs, whose addresses will be identified on the delivery orders using separately identified subline items under the appropriate contract line item numbers (CLINs).

b. The Contractor shall notify the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) of any delay in meeting the agreed upon delivery requirements; however, any allowance of a delay in delivery does not change the contract's terms and conditions.

c. All shipping associated with the purchase of helmets/covers will be FOB Destination.

d. The Contractor shall be responsible for tracking all product shipments to their final destination.

e. The Contractor shall have a tracking system that includes the date shipped, carrier, tracking number, contracted delivery date, and actual date received.

f. The Contractor shall include a copy of or reference the Delivery Order Number with each shipment.

g. All items furnished by the Contractor will be considered a deliverable item and shall be Government property upon acceptance of the item.

h. The planned delivery location schedule can be found at Attachment 5 to this RFP.

Ordering Periods:

(Note: Awarded IDIQ contract will indicate actual dates based on date of IDIQ contract award)

1. Date of IDIQ contract award through one year later

2. One-year anniversary date of IDIQ contract award through one year later

3. Two-year anniversary date of IDIQ contract award through one year later

CLIN Structure:

Line Item Description Quantity Unit of Measure

0001 BALLISTIC HELMETS - ORDERING PERIOD 1 8,100 EACH

0002 HELMET COVERS - ORDERING PERIOD 1 8,100 EACH

0003 BALLISTIC HELMETS - ORDERING PERIOD 2 8,100 EACH

0004 HELMET COVERS - ORDERING PERIOD 2 8,100 EACH

0005 BALLISTIC HELMETS - ORDERING PERIOD 3 8,100 EACH

0006 HELMET COVERS - ORDERING PERIOD 3 8,100 EACH

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

FAR Provision 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors -- Commercial, applies to this acquisition. As prescribed in FAR 12.301(b)(l), the following addendum is provided for this solicitation and hereby amends any language therein:

I. General Proposal Submission Information

A. The following instructions cover the preparation and submittal of the Offeror’s proposal for this solicitation/Request for Proposal (RFP). The RFP consists of the formal RFP (Combined Synopsis/Solicitation document) as well as all RFP attachments. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all RFP requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the RFP terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the RFP may cause their proposal to be determined to be unacceptable and therefore not considered eligible for award. Offerors shall submit only one (1) proposal for the Next Gen Ballistic Helmets requirement as the Air Force will review only one (1) proposal per Offeror.

B. The Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition for this acquisition. Upon examination of the offers, the PCO will review this determination and if, in the PCO’s opinion, adequate price competition exists, no additional data will be requested; however, if at any time during this competition the PCO determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, other means of determining if the proposed prices are fair and reasonable will be utilized IAW FAR 15.404-1(b).

C. The points of contact (POCs) for this acquisition are as follows:

Vanessa Russell-Reed, PCO, vanessa.russell-reed@us.af.mil Aubrey Frost, Contract Specialist (CS), aubrey.frost.1@us.af.mil

If the Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the PCO and CS in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the Offeror is asking the PCO to consider as related to the error or omission.

D. Offerors must submit questions or concerns in writing via e-mail to the PCO and CS indicated above no later than 12:00 PM EST on 21 23 Aug 2019. Questions submitted after this date may not be answered. A question and answer (Q&A) document will be posted to the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website at http://www.fedbizopps.gov within a few days of the question due date listed herein for all potential Offerors to view.

E. Proposals must be submitted by the due date/time as listed at the top of the RFP. The proposal must be submitted in accordance with (IAW) Section II. C. below. By submission of a proposal, the Offeror agrees that their proposal is valid through 30 Sep 2019.

F. All referenced documents for this RFP are available on FedBizOpps. Potential Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications to receive notifications when information has been posted to the website for this RFP.

G. Exchanges of source selection information between the Air Force and Offerors will be controlled by the PCO. E-mail may be used to transmit such information only if the e-mail can be sent encrypted, and must include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104” in the subject line of the email. Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via other secure means, such as AMRDEC DoD SAFE. In order to facilitate the sending and receiving of encrypted e-mails, Offerors must use Microsoft Outlook e-mail configured to support encryption or a different e-mail product that is S/MIME compatible and configured to support encryption. If the Offeror intend to submit their source selection information via encrypted e-mail, they will need to contact the PCO prior to that first submittal in order to exchange certificates used for encryption. To ensure the process is working correctly, send a test encrypted message first (without including any source selection information). When submitting source selection information via e-mail, file suppression utilities, to include but not limited to .zip or .exe files, will not be accepted. Attachments to e-mails must be in .pdf, .doc, .docx, .xls, or .xlsx format. In the event encrypted e-mails are not working, proposal information will be transmitted via AMRDEC DoD SAFE at https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/guide.aspx https://safe.apps.mil/ to the PCO’s e-mail address.

When DoD SAFE is used, the Offeror must receive a “drop-off request” from an inside (i.e.

Government) user. The Offeror must e-mail the PCO to request a drop-off request. After the PCO mailto:vanessa.russell-reed@us.af.mil mailto:aubrey.frost.1@us.af.mil http://www.fedbizopps.gov/ https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/guide.aspx https://safe.apps.mil/ generates a drop-off request for the Offeror, the Offeror will receive an e-mail with a link to submit their drop-off.

H. The PCO will promptly notify Offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competition IAW FAR 15.503(a)(1). Upon notification of exclusion, an Offeror may request and receive a debriefing IAW the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

II. Specific Instructions:

A. Proposals must be received no later than the date and time specified at the top of this RFP.

B. The response shall consist of three (3) separate parts: Part I – Offeror Information, Part II – Technical Proposal, and Part III – Price Proposal.

1. Part I – Offeror Information

a. The Offeror shall fill out their company information on page 7 8 of the RFP document.

This includes their company name, POC, address, Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code, identification of the company name of the manufacturer of the proposed helmet, signature of the company POC who is authorized to sign for and legally bind the company to the proposal, etc. Return a copy of page 7 8 of the RFP in its entirety (or a separate one-page document that includes the same information).

b. If the Offeror will propose a helmet they do not manufacture themselves, the non-manufacturer rule will apply IAW FAR 19.102(f) and 19.502-2(c). Per the non-manufacturer rule, any concern proposing to furnish a product that it did not itself manufacture must furnish the product of a small business manufacturer unless the Small Business Administration (SBA) has granted either a waiver or exception to the non-manufacturer rule, which the SBA has not granted for ballistic helmets. The Offeror must qualify as a non-manufacturer per the criteria listed in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 13, Chapter I, Part 121, §121.406(b)(1).

2. Part II – Technical Proposal

a. General: The Offeror’s Technical proposal shall consist of a specification sheet on the proposed helmet as well as a bid sample. IAW FAR Clause 52.214-20, a bid sample is defined as a product sample that is required to be submitted by the Offeror to show characteristics of the offered product that cannot adequately be described by specifications, purchase descriptions, etc. For this acquisition, a bid sample, i.e. one (1) helmet, must be furnished as part of the Technical proposal submission. The helmet will be evaluated for both technical acceptability under Subfactor 1 and technical capability under Subfactor 2. IAW FAR 52.214-20(d)(2), the helmet will be returned to the Offeror upon their request (as submitted to the PCO) and expense.

b. Subfactor 1 – Salient Characteristic Compliance:

i. The helmet’s technical acceptability will be determined based on whether it meets (at a minimum) the Air Force’s technical requirements (a total of 11 items/salient characteristics) as listed in Attachment 1 of the RFP.

1. Regarding item #11 on the list of salient characteristics that the helmet be listed on the United States Air Force (USAF) Approved for Use List (AUL) as required by Air Force Instruction (AFI) 11-410, Personnel Parachute Operations, para. 4.3.1 and 4.4.1, the list of helmets on the current AUL can be found at Attachment 4 of the RFP for reference.

2. If the Offeror’s proposed helmet is not listed on the AUL at Attachment 4 of the RFP but the Offeror has received a letter regarding the evaluation of the helmet by the Test Parachute Program (TPP) Office at Edwards AFB, CA (which handles testing/evaluation and recommendation for approval of parachute equipment IAW AFI 11-410) stating that the helmet has been recommended to be added to the AUL, this confirmation letter should be submitted as part of the Offeror’s Technical proposal.

3. If the Offeror’s proposed helmet is not listed on the AUL at Attachment 4 of the RFP and has not been evaluated/recommended for approval by the TPP Office, the Offeror must submit a signed statement as part of their Technical proposal that if they are determined to be the successful Offeror for this effort, they understand that they must send their helmet to the TPP Office for evaluation upon notification from the PCO (after contract award). This signed statement is not to exceed one (1) page.

ii. Provide a specification sheet on the proposed helmet proving that it can meet the

Air Force’s technical requirements (salient characteristics).

1. Limited to no more than 25 pages. Pages exceeding this page limitation will not be read or evaluated, and will be removed from the proposal.

2. A page is defined as one face sheet of an 8½”x11” sheet of paper, excluding any charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, or spreadsheets, which may not exceed an 11”x17” paper.

iii. Provide one (1) bid sample (helmet).

c. Subfactor 2 – In-Field Testing Validation:

i. The helmet’s technical capability in terms of “wearability” will be determined based on the results of in-field testing using the capability criteria listed in Attachment 2 of the RFP.

ii. The helmet provided per Subfactor 1 will be the same helmet tested under Subfactor 2.

3. Part III – Price Proposal

a. The Offeror must utilize the Government-provided Pricing Matrix (Excel spreadsheet) at

Attachment 3 of the RFP.

i. Do not manipulate the spreadsheet in any way.

ii. All cells highlighted in green must be filled out by the Offeror, which consist of the unit price per helmet, to include associated shipping costs, and the unit price per helmet cover, to include associated shipping costs, for each of the three (3) ordering periods, for a total of six (6) fill-ins.

iii. The Pricing Matrix will automatically calculate the total price per ordering period for both helmets and helmet covers, using the Air Force’s estimated quantities per ordering period which are included in the Pricing Matrix (Note:

The estimated quantities are projected but are not guaranteed). The total price per ordering period for both helmets and helmet covers will then automatically calculate to determine the Offeror’s total evaluated price (TEP).

b. The awarded Offeror will be bound to the unit prices they propose via this Pricing

Matrix. The indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract’s ordering periods will correspond to a one-year period starting on the date of contract award. The awarded Offeror’s unit prices will be utilized based on the ordering periods established in the IDIQ contract, i.e. Ordering Period 1 will start on the date of contract award and finish one year later, Ordering Period 2 will start on the one-year anniversary date of the contract award and finish one year later, etc.

C. The proposal submission shall be submitted to the Air Force as follows:

1. Part I (Offeror Information) and Part III (Price Proposal) shall be submitted to the PCO via e-mail or AMRDEC DoD SAFE at vanessa.russell-reed@us.af.mil. The subject line of the e-mail shall reference the RFP number of FA8003-19-R-A007.

2. Part II (Technical Proposal) shall be submitted to the Technical Team via mail/delivery service at the address below. The Technical Team is located at a separate location than the PCO, so it is imperative that the Technical proposal submission be sent to the correct location in order to ensure timely proposal evaluations. The Technical Team is located on a secure military installation so additional time for delivery due to security screening of packages that may be conducted at the military installation’s mail processing facility should be made and is the responsibility of the Offeror.

Air Force Security Forces Center Attention: MSgt Markus Nelson 1517 Billy Mitchell Blvd, Building 954 Joint Base San Antonio - Lackland, TX 78236-0119 Subject: FA8003-19-R-A007 Next Gen Ballistic Helmets mailto:vanessa.russell-reed@us.af.mil

3. Proposals received after the specified due date and time will be considered late proposals and handled IAW FAR 15.208(b)(1).

END OF ADDENDUM

OFFEROR INFORMATION

The Offeror shall fill in the information below and return one (1) copy of this page (page 7 8) with their proposal submission.

Company Name: ___________________________________________________

Address: __________________________________________________

Point of Contact: ___________________________________________

E-mail Address: ___________________________________________

Discount Terms: __________________________ Estimated Delivery: __________________________

Registered in SAM? Yes / No Business Size: ___________________________________________

CAGE Code: __________________ DUNS Number: __________________ TIN: __________________

Helmet Manufacturer’s Company Name: _________________________________________________

Acknowledgement of RFP Amendment 0001: ________________ (Initial)

Signature: __________________________________________________ Date: ____________________

Printed Name: ___________________________________________

EVALUATION CRITERIA

FAR Provision 52.212-2, Evaluation -- Commercial Items, applies to this acquisition. As prescribed in FAR 12.301(c), the following addendum is provided for this solicitation and hereby amends any language therein:

I. Basis for Contract Award

A. Source Selection Methodology: This acquisition will utilize Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 12, Acquisition of Commercial Items, in conjunction with selected procedures from FAR Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation. The Air Force will limit the application of FAR Part 15 policies and processes to the maximum extent allowed to create the greatest efficiencies under FAR Part 12. The tradeoff process will be utilized for this source selection in accordance with (IAW) FAR 15.101-1 and 15.3, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS)

215.300 and the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS) Mandatory Procedures 5315.3, to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. The tradeoff process will be utilized because it may be in the best interest of the Air Force to award to other than the lowest priced Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror. The Air Force intends to award one (1) contract to one (1) Small Business Concern as a result of this RFP. In using the best value approach, the Air Force seeks to award to the Offeror who give the Air Force the greatest confidence that it will best meet or exceed the Air Force’s requirements affordably in a way that will be advantageous to the Air Force. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced Offeror where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) reasonably determines that the technical superiority of the higher priced Offeror outweighs the price difference. To arrive at a best value decision, the SSA will integrate the source selection team’s evaluations of the factors and subfactors described in this provision. While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the tradeoff process, by its nature, is subjective;

therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the selection process. Offerors are reminded that the Government will only evaluate one (1) proposal from each Offeror. Award will be made to the Offeror whose proposal conforms to all required terms and conditions, meets all requirements set forth in the RFP, provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation as described in Section I. C. below, and who is deemed to be responsible IAW FAR Part 9, as supplemented. Contract terms and conditions consistent with customary commercial practices are specified in the RFP/contract, with otherwise tailored terms and conditions specified in the Addendum to the RFP/contract.

B. Factors, Subfactors, and Relative Importance:

1. Factors and Subfactors: A detailed and complete analysis of each Offeror’s proposal will be performed. The Government’s evaluation will be based on the factors and subfactors identified below.

Factor I: Technical

Subfactor 1: Salient Characteristic Compliance

Subfactor 2: In-Field Testing Validation

Factor II: Price

2. Relative Importance: Among the evaluation factors considered in the tradeoff decision, Technical, which includes the technical acceptability rating and technical capability rating, is considered significantly more important than Price. Within the Technical factor, the two (2) subfactors are equal in importance. If used, the tradeoff will occur between Technical Subfactor 2 and Price.

C. Award Process: By submission of its proposal, the Offeror accedes to all RFP requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. All responsive proposals will be evaluated for technical acceptability (Technical Subfactor 1) and price completeness, balance, and reasonableness. Proposals found to be technically acceptable under Technical Subfactor 1 will then be evaluated for technical capability under Technical Subfactor 2. Any tradeoffs will occur between the Technical Factor (specifically Technical Subfactor 2) and the Price Factor. Failure to meet a requirement may result in a proposal being determined technically unacceptable. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the RFP terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

1. Step 1: The Air Force will perform an initial responsiveness assessment of Part I (Offeror Information) of the proposal submission, to include verification of any active exclusions

IAW FAR 9.4, verification of the Offeror’s business size status per this acquisition’s assigned North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code of 339113 IAW FAR 4.12 and 19.102, a review of the Offeror’s representations and certifications via the System for Award Management (SAM) IAW FAR 4.12, and verification of the proposed helmet’s manufacturer’s business size to verify the Offeror’s adherence to the non-manufacturer rule (if applicable) IAW FAR 19.102(f), 19.502-2(c), and CFR Title 13, Chapter I, Part 121, §121.406(b)(1).

i. Offerors who propose a helmet manufactured by a large business will be determined not to be in compliance with the non-manufacturer rule and their proposal will not be evaluated further than Step 1.

2. Step 2: The Air Force will evaluate all responsive proposals for technical acceptability and price completeness, balance, and reasonableness. Under the Technical Factor, only helmets which are deemed technically acceptable under Subfactor 1 will be evaluated for technical capability under Subfactor 2.

3. Step 3: Upon conclusion of evaluations, the Air Force will order/sort proposals from lowest to highest price, using only those proposals which were found to be technically acceptable and technically capable and have a complete, balanced, and reasonable price.

4. Step 4: The Air Force may consider a tradeoff between the lowest priced technically acceptable/capable Offeror and the next-in-line Offeror to award to other than the lowest priced proposal if, in the Air Force’s opinion, the benefit anticipated from selecting a superior technically capable proposal (under Technical Subfactor 2) is worth the increased price.

5. Step 5: The Air Force will make a best value decision.

II. Proposal Evaluation

A. Discussions: The Government intends to award without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. Any discussions will be conducted IAW FAR 15.306.

If the PCO determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the PCO/SSA may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

B. Part I: Technical Factor

1. General:

a. The Technical proposal consists of a specification sheet on the proposed helmet as well as the bid sample (helmet). The Offeror’s Technical proposal will be evaluated using a two-phase process.

b. Phase 1 will determine the helmet’s technical acceptability based on whether it meets (at a minimum) the Air Force’s technical requirements (total of 11 items/salient characteristics) (see Attachment 1 of the RFP). If the helmet is determined to be technically acceptable, it will move on the testing under Phase 2.

c. Phase 2 will determine the helmet’s technical capability in terms of “wearability” based on the results of in-field testing using the capability criteria (see Attachment 2 of the RFP), which will serve as validation of the technical acceptability under Phase 1.

2. Phase 1 – Subfactor 1: Salient Characteristic Compliance

Description: This subfactor evaluates the salient characteristics of the Offeror’s helmet (i.e.

technical acceptability) by comparing the submitted specification sheet and helmet to the Air Force’s technical requirements per Attachment 1 of the RFP.

Measure of Merit: This subfactor is met when the Offeror submits a helmet that meets or exceeds the Government’s technical requirements (all 11 items/salient characteristics) as provided in Attachment 1 of the RFP. Regarding item #11 on the salient characteristics that the helmet must be listed on the AUL, this will be verified by reviewing the current AUL and/or coordination with the TPP Office, or receipt of the Offeror’s signed statement that they understand they must send their helmet to the TPP Office for evaluation after award. If the Offeror’s helmet is determined to be technically acceptable, the Offeror’s helmet will move on to Phase 2 of the technical evaluation process.

Rating: This subfactor will be rated on an acceptable/unacceptable (i.e. pass/fail) basis, using the ratings/definitions in the table below.

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

3. Phase 2 – Subfactor 2: In-Field Testing Validation

Description: This subfactor evaluates the “wearability” of the Offeror’s helmet (i.e. technical capability) by testing the helmet in various environments and under multiple conditions.

Measure of Merit: This subfactor is met when the Offeror’s helmet is found to have at least Satisfactory Capability in the areas of integration with components, level of fatigue/pain/discomfort, range of motion, weight variation, slippage, and overall effectiveness, per the criteria as provided in Attachment 2 of the RFP.

Rating: This subfactor will be rated using the average score of the helmet. Security Forces end users will wear the helmet during a full duty shift in the performance of their normal duties and then fill out a survey at the end of their shift. The survey has a total of 10 questions which are based on the capability criteria per Attachment 2 of the RFP covering the areas of integration with components, fatigue/pain/discomfort, range of motion, weight variation, slippage, and overall effectiveness. Each question is worth a certain amount of points. Yes/no questions will be scored as one (1) point for/per yes, zero (0) points for no.

Certain questions allow for more subjectivity from the user, e.g. for the acceptable range of motion, the scores are tied to whether the range of motion is limited (1 point), acceptable (3 points), or full (5 points), allowing for the helmet to receive more points for certain questions to identify the helmets that exceed the Government’s requirements. Justification must be provided by the end user for negative or above/below average responses in order to provide context. There are a total of 39 points possible. All survey results will be tallied using the same scoring/point system. There will be no comparison of helmets, i.e. each Security Forces end user who tests a helmet will only test one (1) helmet total. Multiple users will test each Offeror’s helmet and an even amount of tests per helmet will be conducted. The total score of each survey will be tallied, and then the average score of all surveys per helmet will be tallied, which will equate to an adjectival rating for the technical capability of the helmet, using the ratings/definitions in the table below.

Adjectival Rating Score Superior Capability 32-39 Points

Satisfactory Capability 24-31 Points Unsatisfactory Capability 0-23 Points

C. Part II – Price Factor

1. General: The Offeror’s pricing, as provided on the Government-provided Pricing Matrix at

Attachment 3 of the RFP, will be evaluated for completeness, balance, and reasonableness.

2. Completeness: A complete Pricing Matrix is one in which the Offeror has filled all required cells highlighted in green. Failure to provide complete pricing may result in a proposal being deemed incomplete and ineligible for award.

3. Balance: The Government will review the prices submitted in the Offeror’s Pricing Matrix for balance. IAW FAR 15.404-1(g), unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one (1) or more line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. Unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and could result in payment of unreasonably high prices, so separately priced line items shall be analyzed to determine if the prices are unbalanced.

Pricing may be considered unbalanced if unreasonable variances (both high and low) exist in prices per item/year. Failure to provide balanced pricing may result in a proposal being deemed ineligible for award if the PCO determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

4. Reasonableness: The Government will review the unit prices and total evaluated price

(TEP) submitted in the Offeror’s Pricing Matrix for reasonableness. Per FAR 19.202-6(a), fair market price shall be the price achieved IAW the reasonable price guidelines in FAR 15.404-1(b). Pricing may be considered unreasonable if any unit price or the TEP varies significantly from comparable prices per the application of one or more of the price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404-1(b). Failure to provide reasonable prices may result in a proposal being deemed ineligible for award. If, after receipt of proposals, the PCO determines that there is insufficient data to determine price reasonableness, Offerors may be required to submit additional data IAW FAR 15.403-3(c).

END OF ADENDUM

PROVISIONS AND CLAUSES

FAR Provision 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications -- Commercial Items with alternate I applies to this acquisition. The Offeror verifies by submission of their offer that the representations and certifications currently posted electronically at FAR 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications -- Commercial Items, have been entered or updated in the last 12 months, are current, accurate, complete, and applicable to this solicitation.

FAR Clause 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions -- Commercial Items, applies to this acquisition.

FAR Clause 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders -

- Commercial Items, applies to this acquisition. The following clauses are hereby included by reference:

52.203-6, Restrictions on Subcontractor Sales to the Government with Alternate I 52.203-13, Contractor Code of Business Ethics and Conduct 52.204-10, Reporting Executive compensation and First-Tier Subcontract Awards 52.209-6, Protecting the Government's Interest When Subcontracting with Contractors Debarred, Suspended, or Proposed for Debarment 52.209-9, Updates of Publicly Available Information Regarding Responsibility Matters 52.219-6, Notice of Total Small Business Set-Aside 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Set-Aside 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontract Plan 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting 52.222-3, Convict Labor 52.222-19, Child Labor--Cooperation with Authorities and Remedies 52.222-21, Prohibition of Segregated Facilities 52.222-26, Equal Opportunity 52.222-35, Equal Opportunity for Veterans 52.222-36, Equal Opportunity for Workers with Disabilities 52.222-37, Employment Reports on Veterans 52.222-40, Notification of Employee Rights 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking Persons 52.222-54, Employment Eligibility Verification 52.222-60, Paycheck Transparency 52.223-18, Encouraging Contractor Policies to Ban Text Messaging While Driving 52.225-13, Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases 52.232-33, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer--System for Award Management

The provisions and clauses listed below have been determined by the PCO to be necessary for this acquisition and consistent with customary commercial practices, and are hereby included by full text or by reference as prescribed. All provisions and clauses are available at http://farsite.hill.af.mil.

52.203-3, Gratuities 52.203-12, Limitation on Payments to Influence Certain Federal Transactions 52.203-13 Contractor Code of Business Ethics and Conduct 52.203-17, Contractor Employee Whistleblower Rights and Requirement to Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights 52.203-18, Prohibition on Contracting with Entities that Require Certain Internal Confidentiality Agreements or Statements -- Representation http://farsite.hill.af.mil/

52.203-19, Prohibition on Requiring Certain Internal Confidentiality Agreements or Statements 52.204-4, Printed or Copied Double-Sided on Recycled Paper 52.204-7, System for Award Management 52.204-13, System For Award Management Maintenance 52.204-16, Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting 52.204-17, Ownership or Control of Offeror 52.204-18, Commercial and Government Entity Code Maintenance 52.204-20, Predecessor of Offeror 52.204-22 Alternative Line Item Proposal 52.209-7, Information Regarding Responsibility Matters 52.209-9, Updates of Publicly Available Information Regarding Responsibility Matters 52.209-10, Prohibition on Contracting with Inverted Domestic Corporations 52.214-20, Bid Samples 52.216-19, Order Limitations

Fill-ins:

Minimum Order: $10,000 Maximum Order: $10,000,000 (Single item) $12,000,000 (Combination of items) Series of Orders: 60 calendar days Returned to ordering office: Five (5) business days

52.216-22, Indefinite Quantity Fill-in:

Not required to make deliveries after: One (1) year after the last day of the contract

52.219-28, Post-Award Small Business Program Representation 52.225-25, Prohibition on Contracting with Entities Engaging in Certain Activities or Transactions Relating to Iran --Representation and Certifications 52.232-40, Providing Accelerated Payments to Small Business Subcontractors 52.233-3, Protest After Award 52.233-4, Applicable Law for Breach of Contract Claim 52.247-34, F.o.b Destination 252.203-7000, Requirements Relating to Compensation of Former DoD Officials 252.203-7002, Requirement to Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights 252.203-7003, Agency Office of the Inspector General 252.203-7005, Representation Relating to Compensation of Former DOD Officials 252.204-7003, Control of Government Personnel Work Product 252.204-7015, Notice of Authorized Disclosure of Information for Litigation Support 252.205-7000, Provision of Information to Cooperative Agreement holders 252.209-7004, Subcontracting with Firms that are Owned or Controlled by the Government of a Country that is a State Sponsor of Terrorism 252.211-7003, Item Identification & Valuation 252.211-7008, Use of Government Assigned Serial Numbers 252.215-7007, Notice of intent to Resolicit 252.215-7008, Only One Offer 252.216-7006, Ordering

Fill-ins:

Date of contract award Three (3) years after date of contract award

252.217-7027, Contract Definitization 252.223-7008, Prohibition on Hexavalent Chromium

252.225-7001, Buy American Act and Balance of Payments Program 252.225-7002, Qualifying Country Sources as Subcontractors 252.225-7012, Preference for Certain Domestic Commodities 252.225-7048, Export Controlled Items 252.226-7001, Utilization of Indian Organizations, Indian-Owned Economic Enterprises, and Native Hawaiian Small Business Concerns 252.232-7003, Electronic Submission of Payment Requests and Receiving Reports 252.232-7006, Wide Area WorkFlow Payment Instructions

Fill-ins:

Document type: Combo Invoice Pay Official DoDAAC: F87700 Issue by DoDAAC: FA8003 Inspect by DoDAAC: F2MTCW

252.232-7010, Levies on Contract Payments 252.243-7002, Request for Equitable Adjustment 252.244-7000, Subcontracts for Commercial Items 252.247-7023, Transportation of Supplies by Sea 5352.201-9101, Ombudsman

Fill-in:

Air Force Installation Contracting Center (AFICC)/KP Director 1940 Allbrook Dr Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433

(937) 257-5529

5352.223-9000, Elimination of Use of Class I Ozone Depleting Substances

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 - Salient Characteristics (Tech Subfactor 1) Attachment 2 - Capability Criteria (Tech Subfactor 2) Attachment 3 - Pricing Matrix Attachment 4 - Helmets on Approved for Use List Attachment 5 - Delivery Location Schedule