FA8056-17-R-0001_Final_RFP_posted_01_26_17.docx

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FINAL RFP Q & A

A. Specifications Date Posted On FBO

1. Question: The fabric specification for the Proximity garments and gear (1.5.4 on Attachment 3 - Proximity tab) is an Elmendorf Tear Strength Test – it states a result “no greater than”; we believe this should be listed as “no less than”. Can you please confirm?

Answer: Attachment 3, Tab B, Section 1.5.4 now states “1.5.4. Elmendorf Tear Strength (ASTM D1424). The fabric shall have an Elmendorf Tear Strength score of no less than 6.5 lbs (Wales) and 5.5lbs (Courses) for initial testing.”

2. Question: Attachment 3, FES PPE Ensemble Product Category Specifications, TAB-C Hoods, Sections 1.3.2 & 2.3.2 Seam Burst Strength, for the Firefighter and Instructor Hoods states: “The fabric seam burst strength shall be greater than 599.” A seam burst strength of 599 N is extremely high and more than 3 times the NFPA 1971-2013 standard for knit hood seams used to manufacture stretchable hoods and more in line with the standard used for non-stretch woven garments like the Structural and Proximity garments. Interestingly there are no fabric seam burst strengths specified in Attachment 3 for the TAB-A Structural Garments and TAB-B Proximity Garments, which would default to the NFPA requirement referenced below. Please confirm that the fabric seam burst strength for the hoods in Attachment 3 should match the NFPA standard for knit hoods?

From NFPA 1971-2013:

Section 7.13.9: “Knit hood seams shall be tested for seam strength as specified in Section 8.14. Seam-Breaking Strength Test, and shall have a burst strength of not less than 181 N (40 lbf).

Section 7.1.13.1 states: “Woven garment seam assemblies and specimens of seam assemblies that contain at least one woven material shall demonstrate a sewn seam strength equal to or greater than 667 N (150 lbf) for Major A seams, 334 N (75 lbf) force for Major B seams, and 180 N (40 lbf) force for Minor seams when tested using the method specified in 8.14.3.2.1.

Section 7.1.13.3: “All knit or stretch woven garment seam assemblies shall demonstrate a sewn strength equal to or greater than 180 N (40 lbf) when tested using the method specified in 8.14.3.2.2”.

Answer: The Government has determined the fabric seam burst strength for hoods shall exceed NFPA minimums to increase durability.

3. Question: There is a conflict between Attachment 3, TAB-B Proximity Garments specifications and NFPA 1971-2013 requirements regarding the pant cuff reinforcement size. The USAF specification requires at least 1” outside cuff reinforcement while the NFPA standard requires no more than 1” outside cuff reinforcement which results in a zero tolerance for manufacturing the cuff reinforcements. We believe this maybe an oversight by using portions of the structural requirement specification to make the proximity requirements. Please confirm that the NFPA standard should be used over the USAF specification?

From Attachment 3:

“3.10. Pant Cuff Reinforcements. Pant cuffs shall be reinforced with Ara-shield® or equivalent. The cuff reinforcements shall be black in color and not be less than 2-inches in total width and folded in half so that approximately one half is inside and one half is outside of the leg cuff.” - We read this to be not less than 1” outside.

From NFPA 1971:

“6.3.3 Reinforcing materials that do not meet the radiant reflective requirements specified in 7.3.2 shall be permitted to be affixed only to the garment outer shell radiant reflective surfaces as reinforcement of the sleeve cuffs and trouser leg cuffs where the following requirements are met:

• Reinforcement areas shall not cover the radiant reflective surfaces of the garment by more than 25 mm (1 in.) when measured from the edge of the cuff back along the sleeve or leg.” NFPA states not more than 1” outside.

Answer: The word “approximately” in Tab-B, 2.7. & 3.10. was intentionally included and should be interpreted as Government acceptance of “off center within reason” to allow manufacturers to meet both the NFPA and USAF requirements without being overly restrictive.

4. Question: Attachment 5: Tab A 2.1.1. Body: In reference to the coat design, our coat does not allow for shorter front and longer back. However, the coat meets NFPA interfacing requirements. Is it acceptable for the front to not be shorter than the back, as the language states that the coat length “may be” longer in the back (i.e., it is not “must be”)?

Answer: Yes, this interpretation is correct and a longer back length is not required but is permitted.

5. Question: Attachment 5: Tab A 2.1.1. Body: The whole coat is made up of three panels, as described in 2.1.1. Body. This requirement states that the shoulders will be made up of three separate panels on its own. Please clarify.

Answer: 2.1.1. does state that the coat design shall be no less than three separate panels. It does not specify shoulder construction nor limit the number of panels over the minimum of three.

6. Question: Attachment 5: Tab A 3.13. Reverse Boot Cut: Describe “concave” thermal liner cut in the front.

Answer: Concave is defined as “having an outline or surface that curves inward like the interior of a circle or sphere.” Therefore the bottom pant leg thermal liner located at the boot cut (in the front) should be “concave” or sphered upward.

7. Question: Attachment 5: Tab A 3.14.1. Suspender Ends: Do the front suspender ends need to have the elastic material/be elasticized? Can an Offeror propose a suspender with only the back suspender ends being elasticized?

Answer: The Government requires all ends of the suspender system to terminate with elasticized webbing suspender attachments and leather ends.

8. Question: Attachment 5: Tab A 3.14.1. Suspender Ends: Would the Government consider snap suspenders instead of eight-point attachment suspenders?

Answer: The Government requires all ends of the suspender system to terminate with leather ends that facilitate pant suspender buttons which secures the suspender system to the pants. The terminal end of the suspenders cannot be direct snap attached to the pants.

9. Question: Attachment 5: Tab B 2.3. Inside Coat Pocket: Please clarify “A pocket measuring no less than 7-inch by 9-inch is provided.” And “A pocket measuring no greater than 7-inch by 9-inch is provided.”, as the requirement states the pocket can measure between 7” x 9” and 9” x 9”.

Answer: Attachment 5 – FES PPE Technical Evaluation Matrix, requirement 2.3, has been updated. The evaluation factor now reads “a pocket measuring no great than 9-inch by 9-inch is provided.”

10. Question: Attachment 5: Tab B 3.11.1. Reverse Boot Cut: Describe “concave” thermal liner cut in the front.

Answer: See response to Specifications Q6 above.

11. Question: Attachment 2, Tab E, CLIN X015 AD, General Purpose Fire Fighting Boots, calls out “Large Calf Women’s”, but there is no mention of Large Calf Women’s boots in the technical requirements for Attachment 3, section 1.4 or Attachment 5, section 1.4. Please confirm that there is no Large Calf Women’s size boots required and it will be removed from the Attachment 2?

Answer: This was included in error. There is no requirement for Women’s large calf sizes in Product Category E – General Purpose Boots. RFP Attachment 2 – FES PPE Ensemble Pricing Matrix, Tab E has been updated to remove CLIN X015 AD.

TOP

1/26/17

B. Attachment 2 – Ensemble Pricing Matrix

1. Question: Attachment 2 – FES PPE Ensemble Pricing Matrix has a 6 Month Extension column, all but Tab B –Proximity Garments shows the quantity for this period to be approximately half of the preceding option years. Please confirm if the Proximity Garments should be the same quantity as the option years or half the quantity as per the other tabs?

Answer: The projected quantities under Tab B – Proximity Garments have been updated. As noted, the updated projected quantities for the six-month option reflect half the volume associated with a full option year.

1/26/17

C. General Questions

1. Question: Reference: Solicitation page 325; 52.212-5, CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR EXECUTIVE ORDERS--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JUN 2016); para (e)(1)

a. Does the USAF consider any supplier who is awarded a purchase order by the prime contractor to be a subcontractor for the purposes of flowing down the as-specified clauses to that supplier?

Answer: Please reference FA8056-17-R-0001 0002 Clause 52.212-5 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR EXECUTIVE ORDERS—COMMERCIAL ITEMS (DEVIATION 2013-O0019) (DEC 2016), section (b) which addresses flow down clauses required in an Offeror’s subcontracts with its subcontractors (below). The Government cannot recommend or interpret the application of the clause between the Offeror and its suppliers and suggests that you refer your questions on this to your legal counsel. Those clauses in question are noted below:

“(b)

(1) Notwithstanding the requirements of any other clause in this contract, the Contractor is not required to flow down any FAR clause, other than those in this paragraph (b)(1) in a subcontract for commercial items. Unless otherwise indicated below, the extent of the flow down shall be as required by the clause—

(i) 52.203-13, Contractor Code of Business Ethics and Conduct (Oct 2015) (41 U.S.C. 3509).

(ii) 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns (Oct 2014) (15 U.S.C. 637(d)(2) and (3)), in all subcontracts that offer further subcontracting opportunities. If the subcontract (except subcontracts to small business concerns) exceeds $650,000 ($1.5 million for construction of any public facility), the subcontractor must include 52.219-8 in lower tier subcontracts that offer subcontracting opportunities.

(iii) 52.222-17, Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers (May 2014) (E.O. 13495). Flow down required in accordance with paragraph (1) of FAR clause 52.222-17.

(iv) 52.222-21, Prohibition of Segregated Facilities (Apr 2015).

(v) 52.222-26, Equal Opportunity (Sep 2016) (E.O. 11246).

(vi) 52.222-35, Equal Opportunity for Veterans (Oct 2015) (38 U.S.C. 4212).

(vii) 52.222-36, Equal Opportunity for Workers with Disabilities (Jul 2014) (29 U.S.C. 793).

(viii) 52.222-37, Employment Reports on Veterans (Feb 2016) (38 U.S.C. 4212).

(ix) 52.222-40, Notification of Employee Rights Under the National Labor Relations Act (Dec 2010) (E.O. 13496). Flow down required in accordance with paragraph (f) of FAR clause 52.222-40.

(x) 52.222-41, Service Contract Labor Standards (May 2014), (41 U.S.C. chapter 67).

(xi) X (A) 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons (Mar 2015) (22 U.S.C. chapter 78 and E.O. 13627).

___ (B) Alternate I (Mar 2015) of 52.222-50 (22 U.S.C. chapter 78 E.O. 13627).

(xii) 52.222-51, Exemption from Application of the Service Contract Labor Standards to Contracts for Maintenance, Calibration, or Repair of Certain Equipment--Requirements (May 2014) (41 U.S.C. chapter 67.)

(xiii) 52.222-53, Exemption from Application of the Service Contract Labor Standards to Contracts for Certain Services--Requirements (May 2014) (41 U.S.C. chapter 67)

(xiv) 52.222-54, Employment Eligibility Verification (Oct 2015).

(xv) 52.222-55, Minimum Wages Under Executive Order 13658 (Dec 2015) (E.O. 13658).

(xvi) 52.222-59, Compliance with Labor Laws (Executive Order 13673) (Oct 2016) (Applies at $50 million for solicitations and resultant contracts issued from October 25, 2016 through April 24, 2017; applies at $500,000 for solicitations and resultant contracts issued after April 24, 2017).

Note to paragraph (b)(1)(xvi): By a court order issued on October 24, 2016, 52.222-59 is enjoined indefinitely as of the date of the order. The enjoined paragraph will become effective immediately if the court terminates the injunction. At that time, DoD, GSA, and NASA will publish a document in the Federal Register advising the public of the termination of the injunction.

(xvii) 52.222-60, Paycheck Transparency (Executive Order 13673) (Oct 2016).

(xviii) 52.225-26, Contractors Performing Private Security Functions Outside the United States (Jul 2013) (Section 862, as amended, of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008; 10 U.S.C. 2302 Note).

(xix) 52.226-6, Promoting Excess Food Donation to Nonprofit Organizations. (May 2014) (42 U.S.C. 1792). Flow down required in accordance with paragraph (e) of FAR clause 52.226-6.

(xx) 52.247-64, Preference for Privately-Owned U.S. Flag Commercial Vessels (Feb 2006) (46 U.S.C. Appx 1241(b) and 10 U.S.C. 2631). Flow down required in accordance with paragraph (d) of FAR clause 52.247-64.

(2) While not required, the contractor may include in its subcontracts for commercial items a minimal number of additional clauses necessary to satisfy its contractual obligations.”

2. Question: Reference: Solicitation page 287 of 333; Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, “Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors”, para 1.2. Would a large business who proposes a small business manufacturer meet the partially small business set-aside requirements?

Answer: No, a large business cannot propose under product categories that have been set aside for small business. Structural Garments (Category A), Proximity Garments (Category B), and Hoods (Category C) have are small business set-asides. IAW FAR 19.501 (a), a “set-aside for small business” is the reserving of an acquisition exclusively for participation by small business concerns. IAW FAR 19.502-2, a small business (concern) proposing to furnish a product that it did not itself manufacture must furnish the product of a small business manufacturer unless the SBA has granted either a waiver or an exception to the nonmanufacturer rule. The Government has not determined a basis to seek such a waiver from SBA for any portion of this acquisition.

3. Question: Is it acceptable for the offeror to translate the as-provided solicitation to a .pdf file so that data can be entered onto page 1 of 333 and then submit the completed SF 1449 as a .pdf formatted file?

Answer: Addendum to 52.212-1, Section 3.7 requires that Offerors submit their proposal in “Hard Copy” format and in addition to submitting all proposal information in identical format and content in electronic version on CD/DVD. Section 3.7 allows for Offerors to create Adobe PDF files so long as the file has enabled textual search and copy functions.

4. Question: Because the edited Attachments and Amendment/SF 30 have not yet been released on FBO, we would like to request a two (2) week extension to take these changes into consideration.

Answer: The proposal due date has been extended to 8 February 2017.

5. Question: According to instructions we have received from DoD EMALL for contracts we currently have with them for USAF purchases, EMALL set up a special USAF Corridor for specific items that have been awarded to a commercial supplier under an IDIQ contract. For a USAF Corridor order, DoD EMALL acts as an online order pass-through conduit only. The USAF customer would place orders via the DoD EMALL website, an electronic order with the USAF customers GPC info are then forwarded to the commercial supplier who was awarded those specific items. The commercial supplier then confirms order receipt to DoD EMALL, processes and ships the order directly to the USAF customer and charges the USAF customers GPC.

For clarification regarding credit card fees: All credit card companies charge a transaction fee to use their service, most of the time the charge is paid by the vendor who processes the credit card and not the customer placing an order (a typical exception would be buying gasoline where the gas station charges a higher price to use a credit card). If DFAS is charging the USAF customers GPC for orders through the typical DLA EMALL portal, then DLA would be absorbing the credit card fee which is based on their volume of transactions with the credit card service provider. If the USAF customers GPC is charged by the commercial supplier for orders placed through the DoD EMALL USAF corridor, then the commercial supplier would be charged a fee by their credit card service provider.

Please confirm that for the USAF FES PPE contract, the intent is to utilize the DoD EMALL USAF corridor and the commercial supplier (awardee) will be charging the customers GPC? Or will DoD EMALL charge the USAF customers GPC and the commercial supplier would invoice DFAS via WAWF for payment?

Answer: The intent is to utilize the DoD EMALL USAF corridor and the commercial supplier (awardee) will be charging the customer’s GPC.

1/26/17

FA8056-17-R-0001

Final RFP Comments & Responses

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY