FA8056-17-R-0001_Final_RFP_posted_01.17.17.docx

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

DRAFT RFP Q & A

A. Specifications Date Posted On FBO

1. Question: Is the current NFPA 1971, 2013 edition certification required to be completed at the time the proposal is submitted or before contract award?

Answer: Per RFP Attachment 3 – FES PPE Ensemble Product Category Specifications and RFP Attachment 4 – FES PPE Ensemble Statement of Work, all products are required to be certified IAW all applicable NFPA standards at time of proposal submission. Additionally, any product receiving an award must maintain applicable NFPA certifications throughout the lifetime of the contract.

2. Question: How does the new NFPA 1971, 2017 edition which will be out in May affect this certification requirement for bid evaluation, contract award and future deliveries?

Answer: All products awarded under this acquisition must maintain compliance with applicable NFPA standards to include any updates made during the lifetime of the contract. If the 2017 edition update directly affects any cited requirements, results in potential changes to product cost, or generates any other impacts to the FES PPE program, the USAF will work with potential Offerors or contract awardees to address impacts at that time.

3. Question: The garment sizing kit requirements in the SOL and attachments for CLIN 0004 & 0008 are not very clear. The Structural set requires a maximum of 7 garments in Attachment 3 & 5 tab A, but there is no mention to how many are required for the Proximity sizing kits in tab B of either attachment. Please advise.

Answer: See Specifications Q4 below.

4. Question: Attachment 5, tab A states: “1.3.5.1. Sizing Kit. The contractor shall provide a controlled sample sizing kit with measurement guide and instructions on how to properly size men and women to capture proper fit and accurate interfacing of sleeve/glove, coat/pant, and pant/boot. Kit contents shall include a maximum of seven skipped size sets of coats and pants with common identified sleeve/pant lengths within the sizing ranges identified in 1.3.2. and 1.3.3.. above and utilized to capture sizing for structural and/or proximity (reference 10.2.4. for proximity) coat and pants. Sizing garments shall be easily identifiable or clearly marked as sizing garments to prevent utilization as compliant PPE garments.”

a. Will the Structural sizing kit also be used for the Proximity kit? Please explain how this is possible if these items are awarded to two different bidders?

b. There is no reference 10.2.4 for proximity that we could find in attachment 3 or 5, please clarify?

c. Do the sizing kit garments need to be NFPA certified garments?

Answer: a. No, the Structural sizing kit will not be used for Proximity garments; Proximity garments require their own sizing kit. That was an oversight. RFP Attachments 3 – FES PPE Ensemble Product Category Specifications (i.e., TAB A – Structural Garments, requirement 1.3.5.1, TAB B – Proximity Garments, requirement 1.3.4, 1.3.4.1, 1.3.4.2) and RFP Attachment 5 – FES PPE Technical Evaluation Matrix (i.e., TAB A – Structural Garments, requirement 1.3.5.1, TAB B – Proximity Garments, requirement 1.3.4, 1.3.4.1, 1.3.4.2) have been updated accordingly. b. That reference was included in error, Attachment 5 – FES PPE Technical Evaluation Matrix has been updated to remove that information. c. The sizing kits DO NOT have to be NFPA certified garments. Per the requirements, the sizing kits shall be easily identifiable or clearly marked as sizing garments to prevent utilization as compliant PPE garments.

5. Question: In Table L2 – Samples Specifications (on page 292) in Product Category A, the language for the Structural Coat repeats the Flashlight Holder Hook and Retainer Strap twice. Should the Offeror assume the Government only wants one, which is how the specification on Attachment 3 reads?

Answer: The Government only wants one Flashlight Holder Hook and one Retainer strap. The Government removed the duplicative language so that Table L2 – Samples Specifications, now states “Structural Coat – with Radio Pocket, Microphone Straps, Flashlight Holder Hook and Retainer Strap”

6. Question: In Table L2 – Samples Specifications (on page 292) in Product Category B, the language for the Proximity Pant calls for a Sewn-in Reinforced Knee. The Specification in Attachment 3 for Proximity Pants calls for either no reinforcement or a removable/replaceable knee reinforcement. Please clarify what should be included on the samples.

Answer: Table L2 – Samples Specifications, now states “Proximity Pant – with Removable/Replaceable knee reinforcement and Bellow Search Pockets”

7. Question: Under Factor 1 Technical, Subfactor 2 FES PPE Ensemble Management Plan, please provide clarification on the level of demand/quantities and timelines required under the end of fiscal year surge (item iii) for each Product Category.

Answer: Our current strategy review has indicated that approximately 38% of PPE is bought at the end of the Fiscal Year (Aug-Sep). As there is no centrally managed database to forecast ensemble element demand, no monthly demand projections or quantities can be provided at this time. The frequency of purchases made under this contract will vary based on location, number of firefighters, age of legacy equipment, mission need, etc. All annual quantities included in RFP Attachment 2 – FES PPE Ensemble Pricing Matrix, were derived from available historical data and end user estimations.

8. Question: How did the USAF come up with the yearly quantities for each of the product categories?

Answer: See the response to Specifications Q7 above.

9. Question: The Structural Sizing Kits calls out a maximum of seven skipped size sets of coats and pants. Is this for both men and women sizes or should there be seven for men and seven for women?

a. Please confirm if this applies to the Proximity Kits as well.

Answer: The “Sizing Kit” requirement applies to both men’s and women’s sizing kits. RFP Attachment 2 – FES PPE Ensemble Pricing Matrix has been updated to account for Women’s sizing kits. RFP Attachment 3 – FES PPE Ensemble Product Category Specifications and RFP Attachment 5 – FES PPE Technical Evaluation Matrix have been updated accordingly, please reference Specifications Q4(a) above.

10. Question: Reference: Attachment 3, FES PPE Specifications, Tab A (Structural Garments), Section 3.6. There is reference to “cover the zipper.” Please confirm that a zipper is not specifically required.

Answer: A fly zipper is required for both Structural Pants and Proximity Pants. A new requirement has been added to Tab A – Structural Garments (i.e., requirement 3.6 “Fly Zipper”) and Tab B – Proximity Garments (i.e., requirement 3.5 “Fly Zipper”). All subsequent requirements in those sections have been renumbered in order to maintain consecutive numbering.

11. Question: Reference: Attachment 3, FES PPE Specifications, Tab B (Proximity Garments), Section 3.5. There is reference to “cover the zipper.” Please confirm that a zipper is not specifically required.

Answer: See answer to Specifications Q10 above.

12. Question: Do the structural and Proximity gear need to be NFPA/UL Certified at time of sample submittal or just upon award of solicitation?

Answer: See answer to Specifications Q1 above.

TOP

B. Attachment 2 – Ensemble Pricing Matrix

1. Question: In Attachment 2 Pricing Matrix, would the Government consider including a separate line item for CONUS freight cost and OCONUS freight cost for each Product Category, in order to more accurately delineate cost for various shipments over the 5-year contract?

Answer: As APOs only accept deliveries from the United States Postal Service (USPS), Offerors are required to use USPS for all OCONUS APO shipments. Since USPS charges domestic prices for APO deliveries, there should not be a cost delineation between CONUS and OCONUS freight outside of any potential (lower) CONUS shipping rates negotiated by Offerors with commercial carriers (i.e., FedEx, UPS, etc.).

2. Question: The quantity in the pricing Attachment 2 for the CLIN item AG005, “Add Flashlight Strap” states 2,100 for each year. This number appears to be extremely high compared to the other optional accessories for the structural coat. Please confirm if this quantity is correct. If the quantity is correct, why it is so high compared to those of the other accessories?

Answer: This was a typo. The quantity should be 100 annually. RFP Attachment 2 – FES PPE Ensemble Pricing Matrix has been updated accordingly.

3. Question: The different variation of the structural pants and coats add up to 4,200 each for the first year but the suspenders only add up to 2,000. Should the quantities be equal? There is the similar disparity for the proximity garments. Please provide clarification.

Answer: RFP Attachment 2 – FES PPE Ensemble Pricing Matrix has been updated. The quantities for all coats, pants, and suspenders (in both Tab A – Structural Garments and Tab B – Proximity Garments) align.

C. Helmets

1. Question: In review of the pricing attachment, Attachment 2, specifically for the Fire Helmets, I do not see the option to price the helmets based on the different colors. Typically, a color will determine a new helmet part number. Can you please clarify?

Answer: Please use the Part/Item # column to include any color-specific part numbers. Additionally, please identify what color is associated with each part number (i.e., Black – XXX1234, Blue – XXX3456, etc.).

D. General Questions

Answer: a. Orders will be placed via DLA DoD EMALL. This requirement has been added to the solicitation and SOW. b. It is not anticipated that USAF fire stations from differing installations will combine orders; however, it is possible that fire stations on the same installation may combine orders. c. Please reference RFP Attachment 2 – FES PPE Ensemble Pricing Matrix. This attachment includes estimated annual quantities for each CLIN under every product category.

2. Question: For Tab 6 of Volume II – Technical, Subfactor 1 is repeated (see Tab 2 of Volume II). Should this be corrected to Subfactor 2? If so, please update the page limitation as listed in table L1, to allow adequate space for Offerors to describe their Management Plan.

Answer: Volume II, Tab 6 has been corrected to read as Subfactor 2 with a page limit of 3 pages.

3. Question: Your previous Q&A response to the Draft RFP dated 01/09/2017 stated that orders would be process via DoD EMALL and most of the orders would likely use credit cards. Please confirm that the contract awardee will be processing the customer’s credit cards directly and will be responsible for the credit card fees and not DoD EMALL.

Answer: Per DoD EMALL guidance, the supplier charges the customer’s Government Purchase Card (Government “credit card”) when the customer places the order through a commercial supplier. DFAS charges the credit card when the order is placed with a DLA supplier. As for credit card fees, there are no credit card fees when placing an order with a Government Purchase Card.

4. Question: In Attachment 6, the radio buttons in Section II are not working properly. Only one radio button can be selected in the entire document at one time. Please correct before issuing to each Offerors’ Past Performance POCs. Thank you.

Answer: The Past Performance Questionnaire has been corrected to allow Offerors to select multiple radio buttons.

5. Question: For Volume III Past Performance, can an Offeror acting as a Distributor include Past Performance from the Manufacturer for one or more of the 5 Past Performance offerings?

Answer: Yes, Distributors may include Past Performance from the Manufacturer (See Addendum to 52.212-1, Paragraph 5.4.2.2); however, please note that the Addendum to 52.212-2, Section 8.3.2(2)(iii) states “In the event that the Offeror is a nonmanufacturer of a proposed product which receives an adverse quality performance rating, the Offeror/nonmanufacturer will be accountable for addressing the adverse rating.”

Addendum 52.212-1 has been updated to provide further clarity on this matter.

6. Question: The answers released on Jan 9th are in a document whose header reads, "DRAFT RFP Q&A" along with some questions and responses that appear out-of-date. Additionally, in that the Jan 9th version of the Q&A is also missing our initial set of questions submitted to the USAF last week, we request clarification whether the Jan 9th version of Q&A's reflect the current solicitation or might be posted in error or be a compilation of all previous program's Q&A versions.

If the Q&As reflect the current solicitation, the response used in several responses to questions in the specifications sections, "...we shall take this information under advisement" would indicate that changes to the product specifications might be made and that the solicitation's response schedule might be extended in order to give the manufacturers time to prepare new sets of samples to meet the revised specifications.

Answer: The Draft RFP questions that were initially posted on 6 January 2017 (and subsequently reposted on 9 January 2017 due to a technical error in the 6 January 2017 posting) pertain only to the Draft RFP that was posted on 21 October 2017. This document reflects the questions and answers related to the Final RFP. Offeror's are to prepare their proposals IAW the terms and conditions as stated in the Final RFP released 21 December 2017, along with any clarifications made in these responses to the final RFP.

7. Question: Reference: Solicitation page 289 of 333; section 3.7 Proposals, to include requested submittals (i.e., samples and substantiating documentation) are to be delivered to:

Ms. JoAnn Parks 1940 Allbrook Drive, Bldg. 1, Room 300 Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433 Phone: (937) 257-5791 Email: joann.parks@us.af.mil

Please confirm that all samples be shipped to the Contracting Officer.

Answer: Yes, all product samples will be shipped to the Contracting Officer to the address referenced above.

8. Question: Reference: Solicitation page 296, Section 6.1, “Basis for Contract Award” There is no Section L included in the solicitation. Section L is not otherwise identified within the solicitation. Is it the government’s intention that FAR 52.212-1, page 284 of 333 with Addendum at page 287 be designated as Section L?

Answer: The “Section L” references in the Draft RFP have been removed in the Final RFP. This reference now reads “52.212-1 and Addendum to 52.212-1”.

9. Question: Please confirm that the sample required for the Product Category D Helmets, Technical Rescue Helmet – with Front Helmet Identifier is CLIN 0013AA. It is listed as CLIN 0012AA in table L2.

Answer: The CLIN listed in Table L2 has been corrected to read CLIN 0013AA.

10. Question: Reference: Statement of Work page 6, para 5.e

a. Can the Prime Contractor ship through a DLA Distribution Center for OCONUS shipments?

b. To exploit the potential for significant cost-savings to the program, would the USAF consider adding DLAD 52.247-9037 or a more appropriate clause to invoke FIRST DESTINATION TRANSPORTATION?

Answer: a. OCONUS APO addresses only accept deliveries from the United States Postal Service (USPS). USPS charges domestic prices to ship to APO address. Commercial deliveries (i.e., FedEx, UPS, etc.) are not permissible. b. No, this is not a DLA contract and is not covered by DLA regulations.

FA8056-17-R-0001

Draft RFP Comments & Responses

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY