Questions_1.pdf

Questions dated 20 Apr 2016

1. In Table II the overall dimensions with a maximum height of 96 inches may very likely prohibit any commercial armored vehicle we know of that includes a cupola and a CROWs from meeting that requirement.

PCO Response: The height requirement does not include CROWS/cupola.

The vehicle must be less than 96” from the bottom of the tire that touches the ground to the top of the roof of the vehicle.

2. In regards to this requirement in your vehicle weight it has not exceed 19,000 lbs. We would like to request a waiver to get an exception to increase the weight GVW for our armored the max weight is 22,930 which is slightly higher.

PCO Response: See Amendment 1.

3. The Air Force has published a solicitation for 15-20 commercial armored tactical vehicles.

Perhaps we are missing something but it is not clear to us exactly what happens per item 4.4.3 Test Rejection Criteria.

Does the winner of the award have the opportunity to correct the shortcoming based on the rejection, or is the winner of the award completely disqualified?

PCO Response: There is nothing in the solicitation reflecting that this will occur as the government expects awarding to a responsible contractor which can satisfy its requirements.

4. Is the award for 1 unit at first, contingent upon testing and then the final units of 14-19 subsequently ordered?

PCO Response: Full funding will occur at contract award. The successful offeror must pass testing associated with CLIN 0001, Pre-Production Unit (comprised of 0001AA and 0001AB) before further production can be accomplished.

5. Or, does the Air Force then award the next LPTA vehicle?

PCO Response: Evaluation Basis for Award” provision of the RFP, “A decision on the technical acceptability or unacceptability of each offeror’s proposal will be made. Among those offerors who are determined to be technically acceptable, award will be made to the offeror having the lowest total evaluated price. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal is technically acceptable, conforms to all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, technical requirements, and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation described in the solicitation.

6. Or, does it consider modifying the minimum requirements so that the first vehicle does not necessarily need to be rejected?

PCO Response: No modification is anticipated or needed at this time.

7. If so, how is that not a violation of the rights of other offerors?

PCO Response: N/A

8. If the Air Force does not find that the second vehicle it tests suitable to meet the minimum requirement, does it then give an award to the 3rd and then the 4th and so forth and so on?

PCO Response: Evaluation Basis for Award” provision of the RFP, “A decision on the technical acceptability or unacceptability of each offeror’s proposal will be made. Among those offerors who are determined to be technically acceptable, award will be made to the offeror having the lowest total evaluated price. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal is technically acceptable, conforms to all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, technical requirements, and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation described in the solicitation.

9. Is there a limit to how many companies it can test and reject?

PCO Response: There is nothing in the solicitation that this will occur as the government expects awarding to a responsible contractor which can satisfy its requirements.

10. What then happens if no Commercial Tactical Armored Vehicle meets the minimum requirement?

PCO Response: Should this occur the Government will reevaluate as required; however, market research supports that the requirement can be met.