Solicitation Questions and Answers - 3.pdf

Next Generation Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus

Solicitation Questions & Answers 3

25 Sep 2020

1. Question: Under the “Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs” section, Section 7, the document requests a part number for the SAR Kit. As defined in the Purchase Description, the SAR Kit consists of three separate items (1. Technical Rescue Cart, 2. Air Supply hoses, and 3. Escape Demand Supplied Air Respirators). As these items represent already existing commercial off the shelf products that are sold separately, will the USAF accept separate part numbers for each item?

Answer: Yes, if part numbers already exist for these items; the submittal of separate part numbers for these items will be acceptable. An end item part number for the complete SAR KIT shall be provisioned and incorporated into the technical manual after contract award.

2. Question: CDRL A005 Instructional Media Package requires delivery of Video Media 60 days before delivery of first production unit. This CDRL is identified for order for the Basic Contract under CLIN 0015. The CLINs for each of the three four production items 0011, 0012, 0013, 0014 for the Basic Contract call for deliveries to begin 30 calendar days ARO. Can the Government provide clarification on the relationship between CDRL A005 delivery and the delivery of CLINs 0011, 0012, 0013, 0014?

Answer: CLIN 0015 / CDRL A005 Instructional Media Package relates to the delivery of instructions that includes but not limited to standard information (operation, maintenance, cleaning, storage and any other standard care use) that is provided via the commercial marketplace when entities purchase SCBAs and related equipment. As stated in the applicable CDRL, this item is required to be delivered for approval 60 days prior to the delivery of the first production units. Once CDRL A005, Instructional Media Package has been approved, all ordered Instructional Media Packages shall be due in conjunction with the required due date for the ordered SCBA units. CDRL A005 is being revised to reflect this information and will be posted via an amendment to the RFP on Beta.SAM.gov.

3. Question: Can the Government provide additional information regarding the content of the Instruction Media Package delivery for each of the four contract options after the initial delivery under the Basic Contract?

Answer: The content of the Instructional Media Package shall include standard information pertaining to operation, maintenance, cleaning, storage, and any other standard care and use information. Statement of Work (SOW) paragraph 3.4.3.1 is being revised to reflect this information and will be posted via an amendment to the RFP on Beta.SAM.gov.

4. Question: With respect to section 2.2.2 (Other Government Documents, Drawings, and

Publications), there is no link or location available to review the following documents:

i. T.O. 14P3-11-141-WA-1 Technical Order for JSLIST

ii. T.O. 14P3-1-181-WA-1 Tegchnical Order for J-FIRE

iii. DWG 93107190 J-FIRE Beard

iv. DWG 93107182 J-FIRE Protective Hood (Shroud)

v. DWG 3518266 Nomex Hood (P/N 62681)

vi. DWG 98107184 Carrier

vii. AFMAN 10-2503 Operations in a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Environment

The Contractor requests a link to review these documents to ensure compliance with requirements as set forth in purchase description.

Answer: The requested documents have been uploaded to beta.SAM.gov, with exception to the following which will be forthcoming in the near future:

- T.O. 14P3-11-141-WA-1 Technical Order for JSLIST

- T.O. 14P3-1-181-WA-1 Technical Order for J-FIRE

- DWG 93107182 J-FIRE Protective Hood (Shroud) Please be advised that DWG 93107190 J-FIRE Beard and DWG 3518266 Nomex Hood is being removed from the Purchase Description (PD) as it is no longer applicable. PD paragraph 2.2.2 is being revised to reflect this information and will be posted via an amendment to the RFP on Beta.SAM.gov.

5. Question: Appendix A Section A.3.4 (Test Procedures) requires “Vision correction shall be provided for all individuals with vision impairment, and at least 25% of the subjects shall require vision correction”. Is it the expectation of the USAF for the Contractor to provide the lens kits to the USAF and then the USAF will fit the individuals’ optic prescription into the lens kits provided? Also, please confirm the testing requirements as called out in Appendix A, the sample size will be 32 (as is specified in Appendix B Section B3.3).

Answer: Yes, the government expects the offerors to provide lens kits and it will be the government’s responsibility to fit the optic prescription into the lens kits. Yes, Appendix B Section B3.3 is correct.

6. Question: With respect to J-LIST and J-FIRE suits, is it possible for the USAF to provide one each (to include J-FIRE Protective Hood (Shroud)) to the Contractor on a temporary basis to conduct actual system integration confirmation?

Answer: The references listed for JSLIST suits and J-FIRE Protective Hood (Shroud) provide sufficient details on the protection requirements of these items. JSLIST suits and J-FIRE Protective Hood (Shroud) will not be provided.

7. Question: With respect to the C2A1 filter, the Contractor believes this to be Government Furnished Equipment (GFE). What is the availability of these filters and what is the expected lead time? If the C2A1 is not a GFE, please provide the supplier and associated part number.

Answer: C2A1s are readily available and the suppliers and associated part numbers are as follows:

Part Number CAGE Company Country

782121500810 0000V Termekkod Hungary

GW9034 60240 Gentex DBA USA

CL 6146 U6290 Cam Lock LTD UK

PD paragraph 3.8.1 is being revised to reflect this information and will be posted via an amendment to the RFP on Beta.SAM.gov.

8. Question: With respect to Section 3.4.1.2, the SAR KIT will consist of “Four (4) each escape pressure demand supplied air respirators with escape cylinders that have a 10 minute duration” with no additional specifications mentioned. Is there a requirement for the respirator to switch to cylinder air without operator intervention if there is a disruption in the main airline supply? Is there a requirement for the system to alert the operator that the system is on cylinder air following a disruption of the main airline supply?

Answer: No, there is not a requirement for the respirator to switch to cylinder air without operator intervention if there is a disruption in the main airline supply. Additionally, there is no requirement for the system to alert the operator that the system is on cylinder air following a disruption of the main airline supply.

9. Question: With respect to the CWC mask testing requirements and overall CWC mask concept of operations, will the CWC Mask be disconnected from the SCBA and worn independently as a standalone APR?

Answer: Please refer to PD paragraph 3.4.1.3, CWC Mask Performance, which outlines the continuous flow requirement. The CWC mask shall be designed to provide an integrated filtered respiratory protection system for the user in a CBRN environment. The system must be capable of providing a compressed air supply for interior or exterior fire fighting related operations and a CWC included filtered air system for CBRN operations and other forms of hazardous material threats.

Transition from compressed breathing air (SCBA) to filtered air (APR) must not expose the user to inhalation, absorption, or ingestion contamination. In a CBRN environment, when operating in the filtered air mode, the SCBA shall always have APR capability.

10. Question: Section 3.14 (Emergency Breathing Support System) (EBSS) discusses the requirement to have an EBSS system in accordance with NFPA 1981 Ed 2018. Table 1 (Requirement Cross Reference Matrix) indicated verification method will be by examination and demonstration. Section 4.14 of the purchase description states the demonstration shall be simulated and assessed during the Field Evaluation exercises. In reviewing Attachment 4, there are three sections that address “buddy breathing”. The first instance is found under Emergency Management (ON AIR, PRE ENTRY TEST & DOFFING (EMOP-08)) which will evaluate “Ease of buddy breathing with gloves”. The second instance is found under Bio-Environment (ON AIR, PRE-ENTRY TEST & DOFFING (BEEP-08)) which will evaluate “Ease of buddy breathing”. The final instance is found under Fire & Emergency Services (ON AIR, PRE-ENTRY TEST & DOFFING (FESP-08)) which will evaluate “Ease of buddy breathing with firefighter gloves”. There is no reference to Section 3.14 of the Purchase Description on the questionnaire form. Additionally, the proposed evaluation for “Buddy Breathing”, which the offeror is assuming is the evaluation of the EBSS, is vague and does not provide a complete and realistic assessment of the EBSS capability. The Contractor recommends reconsideration/clarification of these evaluation requirements.

The Contractor recommends clarification to include the following criteria:

a). The ease of EBBS System to be connected and disconnected to a “donor” SCBA while the SCBAs are pressurized.

b). If SCBA has a quick disconnect mask mounted regulator (MMR), the ease with which the MMR can be disconnected and attached to “donor “EBBS connection while the SCBA is pressurized.

c). If the SCBA is equipped with a quick disconnect MMR, the ease with which the MMR can be disconnected from the “donor” EBSS connection and reattached to the original SCBA.

d). If the SCBA is equipped with a quick disconnect MMR, the ease with which said MMR can be interchanged with other SCBA in the fleet without further adjustment.

Answer: Evaluation criteria, as written, is sufficient to adequately evaluate the requirements.

11. Question: The Solicitation document addresses the requirement for 13,917 SCBA – Airpak Only, 13,607 SCBA Commercial Off the Shelf Masks – Only, and an additional 7,082 CWC Masks – only over the base year and the four follow-on years of the contract. If the proposed standard firefighting mask (NFPA 1981 ED 2018) can be dual use for both standard firefighting and CWC operations, does the Air Force still require an additional 7,082 CWC masks?

Answer: The government shall evaluate the 2018 NFPA approved COTS SCBA as outlined in the solicitation as well as the technical requirements submitted to meet the CWC requirements. The quantities listed in the solicitation are valid.

12. Question: Will the Solicitation due date for the procurement be extended? If so, when to you anticipate an amendment to be issued?

Answer: The solicitation due date was extended to 05 Oct 2020 at 3:30PM EST via amendment 0001 to the solicitation, released 04 Sep 2020. In addition, due to the forthcoming RFP amendment (0002), it is anticipated that an additional RFP due date extension will be provided. Details will be provided in the amendment.

13. Question: The evaluation for the Explosive Ordinance Disposal Specific Tasks (A.3.4.6.2) under the EOPD-01 Task (Ease of switching from mask filtered air to bottled air (wearing gloves)) is contrary to issued guidance.

Answer: Update to evaluation EOPD-01 is forthcoming via RFP amendment.

14. Question: With respect to the requirements for the SAR KIT, Section 4.2 of the Purchase Description states: i. Albeit each RFP or solicitation will specify an organization’s individual requirements, the analysis will include, but not be limited to, the requirement for offerors to provide certain, designated certifications and test data on the SCBA and SAR kit being proposed. Where would the USAF desire the test data and certifications of the SAR Kit be located?

Answer: The SAR Kit shall meet all NFPA 1981 (Current Effective Edition) standards. As this is a requirement of the PD, a post award verification of the SAR Kit component certifications and test data will be required. The PD is being revised to update information related to the SAR Kit and will be posted via an amendment to the RFP on Beta.SAM.gov.

15. Question: Regarding CLIN 0004 and CDRL (ELIN) A003, it is requested that the Government reduce the time allotted for the approval/disapproval of CDRL A003 from 60 days to 30 days and change the delivery date for the CDRL from 180 DAC to 210 DAC in order to reduce the level of risk in completing the pre-production testing and report preparation on time without impacting the delivery of CLIN 0001 at 240 DAC. The primary risk being the Government performance of the CWC System Agent Testing under CLIN 0006, PD paragraph 4.8.11, and PD Appendix C which is outside the control of the contractor.

Answer: The timeline outlined in the solicitation is valid; no changes shall be made to the required delivery dates at this time.

16. Question: 4.8.1.2 of the PD states that the “SAR kit shall meet or exceed all NFPA 1981 (Current Effective Edition) standards.” NFPA 1981 requirements for HUD and EOSTI and 30 minute cylinders do not make sense, and may not be achievable for a SAR kit with a 10-minute cylinder. What is the intent of this requirement confirmation?

Answer: The SAR KIT shall be comprised of commercial off the shelf products that will be kitted.

Some components are required to meet NFPA 1981. If any of the components are not required to meet NFPA 1981 then they shall be NIOSH certified. The PD is being revised to update information related to the SAR Kit and will be posted via an amendment to the RFP on Beta.SAM.gov.

17. Question: The proposal requirements for Subfactor Two: Certifications and Test Data state on page 72 of the RFI that “The proposal shall provide one (1) copy of the following certifications and test data for the commercial SCBA unit the offeror intends to submit in accordance with Subfactor One”.

Does this mean no certifications or test data are required for the SAR kit? We do not find a place in the proposal requirements where the SAR kit technical proposal fits.

Answer: Certifications and test data for SAR Kit components shall be provided post award.

18. Question: If the technical proposal and certifications and test data for the SAR kit are intended to be included in Subfactor Two, will the SAR kit then also be included in Subfactor One and be required for the Field Evaluation?

Answer: No, SAR Kits shall not be evaluated during Field Evaluations. SAR Kit certification and test data is a requirement of the PD and a post award verification of the SAR Kit certifications and test data will be required. The PD is being revised to update information related to the SAR Kit and will be posted via an amendment to the RFP on Beta.SAM.gov.

19. Question: 3.21 in the PD states that “if cylinders require a different adapter, the contractor shall provide one (1) adapter per fill station.” How many fill stations are there, so we know how many fill station adapters we will need to supply?

Answer: Eight (8) adapters per installation shall be required for a total of 1,850 adapters. PD paragraph 3.21 is being revised to include this information and will be posted via an amendment to the RFP on Beta.SAM.gov.

20. Question: For the required field test samples, can an Offeror provide a current NFPA and NIOSH approved SCBA with modifications that are supported with “…meeting NFPA and NIOSH criteria" (Section 4.17) and NIOSH and NFPA certified “.. at the time of award" (Section I. Scope) and do not affect the CBRN approval?

Answer: Only 2018 NFPA approved COTS SCBAs with associated mask(s) shall be evaluated during field evaluations.

21. Question: Does the use of more than one battery compartment exclude an offer or result in a lower evaluation? Reference Purchase Description 3.11 Warning Alarms “A centralized battery source shall be used to accommodate ease of battery management.”

Answer: The intent is not to be restrictive and the government will evaluate SCBAs accordingly.

Alarms, alerts and associated batteries shall be examined during the field evaluations IAW outlined requirements (specifically GPOV-08).

22. Question: Does the USAF want to have the bailment agreement ahead of the delivery of the proposal?

Answer: In accordance with RFP provision “Proposal Requirements”, paragraph II.C.2, Subfactor One, the offeror shall complete, sign, date, and submit the Bailment Agreement with its RFP package.

23. Question: Is there a maximum number of representatives for the field evaluation site training? If so, how many are permitted? When does the USAF expect the field evaluations to begin? What are the scheduled dates for each location?

Answer: Our desire is to have no more than two representatives from each offeror at the field evaluation locations. Due to current pandemic related events, the government is still coordinating the dates and locations. We have reached out to the installations and currently there are issues with access to installations due to COVID 19, so it will be dependent on what the current condition is at the installation. Per RFP provision, “Proposal Requirements”, paragraph II.C.2, Subfactor One, the date and time of the orientation/instructional sessions will be scheduled between the AFLCMC/WNKAC contracting office and the offeror after receipt of the offeror’s proposal. Any delays with scheduling will be communicated with the offeror.

24. Question: How many facepieces are required as part of the field evaluation? The sample SCBA will ship with size medium facepieces. We want to include small and large facepieces. Is there a breakdown based on size mask of the evaluators? Example 2 smalls, 4 mediums, 2 larges?

Answer: The question has been previously answered. Please reference “Solicitation Questions and Answers 2”, dated 26 Aug 2020, Question # 13.

25. Question: How many air cylinders are needed to be supplied per SCBA filed evaluation units? We plan on shipping one cylinder per SCBA. Is there a need to include a second cylinder per SCBA?

Answer: One cylinder per SCBA is sufficient for field evaluations; there is no need for a second cylinder per SCBA at this time.

26. Question: Can the TOP 8-2-110 section 4.8.11.4, Table 2 & Appendix C be provided?

Answer: The requested documents has been uploaded to Beta.SAM.gov.

27. Question: With respect to the Solicitation Documents, on Page 73, Para D.1, the Government states that “Offerors are advised that the Small Business Participation proposal is not the same as the Small Business Subcontracting Plan required by FAR 52.219-9. Large business offerors shall not utilize the Small Business Subcontracting Plan in the place of the Small Business Participation proposal.” In additional, at Page 4 Para 10, the Government states the “Offerors are advised that a Small Business Subcontracting Plan is a requirement within this solicitation in accordance with the FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, and such shall be submitted with proposals.”

Generally, Small Business Subcontracting Plans alone consist of many pages in order to comply with FAR 52.219-9 and thus these plans will cause a page count issue related to the Small Business Participation proposal page limit. Since the Page 10 statement is “shall be submitted” then the page count limit at Para D.1 must be taken as excluding the Small Business Subcontracting Plan since Para D.1 states that offerors “shall not utilize the Small Business Subcontracting Plan”. Please confirm that the Small Business Subcontracting Plan is not part of the 15-page count associated with the Small Business Participation proposal. Does the government expect that this plan be submitted as an appendix to another proposal volume?

Answer: The Small Business Subcontracting Plan is separate from the Small Business Participation submission, and is not subject to the 15 page limitation for Proposal Volume III found on page 69, paragraph II.A, of the Solicitation. As the Small Business Subcontracting Plan is a required submission under 52.219-9 Alt II, it shall be submitted as an addendum to Proposal Volume I, Completed RFP, and is not subject to a page limitation.

28. Question: According to FAR 9.308-1 Testing performed by the contractor:

(a)(1) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.209-3, First Article Approval-Contractor Testing, in solicitations and contracts when a fixed-price contract is contemplated and it is intended that the contract require-

(i) First article approval; and

(ii) That the contractor be required to conduct the first article testing.

(b)(1) The contracting officer shall insert a clause substantially the same as the clause at 52.209-3, First Article Approval—Contractor Testing, in solicitations and contracts when a cost-reimbursement contract is contemplated and it is intended that the contract require-

(i) First article approval; and

(ii) That the contractor be required to conduct the first article test.

Since the USAF is asking the offerors to produce a pre-production unit and test that unit, will the USAF add FAR 52.209-3 First Article Approval-Contractor Testing per FAR 9.308-1 above?

Accordingly, will the Air Force modify CLIN 001 that pre-production testing and reporting will be completed after the delivery of the pre-production unit. The Contracting Officer then shall notify the Contractor, in writing, of the conditional approval, or disapproval of the first article?

Answer: The CWC is a pre-production unit not a first article. All instructions and requirements pertaining to pre-production testing and delivery are detailed in the RFP (Notes To Schedule; under ‘Delivery Requirements’; applicable CLINs) and within the PD.

29. Question: Within Para 3.8.1.3 of the CWC Purchase Description, the USAF has identified that the CWC in negative pressure APR mode will be tested in accordance NIOSH RCT-ASR-CBRN-STP-0200, 0201. This testing is also referenced in Appendix C. It has been noted that this NIOSH -0200, 0201 test reference is for SCBA system testing not negative pressure APR mode testing. Thus, please confirm that the testing required under Para 3.8.1.3 for the CWC in negative pressure APR mode should be in accordance with NIOSH RCT-ASR-CBRN-STP-0350, 0351 test protocols? NIOSH -0350, 0351 are APR NIOSH GB and mustard test references.

Answer: NIOSH RCT-ASR-CBRN-STP-0200, 0201 are for SCBA testing, not negative pressure APR mode testing. The PD will be updated to reflect this distinction and will be posted via an amendment to the RFP on Beta.SAM.gov. The negative pressure APR mode will be tested per NIOSH RCT-ASR-

CBRN-STP-0350, 0351.

30. Question: Within Para 4.8.11.4 of the CWC Purchase Description, the USAF has identified that gas life testing for CK, CG, GB and DMMP be accomplished using Q95 and Q224 or equivalent test equipment. It is noted that these two (2) test apparatus are designed to test filters not masks or masks with filters mounted. Table 2 from the Purchase Description relates to test conditions for this testing and these conditions are the test conditions applied to C2A1 canisters testing as per MIL- PRF-51560. Therefore, since Q95 and Q224 testing is specific to filter only testing, it is not clear how a system test for CK, CG, GB and DMMP is to be accomplished with the CWC? Also, Appendix C does not provide guidance associated with this testing requirement since Appendix C relates to Smartman testing under conditions different from the conditions in Table 2. The Government will be providing C2A1 canisters and those canisters will be supplied to the Government in accordance with their procurement using MIL-PRF-51560. Therefore, please clarify this intent of this Q95 and Q224 testing when this testing is filter related?

Answer: The government’s intent is to test the protective capability of the masks, not the government supplied C2A1 filter. As a result, the Smartman test will be used per PD Table 2 and NIOSH RCT-ASR-CBRN-STP-0200, 0201, 0350, & 0351. The PD will be updated to reflect this distinction and will be posted via an amendment to the RFP on Beta.SAM.gov.

31. Question: With an updated PD still expected, if there are any changes being made that were not addressed in the published Q&As, we would request another extension to address those changes in our proposal, as we are getting close to the point where we can no longer make changes to our proposal and still get it in on time.

Answer: It is anticipated that an additional RFP due date extension will be provided. Details will be provided in the forthcoming RFP amendment.