QA_Set_8_170606.pdf

SPEAR Family of Tactical Headborne Systems Q&A Set 8

6 June 2017

Q1: Solicitation section L.2.2.2.2 says, “Each Ballistic and non ballistic impact raw material supplier shall be considered a major subcontractor;" Is it the intent that each ballistic and non-ballistic impact shell material supplier shall also be considered a major subcontractor? The statement as currently written can be interpreted as every supplier that contributes to the manufacturing of the shells should be classified as a major subcontractor.

A1: Each material supplier for ballistic and non-ballistic impact raw material, to include impact shell, shall be considered a raw material supplier.

Q2: Solicitation section L.2.2.2.2 says, “The offeror shall submit a maximum of five (5) and a minimum of three (3) Performance Information Sheets identifying active or completed contracts, either Government or commercial for each prime and a maximum of five (5) and a minimum of one (1) Past Performance Information Sheet for each major subcontractor ... (major is defined as those subcontractors, teaming partners and/or joint venture ... who are projected to perform 25 % or more of the total contract effort).

What is the definition of contract effort? Is total contract effort measured as total material costs?

A2: Total contract effort is the effort required to complete all work associated with the contract, not just material.

Q3: In section L.2.2.1 of the solicitation, Elements 1-4 are described for both Subfactor 1 – Ballistic Helmet and Subfactor 2 – Non-Ballistic Helmet. Is the offeror required to address each element separately for both subfactors (i.e., Element 1,2,3,4 for Subfactor 1, then Element 1,2,3,4 for Subfactor 2), or can the proposal be structured so that both subfactors are addressed under each element (i.e., Element 1 – Subfactor 1 and 2, Element 2 – Subfactor 1 and 2, etc.)? The latter option would decrease duplication of information. An example of this would be the ‘management,’ section. We would essentially submit duplicate copy for each if required to respond how we are reading Section L.

A3: The vendor need not duplicate language in their proposal, but must clearly reference (i.e., Volume, Page, and Paragraph #’s) where the required information can be found.

Q4: For the subject 3rd party testing for FTHS, does the USG intend to provide NTS (CTS) the FTHS PSPEC or are participating vendors allowed to do so? As the solicitation PSPEC is restricted to vendors that submitted a NOI and allowed access, we did not know if it is the intent of the USG to facilitate access to them as well.

A4: Participating vendors may share the performance requirements with their subcontractors (to include laboratories utilized to generate PDM data) in accordance with the export control restrictions summarized on the cover sheet of the specification.

Q5: Is it the Government's intent to waive FAT and use the PDMs as the "de facto" FAT units and immediately award a delivery order for up to the 2,500 required Helmets concurrently with the award of the IDIQ contract?

A5: The Government will not waive FAT. Those offerors in the competitive range will undergo FAT using the PDMs submitted as part of the RFP. Delivery orders may come any time after contract award.

Q6: Is the Government granting approvals for the release of information regarding solicitation H92222-17-R-0003 SPEAR Family of Tactical Headborne Systems (FTHS)-Ballistic and Bump Helmets by interested parties or offerors?

A6: The Government is not approving release of information for solicitation H92222-17-R-0003.

Q7: In paragraph 3.19.2, it is stated that the minimum shelf life of all components and materials in the finished helmet shall be 5 years. Further along in the same paragraph, it is written that ‘as an objective, the finished helmet system and all components shall have a minimum shelf life of 15 years.”

Can you please clarify whether the minimum shelf life is 5 or 15 years?

A7: As stated in Attachment 01 Performance Specification paragraph 3.19.2, the threshold (T) requirement is 5 years with 15 years as an objective (O).

Q8: In paragraph 3.19.3, there is no mention of impact components such as pad sets. What is the service/use life of such components or is that silent and not mandated?

A8: As stated in Attachment 01 Performance Specification paragraph 3.19.3, “Helmet suspension components shall have a service/use life of 24 months …”

Q9: Paragraph 3.19.3 states that the helmets “shall have a service life of 5 years of continuous use in all types of typical military field environments with no operational mission failures if not impacted by ballistic projectiles.” Is there any such requirement for impact damage?

A9: Depending on the severity or type of blunt impact event it is possible that such an event may be considered a helmet end of life event, but this requires a case-by-case analysis. Helmets must meet the blunt impact requirements in the Performance Specification.