Q&A_HSBP1017R0025.pdf

HSBP1017R0025 – Question and Answer (Q&A)

1. In SOW section 4.2.3 it says that Front/Back plates must be available in 10" x 12" and 8" x 10" nominal sizes. The SOW does not seem to indicate that we are to provide any technical data on the 8" x 10" plates. Do Offerors need to provide the information requested in Volume 1 (Technical) items 1-7 specific to the 8" x 10" plates. (separate NIJ certification letters, ballistic test data, weight certifications, thickness certifications, etc.)? Also, do Offerors need to send exemplars of the 8" x 10" version of Plates 1 and 2?

ANSWER: No additional information is required for the 8"x10" plates. The 8"x10" does need to be the same make/model and shape as the 10"x12" version. If everything is the same, then the NIJ Certification will apply to the smaller version as well.

2. SOW Section 4.5 lists requirements for the 6"x6" Ballistic Plate 3. Items 4.5.6 and 4.5.7 ask for V50 velocity and NIJ testing on 10"x12" plates. Does the Government intend for these requirements to reflect the 6"x6" version of the ballistic plate make/model?

ANSWER: All testing data and NIJ Certification requirements are for a 10"x12" version of the same make/model of the 6"x6" plate. Again, if everything is the same (build specifications), then the NIJ Certification will apply to the smaller version as well.

3. With Volume II, can an Offeror submit a combination of Past Performance from itself and its manufacturer (still totaling to 3 Past Performance contracts)?

ANSWER: Per the RFP, "The Government may consider past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant.”

4. In Attachment 3, can the Offeror complete Part Two: General Information to ensure our POCs complete the questionnaire for the specified contract?

ANSWER: Yes.

5. Should Volume III contain completed Representations and Certifications per FAR 52.212-3?

ANSWER: Yes.

6. For Attachment 2, can the Government elaborate on how many plates it intends to purchase each year?

ANSWER: No, CBP can only estimate the total maximum quantity over the life of the contract.

7. Per Amendment 0001, this solicitation is no longer a Total Small Business Set-Aside.

Please elaborate on why the restriction was removed.

ANSWER: The initial RFP contained FAR 52.219-6 Notice of Total Small Business Set- Aside. Subsection (d) of this clause states, "Agreement. A small business concern submitting an offer in its own name shall furnish, in performing the contract, only end items manufactured or produced by small business concerns in the United States or its outlying areas." As such, in accordance with FAR 19.502-2(b)(1), the government does not have a reasonable expectation that offers will be obtained from at least two responsible small business concerns as our market research was not able to find two small business manufacturers that could meet the specifications required by the statement of work. Small businesses are still free to participate in this acquisition.

8. Is the proposal should be one price for all four (4) plates?

ANSWER: No, pricing shall be per individual unit (Plate #1, Plate #2, and Plate #3).

9. As order of 40,000- is this should be 4 plates for one (1) order.

ANSWER: The Government will award an ID/IQ contract in response to this RFP. 40,000 refers to the maximum quantity of Plate #1 that may be ordered under this 5 year contract. One order will not be for 40,000 plates. Orders can be for any combination and any quantity of plates.

10. Is a ballistic plate that meets or exceeds all other plate 2 performance and technical specifications, but does not contain a ‘ceramic layer’ acceptable?

Ref: For ballistic plate 2, SOW 4.4.3 states “Ballistic plate shall contain polyethylene fibers with a ceramic layer.”

ANSWER: No, all requirements must be met.

11. For Attachment 2, Pricing Schedule, there does not appear to be rows in the spreadsheet for plate 1 and plate 2 to account for the two size variants required (8”x10” & 10”x12”). In order to provide the lowest pricing possible, is it permissible for offerors to add rows to accommodate both sizes for plate 1 and 2?

ANSWER: No, a single price per model is required.

12. In order to provide the lowest pricing possible, is a tiered pricing approach permissible on the pricing attachment?

ANSWER: No, a single unit price per model is required.

13. Is there an estimated and/or historical quantity of items ordered over time?

ANSWER: Only maximum estimates, which have been included in the solicitation.

14. What manufacturer was the previous (or current) supplier to CBP for ballistic plates?

ANSWER: There have been multiple single awards to various manufacturers in the past few years.

15. Is there an incumbent CBP ballistic plate contract holder?

ANSWER: None. Recent purchases have been single awards.

16. The solicitation requires that the ballistic plates are listed on the NIJ CPL and that a Notice of Compliance certification is available. Does the product have to be listed on the CPL at the time of proposal submission or only by time of delivery under the contract to the government? Are test results showing that the plate meets the specification and is in process of being listed on the CPL acceptable for the purposes of proposal submission?

ANSWER: NIJ Certification (and listing on the CPL) must be valid at the time of RFP submissions. A copy of the NIJ Notice of Compliance shall be included with the proposal submission.

17. Can a 60-day extension be provided for proposal submission?

ANSWER: At this time the Government does not intend to extend the proposal submission due date.

18. In regard to CBP’s SOW, the weight and thickness requirements are unambiguous. For example, Plate 1 may not exceed 2.65 pounds or 1.20 inches. However, the SOW references only nominal width and length dimensions, rather than stating maximum or minimum requirements.

This creates a significant level of ambiguity for contractors. Such ambiguity can lead to different interpretations, and of greatest concern, could result in bid submissions later deemed unacceptable by CBP.

We request that CBP advise the maximum length and maximum width acceptable under CBP’s internal definition of what constitutes a nominal 10”x12” plate. In addition to informing contractor product selections, such information will also help ensure proper plate fit into CBP’s intended vests / carriers. Similarly, we request that CBP advise the minimum length and width acceptable to CBP. In addition to further informing our product choices, such information will help insure that plates meet CBP’s minimum area of protection expectations / requirements.

ANSWER: The nominal size requirement is geared toward the government achieving its desired performance characteristics without being overly restrictive (based on market research.

19. Will the government consider a waiver for a certified design that would allow our company to utilize the polyurea spray coating on a nylon cover certified design?

ANSWER: No.

20. Will the government consider awarding multiple awards to this contract?

21. If an extension cannot be provided, would the government allow submission of completed and successful test data of the design for plate variant 2 with a pending official approval letter from the NIJ?

22. On a separate note, The NIJ does not certify hard armor plates as small as 6x6 inches.

Could the government please clarify on this requirement and the NIJ certification requirement?

ANSWER: The NIJ uses a 10”x12” plate for compliance testing purposes. Once a model has been certified and listed on the CBP, a vendor can label any plate size of that model Certified as long as the build sheet and radius is the same as what was submitted for certification testing. So, for the 6”x6” plate, the model (to include build sheet and radius) shall be the same as an NIJ compliant plate listed on the CPL.

23. In reference to FedBizOpps.Gov solicitation #HSBP1017R0025 CBP Ballistic Plate Armor, I am inquiring about para. 2.8 of the SOW which states a requirement for a 10-year manufacturer warranty. The industry standard is 5 years so I was wondering if the stated 10-yr period is in error?

ANSWER: The 10 year warranty is accurate.