M67854-19-R-1501_DRAFT_SBNVG_RFP_COMMENTS_RESPONSES.pdf

M67854-19-R-1501 DRAFT RFP PACKAGE RESPONSES TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS

REFERENCE

QUESTION / COMMENT GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

RFP Section L.3.2.2

Will the USMC consider making the following change in order to insure adequate competition of small businesses?

Change From: “Offerors shall submit up to three (3) past performance references on DoD contracts (at least two (2) of which shall be as a prime contractor) during the past five years that are relevant to this solicitation’s requirements. Those Offerors with fewer than three DoD contracts shall provide references for other U.S. Government agency contracts.” “Offerors shall submit three past performance references for work performed on DoD contracts. At least two of the three references shall be for work performed as the prime contractor.”

Change To: “Offerors shall submit up to three (3) past performance references on DoD contracts (at least two (2) of which shall be as a prime contractor) during the past five years that are relevant to this solicitation’s requirements. Those Offerors with no prime DoD contracts shall provide references for other U.S. Government and foreign military sales information that is relevant to the solicitation requirements.”

Offerors shall submit up to three (3) past performance references on Government contracts

(at least one (1) of which shall be as a prime contractor) during the past five years that are relevant to this solicitation’s requirements.

References shall be provided for DoD, other U.S.

Government, or foreign military sales customers for work that is relevant to the solicitation requirements.

RFP, Pg 48, M.5.2, 8.4.1.5

After M.5.2.2, Risk Definitions, numbered section 8.4.1.5, Compliance Requirements states, "Before evaluating paper proposals or other testing, the Government will evaluate offeror's test report data documents as the first round of testing (as part of Factor 1). The evaluation of test report data shall be against compliance requirements, selected from the PSPEC, listed in Table 6."

Is it the Government's intent to have a separate document that provides test report data for each of the Table 6 rows? If so, will a single document with that data, preceding Volume I and standing alone, suffice as proof of eligibility for contract award? Or should the Table 6 data and all other Performance Description Test Report Data be included as an attachment to Volume I?

The Compliance Requirements paragraph has been removed.

RFP, pg 38, Table 1, Volume II, Small

Business Participation, Price Proposal and

Recommended Buy List) and (Pg 40, L.3.2.1.5, Integrated Product

Support

The Title for Volume II indicates that the Recommended Buy List should be included as part of Volume II.

The Technical volume requirement L.3.2.1.5 states, "The Offeror shall provide a Recommended Buy List that will identify to the Government those spares and repair parts the Offeror believes the Government should procure to support and maintain a fully operational SBNVG.

This list shall include the price of the individual spare and repair parts, and the price of those items the Offeror believes are high-failure items."

Is it the Government's intent to have the Recommended Buy List be included as part of the Technical Volume I or Volume II? We recommend it be attached to Volume II since it will include the prices of the items in the buy list.

The RBL shall be a part of Volume II.

PSPEC 3.1.10

In paragraph 3.1.10 of the SBNVG PSPEC it states " The SBNVG shall be interoperable and non-interfering with all sizes of the

Ceradyne and Gentex model Enhanced Combat Helmets (ECHs)

(NSN 8470-01-592-6226, 8470-01-592-6215, 8470-01-592-6208, and

8470-01-592-6235), when installed on the helmet." After contacting the stated suppliers, certain sizes are unavailable. Will the USMC make the required helmet sizes available to bidders prior to the RFP release?

Per the Statement of Work, no GFE/GFP will be provided to the Offeror.

PSPEC

We are looking for some USMC Helmets, so we can validate our

BNVD and COTI Mounting Configuration? Unfortunately, the manufacturers do not have any (USMC NSN) we can purchase in time that can be delivered in under 120 Days. Is there any way you could send us some, (1) Each (S, M, L) of your Helmets to complete testing requirements?

Per the Statement of Work, no GFE/GFP will be provided to the Offeror.

PSPEC pg 12, Table 4-1

There is no specified verification periodicity for the Environmental

Resistance tests (procedures 66 through 75).

The Government has separated tests to be performed periodically during production by the vendor (table 4-1) from tests the Government anticipates to perform on initially delivered units

(new Table 4-2 in updated PSPEC) or on as-needed basis. The vendor is still required to provide supporting data within their proposal that their technical solution has been verified to meet the stated requirement.

PSPEC, pg 3, 3.1.12

Augmented Reality. The SBNVG should have the ability to connect and transfer target location data from a Situational Awareness (SA) tool, such as the Marine Air-Ground Task Force Common Handheld device, and present SA data within the operator's field of view, without impeding target detection via the SBNVG imaging sensors.

Since the SA tool is not specifically identified and an interface connector is not called out, are we to assume the USMC has not yet identified the SA tool and does not require an interface cable to be provided with our proposal and that we are only required to be able to interface to it in the future?

The PSPEC has been updated to reference the

Marine Air-Ground Task Common Force

Handheld (MCH) Early Capability Release

(ECR) device by NSN, as well as the associated gateway hub that may be utilized as an SBNVG interface point for Augmented Reality capability.