MODIFICATION
84 -- BALCS-Compatible Quick Release Body Armor Vest
- Notice Date
- 5/5/2003
- Notice Type
- Modification
- Contracting Office
- Other Defense Agencies, U.S. Special Operations Command, Headquarters Procurement Division, 7701 Tampa Point Blvd, MacDill AFB, FL, 33621-5323
- ZIP Code
- 33621-5323
- Solicitation Number
- USZA22-03-R-0027
- Response Due
- 5/16/2003
- Archive Date
- 5/31/2003
- Point of Contact
- Michael Holland, Contract Specialist, Phone 813-828-7659, Fax 813-828-7504, - Susan Griffin, Contracting Officer, Phone 813-828-7411, Fax 813-828-7504,
- E-Mail Address
-
hollandm2@socom.mil, griffi1@socom.mil
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- This is Amendment 0004 to combined synopsis/solicitation number USZA22-03-R-0027 that was issued on 22 Apr 2003 for BALCS-Compatible Quick Release Body Armor Vests. The purpose of this amendment is to publish questions from industry and the Government's responses. QUESTION 1. The solicitation states, "Offerors must scrutinize this solicitation and ensure their proposals and submissions comply with all requirements. It is not sufficient to merely state your vests comply with the solicitation requirements - you must clearly identify how your proposed vest meets ALL solicitation requirements." The solicitation clearly states that the evaluation of compliance to these standards is "subjective" and therefore is any data sufficient? Are statement from the units that have tested our system acceptable? Are Independent Lab tests required? What is the standard? ANSWER 1: The quoted language is boilerplate phrases used in many solicitations to put potential offerors on notice that they must read the solicitation carefully to ensure compliance with the solicitation requirements. This is a tactical nylon product (a vest cover only) and only hard data on the materials used is required. For example, the info we are seeking is data such as "Cloth Oxford Nylon Type 1 Class 3 of MIL-C-508", "Webbing MIL-W-4088 Type 1A and Type VIII, MIL-W-17337 Type II", etc. Any additional data provided on construction methods (stitch count, thread size, etc.), weights, IR suppression capability, etc., will be considered. While you are correct that a subjective evaluation will be conducted required regarding functionality this is merely an acknowledgement of the nature of the evaluation that is conducted for all solicitations based upon a best value assessment. Particularly in the area of functionality, the ease of use and lack of impact on user movement while wearing the vest is of critical importance and most accurately demonstrated by having the user representatives conduct their evaluation based upon their operational requirements. No formal hard data is required to demonstrate functionality. However, any user feedback from existing sales will be taken into consideration. QUESTION 2. The Natick SOF team was at Ft. Bragg on the April 16, 2003, and demonstrated a Releasable Vest to USASOC and others. This design was developed by the SOF team at Natick in conjunction with several other manufacturers. ANSWER 2: The author is incorrect. This vest was not "developed by the SOF Team at Natick in conjunction with several other manufacturers." The vest shown at the USASOC briefing was a COTS releasable vest, made by Eagle Industries for another program (FSBE II). QUESTION 3. What company produced the vest that is being shown and demonstrated by the SOF team (see question 2)? ANSWER 3. The vest shown and demonstrated by Natick was a vest made by Eagle Industries and is a candidate for the USMC FSBE II program. QUESTION 4. Will the Eagle Industries vest shown at USASOC (see question 2) also be evaluated for this requirement? ANSWER 4. The Government is not considering any particular vest for satisfaction of the solicitation requirements. We have completed a market survey and have synopsized as a fully open small business set-aside. If the vendor (Eagle) submits it as a candidate it will be evaluated. QUESTION 5. Was Eagle Industries given any advanced notice of the requirements of this Solicitation? ANSWER 5. Not to the best of our knowledge. QUESTION 6. When the requirements listed in this solicitation were written, was the Natick-designed vest [FSBE] used as the guide? Example: Two emergency release mechanisms. ANSWER 6. The solicitation baseline for the BALCSR was developed from the BALCS vest system not the FSBE. The intent is to solicit and down select a BALCS vest with a dual release capability. QUESTION 7. Was the Natick-developed vest pre-tested to meet the requirements of this Solicitation? ANSWER 7. No Natick-designed vest will be a candidate under this solicitation. QUESTION 8. Will commercial standards compliance be acceptable in place of Mil Spec for materials items on the vests that use commercial items? ANSWER 8: Commercial materials will be allowed to substitute for MIL-SPEC materials. However, corroborative data must be supplied to allow comparison to MIL-SPEC standards. The critical line in the solicitation regarding this issue is: "The BALCSR vest must contain equal or better than the materials incorporated in the original BALCS vest." Offerors shall provide information to conclusively demonstrate commercial materials meet or exceed the materials in the current BALSC Vest. These materials meet MIL-Spec _______ standards. Additional testing of commercial materials may be required to validate performance. QUESTION 9. We are contemplating submitting a developmental item in response to this solicitation. Two weeks seems to be too short of a proposal preparation period. ANSWER 9. The Government is seeking Commercial Off The Shelf items in response to this solicitation and consequently a lenghty proposal preparation period is not necessary. The solicitation was extended to 16 May by Amendment 0003. QUESTION 10. The solicitation calls for a signed SF1449 as part of the proposal, however this is a combined synopsis/solicitation and no SF1449 was issued. Please clarify. ANSWER 10. The requirement to submit a signed SF1449 was removed as part of Amendment 0003. QUESTION 11: What color do you want the initial 4 samples in (i.e. 3-Color Desert, Woodland, Black)? ANSWER 11: Color does not matter for these 4 samples. QUESTION 12: Do you have a Certs and Reps Packet with the forms you need filled out for this solicitation you can email me? ANSWER 12: The certs and reps simply consist of completed FAR Clause 52.212-3 and DFARS Clause 252.212-7000. These clauses can be downloaded from any website that contains these regulations. You can find links to online versions of the FAR and DFARS at http://deskbook.dau.mil.
- Record
- SN00318100-W 20030507/030505213700 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |