You are on page 1of 7

1. Why does it take 14 Months to award?

a. While 14 months is an estimate and can change depending on the acquisition


circumstances, we do anticipate this procurement to be in the 14 month
timeframe. Since this program is over $1B there are a series of reviews from
solicitation to award, including multiple Peer Reviews from the Under Secretary
of Defense that adds to the timeline. However, the Commander and the
Acquisition Executive at DSCP are looking toward lean six sigma processes to
streamline the acquisition process.
2. What is the Quantity Percentage breakdown of the various types of uniforms?
a. The evaluative quantity located in each subject solicitation portrays the current
requirement for the Army Combat Uniform (ACU)/Flame Resistant (FR) ACU. An
estimate is 60% and 40% FR/FR-P (Flame Resistant Permethrin).
b. Please NOTE: The draft solicitation allows for ultimate flexibility, and therefore,
any combination of subject items can be ordered. The evaluative quantity is
simply for evaluative purposes.
3. If the Berry Amendment for FR Rayon expires before the FR ACU Contract ends, what is
DSCP’s plan to procure an alternative FR ACU if it is based on a material specification vs.
a performance requirement?
a. The FR RAYON does not have an exception to the Berry Amendment. We are
able to procure the non-domestic FR RAYON due to a Determination of Domestic
Non-Availability (DNAD). The DNAD for the RAYON will continue to be
applicable, however market research will continue to be conducted throughout
the life of the contract. (See also question #38)
4. There have been recent issues as to the 50% subcontract rules, is it 50% of each item or
50% of the value of the contract. There have been recent determinations that a prime
must produce 51% of each end item?
a. See slides 68-74 for complete details.
5. Is a PDM required for each type of ACU/FR ACU/Permethrin FR ACU Coat/Trouser?
a. No, PDMs are only required for the regular ACUs, Type 1 Class I Coat or Type 1
Class I Trouser for each proposed place of manufacture dependent on the lot
you are offering on; e.g. coat or trouser. However, if you are offering on both a
coat and trouser lot, a PDM is required for both the coat and trouser and for
each place of manufacture.
b. PDM’s are required for each place of manufacture listed under clause: 52.215-6.
c. For example, if you intend to subcontract a portion of this award, a PDM must be
submitted from each subcontractor’s place of manufacture.
6. Award just for trousers?
a. Yes, there are individual lots for just trousers and there are individual lots for just
coats. However, it is possible to get a single award for coats or a single award for
trousers, or an award for both coats and trousers.
7. What Percentage of the requirement for ACU/FR ACU/Permethrin FR ACU Coats and
Trousers are Mandatory Sources?
a. Estimate about 25% to mandatory sources
8. What will the Initial Order Quantity be?
a. Four month delivery orders at the Annual Estimated Quantity.
9. Who are the approved Permethrin treatment vendors?
a. We do not approve vendors, Permethrin Treatment vendors must be EPA
certified. Once a Prime/Permethrin applicator passes First Article, they are
approved for full scale production.
10. When will the Solicitation be issued?
a. December 16th was the targeted date; however, this date has slipped. We are
not looking to release over the holidays. Any updates on the date of the
solicitation being issued will be posted to Federal Business Opportunities.
11. Each draft Request for Proposal (RFP), gives a percentage, what does this represent?
a. Percentage of that item (Example: Coat) in that particular solicitation only.
12. Will there be three different awards under solicitation, for example on the Small
Business Set-Aside Lot?
a. Yes, on the Small Business Set-Aside there will be three different lots of coats
and three different lots of trousers with awards on each lot. The intent is to have
different contractors for each of the coat or trouser lots under the same
solicitations. However, the Government reserves the right to make awards of
multiple lots to the same contractor if in the best interest of the Government.
13. Outsource Manufacturing?
a. See slides 67-74 for complete details.
14. How many sets of PDM’s are required?
a. See answer to question #5.
15. What are the procedures for a Small Business to quote on the 8a and Hub Zone
solicitations?
a. All offers must fill out each solicitation/lots that they are offering on.
b. However, the 8a and HUBZone lots could be dissolved due to lack of 8a Small
Business/HUBZone small business participation. If this is the case, the Small
Business lots will be utilized to make an award, therefore, Small Businesses can
still offer on the 8a Solicitaiton/HUBZone Solicitation for the lots designated
Small Business Set-Asides.
16. How do we evaluate price?
a. We evaluate the unit price by multiplying the evaluative quantity for each type
of uniform on subject lot by the offered price to get the total evaluative total
price; refer to charts 25-26 in the Pre-Solicitation charts.
17. When does an 8(a) or a HUBZONE need to be certified to be eligible for award to offer
on 8a/HUBZone lots.
a. As all of our 8a/HUBZone lots are competitive , all firms are required to be
certified 8a/HUBZone at time of solicitation closing.
18. Are the QAR’s still required to release fabric from fabric mills?
a. Yes, this is the current anticipated process. However, we are having internal
discussions in reference to this subject.
19. Economic Price Adjustments (EPA)?
a. DSCP has been researching this issue since this question was addressed the day
before the Pre-Solicitation Conference. Market Research responses did not
reflect an industry concern on pricing out long term contracts and a need for
economic price adjustments. While it may be too late in the acquisition process
to address this topic for this procurement, DSCP will continue to further research
this issue for future acquisitions. Recommend the industry submit further
information to DSCP, POC, Susanne McHale, suanne.mchale@dla.mil.
20. Are the RFID tags required to be berry amendment compliant?
a. No, not at this current time.
21. Are the PDM’s required to be Permethrin treated?
a. See answer to question #5.
22. Does the advantage of Sole source vs. open solicitation?
a. We are assuming this is regarding the FR fabric. The army is currently
researching the FR Fabric and looking to develop a Performance based
specification for the FR Fabric. Reference other questions concerning the FR
fabric.
23. Should RFID Item Level Pricing be included on the initial offers or wait for Amendment?
a. Currently, case and pallet level RFID is required and should be included in your
unit price. If an amendment is issued requiring item level RFID, pricing will need
to be adjusted to include this requirement.
24. How do we prevent knockoffs?
a. There is an Army logo on the label.
25. FR off shade to nyco standard?
a. All applicable shade standards are defined in the solicitation. ACU Type I uses
shade standard #3729; ACU Type II uses shade standard #3757. These standards
are not the same shade.
26. Spec finished measurements? Adjust finished to post treatment?
a. New dimensions tables are currently in development to accommodate some
shrinkage in post-manufacture Permethrin treatment.
27. Two STAGE sample submitted to accept /reject, how long does the Government have to
provide a response?
a. DPSCM 4155.3 states that the government has 30 days to provide response on
each individual evaluation.
28. According to multiple sources within the military, taber abrasion is a much more
accurate test method to predict wear and tear in the field. Why is this test method not
included in the specification requirements?
a. ASTM D 3884, Taber abrasion, 5.10 denotes that this test method is accordingly
not recommended for acceptance testing in contractual agreements between
purchaser and supplier because of the poor between laboratory precision of the
test method. The Taber method also does not correlate with assessing field
wear.
29. Regarding the Drawstring Cord, is this correct, it seems like the cords are very long, and
not comparable to the waist size?
a. Page 7 Paragraph 3.5.2
i. X-S and Small 31.5 Drawstring Cord 50”
ii. M and Large 39.5 Drawstring Cord 52”
iii. XL and XXL 47.5 Drawstring Cord 54”
Follow the requirement as stated. However, this will be forwarded to the Army for
evaluation.
30. Permethrin Testing--Sample size is listed as ANSI/ASQZ Z1.4, Special Inspection Levels S-
1 and AQL of 1.5, this is 5 Garments per lot of 1500 to 35,000. Are the C of C’s going to
require 5 garments or 3 garments as being done by NATICK Testing Labs? These are
destructive testing and very expensive to the contractor.
a. For FAT, 6 items shall be sent to the Government for testing and 3 items shall be
tested by the contractor’s lab. After FAT, sampling for both government and
contractor’s testing (as applicable) shall refer to GL/PD 07-13A or GL/PD 07-14A,
paragraph 4.5.1, section D.1, (ANSI/ASCQ Z1.4 Special Inspection Levels S-1 and
AQL of 1.5) Discussions are ongoing with the Army pertaining to the AQLs.
Reference subject solicitation/amendments for updates.
31. What are the performance requirements for bite protection on FR-P?
a. See GL/PD 07-13A or GL/PD 07-14A, paragraph 3.4.2
32. What end item processes need to take place on the FR-ACU Permethrin or FR-ACU? Will
this change the shade?
a. Permethrin is required to be applied to the FR ACU Permethrin (Type II, Class II) -
see GL/PD 07-13A or GL/PD 07-14A, paragraph 3.4.1, 3.4.2 and other references
throughout the specifications. A two-stage shade evaluation process will be
used to validate shade. The Prime contractor is responsible to meet the shade
standard as listed in the solicitation.
33. How do you judge efficiency and durability for FR ACU Permethrin?
a. See GL/PD 07-13A or GL/PD 07-14A, paragraph 3.4.1 & 3.4.2. First Article Testing
requires testing of Permethrin treatment application at 0 and 20 launderings,
and bite protection testing at 0, 20 and 50 launderings. Testing of each lot for
Permethrin application will continue throughout the life of the contract. The
government will also conduct verification testing to validate the results of testing
performed by the contractor's qualified laboratory.
34. Is the Army planning on fabric solicitation to coincide with the decision on “New” Camo
pattern?
Should fabric submission be printed on the “New” Camo?
a. Your offer/PDM’s should follow the fabric requirements as listed in the
solicitation. Most likely a “New” Camo pattern will not be incorporated in this
initial solicitation.
35. We are a Disadvantaged Small Business that is located in a HubZone and 8(a) certified.
In talking with our Supplier/Manufacturer, they mentioned that some of these type of
contracts require that the Small Business is required to manufacture on site at least 51%
of the items in addition to what they receive from their supplier. Is this true for these
contracts? Or will we be able to have all the manufacturing done with the supplier and
our primary role as a Distributer is preserved?
a. Please reference slides #68 to 74.
36. Do we use the same patterns and specifications for both fabrics?
a. End items: Specifications GL/PD 07-13A and GL/PD 07-14A and the cut patterns
(latest dates in the technical data) apply to both Types and Classes. The only
pattern distinction between the types is that FR Coats and Trousers have a small
patch (on the sleeve cuff and cargo pocket flap, respectively) to indicate that
they are the Flame Resistant.
Cloth: Type I garments use MIL-DTL-44436A, and Type II garments use GL/PD
07-12. Both are printed with Universal Camouflage Pattern.
37. Do we use the same final measurements for both treated and untreated garments?
a. See answer to question #26.
38. Purchase descriptions GL/PD 07-13A and GL/PD 07-14A both require a specific fiber
blend of 65/25/10 rayon/para-aramid/nylon ripstop for "Type II" flame resistant fabric.
As this blend is protected by patent # 6,867,154, fabrics made of that blend (Type II in
the purchase descriptions) are currently available from a sole source. What provisions
can be made to allow for an alternate, approved equivalent FR_ACU material? Will you
be accepting products that meet or exceed the physical testing performance and flame
resistant protection requirements but do not comply with the specified blend?
a. At this time the Army is comfortable with the fabric solution currently listed in
this solicitation. Many of you are aware of an effort the Army underwent last FY
to evaluate a new Fabric alternative and although an alternative was identified it
was determined that the cost to the taxpayer of maintaining logistic chain of two
separate material solutions would be excessive.
About 6 months ago , the Army submitted a Sources sought looking for material
solutions for FR Fabric . They received several interesting solutions which may be
viable options. However, until the Army can conduct follow on testing, new
material solutions will not be accepted. The path ahead is in early 2010 the Army
is going to sit down with leadership to discuss the findings of the Sources Sought.
This may include an Army solicitation for a new material solution, however, the
testing that would have to be conducted for this type of a change will take a
significant amount of time and a new solution may not be identified until well in
FY11. The solution may include updating the PD’s to remove references to
specific fabrics and focus on performance based.
The Army Combat Shirt may become performance based initially with other
items to follow.
39. Provided the purchase description is rewritten as a true performance specification, what
color standard will be used? Should new fabrics be matched to the current pink-casted
FR_ACU standard (roll # 3757) or to the traditional ACU color standard (roll # 3729)?
a. See answer to question #25
40. As none of the subject three solicitations addresses the need for Permethrin treated
50:50 NyCo. Do you expect there to be a requirement/solicitation to address Permethrin
treated NyCo ACU?
a. At this time, there is not a requirement for treated NYCo ACUs.
41. Has the fly pattern issues been corrected with the latest pattern?
Yes. Army has completed a pattern validation study and confirms that the fly pattern is
correct. If you still have concerns/questions, please contact Leighann.Mazoki@dla.mil.
42. Does the Government plan to license the IP on the current FRACU product to ensure
multiple sources, or make this a performance based specification, thus eliminating the
sole source situation that currently exists? If so, what is the timeline to make this
happen?
a. No, not at this current time.
43. With the possibility of saving tens of millions of dollars per year in replacement costs,
when is consideration given to 100% US made FRACU products that have equal to or
better burn protection and better durability than the current patent protected, foreign
components?
a. See answer to question #38
44. The current FRACU garment is noticeably off shade compared to the NyCo standard.
How should the industry proceed in shade matching this product (match NyCo standard
or current product) and how are they held accountable?
a. All fabric should be targeted to match the standard listed in the subject
solicitation/contracts. All applicable shade standards are defined in the
specification. ACU Type I uses shade standard #3729; ACU Type II uses shade
standard #3757; components are as specified in the solicitation, but in general
they target color chip #24165, or roll #3736 for hook and loop only. Also see
answer to question #25.
45. The ACU garment was changed to NyCo to provide improved strength and durability.
Should the FRACU be held to the same durability standards (ie tear strength and
breaking strength)? Why or why not?
At this time the Army is comfortable with the fabric solution currently listed in this
solicitation. Type I garments shall be made from cloth conforming to all physical and
visual requirements stated in MIL-DTL-44436A. Type II garments shall be made from
cloth conforming to all physical and visual requirements stated in GL/PD 07-12.
Requirements differ between these two cloth specifications. Also, see answer to
question #38
46. We noticed the construction of the fly has changed from the current construction
procedure. Is this due to the concerns being voiced from the field regarding the overall
durability of the crotch and surrounding seams/area?
a. Yes.
47. Page 11, section 3.7.7.3 states that the cargo pockets and flaps shall close with a three
(3) button (2) buttonhole closure per pocket. However, the drawing on page 45, Figure
3 shows a two (2) button closure for the cargo pocket and flap. Need clarification on the
exact number of buttons to be used on the cargo pockets.
a. Three Buttons, two buttonholes is correct. The figure 3 on page 46 shows the
edge of the third button placed in the pleat area.