693JJ919R000079 RFP Questions and Response_ML_04-29-20.pdf

Solicitation #693JJ919R000079 Full-Scale Vehicle Side Impact Moving Deformable Barrier Testing, Full-Scale Vehicle Side Pole Barrier

Impact Testing, and Side Air Bag Out-of-Position Testing for New Car Assessment Program (NCAP)

Questions and NHTSA Response

1. With regards to Section J – List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments, for each of the referenced test procedures could NHTSA provide either a document whereby the changes are highlighted or a detailed breakdown (page by page) describing each of the changes for the following:

J.1 Laboratory Test Procedure for New Car Assessment Program Side Impact

Moving Deformable Barrier Testing, March 2020;

J.2 Laboratory Test Procedure for New Car Assessment Program Side Pole Barrier

Impact Testing, March 2020;

J.4 Laboratory Test Procedure for Side Air Bag Out-of-Position (SAB-OOP)

Testing, November 2019.

NHTSA Response: Each Laboratory Test procedure has a change log that calls out where changes were made, but a detailed breakdown is not available. In order to obtain this, it would require a side-by-side comparison to the previous version.

2. With regards to L.6 Instructions for Technical and Cost Proposals, we have the following questions:

a. Past RFP’s like the NCAP Frontal, which is only one test mode, had a (50) page limit. This RFP has a (30) page limit for two test modes making it difficult to include all the required information. Could NHTSA increase the page limit to

(50) pages?

NHTSA Response: The page limit is changed to fifty (50) for the Technical Proposal.

b. Can addendums beyond staff biographies, resumes, QA Management Plan (L.8.2) and In-House Procedures (L.8.2) be submitted with the Technical Proposal?

NHTSA Response: Addendums submitted beyond what is requested per the RFP will not be used for evaluation purposes.

c. Will any addendum count against the page limit requirement?

NHTSA Response: Addendums submitted will not count against the fifty (50) page limit requirement.

d. Subparagraph c. states that email is the preferred proposal submission method, and also states that if email submission is not possible to submit CD-ROM copies of the proposal via mail. To clarify, if the proposal is submitted via email, there is no need provide CD-ROM copies to NHTSA. Please confirm.

NHTSA Response: If the proposal is submitted by email, the Offeror is not required to provide

CD-ROM copies of the proposal.

Full-Scale Vehicle Side Impact Moving Deformable Barrier Testing, Full-Scale Vehicle Side Pole Barrier

e. If submitting the proposal via email, what is the maximum file size that the

NHTSA can accept?

NHTSA Response: The maximum files size emails received at DOT is 10MB.

3. Regarding Past Performance and Prior Experience (page 71.), (Subparagraph) j. Provide three (3) Past Performance Questionnaires (attachment J.6) that have been completed by customers:

a. Question #6 within attachment J.6, does not provide an option for non-government customers. Could the response options be revised? For example, change Government issued change orders to Customer issued change orders?

NHTSA Response: The Offeror is required to provide three (3) Past Performance questionnaires that have been completed by customers of the Offeror which meets the requirements of Section L.8.5.J.1) through 5) and will be evaluated per Section M.2.4 Past

Performance and Prior Experience. The Offeror can add information to the J.6, Past

Performance Questionnaire to meet the requirements of Section L.8.5J.1) through 5).

b. Furthermore, if the contract dollar value has not changed, should the person completing the form leave this question blank? Can a field be added (e.g. Not

Applicable)?

NHTSA Response: See response for question 3.a.

4. With regards to Section L.8 VOLUME 1 – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS, sub-section 3. Facilities and Equipment on page 64 of the RFP states that “as part of the proposal the Offeror shall provide submissions identified in the table”, which appear on pages 68-69, in an effort to reduce any confusion, can the items listed under item 20 be revised from being listed as sub-items 17a-17g to 20a-20g?

Full-Scale Vehicle Side Impact Moving Deformable Barrier Testing, Full-Scale Vehicle Side Pole Barrier

NHTSA Response: Items listed under item 20 may be revised from being listed as subitems

17a-17g to 20a-20g.

5. Within the item 20 (Dummy qualification equipment) of Section 3, “Facilities and

Equipment,” which is the part of L.8 Technical Proposal guideline, requirements 17d, 17e, and 17f ask for the information about the dummy qualification fixtures generally used for a frontal dummy. Could you please verify whether these fixtures information are still required for this RFP?

NHTSA Response: The fixtures required in subitems 17d, 17e, and 17f are required. There is another testing part of this contract that may utilize dummies that will need this qualification equipment.

6. CLIN 00022 of Section B of this RFP asks for the cost of full qualification of an infant

CAMI dummy. We could not find the qualification procedure in part 572 subpart K nor in any testing procedures included as part of this RFP. Could you provide some details or the source of this qualification procedure for this infant dummy? Or, are we allowed to make the cost estimate based on the CAMI Newborn procedure prepared by Humanetics

Inc?

NHTSA Response: Given the simplicity of the CAMI Newborn, the intent is to make sure that maintenance is kept so that all specifications in part 572 are met.

Full-Scale Vehicle Side Impact Moving Deformable Barrier Testing, Full-Scale Vehicle Side Pole Barrier

7. If we submit the proposal via an email, do we get a notification verifying that the proposal was received well including the relevant attachments?

NHTSA Response: NHTSA will provide written confirmation for receipt of proposals and attachments.