Attachment_32_Question_and_Answers.pdf
PDF 121 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA8121-22-R-0014
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to a federal solicitation for the overhaul of F100-PW-220/229 Convergent Segment Assemblies. The solicitation seeks firm fixed price proposals for a multiple award IDIQ contract with a 60 month period of performance and five one-year ordering periods. The work includes overhaul of the convergent segment assemblies, which are parts of the F100-PW-220/229 engines that power various aircraft. Coatings other than those specified may be used due to supply issues. Pricing should incorporate expected scrap rates. Parts condemned after work will be reimbursed under certain CLINs. Offerors should identify probable repair levels but pricing does not need to differentiate levels. Variations in repair mix should be accounted for in pricing. The solicitation is available at www.beta.sam.gov and is not set aside. The buyer is Amanda Payne and point of contact is Treva Billinger of the Air Force Sustainment Center.
View the file
Other files
Show all 36
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Question 1: According to the engineering instructions for repair, RQR‐10, Rev E (attachment 8) the coating requirements are restricted to PWA 256‐1, 701HE or AMS 2447‐8. On table 6 we understand that PWA 53 can be used as alternative to the plasma wear coating (referred to on table 5). Please advise if PWA 53‐1 can be used as an alternative to PWA 256‐1, 701HE, or AMS 2447‐8.
Answer 1: AMS 2447‐8 and PWA 256‐1 are the preferred coatings. However, they require
Helium to spray. Vendors cannot obtain Helium right now. We've approved RFV's to allow 53‐1 until they can obtain Helium. The preferred coatings are denser and thinner which makes for a better wear surface.
However, 53‐1 will perform sufficiently to last a full interval and only requires Argon to spray.
Question 2: The Estimated Quantities don't seem consistent between the solicitation and the RPOW listing
(attached) from the SASPO Website. The quantities per year definitely affect manpower requirements and we just wanted to check to make sure the estimated quantities in the solicitation were correct.
Answer 2: The quantities on the solicitation are correct.
Question 3: We were also wondering if parts that get condemned that have had work put into them (for example stripping the coating and FPI) will be reimbursed through the Over & Above CLIN?
Answer 3: For the USAF CLINs the scrap rate should be included into the Firm Fixed Price. For the FMS
CLINs the Government will negotiate based on the operation that the parts scrap to cover incurred cost and will be paid via the Over & Above CLIN.
Question 4: In looking at the PWS for the subject Solicitation, I have a question on the level of repair.
Are you looking for 3 different prices?
Minor
Medium
Major
Or just identifying the probable level of repair?
Answer 4: We are just identifying the probable level of repair and anticipated percentage of occurrence in the PWS diagram and not looking for 3 different prices.
Question 5: If the mix should vary greatly in the direction of major, will this additional effort be handled as Over and above, or should we include it in our overall pricing assumptions?
Answer 5: Please include it in your overall pricing assumptions.
July 13, 2022 Questions & Answers: Convergent Nozzle Assembly FA8121‐22‐R‐0014
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .