QA_MEC_Test_Stand_-_Round_2.pdf

Q&A Round 2 for FA8125-16-Q-0041 - MEC Test Stand Purchase

Q45. Reference 3.5.9 - Will the government remove the requirement to supply all fixturing necessary for mounting and testing each UUT based on the inability for vendors to obtain pricing for the required UUT interface tooling?

A: No, all tools and fixturing necessary to test all subcomponents and MEC’s shall be required.

Q46. Reference Q12 of QA issued on June 1, 2016 and SOW section 5.5 - Based on the answer to question 12, the requirements in SOW section 5.5, and the provided appendix examples it is apparent the government is requiring a traditional T.O. Will the government provide a TMCR in accordance with TM-86-01N that traditionally defines a USAF TO such that all vendors will be responding to a formally defined requirement?

A: No, commercial manuals are acceptable. T.O. cited in answer to Q12 and included in Appendix M as well as that included in Appendix L are for reference only and detail typical information to be included in each manual.

Q47. Reference Q34 issued on June 1, 2016 - When will the TDP option selection worksheet be issued?

A: TDP Options Worksheet is now available as Appendix O. Reference revised SOW, Rev 2.

Q48. Section 3.2, Construction, states “Metals shall be of corrosion resistant materials unless suitably protected to resist corrosion.” Does this include all metal, to include fittings? Please clarify.

A: Yes, this is to include fittings.

Q49. Section 3.3.2, Surge Protection, states “All equipment shall utilize surge protection provided by Contractor with Government approval.” Does this apply purely to electrical surge protection, or should we also consider oil/fluid lines as well? Please clarify.

A: The surge protection statement referenced applies to electrical surge protection. However, the test stand is a standalone system, i.e., all flows, pressures and operational functions are initiated by equipment supplied as a part of the stand. Contractor shall provide whatever equipment including safety devices necessary to allow proper and safe operation of the test stand, in accordance with all codes and industry standards cited in the SOW and attachments.

Q50. Should the supplied test tooling / fixturing for each unit include all tools and fixtures utilized for any purpose ( adapter, indicator, adjustment wrench, etc. ) within the entirety of the testing procedure for both the main item and all sub-components or should the list be limited to only final test tooling?

A: Commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) tooling, such as standard screwdrivers and wrenches are not a part of this solicitation. Tooling that has a specific part number as detailed in Appendix I, whether for subcomponents or full MEC assemblies is a part of this solicitation and must be provided by the contractor. See revised Appendix I, Rev C for additional information.

Q51. The 10 month delivery called for seems very aggressive for equipment of this magnitude and the considerable requirements called out in the SOW. Is there flexibility on this requirement?

A: The ten (10) month delivery schedule will be extended to fifteen (15) months. See revised SOW, Rev 2, as well as updates to CLIN Delivery times referenced on the schedule (noted in amendment 03).

Q52. For full calibration at vendor facility (3.5.7), is it expected that the vendor will provide NIST-traceable calibration instruments comparable to what the PMEL department at Tinker AFB would use?

A: Yes, contractor will need to have the proper calibration instruments to complete a “…successful MEC Test Stand calibration…” as per para. 4.8.1 of the SOW.

Q53. Manuals (5.5.1, 5.5.2) appear to be called for to be provided in commercial, vendor format per the content described. Please confirm that the T.O. format of the existing test stand manuals does not need to be replicated.

A: Reference answer to Q46 above.

Q54. SOW says "Test stand return ports 535AA and 535AC shall be outfitted with removable/replaceable filter screens (see Appendix H)." However, I cannot find mention of the filter screens in Appendix H. Please clarify.

A: Requirement has been removed. Reference para. 3.1 of revised SOW, Rev 2.

Q55. Are there any Contractor Qualifications required for the Siemens S7 PLC Control/Automation?

A: Reference para.’s 3.9 and 8.2 of revised SOW, Rev 2 for relevant qualifications.

Q56. Are there any Contractor Qualifications required for Electrical Engineering?

A: Reference answer to Q55 above.

Q57. In Reference to the Answer to Q27: The UUT T.O.s specifically tell the operator to operate the exact controls on the old test stand. If the contractor uses a different approach will the contractor be responsible for redlining or providing new UUT T.O.s?

A: The intent is to have the test stand configuration match the end item T.O.’s without the need to change them, similar to DAQ upgrades completed on a number of existing MEC test stands. For example, original stand design included manual switches to energize various pumps and motors while the upgraded stands utilized HMI control methodology to control these items. However, the integrity of the existing end item T.O.’s was maintained as HMI controls were tagged with the same Significant Item Number (SIN) as the original design. The same approach is to be implemented here and therefore, the end item T.O.’s will not change.

Q58. In Reference to the Answer to Q35: Woodward has stated they are not interested in quoting the PRNV's. They are also not interested in quoting the other 800+ tools/flight hardware parts called out in the T.O.s with their P/N. I assume there are no fabrication dwgs available on these parts, correct? If so can the contractor reverse engineer these tools/flight hardware?

A: Follow-up conversations with Woodward have shown that they are prepared to quote the tools/fixtures necessary to test all subcomponents as well as full MEC assemblies. Reference revised Appendix I-Rev C for additional details. Note also changes to para. 6.16 of F101 T.O. 6J3-4-109-3 included in this revised appendix.