Q&A's_29_March_18_FA822418R0024-0002.pdf

Dry Media Blast Robotics System Maintenance

FA822418R0024

Questions and Answers #2

29 March 2018

1. How many Robots and Robotic Systems are there?

ANSWER: There are 4 robots and 2 systems

2. Please clarify the type of robots in the systems? Are all Kuka?

ANSWER: Bldg 674 are Kuka, Bldg 238

3. What Controller language are the Kuka Robots? Are they KR C4?

ANSWER: KRL-Kuka Robotic Language.

4. Who is responsible for changing and purchasing the blasting tips for the Clemco Machinery?

ANSWER: Maintenance Support.

5. What are the current Preventative Maintenance responsibilities?

ANSWER: No current PM on this contract. See revised PWS.

6. Who is responsible for ordering replacement parts not under warranty?

ANSWER: Please refer to PWS

7. What are the operator’s responsibilities?

ANSWER: Operating robots

8. Does the System have a PLC and will it need to be programmed? What type of PLC?

ANSWER: Yes the system has Allen-Bradley PLC and yes they will need to be programmed

9. Some service work must be performed by the supplier (Warranty purposes). IE Kuka.

What is the procedure to do this?

ANSWER: If the equipment is under warranty, that would be performed by the contractor. If not that would be paid by under the CLIN.

10. Robotic Simulation and OLP can be done for robot programming. (Prevents errors causing damage) Is this being utilized currently?

ANSWER: Does not have it, the operators always watch robots to ensure that no damages are done.

11. CLIN 0001 – On-Call Support: The nature of on-call support is that it is open ended. A contractor cannot provide on-call support on a firm fixed price basis unless Hill AFB can provide the number of calls and the call complexity level as part of the PWS. Contractor requests this CLIN be conducted on a Time & Materials basis.

ANSWER: See revised PWS para 1.1 this is a monthly service to be provided during the hours listed.

12. CLIN 0002 – On-Site Preventative Maintenance: The solicitation calls this CLIN “On- Site Preventative Maintenance” and the PWS (Paragraph 1.2) describes a task for “On- Site Labor and Parts for Maintenance and Repairs”. The PWS is not describing a preventative maintenance effort, which would be a predetermined set of tasks that would be performed on a reoccurring regular basis. However, the language in the PWS is describing troubleshooting and repair on an as-needed basis. Please provide clarification regarding whether CLIN 0002 is for a preventative maintenance task or an as-needed basis task.

ANSWER: Please see revised PWS on Section 1.2 CLIN 0002. It is unknown and to be determined how many on-site repair trips will be needed or what parts will need to be replaced. The Contracto Type is changed to time and Materials for these services.

13. CLIN 0003 – Training: Since it is to be determined how many repairs and updates will be necessary over the course of the year, this CLIN should be Time and Materials. Section

1.5 of the PWS states that Section 1.4 will be a Time and materials Task Authorization. However, the solicitation states that CLIN 0003 is FFP. Contractor requests clarification on the contract type and that this CLIN be conducted on a Time and Materials Basis.

ANSWER: Please see revised PWS on Section 1.5 and 1.4. This section is now for annual training.

14. . CLIN 0004 – Programming: At this time it is undefined regarding how many programming variations will be required based on workload or requests changes. Section

1.5 of the PWS states that Section 1.3 will be a Time and materials Task Authorization. However, the solicitation states that CLIN 0004 is FFP. Contractor requests clarification on the contract type and that this CLIN be conducted on a Time and Materials Basis.

ANSWER: Please see revised PWS, Section 1.4 Programming Services

15. CLIN 0005 – Travel: This CLIN cannot be conducted under a FFP contract type since the number of trips is unknown and cannot be predetermined. Contractor requests this CLIN be conducted on a Time & Materials basis.

ANSWER: Please see revised PWS, Section 4.5 Travel and revised CLIN 0005

16. CLIN 0006 – Unscheduled Maintenance and Repair: The solicitation refers to Section

1.5 of the PWS. However, section 1.5 of the PWS does not describe a scope of work. Should this CLIN be associated with Section 1.2 of the PWS? If so, then there is missing section in the PWS that should describe the On-Site Preventative Maintenance scope. Please advise regarding whether there is a missing scope element in the PWS.

ANSWER: Please see revised PWS on Section 1.2 Unscheduled Repair

17. Section 2 of the PWS, First Line of the Table: The contractor is required to monitor the phoneline and email from 6 am to 6 pm Mountain Time. However, if a call comes in during the unmonitored hours, there is still a requirement for the contractor to respond within four hours after the phone call or email was sent. However, if a call or email comes in a just after 6 pm, it is probable that the call or email will remain in the cue until 6 am the next day, which is when we again start monitoring the phoneline and email. Contractor requests a change of Section 1.1 to be a 24 hour response time to response to calls and emails. Travel approval is required. If approval is not obtained in a timely manner, then the contractor should not be penalized for delays in being on-site. Contractor requests a change to the PWS such that the 24-hour clock will start after the contractor receives COR approval to travel.

ANSWER: Please see revised PWS for Section 1.1 On-Call Technical Telephone and E- Mail Support

18. Section 2 of the PWS, Second Line of the Table and Section 1.2 of the PWS:The requirement is for contractor to be on-site within 24 hours of a work stoppage. Contractor requests language that provides a period of time for off-site investigation of the issue prior to the clock starting on the 24 hour countdown to be on site.

ANSWER: Please see revised PWS in the Service Summary

19. Who will make the determination of a work stoppage and how will this be communicated to the contractor?

ANSWER: The Government will make the determination

20. Section 2 of the PWS, Third Line through Fifth Line of the Table:These each have a 100% performance acceptance. Who is responsible for evaluating the performance how will the performance be monitored?

ANSWER: This is evaluated by the Contracting Officer Representative, not all SS are 100%. The Government wants training to be 100%, an accident/mishap/incident will be recorded and reported 100% all the time. A safety program shall be provided to the Government Safety office 10 days after award.