Questions and Answers 5 Jan 12.pdf

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

FA8533-11-R-32740

5 January 2012

1. Question: How does the government intend for ECPs for each of the Maintenance stand variants to be priced? ECPs are completed as part of a change/improvement being made to the subject item. There is currently no indication of how many ECPs will be required per variant. Will the government provide a number of ECPs for each variant against which costs may be calculated?

Government Response: The cost associated with the ECP CLIN shall be for generation of the necessary paperwork for submission of the change to the Government for review. There is no set number of ECPs that will be needed for the contract as ECPs are generated on an “as required” basis. Furthermore, the cost impact (increase or decrease) associated with the proposed change shall be included as a part of the ECP itself and shall be considered during the evaluation/review process of the ECP.

2. Question: The differences in a "stairway" and a "ladder", and their application will have considerable bearing on the ultimate platform design. Can the Government please clarify?

Reference: Purchase Description Sections 3.2 and 3.8.6.4 - Section 3.2 states that the Hydraulic scissor lift will consist of a "main stairway". Paragraph 3.8.6.4 references entry and exit "from the ladder".

Government Response: The design for use with a stairway or ladder is of the contractors’ choice. The PDs will be changed to remove called out design. See Revision 1 for appropriate PDs.

3. Question: The RFP CLINS require that unit production is priced as part of the proposal submission. The final production unit configuration will be based on the results of testing and OPEVAL which may change the proposed prototype. In order to achieve a more accurate price/cost for unit production, will we have the opportunity to renegotiate/adjust production pricing after the final configuration of the prototypes is achieved?

Government Response: The purpose of the testing is to verify the units meet the purchase descriptions and statements of work. Prices for the production units should be proposed for the cost of producing the units in accordance with the purchase descriptions and statements of work.

4. Paragraph 3.2, Program Reviews, of the respective SOWs indicate a number of meetings “…between the contractor and Government representatives at Robins Air Force Base facility.”

Paragraph 3.2.4 states that “The contractor shall provide a conference room suitable for meetings of up to five (5) Government representatives, plus contractor personnel in support of scheduled meetings.” Please confirm that paragraph 3.2.4 does not apply to meetings “…between the contractor and Government representatives at Robins Air Force Base facility.”

Government Response: Concur. The SOWs will be changed to reflect contractor provided conference room only when at contractor’s facility. See Revision 1 for appropriate SOWs.

5. The SOW cites OSHA 1910.29 and AFOSH 91-501 as the requirements viewed as applicable to these work stands. While the OSHA document applies to "manually propelled mobile ladder stands and scaffolds", it does not necessarily anticipate the peculiar characteristics and requirements of these very specific and unique designs. In fact, no OSHA requirement appears to address variable-height stair cases. AFOSH 91-501 specifically states that all staircases are to maintain an angle of 55 to 60 degrees from the horizontal, yet that cannot be maintained with a design based on the Articulating Staircase specifications. How will proposals be evaluated if the physical requirements and functional capabilities run contrary to limitations imposed by OSHA

1910.29 and AFOSH 91-501?

Government Response: These called out standards are currently what the Air Force maintenance stands are reviewed against. Engineering in conjunction with Robins AFB Safety Office will review all designs for compliance to OSHA / AFOSH standards. As for the question on the Articulating Staircase and the ability to meet the defined slope requirements: “The slope of the steps section will be a minimum of 55 degrees and a maximum of 60 degrees measured from the horizontal.” It is understood that the slope cannot be maintained based on the design and as such the requirement for blocking the platform opening in case the slope exceeded the 60 degrees was added to the PDs.

6. Reference PDs ( Both Articulating Stair Case and Hydraulic Scissor Lift) Para 3.8.1 – States “ ..The size and weight of the stand shall be “as small as possible”” Para 3.8.1.1 “ … The “base” dimensions footprint shall be:… Para 3.8.1.2 “ … the “platform” footprint size ( working deck ) – shall be: …

Clarification – The PD states “as small as possible” but then states “ size shall be”:

Question: A. Does the contractor have the latitude to reduce the “base” dimensions as long as stability and OSHA compliance is met?

B. Is there a minimal size for the “platform” (Working Deck) size for each type within the Two requested Article? - Articulation Stair Case and Hydraulic Scissor Lift?

Government Response: The statement “The size and weight of the maintenance stand shall be as small as practical” was input in the PD in case the base / platform dimension had to be exceeded to meet the safety requirements as called out in the next sentence. For the specific questions:

Question A: The called out base dimensions are based on the previous versions of the stands.

The contractor has the latitude to make the base smaller and still meet safety requirements, stability requirements, and environmental call outs.

Question B: The called out platform dimensions are the minimal requirements by the field.

7. Reference PDs (Both Articulating Stair Case and Hydraulic Scissor Lift) Para 3.8.3 – States “ …maintenance stand shall be adjustable via the use of hydraulic actuators”

Can you confirm that hydraulic actuators be manual operated. What forms of power are accepted?

Question – Does the contractor have latitude to use / specify electrically powered or manual powered hydraulic actuators?

Government Response: Hydraulic actuators shall be manually powered.

8. Is there a preference to all Steele or all aluminum construction?

Government Response: This is left to the contractor’s discretion.

9. Reference PDs ( Both Articulating Stair Case and Hydraulic Scissor Lift) Para 3.8.1.4 states … “ The two working levels shall be designed to provide…”

Question – Please clarify “ two working levels”

Government Response: This was inadvertently left in the PDs. PDs have been revised to remove “two”.