RFP_Release_-_Questions_from_Industry_6Nov19.docx

RFP Release Q&A_4

1. Could the definition of a lot be further clarified? For example “A lot shall consist of two weeks of production” or something more specific?

Response: The typical lot would most logically be identified as 140 pallets, since that quantity is designated as a full truck load. Potential bidders may opt to define a lot size differently.

Lot sampling is based on ANSI/ASQ definitions, which provide guidance for whatever lot size is defined by the manufacturer.

2. Would the Government consider changing sampling plan to reduce cost and waste? Will the government expect these samples to be scrapped or returned to the production stream, if they pass the tests above?

Response: See September Q&A Response below:

34. MIL-DTL-27433 (Draft of G version) requires the sampling plan per ANSI/ASQ Z1.4, general inspection level II, single sampling plan for normal inspection. For a lot between 91 and 150, the sample size would be 20 and would be subject to tests outlined in 4.5.3.4, 4.5.5.1, and 4.5.9.2. If these are performed on the actual pallets (which it appears they would be) what are done with the 20 pallets that went through this testing? Will the production rate need to be increased to account for the 20 pallets tested?

· Section 4.5.9.2 specifies “Samples shall be removed from actual pallets, off-cuts, or representative witness samples”. Completed production pallets are not mandatory for this testing

· Sample pallets used for tests 4.5.3.4 & 4.5.5.1 will be included in production quantities for all pallets that pass testing.

· Production rates should not be increased to account for the test samples.

3. This raises the same issue as question 2. Unless a sufficient quantity of representative cut offs, extractions or witnesses is available, this will require destruction of a large quantity of pallets at government expense.

Response: As stated in the “question”, this issue is the same as question 2. See the answer to Question 2. Manufacturing processes will allow for “representative samples” to be easily produced at a minimal cost to the producer.

4. Can the Government confirm which specific water penetration test is required?

Answer: See MIL-DTL-27443G posted on FBO October30, 2019 for the official, published version of the specification.

5. Was the Government’s intention to replace with MIL-PRF-32550?

Answer: Yes, MIL-PRF-32550 is the required coating for the rivets. See “Amended_Drawings_201993426” posted October 1, 2019 on fbo.gov. The specification is listed on the drawing 201993426 in note 8. The specification was removed from MIL-DTL-27443 section 2.2.1 to mitigate redundancy, since the document (MIL-DTL-27443) requires the pallet to be built to the TDP (drawing 201993426).