Q A for FA8509-10-R-21507 dated 29 July 2010.pdf

Q&A for RFP FA8509-10-R-21507 (3) dated 29 July 2010

Q – Three drawings are identified that are not in the drawing release. They are: 200811943, 200812104, 200812105

A – The TO’s and drawings are still “drafts” and there maybe some discrepancies that will need to be reconciled, thus the requirement for Kit Proof.

Q – Can the contractor assume that the testing was fully successful and that a seat manufactured to the provided drawings is therefore assumed to be fully crash loads certified by the Government?

A - The previous testing on this assembly was for the seat and attaching hardware. The testing was fully successful. The seat itself is a COTS item that was advertised to survive the necessary crash loads, so therefore assuming the attaching hardware was manufactured (since the contractor will be procuring the seats themselves) to the drawings the complete assembly is assumed to be fully crash load certified.

Any changes to the design will require analysis to prove crashworthiness. Since this assembly has not been analyzed/fit-checked for the other MDS's, this is a possibility, however the variation from MDS to MDS should not change dramatically (hence why analysis is anticipated, but full testing is not).

Q – Are these drawings associated with Lockheed Martin part numbers (see below)? We are unable to find any Lockheed drawings in TDP.

LS3859F8PP24

LS3859-8PP16

LS3859F8PP10

LS3859F8PP24

LS3859-8PP16

LS3859F8PP10

LS3859-8PP16

LS3859F8PP10

LS3859F8PP10

LS3859F8PP16

LS3859F8PP12

A – These drawings are not available at this time.

Q - In Performance Plan document 12Jul10, EMS in Section G references "IAW 1 Aug 07 AFMC/CV Policy letter". Can you please provide that letter/document so that we may understand requirement of 1 Aug 07 AFMC/CV Policy letter as this may be an updated version of EMS requirement?

Who is POC for EMS for potential contractors (so that we may learn the timeline of the process, etc.)?

A – A revised Performance Plan will be released with the contract award document that will reflect a revised Section G that removes the reference to the “Policy Letter.” It should be noted that any contractor employee working on an Air Force Installation will require EMS training within 30 days of beginning work. The prime contractor is responsible for ensuring that all subcontractors comply with this requirement. Points of contact for the training will be provided after the receipt of the award.

Q - On page 41 of RFP under "Ship To/Place of Performance" can you please explain Type/Code:

Ship In Place.

Other locations are listed, but I do not understand Ship In Place.

A – Ship In Place refers to when the contractor has completed the Production Kits, they are to bill the Government and store the assets in a secure area (i.e. contractor’s facility) until further direction is provided. Reference PWS paragraph 4.9.2.

Q - Discrepancy between RFP and PWS RevA (para 4.8) for CLINS below in regard to place of performance (RFP) and field installation

(PWS):

CLIN 0013

Per RFP, place of performance FB4830, Moody AFB Per PWS para 4.8, Install at (para 4.8, section

b) Hurlburt, Kirtland, Kadena & RAF Mildenhall

CLIN 2001

Per RFP, place of performance FB4830, Moody AFB Per PWS para 4.8, Install at Patrick AFB.

CLIN 1002 & 1003

Per RFP, place of performance FB4469, Kirtland AFB Per PWS para 4.8, Install at Moody AFB.

A – The Place of Performance listed in the PWS is correct. The Place of Performance will be updated on RFP amendment 0003 and it will match the PWS.