Egress_-_Amendment_0004_-_Consolidated_Questions_and_Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 26 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Amendment 5 for MRAP Cougar Egress Upgrade
- Solicitation number
- M67854-13-R-5501
- Issued by
-
United States Marine Corps
About this file
Questions and Answers
View the file
Other files
Show all 25
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Number | RFP Document | Section # | Context/Issue | Question | Answer |
| 1 | P-Spec Rear Door | 3.13.21 | Requirement 3.13.22 is the only one that indicates a weight restriction ‘per door.’ However, 3.13.23 is not specific enough to understand if ‘the system’ is a single door or the entire rear door system (possibly two doors).• “3.13.21 The system shall not exceed 700 lbs excluding those major subsystems which do not articulate with the door.(T)” |
“3.13.22 The system shall not exceed 660 lbs per door excluding those major sub-systems which do not articulate with the door.(O)” “3.13.23 The system shall not exceed 800 lbs.”
| Requirement 3.13.21 does not specify if the 700 lbs is for a single door or for the entire rear door system. Is the 3.13.21 weight for a single door? | If the Offeror's design solution is a single door than the weight is for a single door. If the Offeror's design includes multiple doors, than it would include the weight of all doors in the system. | ||||
| 2 | P-Spec Rear Door | 3.13.21 & 3.13.23 | “3.13.21 The system shall not exceed 700 lbs excluding those major subsystems which do not articulate with the door.(T)” “3.13.23 The system shall not exceed 800 lbs.” | Requirement 3.13.23 does not specify if this weight is for both doors or for a single door. Does this door weight conflict with the required weight of 3.13.21? | If the Offeror's design solution is a single door than the weight is for a single door. If the Offeror's design includes multiple doors, than it would include the weight of all doors in the system. |
| 3 | Attachment 4: CDRL_to_CLIN_Matrix | Various | Some CDRL to CLIN references in Attachment 4 (CDRL_to_CLIN_Matrix) do not match those in Attachment 2. | Please confirm the applicable CLINs for each of the following CDRLs. |
CDRL A006
Attachment 4: All CLINS Attachment 2: CLINS 1 through 4
CDRL A007
Attachment 4: All CLINS Attachment 2: CLINS 0001 - 0002 - 0003 - 0004
CDRL A011
Attachment 4: CLIN 0001 Attachment 2: CLINS 0001 - 0003 - 0005 - 0007
CDRL A037
Attachment 4: CLIN 0003 Attachment 2: CLIN 0001
CDRL B002
Attachment 4: CLIN 0001
| Attachment 2: CLIN 0003 | Attachment 4 will be removed from the solicitation package. | ||
| 4 | Attachment 2 | Section B of the solicitation identifies: |
CLIN 0001: Design and Development CLIN 0005: First Article Production Egress Kits (option) CLIN 0009: Technical Data Package (TDP) (option)
CDRL B017, Technical Data Package (TDP) identifies option CLIN 0005.
| Does the Government intend for the TDP to be an optional requirement or was the intention to map CDRL B017 to CLIN 0001. | An updated CDRL B017 reflecting CLIN 0009 will be provided. All costs associated with the TDP and providing the TDP shall be included within the cost of CLIN 0009. This CLIN will remain an option CLIN. | ||||
| 5 | Egress_-_SF33_Solicitation_-_22_Nov_2013 | L.2.1 | 1. Front driver door, front commander door, rear door(s), hinges, primary/service handles and locks, secondary/combat handles and locks, door assists, transparent armor, opaque ballistic armor, …. | Will the test buck undergo blast/ballistic testing? | The test buck will only undergo the 5 tests defined in Section L. |
| 6 | Egress_-_SF33_Solicitation_-_22_Nov_2013 | L.2.1 | 1. Front driver door, front commander door, rear door(s), hinges, primary/service handles and locks, secondary/combat handles and locks, door assists, transparent armor, opaque ballistic armor, …. | Can surrogate armor panels be used for the test buck? | The system should be production representative. If any parts are not production representative, it shall be clearly documented. Refer to L.2.1(6). |
| 7 | Attachments 5 and 6 P-Spec (both) | 3.6.2 (Front and rear) | The systems door assist shall be able to perform 20 cycles (1 |
cycle = open and close) independent of vehicle power while the vehicle is upright on ground with a 5% (1:20) crown at 12
| hours after vehicle power interruption (T) | Does the system need to meet this requirement at the full range of operational temps as indicated in the requirements section 3.12 Durability, Strength, and Performance? | Yes, the system needs to meet the requirements at all temperature thresholds. | ||||
| 8 | Attachment 8 - Test Buck Illustration | N/A | Only nominal dimensions are given for the test buck. | What are the units for the dimensions shown? | The unit of measurement is in inches. | |
| 9 | Attachment 8 - Test Buck Illustration | N/A | Only nominal dimensions are given for the test buck. | What tolerance(s) should be applied to the these dimensions? | The tolerance is dependent on your design and manufacturing capabilities. The Government recommends +/- 1 inch maximum. | |
| 10 | Egress_-_SF33_Solicitation_-_22_Nov-2013 | L.1.1 | Volume 1 Content | Are the draft written installation instructions described in section L.1.1 of the solicitation counted against the total page count for Volume 1? | ||
| If the answer is no, then is there a page limit on the Draft Written Installation instructions? | No. The draft installation instructions are not counted in the page count. There is no limit to the number of pages in your installation instructions, it is dependent on your instruction. | |||||
| 11 | Solicitation | L.2.2 | Test Buck Installation Instructions. Per SoW, the design test buck will come installed. | Does the Government require instructions on how the Egress modifications were installed on the Test Buck as it will be delivered to the Government, or does the Government require instructions describing the Test Buck interface requirements for operation during Government testing? | The Government requires installation instructions that also describe the test buck interface requirements for operation during Government testing. | |
| 12 | Attachment 8 - Test Buck Illustration | N/A | Test Buck cube geometry is a fully enclosed box. However, the solicitation indicates that the test buck "must be open to allow for continuous fluid flow around the components as experienced in submersion testing." | Can the Offeror omit the bottom plate depicted in the Test Buck illustration to achieve this fluid flow? | Yes, the Offeror can omit the bottom plate. | |
| 13 | Attachment 8 - Test Buck Illustration | N/A | The test buck illustration has no material thickness called out. | How thick is the material used for construction of the test buck required to be? | The front and rear door systems should be production intent. The test buck should be of material size to maintain structural rigidity during operation and movement. | |
| 14 | Attachment 8 - Test Buck Illustration | N/A | The test buck illustration has no material thickness called out. | Does the test buck structure have to be made out of a specific material? | The front and rear door systems should be production intent. The test buck should be of material and size to maintain structural rigidity during operation and movement. Material is the Offerors choice. | |
| 15 | Attachment 8 - Test Buck Illustration | N/A | The test buck illustration does not locate the front doors in the vertical direction. | Is there a specific location that is required for the vertical placement of the front doors? | No specific location in the vertical direction is required for the front doors, as long as it is encompassed by a door frame. | |
| 16 | Attachment 8 - Test Buck Illustration | N/A | The test buck illustration does not locate the rear doors in the horizontal direction. | Is there a specific location that is required for the horizontal placement of the rear doors? | No specific location in the horizontal direction is required for the Rear doors, as long as it is encompassed by a door frame. | |
| 17 | Attachment 8 - Test Buck Illustration | N/A | The test buck contains no internal cross-bracing or reinforcement. | Is the Offeror permitted to reinforce the interior of the test buck box to improve the rigidity of the walls? | The Offeror can construct the test buck in any fashion to support the Offeror's design solution. However, the dimensions of the test buck must be in accordance with attachment 8. | |
| 18 | Attachment 8 - Test Buck Illustration | N/A | The test buck does not provide vehicle representative features for mounting of the actuator system underneath the windshield. | Is the Offeror permitted to add features to the front of the test buck to accommodate this mounting location? | The Offeror can construct any features required to install a production representative design on the test buck. | |
| 19 | Attachment 8 - Test Buck Illustration | N/A | The test buck does not include performance specification details for the lifting eyes. | Is a specific lifting eye system required? If not, is there a required load rating or factor of safety required? | The lifting eyes should be sufficient to support the weight of the Offerors test buck to facilitate the lifting, loading, and moving of the test buck to execute testing. No specific lifting eye system is required or will be evaluated. | |
| 20 | Solicitation | L.2.1 | Item 3 in section L.2.1 indicates that the test buck must allow all doors to be activated and fully opened simultaneously. | Is this an additional performance requirement for the operation of the egress upgrades? | In accordance with the performance specifications for the door assist section for both the front and rear doors, each door system must have their own activation device capable of operating independently. However, both front and rear doors must be able to activated and fully opened simultaneously. | |
| 21 | Solicitation | L.2.1 | Item 3 in section L.2.1 indicates that the test buck must allow all doors to be activated and fully opened simultaneously. | What performance specification applies to this requirement? | Refer to answer of question 20. | |
| 22 | Solicitation | L.2.1 | Item 3 in section L.2.1 indicates that the test buck must allow all doors to be activated and fully opened simultaneously. | It is not clear what is required of the Offeror to achieve simultaneous opening. Is it the customer's intent to have the Offeror modify their system to support this? | Refer to answer of question 20. | |
| 23 | Solicitation | L.2.2 | Section L.2.1 does not mention the inclusion of the exhaust modification in the test buck. | Is the exhaust re-route/modification required to be installed on the test buck? | The exhaust reroute/modification is not required to be installed on the test buck. | |
| 24 | Solicitation | L.1.4.1 | Section 2.0 states "Offeror's shall submit one (1) complete test buck with fully functional door solution installed, and draft written instructions and integration of the buck kit on the test buck." |
| Section L.1..4.1 states "The Offeror’s test buck must be shipped to the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. Each crate should be marked “Cougar Egress Doors Source Selection, Vendor XXX, crate Y of Z." | Please clarify the Government's requirement for multiple crates when the Egress modifications are required to be installed on the test buck. | If the Offeror is providing one crate it will be marked as "Cougar Egress Doors Source Selection, Vendor XXX, crate 1 of 1". If there are additional crates they would be marked "Cougar Egress Doors Source Selection, Vendor XXX, crate Y of Z". | ||||
| 25 | Attachments 5 and 6 P-Spec (both) | All | The entire list of MIL-STD-810 environment requirements state the system “shall retain material safety, integrity, and performance” during and after exposure to the specific environmental condition. | Does performance include actuation times and number of actuation cycles? | Yes, the number of actuation cycles and times should be consistent in all environments. | |
| 26 | Egress_-_SF33_Solicitation_-_22_Nov_2013 | L.3.2 | Offerers shall include details on ballistic coupon test to include ballistic certifications or coupon data regarding the opaque and transparent armor built into their test buck. | Are third party certifications required? | Yes, transparent Armor certifications from an independent test facility are required. | |
| 27 | Solicitation | Section L.3.2 | Original Context: |
Offerers shall include details on ballistic coupon test to include ballistic certifications or coupon data regarding the opaque and transparent armor built into their test buck.
Original Question:
Are third party certifications required?
PEO Response:
Yes, transparent Armor certifications from an independent test facility are required. This response is confusing. Section L.3.2 of the solicitation states, “Offerers shall include details on ballistic coupon test to include ballistic certifications or coupon data regarding the opaque and transparent armor built into their test buck.”
| Is a certification required for opaque armor built into the test buck? If yes, is 3rd party certification required for the opaque armor? | Yes, 3rd party certification is required for opaque armor solutions. | ||
| 28 | SOW | 9.0 | |
| Section 9.0, sub-paragraph 5.a states: |
| The Contract CSDR plan will include level 3 of the contract WBS and any lower level WBS elements designated by the Government as being high risk, high value, or high technical interest. | Is the contractor allowed to use their own WBS structure or must we use the WBS presented on form DD2794(attachment 10). If so please provide a detailed WBS structure. | The detailed WBS structure was provided in attachment 10 (DD2794 (CSDR plan)). Item 12 WBS Reporting Elements has the structure that the Offeror should use as it is in compliance with MIL-STD-881C Appendix G, Service Vehicle Systems. If the Offeror chooses they may further break out the level of indenture of the required structure. | ||||
| 29 | Solicitation | Section M.3 | Offerors are advised that paramount consideration will be given to the evaluation of the first five technical capability factors. Technical Engineering for the Test Buck is more important than Past Performance, but both are more important than Front Door, Rear Door/Steps, Exhaust Approach, Test Support, and Government Data Rights Fabrication and Production Capabilities. Front Door, Rear Door/Steps, Exhaust Approach, Test Support, and Government Data Rights and Fabrication and Production Capabilities are of equal importance, but more important than Management Approach. Each of the five main technical factors is more important than Price. | Can the Government quantify by how much each factor is weighed relative to the others? | There are no quantitative weighted factors. The factors are listed in order of importance as they are currently written. | |
| 30 | Solicitation | L.1.4 | The Offeror’s Test Buck submitted in response to this RFP shall be delivered to and addressed as follows: |
U.S. Army Aberdeen Test Center 400 Colleran Road, Bldg 358.
Attn: Jason Yost (410-278-5766) Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5059 RFP Number: M67854-13-R-5501
TO BE DELIVERED UNOPENED
| Is a representative of the Offeror allowed to accompany the Test Buck onto the facility? | The Offeror can accompany the delivery of the test buck to the address provided. | ||
| 31 | Solicitation | L.1.4 | The Offeror’s Test Buck submitted in response to this RFP shall be delivered to and addressed as follows: |
U.S. Army Aberdeen Test Center 400 Colleran Road, Bldg 358.
Attn: Jason Yost (410-278-5766) Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5059 RFP Number: M67854-13-R-5501
TO BE DELIVERED UNOPENED
| If a representative of the Offeror is allowed to accompany the Test Buck onto the facility, what are the requirements to obtain the necessary passes/ID badges and visitor approvals. | Instructions will be sent out in the next amendment. | ||
| 32 | Solicitation | Section L.1.4.1 | Original Context: |
Section L.2.0 states: "Offeror's shall submit one (1) complete test buck with fully functional door solution installed, and draft written instructions and integration of the buck kit on the test buck."
Section L.1..4.1 states: "The Offeror’s test buck must be shipped to the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. Each crate should be marked “Cougar Egress Doors Source Selection, Vendor XXX, crate Y of Z."
Original Question:
Please clarify the Government's requirement for multiple crates when the Egress modifications are required to be installed on the test buck.
PEO Response:
| If the Offeror is providing one crate it will be marked as "Cougar Egress Doors Source Selection, Vendor XXX, crate 1 of 1". If there are additional crates they would be marked "Cougar Egress Doors Source Selection, Vendor XXX, crate Y of Z". | Is the Offeror's Test Buck required to be crated or can it be palletized? | The Offeror test buck may be crated or palletized, but the shipment (crate or pallet) will be marked as "Cougar Egress Doors Source Selection, Vendor XXX, crate (pallet) 1 of 1". If there are additional crates for supporting materials (e.g. electrical lines, hydraulic hoses, technical manuals, fluids, etc.), these crates (or pallets) they would be marked "Cougar Egress Doors Source Selection, Vendor XXX, crate Y of Z". | ||
| 33 | P-Spec Rear Door | 3.13.22 | The Questions and Answers issued in Amendment 001 dated 3 December 2013 addressed question number 1 with the following statement: |
“If the Offeror's design solution is a single door than the weight is for a single door. If the Offeror's design includes multiple doors, than it would include the weight of all doors in the system.”
This answer is inconsistent with Objective requirement 3.13.22 which states “The system shall not exceed 660 lbs per door excluding those major sub-systems which do not articulate with the door.(O)” Further, the clarification makes the objective requirement more restrictive than the threshold requirement.
According to the objective requirement cited, each door can weigh 660 lbs compliant with the system objective. According to the answer received to the submitted question each door can weigh 350 lbs to be compliant with the system threshold.
Please explain the intent of these requirements, as the threshold requirement is more restrictive (700 lbs for the system) than the objective requirement (660 lbs per door).
| Please clarify the weight requirements for the rear door and define what is meant with the use of the word “system.” | The rear door system (excluding those major sub-systems which do not articulate) which will consist of either 1 door or 2 doors depending on offeror's design, shall not exceed 700 lbs (T), 660 lbs (O). | |
| 34 | Attachment_2_-_Combined_B_CDRLs.pdf |
Attachment_1_-_SOW_-_13_Nov_2013.pdf CDRL B013 CDRL B013, IBOM states “The Contractor shall submit the IBOM to the Government 30 calendar days after receipt of contract award.”
SOW paragraph 3.7.1 Postaward Conference, states “In accordance with FAR 42.503 Postaward conferences, the Contractor shall host a postaward conference at its CONUS facility or in Stafford, VA within thirty (30) calendar days after contract award.”
| SOW Paragraph 3.7.5.1 Critical Design Review (CDR), states “Topics covered at the CDR shall include, but not be limited to the following: f. Review of established Initial Bill of Materials (IBOM).” | Is it the Government's intent to review a preliminary IBOM at the postaward conference? | Both the IBOM submission and the postaward conference will be conducted within 30 days after contract award, but it is not required to review the IBOM at the conference; The Contractor shall submit the IBOM to the Government 30 calendar days after receipt of contract award. |
| 35 | Attachment_2_-_Combined_B_CDRLs.pdf |
Attachment_1_-_SOW_-_13_Nov_2013.pdf CDRL B013 CDRL B013, IBOM states “The Contractor shall submit the IBOM to the Government 30 calendar days after receipt of contract award.”
SOW paragraph 3.7.1 Postaward Conference, states “In accordance with FAR 42.503 Postaward conferences, the Contractor shall host a postaward conference at its CONUS facility or in Stafford, VA within thirty (30) calendar days after contract award.”
| SOW Paragraph 3.7.5.1 Critical Design Review (CDR), states “Topics covered at the CDR shall include, but not be limited to the following: f. Review of established Initial Bill of Materials (IBOM).” | Will the Government revise CDRL B013 to align delivery of the IBOM at the CDR event in accordance with SOW Paragraph 3.7.5.1? | No. IBOM to the Government 30 calendar days after receipt of contract award. The Government shall provide comments 30 calendar days. Final is due 15 calendar days after receipt of the Government comments. The IBOM will be a topic of discussion at the CDR. | ||
| 36 | Statement of Work | 8.4.1 | SOW paragraph 8.4.1 states "The Contractor shall be responsible for Preserved and Packaged (P&P'd) of deliverables for the egress upgrades. Packaging data shall be developed IAW MIL-STD-2073-1E…" |
MIL-STD 2073-1E specifies that the Government will specifically identify the packaging materials to be used. These materials may or may not be available through Suppliers with which we currently have a relationship. This could cause increased cost and possible delays. Version 1D allows the Contractor flexibility in the specific materials used as long as the requirements are met.
| Will the Government revise the SOW to reference MIL-STD 2073-1D instead of version 1E? | No. MIL-STD 2073-1E is applicable reference. The Government requests best commercial practices. | ||||
| 37 | RFP Notice | What is the deadline for the submission of questions? | COB 10 December 2013. | ||
| 38 | SF33 | Block 9 | Will the Government consider an extension for proposal submission due to the holidays, and office closures? | Yes. The proposal due date has been extended until Thursday 23 Jan 2013. | |
| 39 | Solicitation | L.2.0 | Test Buck Requirements | ||
| What are the Test Buck interface requirements for the Government's test facility? | Connectors for 24V vehicle power (if applicable) and/or vehicle air supply connectors (if applicable). | ||||
| 40 | Solicitation | L.2.1 | L.2.1 States: "1. Front driver door, front commander door, rear door(s), hinges, primary/service handles and locks, secondary/ combat handles and locks, door assists, transparent armor, opaque ballistic armor, emergency egress attachment points (D-Rings), crush sensors (if applicable), first responder receptacles, independent power sources, connectors for 24V vehicle power (if applicable), Vehicle air supply connectors (if applicable)..." |
Previous Government Guidance: "If vehicle power (electric or air) systems are required for functionality of the egress solution, they will be made available to power the test 'buck'."
| If the test buck requires vehicle power (electric or air), is it up to the offeror to choose what type of interface connection that will be? | It is up to the Offeror to choose what type of connection it will be; the connection must be sized appropriately to power the Offeror's system. The Offeror should also specify the power requirements with the delivery of the test buck. | ||||
| 41 | Solicitation | L.2.1 | L.2.1 States: "3. Test buck must be designed for all doors to be activated and fully open simultaneously." | If the test buck requires vehicle power (electric or air), should the Offeror provide a single interface point, or are multiple interface points acceptable? | The Offeror should provide a design in the best interest of the Government. |
| 42 | Solicitation | L.2.1 | Previous Government Guidance: "If vehicle power (electric or air) systems are required for functionality of the egress solution, they will be made available to power the test 'buck'." | If the test buck requires vehicle power (electric or air), does the government have any requirements for the location of the power interface relative to the test buck (i.e. length of cables/hoses/tubing)? | No. |
| 43 | Solicitation | L.2.3 | Previous Government Guidance: "If vehicle power (electric or air) systems are required for functionality of the egress solution, they will be made available to power the test 'buck'." |
L.2.3 States:
| "4. Egress – Submerged time – The time it takes to open all doors while the assembly is submerged underwater (with the entire system mounted to a bread-board buck having been submerged for 30 minutes with water pressure equalized on inside and outside door surfaces)." | If the test buck requires vehicle power (electric or air), will the interface that provides vehicle power also be subjected to the "submerged time" test? | Vehicle power systems will not be subjected to submersion. The interface at the vehicle will not be submerged. The interface at the test buck will be submerged. | |||
| 44 | General | …Given the test buck and door weight issues described above, and another set of questions for review and comment, m attached, we ask you to consider this extension request along with the other valid reasons outlined in our previous requests for a due date extension to 31 January 2014. | Yes. The proposal due date has been extended until Thursday 23 Jan 2013. | ||
| 45 | SOW | ||||
| CDRLs | 3.2 | ||||
| A001 | The SOW paragraph and CDRL associate to the Data Management Plan do not specify a timeframe for delivery to the Government. | When does the Government require CDRL A001, Data Management Plan to be delivered? | Delivery of A001 will be 30 calendar days after contract award. Correction has been made and the revised CDRL is provided. | ||
| 46 | Solicitation | Section F | Section F of the solicitation states: |
CLIN 0003, Test Readiness Review (TRR), delivery date is 3 months After Date of Contract (ADC).
CLIN 0004, TRR CDRLS, delivery date of 30-Sep-13 (3 months ADC).
SOW paragraph 3.7.4 states:
A Test Readiness Review (TRR) shall be held at the Contractor's facility no later than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the start of any applicable Limited User Evaluation (LUE), Developmental Test (DT), Live Fire (LF) Test, or Operational Test (OT) phase involving the egress upgrades.
The Government requires the TRR to be conducted no later than 30 days prior to the test events, and the TRR requirements are due 3 months ADC; approximately the same time, as the Critical Design Review (CDR). Does the Government concur with the following sequential order of milestones?
1. Estimated contract award: 1-July-2014
2. Post Award Conference (PAC) (approximately 30 days after contract award)
3. Critical Design Review (CDR) (approximately 30 to 60 days after the PAC, or approximately +60 to +90 days after contract award)
4. First article production complete (6 months ADC)
5. Test Readiness Review (TRR) 5.a: Government Testing: First Article Test (FAT) 5.b: XXXX testing: Section 5.0 of the SOW
6. Production Readiness Review (PRR)/System Verification Review (SRR)
7. Full Rate Production
The Government does not agree with the milestone sequence listed within the question. The Government's expected order of sequence is as follows:
1. Contract award
2. Post Award Conference (PAC) (approximately 30 days after contract award)
3. Critical Design Review (CDR) (approximately 30 to 60 days after contract award)
4. Test Readiness Review (TRR) 90 days after contract award.
5. First article production complete (6 months ADC) 5.a: Government Testing: First Article Test (FAT) 5.b: XXXX testing: Section 5.0 of the SOW
6. Production Readiness Review (PRR)/System Verification Review (SRR)
7. Full Rate Production
47 SOW 5.0 Section F of the solicitation states:
CLIN 0003, Test Readiness Review (TRR), delivery date is 3 months After Date of Contract (ADC).
CLIN 0004, TRR CDRLS, delivery date of 30-Sep-13 (3 months ADC).
SOW paragraph 3.7.4 states:
A Test Readiness Review (TRR) shall be held at the Contractor's facility no later than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the start of any applicable Limited User Evaluation (LUE), Developmental Test (DT), Live Fire (LF) Test, or Operational Test (OT) phase involving the egress upgrades.
The Government requires the TRR to be conducted no later than 30 days prior to the test events, and the TRR requirements are due 3 months ADC; approximately the same time, as the Critical Design Review (CDR). Two part question.
Question A:
Is the Offeror authorized to use first article production kits to conduct the testing requirements in section 5.0 of the SOW? For example, reliability testing and EMI testing.
Question B:
| If, the Offeror is authorized to use first article production kits to conduct the testing requirements in section 5.0 of the SOW, will the Government adjust the schedule for the TRR requirements, test events, and deliverables to correspond with completion of first article production kits, which will be used for the Government FAT? (Please refer to previous question regarding order of milestones) | A. Yes. B. No. | |||||
| 48 | SOW | 4.6 | First Article Test (FAT) | How many calendar days does the Government estimate are required to conduct/complete the First Article Test (FAT) for all egress upgrades? | Up to 365 days depending on the design solution, however full rate production may be allowed prior to completion of all government testing. | |
| 49 | SOW | 8.3.2 | Technical Manual development and validation/verification. | Is the Offeror authorized to use first article production kits to conduct TM development and validation/verification activities? | Yes | |
| 50 | Solicitation | L.3.2.1 | Opaque armor certification | Is the use of armor steel required on the test buck? | No, the vendor may choose any armor that meets the requirements, but the solution should be production intent. | |
| 51 | Solicitation | L.2.1 | 3. Test buck must be designed for all doors to be activated and fully open simultaneously. | Is the intent for the activation method to reflect the production design? | Yes | |
| 52 | Solicitation | L.2.1 | 3. Test buck must be designed for all doors to be activated and fully open simultaneously. |
| We’ve already communicated that this functionality is not reflected in the P-Spec, so we should reiterate that and then ask is | Does the Government require a single point interface to activate all doors (driver, co-driver, and rear door(s)) simultaneously during the test buck functional test? | No. The system’s rear door assist shall have remote activation control to open and close the door(s), accessible by the driver and a-driver while belted in the seated position. | ||||
| 53 | Solicitation | L.2.1 | 3. Test buck must be designed for all doors to be activated and fully open simultaneously. | Will the Government activate the doors from inside of the test buck as they would in a fielded vehicle? | The Government will activate the doors from inside and outside of the test buck as they would in a fielded vehicle. | |
| 54 | Solicitation | L.2.1 | 3. Test buck must be designed for all doors to be activated and fully open simultaneously. | Does the Government require an external activation mechanism to open the doors on the test buck? | Per Primary Door Egress Performance Specification, section 3.1, describes the system should have both an internal and external primary/service handle. | |
| 55 | Solicitation | L.2.3 | L.2.3 Test Results. The Test Buck results will be used and evaluated under Factor 1. The following will be evaluated: |
1. Egress – Flat ground time – The time it takes to fully open and fully close the front and rear door(s).
2. Egress – Flat ground cycles – The number of door opening/closing cycles the doors can perform independent of vehicle power.
3. Egress – On side cycles – The number of door opening/ closing cycles the doors can perform independent of vehicle power while the vehicle is resting on one side. The rear door(s) and the unobstructed front door are to be cycled.
4. Egress – Submerged time – The time it takes to open all doors while the assembly is submerged underwater (with the entire system mounted to a bread-board buck having been submerged for 30 minutes with water pressure equalized on inside and outside door surfaces).
| 5. HSI – Crush sensor (if proposed) – The demonstration of the crush/pinch prevention sensor for the doors. | Is the Offeror allowed to attend/observe the Government test buck functional tests? | No. | |||
| 56 | Solicitation | L.2.0 | Offeror's shall submit one (1) complete test buck with fully functional door solution installed, and draft written instructions and integration of the buck kit on the test buck. The test buck will allow the Government to perform physical tests, inspections, and demonstrations to evaluate the technical subfactors outlined in Section M and assess the Offeror’s technical acceptability. Submissions become the property of the US Government and will not be returned to the Offeror. | ||
| Does the Government require the rear step upgrade to be included with the test buck? | Yes, if it is integrated into the rear door system. | ||||
| 57 | Attachment_2_-_Combined_D_CDRLs.pdf | D023 | CDRL D023 states: | ||
| BLK 12 – Draft delivered 30 calendar days after Government approval of D036 Courseware Data Files. | Where is the requirement identified for CDRL D036 or was CDRL D023 intended to reference CDRL D022, INSTRUCTIONAL MEDIA PACKAGE (COURSEWARE DATA FILES) DEVELOPMENT? | CDRL D023 was intended to reference D022. Correction has been made and the revised CDRL is provided. | |||
| 58 | Solicitation | Page 23 of 24 | Is it the intent of the USMC, PM-MRAP to conduct a Preliminary Design Review (PDR) approval by the Government prior to submission/delivery of the 10 Egress Kits (CLIN 0005) for FAT testing in compliance with the requirements of the SOW and PS for front and rear door egress kits to ATC? |
| The Government conducted a pre-solicitation notice industry day event which allowed vendors access to all Cougar platforms and where the government released early drafts of SOW and P-specifications to interested parties for development and design work to facilitate Offerors' design; therefore no PDR is necessary. The Government will conduct a CDR as outlined in the requirements. To further facilitate the vendors' ability to design an egress systems without a TDP, the Government is hosting a second industry day from 18 Dec to 24 Dec where vendors may refine their solution. | |||
| 59 | Solicitation | Reference context of question 58. | Will the Government considers a modification to the solicitation for requirement of a PDR? |
| No. See question #58. | |||
| 60 | Solicitation | L.2.0 | Would the Government re-considers the requirement for a Test Buck and written installation instruction to be delivered to ATC on the due date of the solicitation response as part of the proposal submission? |
| No. The Government has provided vendors the time required to submit a test buck to meet the requirements. | ||||
| 61 | P-Spec Rear Door | Attachment_6_-_PSPEC_Rear_Door 3.13.21 The system shall not exceed 700 lbs excluding those major subsystems which do not articulate with the door.(T)3.13.22 The system shall not exceed 660 lbs per door excluding those major sub-systems which do not articulate with the door.(O)3.13.23 The system shall not exceed 800 lbs. | Our interpretation is that the 3 requirements are to be interpreted as one requirement in support of the weight requirements for the rear doors. Please confirm that if the Offeror proposes a two door solution, and each door weighs less than 660 lbs, then Offeror has satisfied the per door objective requirement specified in 3.13.22 and has exceeded the government’s threshold requirements and as a result satisfied the governments weight requirement for the rear door? | If the Offeror proposes a two door solution, and BOTH doors’ combined weight is less than 660 lbs, then Offeror has satisfied the objective requirement specified in 3.13.22 and has exceeded the Government’s threshold requirements and as a result satisfied the governments ‘weight requirement for the rear door. If the Offeror proposes a two door solution, and BOTH doors’ combined weight is more than 660 lbs, then Offeror has not met the door objective requirement specified in 3.13.22 and as a result has not satisfied the Government’s objective weight requirement for the rear door. The 800lb limit is th emaximum weight of both the door(s) and the major subsystems of the rear door egress kit which do not articulate with the door(s). |
Sheet2
Sheet3
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .